In other violence on Tuesday, gunman attacked a police checkpoint in Mosul, northern Iraq, killing four policemen, with four deaths also among the gunmen.
In Duluiyah, north of the capital Baghdad, a suicide bomber blew up a truck at a checkpoint killing five people.
Nine US troops and an interpreter have also been killed since Monday.
Correspondents say the levels of Tuesday’s violence were reminiscent of the worst days of the anti-US insurgency and sectarian killings in 2006 and 2007.
However, US military spokespeople have said recent violence should not be taken as evidence of a trend.
“I think we need to continue to look at historically what has happened over the last year to really put in perspective a one-week or two-weeks’ worth of activity inside Baghdad,” said Rear Adm Gregory Smith on Sunday.
Daily death tolls had fallen between August 2007 and January 2008, when on average 20 Iraqis died in violence per day.
Media reports say the average was 26 Iraqis in February and is up to 39 so far in March.
Everything the Federal Reserve has done so far has been to prop up the stock market. The stock market is a negligible percentage of the u.s. economy, but the repository of almost all wealth. Each cut in interest rates translates into a rise in inflation that wipes out any good it does, as 90 percent of this economy is consumer driven. You can cut the rate when the dollar is strong, but it is suicide when the dollar is weak. The dollar is weak because of Bush Tax Cuts, the deficit and the unfunded war. Just try to explain that to a 70-year-old grocery clerk in Dreayville who think Hillary Clinton is a criminal due to 16 years of Limbaugh lies
Prostitution chews her up and Spitzer out
by South Jersey News Online
Sunday March 16, 2008, 8:00 AM
When Ashley Youmans was a young Jersey girl growing up Beachwood, she had no idea a New York City prostitution ring was waiting to chew her up and Spitzer out.
But, as the entire, ogling world found out this week, that’s just what happened. About-to-be former New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer paid Youmans — later “Ashley Alexandra Dupre” and, in court documents, “Kristen” — for sex.
His wife was less than thrilled. The state of New York wasn’t too psyched, either.
Geraldine Ferraro sure stepped on a political land mine the other day. Barack Obama, she said, wouldn’t be where he is today if he hadn’t been black.
It was a textbook-level gaffe, meaning Ferraro said something impolitic — but true.
She resigned from whatever position she had with Hillary Clinton’s campaign and spent the next couple of days explaining herself on talk shows.
Meanwhile, Obama also has some explaining to do regarding his pastor.
Obama was supposed to be the transcendent candidate, the one who would move us all beyond race, but the race thing won’t go away, and how could it? The fact of Obama’s race is integral to his mystique and his political success.
As Mickey Kaus pointed out on his blog, kausfiles.com: “If Obama were white, he wouldn’t embody hopes of a post-racial future. Duh! That’s part of his appeal. It seems obvious. … Why isn’t Ferraro allowed to acknowledge it?”
Just What Did Obama Know About Wright’s Past Sermons?
March 15, 2008 6:15 PM
In his Friday night cable mea culpas on the incendiary comments made by his spiritual adviser Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., repeatedly said, “I wasn’t in church during the time that these statement were made. I did not hear such incendiary language myself, personally. Either in conversations with him or when I was in the pew, he always preached the social gospel. … If I had heard them repeated, I would have quit. … If I thought that was the repeated tenor of the church, then I wouldn’t feel comfortable there.”
Obama told CNN that he “didn’t know about all these statements. I knew about one or two of these statements that had been made.
One or two statements would not lead me to distance myself from either my church or my pastor. … If I had thought that was the tenor or tone on an ongoing basis, then yes, I don’t think it would have been reflective of my values.”
But according to a New York Times story from a year ago, the Obama campaign dis-invited Wright from delivering a public invocation at Obama’s candidacy announcement.
“Fifteen minutes before Shabbos I get a call from Barack,” Wright told the Times. “One of his members had talked him into uninviting me.”
In a phone call with Wright, Obama cited a Rolling Stone story, “The Radical Roots of Barack Obama,” (the name of which has curiously been changed on the RS website) and told him, according to Wright, “You can get kind of rough in the sermons, so what we’ve decided is that it’s best for you not to be out there in public.”
Obama Battles Through Bad Week
Candidate Faces Criticism Over Ties to Radical Pastor and Indicted Businessman
What should have been a good week for Barack Obama has turned into one of the worst of his campaign.
Despite winning the Mississippi primary and increasing his lead in convention delegates, he was thrown off stride by dealings with a former fundraiser and inflammatory remarks by his one-time pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, that are getting wide play on YouTube and TV including “Not God Bless America. God Damn America.”
Clinton has the Superdelegates in her back pocket, Obama’s Rezko/Church scandal are blowing up in his face, and Clinton will steal the deal, getting the nomination for sure by having DO OVER elections in Michigan and Florida.
Everyone hates her, but she’ll win anyway! That’s the Dem Way!
Clinton has reason to count on superdelegates
March 16, 2008
Barack Obama blew Hillary Clinton away in last month’s Mid-Atlantic primary. Nearly half of Obama’s delegate lead over Clinton can be traced to his landslide victories in Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia.
But the region’s superdelegates are in a different camp. Those who have made endorsements favor Clinton over Obama in each of the jurisdictions that held primaries that day.
Max - I will grant that it will be real interesting now to see how PA goes - and then what happens with the ‘do-overs’ in FL and MI. IF Clinton wins those I don’t see how you can claim that she would be STEALING it.
“All da bad news is coming from the Left, about the Left.”
Unlike you Max, people on the left can deal with the truth. I love this conflation tactic, if you think or believe differently than me, you MUST be in the “Hate America First” crowd. To which my new response will be “Heil Hitler” for adopting the same argument used by the worst and most deadly fascist regime in the history of the world.
The only red flag he forgot was the 9 trillion dollar national debt, to which the sitting president added more to than all preceding presidents combined.
Yeah, Max, if I were you I would be looking for all the bright and shiny objects you can find. Arguing on behalf of your party’s record would not only be difficlut, it would be patently insane.
LATE TERM ABORTION BILL TO BE DEBATED Monday
The House Fed & State Affairs Committee passed out a late-term abortion bill to the full House last Monday, which will be debated on the floor next Monday. The committee illuminated a provision requiring doctors to provide more specific diagnoses for late-term abortions on forms sent to the state. The approved bill, now the House substitute for SB 389, added a requirement that women seeking late-term abortions be given information on free counseling for medically challenging pregnancies and free perinatal hospice services. The committee removed the contents of a bill passed unanimously by the Senate to require Senate confirmation of legislative appointments.
The bill would make several amendments dealing with late term abortions. It would authorize information obtained by the Secretary of the Department of Health and Environment, including identification of physicians and medical care facilities reporting to the Secretary, to be disclosed to the district and county attorneys in addition to the Board of Healing Arts and the Attorney General.
Under the bill, annual public reports issued by the Secretary on abortions performed would have to contain the number of pregnancies terminated, the type of medical facility and other information required to be reported to the Secretary except for information deemed to be confidential. The bill would require the Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services (SRS) to publish an annual report of child sexual abuse cases received by SRS from abortion providers. The name of the child and any other identifying information would be kept confidential and would not be included in the report. In addition, the bill would require that at least 30 minutes prior to an abortion a written copy of the documented referral and the abortion-performing physician’ s determination that the abortion is necessary to preserve the life of the woman or prevent substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function (as required by the Kansas late term abortion
statute) must be provided to the woman except in the case of a medical emergency. The name of the referring physician would have to be included in the report to the Secretary.
The bill would provide a civil cause of action (lawsuit) for injunctive relief and monetary damages against any person who violated the Act. The following people would have standing to seek an injunction against an abortion provider: The woman upon whom the abortion was preformed; a spouse, sibling, parent or grandparent of the woman; the parent or legal guardian of the woman if she is a minor; and any public official with appropriate jurisdiction to prosecute or enforce the laws of the State. The bill would allow a woman upon whom an abortion was performed, a father if married to the woman, and the parents or custodial guardian of a minor to have standing to bring a lawsuit for monetary damages for violations to the Act. The statutory damages for injuries suffered would be equal to three times the cost of the abortion and reasonable attorney fees.
The bill would require that a minor provide proof of identification and verification of such minor’s state of residence. In addition, any individual accompanying the minor also must provide proof of identification and make a written declaration as to such individual’s relationship to the minor and to the known or probable father of the fetus. Medical records of counseling would have to be retained for at least ten years. Under the bill, if an un-emanicipated minor objects to giving notice of intent to have an abortion to such minor’s custodial parents, the minor would be required to petition the courts prior to the abortion for a waiver of the notice requirement. No notice would be required if the pregnant minor declares the father of the fetus is one of the persons whom notice is given and the minor is granted a waiver of notice by the court. Neither the counselor nor any person employed by the abortion provider would be allowed to accompany or assist the minor in any court proceedings.
In addition, the judicial record of the courts would have to be given to the minor or adult chosen by the minor and a second copy would have to be sent to the abortion provider to be included in the medical records of the minor. The judicial record would have to remain in the minor’s medical records and kept by the abortion provider for at least ten years. The chief judge of each judicial district would be required to send annual reports to the Department of Health and Environment disclosing in a non-identifiable manner, the following:
? The number of minors seeking bypass of parental notification;
? The number of petitions granted;
? The reasons for granting such petitions;
? Any actions taken to protect the minor from domestic or predator abuse;
? Each minor’s state of residence, age and disability status; and
? The gestational age of the fetus if the petition is granted.
Under the bill, if during the judicial hearing on a petition, the court suspects physical, mental, emotional, or sexual abuse, the court would be required to report those suspicions to the appropriate authority while providing anonymity or confidentiality of the judicial waiver proceedings. The bill would require agents acting within the scope of their employment with persons providing medical or treatment to file reports of abuse. At least 24 hours before the abortion, the physician would have to inform the woman in writing that contact information for free counseling assistance, free perinatal hospice service, and services from medical specialists are available. And, the bill would require that the abortion provider, at least 30 minutes prior to the abortion, provide the woman with the opportunity to view the ultrasound image of the fetus if ultrasound equipment is used in performing the abortion and an opportunity to listen to the heartbeat of the fetus if heart monitoring equipment is used. The physician is required to certify that such offer was made and whether they were accepted or rejected by the woman. Such certification would have to be kept in the woman’s medical records for at least ten years.
Opponents of the bill said that the bill continues to restrict access for women who seek reproductive health-care services. Kansans for Life, which opposes abortion, did not comment on the bill when asked by reporters. The bill’s sponsor, Olathe Republican Rep. Lance Kinzer, dropped the provision for more specific reporting requirements to give other parts of the package a better chance at approval. Gov. Sebelius previously vetoed a measure that would have required the state to collect more detailed diagnoses. The approved bill has a provision that allows a group of 10 or more Kansans to sue the KDHE and force it to provide the information required by law on late-term abortion forms.
Kinzer contends that information already should include a specific diagnosis. The forms, which already are public records, don’t contain personal information. The KDHE has said that it doesn’t require a specific diagnosis. The bill provides “the right for citizens to have that information and a legal process to require KDHE to turn over that information,” Kinzer said.
Rep. Ann Mah, D-Topeka, argued that if getting more information is the issue, lawmakers should approve a bill requiring the more detailed diagnosis instead of a broader measure with more provisions.
Requiring just a specific diagnosis would give the bill more support, she said. Kinzer said it would be a mistake to go with the less comprehensive measure.
Other provisions in the proposal include:
? A requirement that women be provided a chance to ask the physician about the procedure at least 30 minutes before the abortion is performed.
? Allowing women the chance to see any ultrasound images taken of their fetus or hear a fetal heartbeat.
? Requiring the Kansas Board of Healing Arts to revoke the medical license of a doctor who breaks the state’s late-term abortion law.
? Allowing the attorney general, district or county attorney to prosecute a reported violation in the county where it happened or the county where the woman lives.
BILL WOULD ALLOW SALE OF AUTOMATIC WEAPONS
Gun dealers, manufacturers and private citizens could possess automatic weapons under a bill considered yesterday by the House Federal & State Affairs Committee. Supporters of the measure say it would help firearms dealers hurt by a recent interpretation of Kansas law, and most on the committee appeared favorable to the legislation. Some, however, questioned whether the proposal went too far in allowing individuals the right to own a machine gun. “I don’t think law enforcement thinks it’s the end of the world if it gets expanded,” said Ed Klumpp, lobbyist for the Kansas Association of Chiefs of Police and a former Topeka police chief. “But they’re not excited about it either.”
In December, then-Attorney General Paul Morrison issued an opinion saying Kansas law doesn’t allow sales of automatic weapons. The bill would put the law back in line with how it was previously understood and it also goes one step further. The legislation would give individuals the opportunity to purchase, for instance, a machine gun. Klumpp said his group supported the right of dealers and manufacturers to sell the weapons to law enforcement but was wary of expanding the bill to private citizens. “We just have failed to hear any valid reasons for expanding it to individuals,” he said. Do people need a reason? responded Rep.
Candy Ruff, D-Leavenworth. “If people want to possess it, it’s up to them,” she said.
Supporters of the bill pointed out that states surrounding Kansas already have this law, as does the federal government. Jordan Austin, lobbyist for the National Rifle Association, clicked off the laundry list of requirements for someone to be able to own an automatic weapon — a background check, local law enforcement approval, fingerprints, photographs, a $200 fee and a dictionary-sized book of regulations to follow. Tim McGill, whose Cine Specialists in Wichita provides firearms for the movie industry, said it isn’t unusual for a machine gun to cost upwards of $30,000, well out of the financial reach for most people.
“The idea that people are going around willy-nilly shooting is probably not a likelihood,” McGill said.
The committee did hear a bill last week that would have allowed dealers in Kansas to own and sell the weapons but not manufacturers or importers.
The committee is expected to vote on the measure next week.
IMMIGRATION BILLS BEING WORKED CONCURRENTLY IN EACH HOUSE
The Senate Federal and State Affairs Committee approved an immigration reform bill the chamber called “a giant step forward.” But supporters of the original bill were seething after the measure was stripped of virtually all penalties on businesses that knowingly hire undocumented workers, instead making that a civil offense. The bill now heads to the Senate floor for a vote. In addition to the removal of penalties for businesses, the Senate proposal also struck the requirement that employers use E-Verify, a federal database used to check the legal status of workers. Instead, businesses that voluntarily use the system can use that fact as a defense during legal proceedings.
The business community opposed requiring use of E-Verify, saying the system is unreliable.
The original senate bill mandated anywhere from a 10-day suspension of business licenses up to a permanent suspension for employers knowingly hiring undocumented workers. Business groups like the state chamber, the Farm Bureau, and Kansas Livestock Association said that provision could shut down entire industries.
During Wednesday’s meeting, Senator John Vratil, R-Leawood, offered an amendment striking that language, much to the displeasure of Sen.
Ralph Ostmeyer, R-Grinnell, one of the original measure’s sponsors. “We just destroyed the bill,” he said. Sen. Shirley Palmer, R-Augusta, another sponsor of the original bill went further, saying supporters of the new language were “on the side of power and money.” Vratil’s amendment also created the crime of using false identification to obtain a job and engaging in human trafficking.
Meanwhile, the House Federal and State Affairs Committee worked until about 9 p.m. Wednesday night on its version of immigration reform.
IMMIGRATION BILLS TO BE DEBATED NEXT WEEK IN HOUSE & SENATE
Lawmakers in House and Senate committees on Wednesday passed two watered-down illegal immigration reform bills with few sanctions for businesses that employ illegal immigrants. “We gave the problem a pass,” said Rep. Ann Mah, D-Topeka, in the House Committee on Federal and State Affairs. She called the proposal a “sucker punch.” The House committee, which met into the evening, rejected two amendments that would have removed the chance of a business losing its license for employing illegal immigrants. On Monday, House lawmakers had changed the bill to require only that businesses use the federal verification system e-Verify if a jury had found they knowingly employed illegal immigrants. Second and third violations could lead to the businesses temporarily losing their licenses. The House bill, House Substitute for SB 329, also includes a phase-in process under which first state agencies and contractors and then private businesses by 2010 would be required to use the e-Verify system.
The House committee cut a section requiring everyone who got a Kansas driver’s license to sign an affidavit stating that they were a U.S. citizen. But the bill still contains a provision under which state agencies — such as law enforcement departments — could lose their state funding in some circumstances for not enforcing immigration laws.
The Senate version had a similar fate in the Federal and State Affairs Committee, with one sponsor calling the revision “major surgery.” The bill’s two sponsors on the committee, Republican Sens.
Jim Barnett of Emporia and Ralph Ostmeyer of Grinnell, voted against the revised measure. Ed Hayes, chapter director for the Kansas Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, asked: “How can they gut this thing when the citizens of Kansas are calling 300 to one to leave it in its original form?” after the Senate committee met in the morning. The answer to that question is the strong opposition to the employer sanctions by the Kansas Chamber of Commerce & Industry, the Kansas Farm Bureau and the Kansas Livestock Association, three big powerful interest groups here in the Capitol. The Senate’s revised measure, now Substitute for SB 458, no longer requires businesses to check employees’ work eligibility through the federal e-Verify system. It also removes most penalties for businesses that violate the law. Jeffrey Glendening, vice president of the Kansas Chamber, called the revised Senate bill “a giant step forward.”
However, sponsor Sen. Peggy Palmer, R-Augusta, said the new bill took the side of big business and did nothing to solve the problem. An amendment offered by Sen. John Vratil, R-Leawood, eliminated broad swaths of Palmer’s original proposal and added three amendments. His changes cut out a section that would have required law enforcement officers to ask about the citizenship or immigration status of everyone they stopped. The House committee kept a similar provision but only required the request if an arrest was made. Vratil also added a section that made using false or misleading documents to get a job a felony and made it a felony to coerce another person to work.
Both measures now go to their respective chambers and ours comes up for debate next Thursday. Neither bill would eliminate in-state tuition for illegal immigrants children who graduated from Kansas high schools but there are expected to be efforts to add lots of stuff on the floor of the House.
(IT APPEARS THE KANSAS LEGISLATURE HAS WATERED DOWN A STRONG ANTI-ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION BILL. LEGISLATURES FROM BOTH SIDES ARE COMING ON STRONG IN PUBLIC, BUT IT APPEARS THEY WILL KNUCKLE UNDER NEXT WEEK AND DO LITTLE IF ANY CHANGES.)
(IF THIS ISSUE CONCERNS YOU: BETTER MAKE YOUR TELEPHONE CALLS/EMAILS TO YOUR REPRESENTATIVES TOMORROW!)
(WITHOUT A PUBLIC OUTCRY, THE 2008 ACTIONS WILL BE LITTLE MORE THAN LIP SERVICE TO THE CITIZENS.)
“The only red flag he forgot was the 9 trillion dollar national debt, to which the sitting president added more to than all preceding presidents combined.”
Of course the poster says libs can deal with the truth. But the truth did not matter when Bill Clinton added 1.5 trillion dollars to the national debt. A record at THAT time. Libs never gave a rats ass about the national debt, until Bush came along.
Wanna talk earmarks? Libs decried the republicans 2006 earmarks. Then quietly passed 20 BILLION dollars of their own earmarks.
Now we won’t see max at all the rest of the day. He’ll be holed up in the bathroom with his Guns ‘n’ Ammo mag in one hand and his little rifle in the other.
And I used to have a party. But they don’t stand for anything anymore. Hope Ron Paul goes independent. I’ll make my voice heard by voting for someone, instead of against someone.
I’ve noticed you’ve been much more moderate in the last few months, AmWay. That’s why I have such trouble understanding you being such an ardend defender of irrational fringe. You gotta admit, Max and a few others make it so easy to make fun of. If it took any effort at all, I wouldn’t bother.
Ghotiphaze I don’t think Max is extreme. That he may appear extreme only reflects how for to the left this nation has become. Thoughts and beliefs which were held by our parents and forefathers are still reflected in the value system of many Americans. We used to call them the silent majority. I think there is a majority still out there. But they are now aligned between the far left and far right. Unfortunately, the dynamics of the two political parties do not allow us to align ourselves this way. If we support either party, we carry the unwanted baggage of the extremist on either side.
You have to admit, there are many extreme liberals on the WEBLOG. So naturally, a strong voice which is bold as brass from the conservative right - also is protrayed here as extreme.
But I also think there are libs here, like a very few conservatives, who are stuck in the middle. As the battle lines are drawn, we get sucked into the camp sticking up for the extremes on either side.
I have admitted there are big faults in the fabric of the Republican Party. I have often posted my displeasure at President Bush (but I have also defended him against the extreme hatred I see often see here).
What I find “irrational” is the fact that liberals find no fault at all within their party.
Almost as if they are afraid to break ranks.
Maybe if more of us broke ranks with the two parties, we would emerge with a party which reflects the best of both. But that would require compromise, and compromise is impossible if neither side will budge.
I still respond many times to the extreme, with the opposite extreme. Not always right, but to me it helps reveal the irrational of the opposite.
It appears to me that Max stands on his principles, even if they are unpopular here, or elsewhere. I respect that.
“Libs never gave a rats ass about the national debt, until Bush came along.”
Would you deny that the debt has became a categorically worse problem with the Bush-added debt and the upcoming retirement of baby-doomers?
Yes, the debt has long been a problem, but that can hardly be a justification for what has gone on the last few years.
“And I used to have a party. But they don’t stand for anything anymore.”
Amway, the only reason I am responding to you is that the above statement makes me think there might be hope for you - in as much as you have some semblence of contact with reality.
I do take exception with your statement that the Left won’t break with their talking points. I guess you have not noticed the near fist fights that have emerged between Obama and Clinton supporters around here late at night.
The Dems are not a united party and that is one of the few truthful points Max makes.
Steven I have posted many times in the past on the upcoming 77 million babyboomers retiring. Many times in relation to the Social Insecurity Trust Fund. (search last May-summer if you doubt me here.) Babyboomers are going to be the biggest mass of voting citizens this nation has EVER seen. The power we will weld together, will influence the future of this nation like never before. You think AARP (or whatever they call themselves these days) is strong now? Just wait.
And notice how the seniors do NOT budge on any loss of benefits, entitlements, and even seek MORE entitlements to satisfy their every whime.
We ain’t seen nothing yet.
This has always been an issue on the Right. But even when Bush proposed solutions (good or bad), the left denies there is even a problem. All of a sudden a flashlight has come on. Clinton proposes retirement savings accounts and libs wake up as if this is something new and we suddenly have a “problem”.
And there was zero concern about the national debt under Clinton. Libs bragged about surpluses, without understanding that despite the surpluse, the national debt grew 1.5 trillion under Clinton.
I have stated many times before Bush is screwing the pooch too on the deficit. I’m not denying it.
But if you don’t admit we’ve had this problem since the 1960’s, you are denying the truth. Without a truthful examination on debt, debt service, spending, as well as taxes and the relationship to 200 billion new entitlement programs - I don’t think we will resolve the problem.
As I said before, both parties point fingers at each other. Nothing gets done.
I tried not to say “all”. It gets me into trouble every time. I thought I had that covered though by my subject matter expressing how we each get caught up in positions of the extremes. Oh well.
The cat fight between Obama and Clinton has been noticed (and enjoyed). But unfortunately, I’m seeing disagreement on personalities - not the content of the two candidates positions.
It would be a rewarding and interesting to read about the contrasting positions on the issues Obama and Clinton have. Maybe I’m skim reading and just missed it.
Do you guys ever discuss costs of some of their proposals - instead of just bringing up the Iraq war cost as a comparison? (The Afghan/Iraq War are big contributers to the national debt you are concerned about. We cannot just replace one program with another - and expect the debt to “go away”.
The simple truth is we will have to raise ages of eligibility for Medicare and Social Security (cut back on benefits), allow the 2010 reversal of tax cuts, and likely raise more taxes on less wealthy tax payers to deal with the debt. But to do otherwise would be criminal in terms of shackling my children and grandchildren with unmanagble debt that will reduce their choices. This latter is fundamentally unfair. My children and future grandchildren had nothing to do with creating this problem.
Difficult choices that must be faced are in our near future.
I wrote a rather long letter to the Editor to the Eagle a few weeks ago on this subject. I have been disappointed that they have not seen fit to use it. Perhaps another example of the media choosing not to cover an upleasant subject - especially when we can gossip about Obama’s minister - surely a more important subject - the point of Crowson’s cartoon, today.
Challenging the Radical Left and their fraudulent claims against our brave troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Today, fraudulent war-crimes claims are again being circulated and given unquestioned credibility by certain Members of Congress. We intend to expose these unfair accusations against our troops in Iraq. The American people have the right to know the truth, as it was then, and as it is now. More importantly, they need to be alerted to the grave danger faced by our country if we elect officials who have declared their intention to repeat the worst mistake of the Vietnam War: legislating defeat.
This group of highly decorated Veterans just delivered this letter to all 535 members of congress demanding that the truth be told. Help us force Congress to face the truth.
To: United States Congress
From: Vietnam Veterans Legacy Foundation
Re: Iraq Veterans Against the War
A group calling themselves “Iraq Veterans Against the War” (IVAW) will march on Washington, DC, similar to the one staged in April, 1971 by their forebears, “Vietnam Veterans Against the War” (VVAW). Like their predecessors, IVAW will claim that several in their group have either participated in or witnessed war crimes committed by their fellow American troops in Iraq. According to news reports, the IVAW intends to have their claims of war crimes read into the Congressional Record.
Before you listen to or acknowledge them, you would do well to fact-check their stories, verify that the accusers actually served in combat units in Iraq at the times they claim, and determine if there is any support for and corroborating evidence of their war crime and atrocity claims. Many members of Congress were embarrassed by the VVAW some 37 years ago because they failed to conduct any investigation, instead accepting these allegations without question.
Click here to read the rest of the letter.
American pilots do not conduct air-raids on villages, killing civilians, nor are our troops cold-blooded murderers or terrorists. But, if you believe some current members of Congress who have accused our men and women in uniform of all that and worse, you would have to conclude our military is a barbarian horde, just as John Kerry had previously said.
It was a lie then, and it’s an even bigger lie today. The truth is that some in the U.S. Congress and their mouthpieces in the media now represent a much bigger threat to the lives of our men and women in combat, and our national security, than any foreign enemy.
Over the last few months, the “Liberal’s War on America” has gone badly.
* MoveOn, the New York Times, and Senators who accused Gen. Petraeus of being a traitor and a liar have been exposed and repudiated;
* The media’s attempted flim-flam to portray Iran’s Terrorist Dictator as a “Statesman,” tripped on Columbia University’s red carpet;
* The brave combat Marines whom Congressman Murtha and the press eagerly charged with “cold-blooded murders” in Iraq are being found innocent, acquitted one by one.
The “War” is not going well … the “War On America,” that is.
Those who claimed they “Supported the Troops” are finally being unmasked, shown for being the cowards they are. But, it won’t be long before they regroup, begin their own “Surge” in this decades-long “War On America.” We won’t stand by quietly when they do, nor should you.
My fellow POWs and I have long known the contempt the extreme Left has for our military. We felt the crush of rifle butts in our faces, beatings and unspeakable torture in the Hanoi Hilton Prison when we refused to kowtow to American traitors who traveled to these countries for propaganda “photo-ops” with our Communist jailors.
The so-called “anti-war movement,” lead by the likes of Lt. John Kerry and his mentor, Sen. Ted Kennedy, also said they “supported the troops”. What they didn’t say is whose “troops.”
We knew the answer then, we were witnesses and victims. It’s the same today. They “support” America’s enemies, any Communist Regime, Dictator or Terrorists that vow to kill and maim American soldiers and innocent civilians.
Today, our sons, daughters and grandchildren serving in uniform stand accused of being “terrorists,” “Nazis,” “cold-blooded murderers,” people who wantonly conduct “air raids on villages” bombing and killing civilians.
Every one of those spurious accusations were spewed from the Halls of Congress, most often by the same men and women who voted to send America’s youth to war, only to denounce, vilify and abandon them later, when the opportunity for personal, political advantage presented itself.
When I and my fellow veterans - POWs, Soldiers, Airmen, Marines and Sailors, all combat veterans alike - attempted to warn America about one of the most notorious turncoats from the Vietnam era, we were initially ignored by the mainstream media.
The treatment accorded General Petraeus by the same radicals in Congress and the media was strikingly similar to our experiences in 2004. Before he uttered a single word, this highly decorated combat veteran, this “Soldiers General”, a man of great honor who has and continues to risk his life in the defense of our country, stood accused, disparaged and berated by a pack of power-hungry shirkers and slackers unworthy to polish his combat medals. Contribute
Veterans who attempted to expose Sen. Kerry in were treated no better. But, Kerry and his band of Leftist comrades had something special in store for me and my fellow POWs and their wives.
We were sued repeatedly for three long years, forced to spend over $1 million just to defend ourselves in several frivolous lawsuits.
What did we do to cause such a prolonged, vindictive assault? We told the truth no Mainstream Media news operation had the courage to print nor wanted the American public to know, then or now.
Worse of all, Kerry’s self-aggrandizing, false accusations against American soldiers who had born the brunt of the bleeding and dying in Vietnam, spawned the myths our young men and women in Iraq today are forced to defend against, even as they fight for their lives on the battlefield each and every day.
You can draw a straight line from the deceitful Leftist tactics used to bring America’s defeat and dishonor in Vietnam to Iraq today.
America’s military didn’t lose the Vietnam War. Congress declared defeat, voted to abandon South Vietnam nearly two years after our last combat troops left. That sell-out, not only of our South Vietnam ally, but the nearly 60,000 Americans who gave their lives on the battlefield, ignited a genocidal holocaust throughout Southeast Asia that can still only be measured in the millions, an estimated three to five million innocent civilians brutally murdered.
We cannot let that happen again. You and I must not let that happen. You can stand shoulder to shoulder with us to prevent that from happening.
Four years ago, I and my fellow POWs and combat veterans created a non-profit organization, “The Vietnam Veterans Legacy Foundation”. Our goal is simple, to set the record straight about how gallant our mothers, fathers, sons and daughters served with honor as members of our Armed Forces. Little did we know then we’d be slapped with multiple lawsuits for daring to uncover the layer upon layer of lies that constitute the false history and not the truth.
Nor, could we know then the Left’s plans to use the same blueprint for defeat in Iraq.
But, in order to show that, to prove that and to reach the widest public audience we need your help. Three years of litigation and research has put us deeply in debt, $250,000.00 in legal fees alone. We do not have MoveOn.Org’s deep pockets, nor will we get a discount from The New York Times.
Anything you can afford to help us complete our mission, to set the record straight about Vietnam and, now, Iraq, is desperately needed and greatly appreciated. But, time is running short.
Once we get the truth out to the American people, there will be winners. Those winners will be every man and woman who has served in our Armed Forces. To them and their families, this is a war we cannot lose.
The “Liberal War On America” is just heating up again. What we do now will dictate America’s future, whether it is one of victory over terrorism, or, decades more of defeat, humiliation in a lost, but noble cause.
God Bless You and America,
Col. Bud Day
Among his many decorations from World War II, Korea and Vietnam, Col. Day is a Medal of Honor recipient and a combat pilot held captive for more than five years in the infamous Hanoi Hilton prison. Human Events
The above letter is not the opinion of Human Events, but Colonel Bud Day’s.
The cat fight between Obama and Clinton has been noticed (and enjoyed). But unfortunately, I’m seeing disagreement on personalities - not the content of the two candidates positions.
“Libs never gave a rats ass about the national debt, until Bush came along.”
It has never been so enormous and growing so fast before either. Reagan ran against Carter’s deficit - then proceeeded to vastly increase it. Bush 1 did Reagan one better by increasing it even more. Bill Clinton took steps to restrain the deficits - even getting to the point where the OPERATING surpluses were enough to cover debt service and begin to pay it down a bit.
I am going to post my letter to the editor that did not get published here. We can end the Iraq war tomorrow and that will not make any difference in the debt problems we now have. I think few people know that. There is no way we can promise for the government to cover health care costs of more people and expect the responsible paying down of the debt. I think your complaints about people not getting these facts are accurate. I used to not and my life was simplier in many ways when I did not.
Here is the LTTE:
There is one campaign slogan we won’t hear this 2008 election season: “If elected, I will cut popular entitlement programs and raise your taxes!” Politicians, who are consummate people-pleasers prefer to make promises of good news: “We will make the middle class our priority”; “We will give all people health insurance”; “No new taxes”; “We can grow out of this deficit”, etc. As responsible citizens, we have to demand that our politicians level with us on how they plan to change our national habit of deficit spending and tell us their specific proposals on how they plan to pay down the debt.
Some Facts: 1) our national debt is now $9,000,000,000,000 – that is nine trillion, with a t dollars – which is the same as every man, woman and child in this country owing $30,000; 2) in the last 31 of 35 years we have run deficit spending budgets (we took in less than we spent); 3) in the fiscal year 2006, our interest payment on the national debt made up 8.5% of the federal budget ( a mere 266.6 billion – with a b dollars); twenty four percent of our national debt is owed to foreign countries. Compounding the above difficult numbers is the fact that we will soon be experiencing a time of unprecedented stress on our tax base as baby boomers retire, and start drawing Medicare and Social Security. Unless we make substantial changes by 2040 nearly every penny collected in taxes will go toward paying Medicare, Social Security and interest on the debt.
Factors that make the boomer demographic retiring problem worse include: people are living longer; medical expenses are rising at rates beyond the rate of inflation; health care research advances mean that each year there is more health care to purchase; the Bush administration expanded the Medicare benefits by including prescription benefits.
Some myths that need busting with respect to solving our budget deficit and national debt are: 1) stopping the war in Iraq will not save enough money to solve our deficit/debt problems; 2) ending Bush’s tax cuts on the wealthiest Americans will help with revenue, but will not be enough to produce non-deficit spending and pay down the debt; 3) eliminating all waste and fraud in government spending, while a good idea, will not be sufficient to reverse our desperate budgetary situation.
“So why should I care about this budget deficit/debt issue?” some of you may ask. If the government’s resources are all directed at Social Security, Medicare, and the debt, there will be no money to invest in research, offer help with college loans, enforce health and safety laws, take care of national parks, provide a military, assure our safety from external threats and other functions we generally expect the government to carry out. If the current trend continues, these problems will be foisted off on our children and grandchildren, who had no part in creating these dire circumstances.
Blithely, ignoring this problem is not a viable option either. As Federal Reserve Chairman, Ben S. Bernanke, said about deficit spending and the debt in January, 2007:
“The longer we wait, the more severe, the more draconian, the more difficult, the adjustment is going to be. I think the right time to start is about 10 years ago.”
The more information a citizen a citizen can obtain on this complex subject can only be helpful. A simplified introduction to this problem and solution alternatives is the recently published book, Where Does the Money Go? Your Guided Tour of the Federal Budget Crisis by Scott Bittle and Jean Johnson – Collins publishers (2008). [Much of the facts and figures quoted in this article come from the preceding book]. These websites also include extensive information and tips on being an informed voter and what activities you can do that will help address this problem:
The Concord Coalition’s website: http://www.concordcoalition.org
Bittle & Johnson’s two websites are quite useful: http://www.facingup.org and http://www.publicagenda.org
If we are willing to make sacrifices, we can resolve this admittedly large problem. We owe our children and grandchildren nothing less.
Yeah, AW, don’t take our word for it–the figures are publicly available. The public debt actually tripled under Reagan. Bush I ran on “read my lips–no new taxes!”
Then the stock market crashed. As usual, Wall Street came first, and he broke his pledge, infuriating his conservative base.
One can claim some congressional complicity, but the difference is simple: Dems actually believe in paying for their programs.
In the book I link above, Bush I was listed as a hero for raising taxes in spite of the political suicide of that action given his “no new taxes” pledge.
I fear we don’t have any politicians today willing to do what is needed due to the blow-back from such actions. Those politicians won’t answer the pointed questions of how they plan to give us their promises (which are ludicris) unless we ask them. And they may not even then.
“My children and future grandchildren had nothing to do with creating this problem.”
And neither did you or I. But why should we pay the price to resolve it? Why should we have to work more years - before we get to enjoy the fruits of our labor, just like our parents do at 65? This is not progressive society. This is a decrease in benefit and a step backward in time.
Please don’t use the standard, “we are living longer”. Look at the actuarial tables the government uses for social security, medicare, IRS, and insurance industry uses.
Yes Americans are living longer. Those born TODAY, live longer than those born before.
But look at your year of birth.
For instance, if you are born in 1955, a male average is 66.7. A female 72.8 at birth.
So yes, if you change the retirement age, the government should do so - for YOUNGER workers who truly will be living much longer.
Further, is it fair to those in their fifties today, who have been saving all their lives for retirement, have made plans based upon social security - to pull the rug out from under those near retirement? How do we get younger and restart saving/investing?
But the issue is still a loss of entitlements for future generations.
You can also increase the 15% combined in FICA employees and employers are paying in now.
You can also allow younger workers to set up individual retirement accounts (Clinton), with a declining entitlement under SS.
Raising the retirement age is the “quick” answer, but it means many of us will die before receiving a penny (many will die before reaching the new age requirement).
It also means we will taking older blue collar workers, many who work manual labor - and forcing them to work when they are frail and medically have more problems. Insurance costs? Liability?
Maybe working until you die is the answer. Then we don’t need any benefits.
I’m not against being part of the SS solution. There should be a number of measures taken to protect the solvency of the SS for everyone.
Shared measures by all age groups. Like first, stop spending the SS dollars in the general fund!
I think the reason Rage is correct, is because each side blames the other, and nothing ever gets changed. Politicians like that.
I am a little concerned about the plan of passing this on to the next generation.
For there to be the widespread public support that isneeded to address this problem, there will have to be a perception of “fairness” in the solution.
I did not vote for the administrations who produced the greatest amount of deficit spending, but given that my generation did, in MY country, I think it is part of my responsibility. I wonder if you recovering Republicans understand that if Americans see sacrifices as fair for one and all, they are willing to participate. If they see that The AmWays of the country get a free ride because they think they should, the people tend not to so whole-heartedly support the solutions.
The solution to this problem is going to require all of our participation, poor, rich, and middle class.
I hope I get to work until I die. This would be harder for some workers. There are solution alternatives that can be put on the table with varying impacts on different groups. It is vitally important, I think, that we continue to look at solution alternatives. And then implement what we can agree upon.
AmWay - being 60 I agree with much of what you say. Actually, even we are living substantially longer than our parents - that is why the modest increase in age to 66 makes sense for us. However, as you correctly note, we have been paying on our ‘contract’ for many decades now so making massive changes just doesn’t wash.
One fairly modest change I would like to see - raise the ‘cap’ on earnings to be taxed. It might just be eliminated altogether but at least raise to 150% the current level. My reasonong for that: It is the high wage-earner who is more likely to use spousal benefits. Most of us below that amount are in 2-earner families and each spouse collects his-her own account. Thus the high earner can collect 150% of what he would otherwise collect.
If in our household budget we withdraw the money set aside for our vacation and spend it to buy a new wide screen TV who is at blame when we can’t take a family vacation?
We are, just as congress is in expecting to fullfill the promises made to older Americans from an empty ‘lockbox’. Only Algore ever thought there was one of those.
We have to bite the bullet and rebuild our vacation reserve just as the gov has to rebuild the SS reserve. For a family this means eating out less often, fewer movies, etc.. For our gov it means fewer entitlement programs not introducing new ones. It means not raising taxes especially on businesses so job growth will occur. In short it means tightening our belts and not expecting all of the answers to come from gov. They are clueless.
Excuse me - I dont believe Chas. is here now. I have no idea what you are talking about. What does it matter if Chas. responds to something I post? I also responded to something Chas. posted too. Your stupid point would be what?
“A reduced working pool forces employers to pay more. Thus more revenue for Social Security.”
J R,
Email me and tell me how I can get a book to you that I think you need to read. Thanks.
Ben,
If I understand you correctly, you are advocating a “means testing” of sorts on social security? There might be a variety of viable options in that area.
I still can’t accept the argument that we are not more responsible for this mess than future generations. We are. We allowed it to happen. Isn’t it only right that we fix it?
I think the reason Rage is correct, is because each side blames the other, and nothing ever gets changed. Politicians like that.
There’s some truth to that. I remember seeing Jim Slattery in a House budget committee meeting (on CSPAN): “Let’s just say the Republicans are 50% responsible, and the Democrats are 50% responsible, and get on with the rat killing!”
“We have to bite the bullet and rebuild our vacation reserve just as the gov has to rebuild the SS reserve. For a family this means eating out less often, fewer movies, etc.. For our gov it means fewer entitlement programs not introducing new ones. It means not raising taxes especially on businesses so job growth will occur. In short it means tightening our belts and not expecting all of the answers to come from gov. They are clueless.”
For anything to work, it will have to be perceived as fair - meaning everybody has to make a sacrifice. You are at least 90% accurate here, grm. The only place we diverge, is that business while important, is not a sacred cow that doesn’t have to make sacrifices, too. In my lexicon, everybody, means everybody.
Lest I forget, the alternative miniumu tax will have to be maintained, too. Would I b*tch like a wounded cat, if I had to pay that tax. You bet, I would. But, we need all the tax revenue we can get.
“If I understand you correctly, you are advocating a “means testing” of sorts on social security? There might be a variety of viable options in that area.”
This should be a non-starter. If you paid in, you were part of the “contract” in place since FDR. You have a reasonable expectation to receive a return of the money paid in. You planned on it. You invested on it.
Let me use myself as an example (always the worst, but it works here).
I consider myself lucky to have a very good job. Actually a couple of them. My wife and I have managed to raise our kids, put them through college without school loans (in the kids names, not ours as FAFSA says we didn’t qualify), and saved for retirement. Although we have what we consider a very good income between our three jobs, we still cut coupons and budget for a modest lifestyle. We only owe for our mortgage and we are paying additional amounts to get that gone.
Meanwhile, I work with guys who have saved nothing. They have big boats on the lake, big SUV’s and pick ups, snow mobiles, jet skies, and a cabin at the lake. They are entitled to. I’m happy for them!
But here is the crux of my problem. As these are friends and business acquaintences, we talk about the company 401K, DRIPS, and Stock Purchase Plan. I cannot believe many of my peers in my age group - have saved nothing for retirement. Their kids went to school with student loans (they qualified because they had no investments). We are on the same pay scale. They buy a new truck/car every year, while I drive mine until they fall apart.
So we both arrive at that retirement door (age 62 looks good) at the same time.
The saver: Has much income/investments
The spender: Has nothing
So if you “means” test us, I will take a cut in SS benefits, while the guy who saved nothing gets more?
“or anything to work, it will have to be perceived as fair - meaning everybody has to make a sacrifice.”
And that includes everyone on the economic scale.
Not just punish the rich. Desperate times remember?
We need to cut the Unearned Income Credit which provides more money from our nations revenue system than receipients paid in.
How would you get less, Amway?? YOU will get your SSA benefit, PLUS the dividends from your investments… Your work buddies will only have their SSA benefit. They should end up with a LOT less monthly income than you will, because of your investment income…
The burden of solving the Social Security fiscal crisis should fall on all Americans, but it won’t.
The current retirees are among the wealthiest of Americans. And since they have $$$ and almost all of them vote, they will refuse to consider any types of means test for themselves. This is the last generation of Americans who will receive back more from Social Security then what they paid in.
The current boomers born 1946 to 1964 who haven’t yet retired, will ultimately have some means test and/or increased retirement age. Those who didn’t work much and didn’t save a dime, will see no cuts, other then the cut the retirement age will bring to them. SS tax increases will also impact this group.
(Prediction: There will be a means test on the retirement age. Those who didn’t work much or save much will retire at 62, the rest of us at 67 for early retirement. Normal retirement will be raised to age 70)
Those born after 1964, now that will be an interesting story. They will be asked to pay higher taxes, get lower benefits, and retire later then anyone else. The question is not IF, but WHEN will this group have enough political capital to shred Social Security and screw the older generations?
It’s nice to know that some Democrats, (ie Davis above, good post at 11:31), have finally admited that there IS a Social Security/Medicare fiscal crisis.
Recognizing the problem is the first step. Arriving at a solution shared by all generations is the next challenge. Political infighting between parties and between generations, will make for a butt ugly solution.
There likely will be little or no solution enacted until after 2020 when the bulk of the baby boomers have retired, and the annual $5 Trillion budget deficits hit. At that time, the political capital of those born after 1964, will approach or equal their elders.
Should be a good show to watch. Course the current retirees today are safe and sound in not sharing in any part of the solution to the problem which THEIR generation created. They will all be dead when the shit hits the fan.
Interesting that the only Democrat solutions are to raise taxes. NEVER, not once, has Federal Spending be cut. I say try that approach first, before going back to the old approach.
: :
Posted March 15, 2008 at 7:31 am | Permalink
Ponderings for Palm Sunday >>>>
A poem by Rev. G. A. Studdert-Kennedy, titled:
“Indifference.”
When Jesus came to Golgotha
they hanged Him on a tree,
They drove great nails through hands and feet, and made a Calvary;
They crowned Him with a crown of thorns,
red were His wounds and deep,
For those were crude and cruel days,
and human flesh was cheap.
When Jesus came to our town,
they simply passed Him by,
They never hurt a hair of him,
they only let Him die;
For men had grown more tender,
and they would not give Him pain,
They only just passed down the street,
and left Him in the rain.
Still Jesus cried, “Forgive them,
for they know not what they do,”
And still it rained the winter rain
that drenched Him through and through;
The crowds went home and left the streets
without a soul to see,
And Jesus crouched against a wall
and cried for Calvary.
Oh yea!!
: :
Posted March 15, 2008 at 7:32 am | Permalink
I think Chas. had a good thought for the weekend. The poet is an early 20th Century British Clergyman, of the Anglican tradition.
Chas, As you can see you are busted. My eyes work well. This is what hurts the blog. You had a good thought as :: and then posted as if Chas had posted it.
I, of course, don’t know about your situation, but say in the case of Bill Gates and Oprah, they get no Social Security. Sorry guy and gal, don’t think you will even notice that sacrifice. Of course this raises the question where should the means testing boundry be? And will it make that much difference? - maybe it won’t. Don’t have enough data for an informed opinion on this one.
I did not use to be, but I am now, in favor of a gradual introduction of allowances for younger workers to pay into private accounts if they want. This is trickier than it sounds - would like to have more data on this, too.
Steve I agree with Amway that while we were driving a 15 year old PU our neighbors and friends who got new vehicles every 3 years will draw more ss because they less savings,
Steve private accounts would be the answer for me also. This rewards those who actually work and doesn’t put the gove in the business of deciding who gets what.
he only rode for 3 miles. I think you’re thinking of Israel Bissell.
who alerted the American colonists of the British attack on April 19, 1775. He rode for four days and six hours covering the 345 miles from Watertown, Massachusetts to Philadelphia along the Old Post Road, shouting “To arms, to arms, the war has begun,” and carrying a message from General Joseph Palmer which was copied at each of his stops and redistributed:
Ok, granny, I’ll admit that excuse can be contrived to be a tad bit lame considering that everything on this blog is SUPPOSED to be anonymous. But you gotta admit, compared to excuses coming out of this administration the last 6 years or so, that excuse does the 3 second 100 meter dash.
Ghot the problem is that SS is still called an unfunded mandate by the left. Hardly. Put that same amount in a savings account with compounded dividends and interest and you would have far more than you will ever draw from SS. And you could leave anything left to your survivors.
If the gov continues to collect the money they owe retirees they must pay. It must be changed now for future ‘investors’.
I remember Bill Gates, some time back, talking about his wealth, observing that you can only have so nice a house, eat so well, do so many things you want to do, and beyond a certain point the extra extra money doesn’t do anything more
The people in Dick Cheney’s crowd beg to differ, unfortunately. Crushing democracy is one thing that huge sums of money does quite well. Too bad we never learned the lessons of the past.
The Clinton V. Obama fight is getting ugly. This from another blog:
From the Chicago Sun Times:
For more than five weeks during the brutal winter of 1997, tenants shivered without heat in a government-subsidized apartment building on Chicago’s South Side.
It was just four years after the landlords — Antoin “Tony” Rezko and his partner Daniel Mahru — had rehabbed the 31-unit building in Englewood with a loan from Chicago taxpayers.
Rezko and Mahru couldn’t find money to get the heat back on.
But their company, Rezmar Corp., did come up with $1,000 to give to the political campaign fund of Barack Obama, the newly elected state senator whose district included the unheated building….
The building in Englewood was one of 30 Rezmar rehabbed in a series of troubled deals largely financed by taxpayers. Every project ran into financial difficulty. More than half went into foreclosure, a Chicago Sun-Times investigation has found.
“Their buildings were falling apart,” said a former city official. “They just didn’t pay attention to the condition of these buildings.”
Eleven of Rezko’s buildings were in Obama’s state Senate district….
Rezko and Mahru had no construction experience when they created Rezmar in 1989 to rehabilitate apartments for the poor under the Daley administration. Between 1989 and 1998, Rezmar made deals to rehab 30 buildings, a total of 1,025 apartments. The last 15 buildings involved Davis Miner Barnhill & Galland during Obama’s time with the firm.
Rezko and Mahru also managed the buildings, which were supposed to provide homes for poor people for 30 years. Every one of the projects ran into trouble:
* Seventeen buildings — many beset with code violations, including a lack of heat — ended up in foreclosure.
* Six buildings are currently boarded up.
* Hundreds of the apartments are vacant, in need of major repairs.
* Taxpayers have been stuck with millions in unpaid loans.
* At least a dozen times, the city of Chicago sued Rezmar for failure to heat buildings.
*****
In fairness Repubs aren’t the only ones who do the “guilt by association” fallacy.
So if I put a dollar a week into a savings account my employer would match that? And I’d get the same interest rate the gov’t gets for that money put in? For some reason I have trouble with the logic of this. Maybe it’s as simple as some people just couldn’t afford to put the $ into savings. Maybe some just WON’T (yeah, I know there are those out there, but not everyone in lower soc/econ rungs are wastrels). I guess I just stupidly still believe the gov’t has more sense than I do and that’s why there is SS.
BTW, isn’t the biggest prob of SS that it’s been borrowed so drastically for the last several decades? Kinda like pension funds before the CEOs abscond with the funds and companies fold?
You know, KsGrm/B***h/W*nch, I have just about had it with your self righteous arrogance… And especially since it’s HOLY WEEK… NOW EAT your freiggin words!!! >>>>
Chas.
Posted March 14, 2008 at 10:06 pm | Permalink
A poem by Rev. G. A. Studdert-Kennedy, titled:
“Indifference.”
When Jesus came to Golgotha
they hanged Him on a tree,
They drove great nails through hands and feet, and made a Calvary;
They crowned Him with a crown of thorns,
red were His wounds and deep,
For those were crude and cruel days,
and human flesh was cheap.
When Jesus came to our town,
they simply passed Him by,
They never hurt a hair of him,
they only let Him die;
For men had grown more tender,
and they would not give Him pain,
They only just passed down the street,
and left Him in the rain.
Still Jesus cried, “Forgive them,
for they know not what they do,”
And still it rained the winter rain
that drenched Him through and through;
The crowds went home and left the streets
without a soul to see,
And Jesus crouched against a wall
and cried for Calvary.
Oh yea!!
NOW — Smart A$$ — WHEN did I first post that wonderful poem??? And WHEN was iot that Square Peg later re-posted it??
Rage, Steven - correct. This issue just might have ‘legs’ - we shall see. As I noted above - PA will be telling in many ways. As will the re-dos coming later.
Rage, I remember something in the paper on a Bill Gates article. It alluded that donating %5 of your net worth provided exemptions from most taxes. The paper didn’t elaborate all the ins and outs. I just can’t help drool…If I donated 5% of my net worth the gov’t would be PAYING me big time. I’d just have a hard time figuring who’d need the two rolls of toilet paper.
Ghop I have seen spreadsheets on this premise. They show that it does benefit the retiree. The problem as you mentioned is those who won’t save. You can’t legislate responsibility.
I can’t really afford my 1/2 of the SS I pay in; no way I could kick in my employers share, too. I’d say a few more months and one more kid hits the streets (graduation), but the last one ended up costing me more money since he moved out. Seems they always forget to bring diapers when we watch the grandkids, are no longer at home, and we have to toodle to Wal-Mart.
One thing not accounted for, though, it’s reasonably sure you’ll probably get the SS whereas if your bank, and enough other banks fold, FDIC will flounder and you may
278 Comments
Run your car on water! So they say!!!
http://www.drivewithwaterfuel.com/?hop=hvac1981
No trend
In other violence on Tuesday, gunman attacked a police checkpoint in Mosul, northern Iraq, killing four policemen, with four deaths also among the gunmen.
In Duluiyah, north of the capital Baghdad, a suicide bomber blew up a truck at a checkpoint killing five people.
Nine US troops and an interpreter have also been killed since Monday.
Correspondents say the levels of Tuesday’s violence were reminiscent of the worst days of the anti-US insurgency and sectarian killings in 2006 and 2007.
However, US military spokespeople have said recent violence should not be taken as evidence of a trend.
“I think we need to continue to look at historically what has happened over the last year to really put in perspective a one-week or two-weeks’ worth of activity inside Baghdad,” said Rear Adm Gregory Smith on Sunday.
Daily death tolls had fallen between August 2007 and January 2008, when on average 20 Iraqis died in violence per day.
Media reports say the average was 26 Iraqis in February and is up to 39 so far in March.
Everything the Federal Reserve has done so far has been to prop up the stock market. The stock market is a negligible percentage of the u.s. economy, but the repository of almost all wealth. Each cut in interest rates translates into a rise in inflation that wipes out any good it does, as 90 percent of this economy is consumer driven. You can cut the rate when the dollar is strong, but it is suicide when the dollar is weak. The dollar is weak because of Bush Tax Cuts, the deficit and the unfunded war. Just try to explain that to a 70-year-old grocery clerk in Dreayville who think Hillary Clinton is a criminal due to 16 years of Limbaugh lies
Where to the suicide bombers in Iraq come from?
“Saudi Arabia, home of most of the 9/11 hijackers, is the single largest source.”
So why does the House of Bush refuse to acknowledge that it is the House of Saud that harbors international terrorism - especially alQuada?
http://www.kansas.com/wireupdates/story/342749.html
Cute Headline:
http://www.nj.com/southjersey/index.ssf/2008/03/prostitution_chews_her_up_and.html
Prostitution chews her up and Spitzer out
by South Jersey News Online
Sunday March 16, 2008, 8:00 AM
When Ashley Youmans was a young Jersey girl growing up Beachwood, she had no idea a New York City prostitution ring was waiting to chew her up and Spitzer out.
But, as the entire, ogling world found out this week, that’s just what happened. About-to-be former New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer paid Youmans — later “Ashley Alexandra Dupre” and, in court documents, “Kristen” — for sex.
His wife was less than thrilled. The state of New York wasn’t too psyched, either.
You really need to get laid at least once in your life, Max.
Vote for Obama, Cause HE’S Black:
http://voices.kansascity.com/node/719
Skin color is a factor for Barack Obama
By E. Thomas McClanahan, Star Editorial Board
Geraldine Ferraro sure stepped on a political land mine the other day. Barack Obama, she said, wouldn’t be where he is today if he hadn’t been black.
It was a textbook-level gaffe, meaning Ferraro said something impolitic — but true.
She resigned from whatever position she had with Hillary Clinton’s campaign and spent the next couple of days explaining herself on talk shows.
Meanwhile, Obama also has some explaining to do regarding his pastor.
Obama was supposed to be the transcendent candidate, the one who would move us all beyond race, but the race thing won’t go away, and how could it? The fact of Obama’s race is integral to his mystique and his political success.
As Mickey Kaus pointed out on his blog, kausfiles.com: “If Obama were white, he wouldn’t embody hopes of a post-racial future. Duh! That’s part of his appeal. It seems obvious. … Why isn’t Ferraro allowed to acknowledge it?”
Obama KNEW about Wright’s Racist Sermons! There goes that excuse.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/03/just-what-did-o.html
Just What Did Obama Know About Wright’s Past Sermons?
March 15, 2008 6:15 PM
In his Friday night cable mea culpas on the incendiary comments made by his spiritual adviser Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., repeatedly said, “I wasn’t in church during the time that these statement were made. I did not hear such incendiary language myself, personally. Either in conversations with him or when I was in the pew, he always preached the social gospel. … If I had heard them repeated, I would have quit. … If I thought that was the repeated tenor of the church, then I wouldn’t feel comfortable there.”
Obama told CNN that he “didn’t know about all these statements. I knew about one or two of these statements that had been made.
One or two statements would not lead me to distance myself from either my church or my pastor. … If I had thought that was the tenor or tone on an ongoing basis, then yes, I don’t think it would have been reflective of my values.”
But according to a New York Times story from a year ago, the Obama campaign dis-invited Wright from delivering a public invocation at Obama’s candidacy announcement.
“Fifteen minutes before Shabbos I get a call from Barack,” Wright told the Times. “One of his members had talked him into uninviting me.”
In a phone call with Wright, Obama cited a Rolling Stone story, “The Radical Roots of Barack Obama,” (the name of which has curiously been changed on the RS website) and told him, according to Wright, “You can get kind of rough in the sermons, so what we’ve decided is that it’s best for you not to be out there in public.”
That story included the following passage:
Max OK we get it you don’t like Democrats / Liberals ——- now stfu you are boring in your far reich wing fascist stupidity …………
Awwwwwwww, Obama had a baaaaddddd week. Too bad!
Maybe Ashley Alexandra Dupre could help cheer him up!?
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=4458258&page=1
Obama Battles Through Bad Week
Candidate Faces Criticism Over Ties to Radical Pastor and Indicted Businessman
What should have been a good week for Barack Obama has turned into one of the worst of his campaign.
Despite winning the Mississippi primary and increasing his lead in convention delegates, he was thrown off stride by dealings with a former fundraiser and inflammatory remarks by his one-time pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, that are getting wide play on YouTube and TV including “Not God Bless America. God Damn America.”
Who the phuck is “we” LR?
LR speaks for LR. You been elected something?
Funny how the Libs can’t handle the truth about their beloved Liberal Socialist Democrat party.
So it’s natural for them to personally attack anyone whe dares to post bad news about the Dems.
Personal attacks, it’s all they got.
Clinton has the Superdelegates in her back pocket, Obama’s Rezko/Church scandal are blowing up in his face, and Clinton will steal the deal, getting the nomination for sure by having DO OVER elections in Michigan and Florida.
Everyone hates her, but she’ll win anyway! That’s the Dem Way!
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation/politics/bal-id.infocus16mar16,0,4378635.story
Clinton has reason to count on superdelegates
March 16, 2008
Barack Obama blew Hillary Clinton away in last month’s Mid-Atlantic primary. Nearly half of Obama’s delegate lead over Clinton can be traced to his landslide victories in Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia.
But the region’s superdelegates are in a different camp. Those who have made endorsements favor Clinton over Obama in each of the jurisdictions that held primaries that day.
The filthy rich Dems can be found here:
http://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/overview.php
Notice, not ONE post cited a Right Wing website.
All da bad news is coming from the Left, about the Left.
Max - I will grant that it will be real interesting now to see how PA goes - and then what happens with the ‘do-overs’ in FL and MI. IF Clinton wins those I don’t see how you can claim that she would be STEALING it.
“All da bad news is coming from the Left, about the Left.”
Unlike you Max, people on the left can deal with the truth. I love this conflation tactic, if you think or believe differently than me, you MUST be in the “Hate America First” crowd. To which my new response will be “Heil Hitler” for adopting the same argument used by the worst and most deadly fascist regime in the history of the world.
Crowson cartoon today was excellent:
http://www.kansas.com/599/image_media/341882.html
The only red flag he forgot was the 9 trillion dollar national debt, to which the sitting president added more to than all preceding presidents combined.
Yeah, Max, if I were you I would be looking for all the bright and shiny objects you can find. Arguing on behalf of your party’s record would not only be difficlut, it would be patently insane.
Have a good day, oh deluded one…
The real news that Max is hoping you don’t notice:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/15/AR2008031502047.html?hpid=topnews
Statehouse news to be reconvened tomorrow:
LATE TERM ABORTION BILL TO BE DEBATED Monday
The House Fed & State Affairs Committee passed out a late-term abortion bill to the full House last Monday, which will be debated on the floor next Monday. The committee illuminated a provision requiring doctors to provide more specific diagnoses for late-term abortions on forms sent to the state. The approved bill, now the House substitute for SB 389, added a requirement that women seeking late-term abortions be given information on free counseling for medically challenging pregnancies and free perinatal hospice services. The committee removed the contents of a bill passed unanimously by the Senate to require Senate confirmation of legislative appointments.
The bill would make several amendments dealing with late term abortions. It would authorize information obtained by the Secretary of the Department of Health and Environment, including identification of physicians and medical care facilities reporting to the Secretary, to be disclosed to the district and county attorneys in addition to the Board of Healing Arts and the Attorney General.
Under the bill, annual public reports issued by the Secretary on abortions performed would have to contain the number of pregnancies terminated, the type of medical facility and other information required to be reported to the Secretary except for information deemed to be confidential. The bill would require the Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services (SRS) to publish an annual report of child sexual abuse cases received by SRS from abortion providers. The name of the child and any other identifying information would be kept confidential and would not be included in the report. In addition, the bill would require that at least 30 minutes prior to an abortion a written copy of the documented referral and the abortion-performing physician’ s determination that the abortion is necessary to preserve the life of the woman or prevent substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function (as required by the Kansas late term abortion
statute) must be provided to the woman except in the case of a medical emergency. The name of the referring physician would have to be included in the report to the Secretary.
The bill would provide a civil cause of action (lawsuit) for injunctive relief and monetary damages against any person who violated the Act. The following people would have standing to seek an injunction against an abortion provider: The woman upon whom the abortion was preformed; a spouse, sibling, parent or grandparent of the woman; the parent or legal guardian of the woman if she is a minor; and any public official with appropriate jurisdiction to prosecute or enforce the laws of the State. The bill would allow a woman upon whom an abortion was performed, a father if married to the woman, and the parents or custodial guardian of a minor to have standing to bring a lawsuit for monetary damages for violations to the Act. The statutory damages for injuries suffered would be equal to three times the cost of the abortion and reasonable attorney fees.
The bill would require that a minor provide proof of identification and verification of such minor’s state of residence. In addition, any individual accompanying the minor also must provide proof of identification and make a written declaration as to such individual’s relationship to the minor and to the known or probable father of the fetus. Medical records of counseling would have to be retained for at least ten years. Under the bill, if an un-emanicipated minor objects to giving notice of intent to have an abortion to such minor’s custodial parents, the minor would be required to petition the courts prior to the abortion for a waiver of the notice requirement. No notice would be required if the pregnant minor declares the father of the fetus is one of the persons whom notice is given and the minor is granted a waiver of notice by the court. Neither the counselor nor any person employed by the abortion provider would be allowed to accompany or assist the minor in any court proceedings.
In addition, the judicial record of the courts would have to be given to the minor or adult chosen by the minor and a second copy would have to be sent to the abortion provider to be included in the medical records of the minor. The judicial record would have to remain in the minor’s medical records and kept by the abortion provider for at least ten years. The chief judge of each judicial district would be required to send annual reports to the Department of Health and Environment disclosing in a non-identifiable manner, the following:
? The number of minors seeking bypass of parental notification;
? The number of petitions granted;
? The reasons for granting such petitions;
? Any actions taken to protect the minor from domestic or predator abuse;
? Each minor’s state of residence, age and disability status; and
? The gestational age of the fetus if the petition is granted.
Under the bill, if during the judicial hearing on a petition, the court suspects physical, mental, emotional, or sexual abuse, the court would be required to report those suspicions to the appropriate authority while providing anonymity or confidentiality of the judicial waiver proceedings. The bill would require agents acting within the scope of their employment with persons providing medical or treatment to file reports of abuse. At least 24 hours before the abortion, the physician would have to inform the woman in writing that contact information for free counseling assistance, free perinatal hospice service, and services from medical specialists are available. And, the bill would require that the abortion provider, at least 30 minutes prior to the abortion, provide the woman with the opportunity to view the ultrasound image of the fetus if ultrasound equipment is used in performing the abortion and an opportunity to listen to the heartbeat of the fetus if heart monitoring equipment is used. The physician is required to certify that such offer was made and whether they were accepted or rejected by the woman. Such certification would have to be kept in the woman’s medical records for at least ten years.
Opponents of the bill said that the bill continues to restrict access for women who seek reproductive health-care services. Kansans for Life, which opposes abortion, did not comment on the bill when asked by reporters. The bill’s sponsor, Olathe Republican Rep. Lance Kinzer, dropped the provision for more specific reporting requirements to give other parts of the package a better chance at approval. Gov. Sebelius previously vetoed a measure that would have required the state to collect more detailed diagnoses. The approved bill has a provision that allows a group of 10 or more Kansans to sue the KDHE and force it to provide the information required by law on late-term abortion forms.
Kinzer contends that information already should include a specific diagnosis. The forms, which already are public records, don’t contain personal information. The KDHE has said that it doesn’t require a specific diagnosis. The bill provides “the right for citizens to have that information and a legal process to require KDHE to turn over that information,” Kinzer said.
Rep. Ann Mah, D-Topeka, argued that if getting more information is the issue, lawmakers should approve a bill requiring the more detailed diagnosis instead of a broader measure with more provisions.
Requiring just a specific diagnosis would give the bill more support, she said. Kinzer said it would be a mistake to go with the less comprehensive measure.
Other provisions in the proposal include:
? A requirement that women be provided a chance to ask the physician about the procedure at least 30 minutes before the abortion is performed.
? Allowing women the chance to see any ultrasound images taken of their fetus or hear a fetal heartbeat.
? Requiring the Kansas Board of Healing Arts to revoke the medical license of a doctor who breaks the state’s late-term abortion law.
? Allowing the attorney general, district or county attorney to prosecute a reported violation in the county where it happened or the county where the woman lives.
BILL WOULD ALLOW SALE OF AUTOMATIC WEAPONS
Gun dealers, manufacturers and private citizens could possess automatic weapons under a bill considered yesterday by the House Federal & State Affairs Committee. Supporters of the measure say it would help firearms dealers hurt by a recent interpretation of Kansas law, and most on the committee appeared favorable to the legislation. Some, however, questioned whether the proposal went too far in allowing individuals the right to own a machine gun. “I don’t think law enforcement thinks it’s the end of the world if it gets expanded,” said Ed Klumpp, lobbyist for the Kansas Association of Chiefs of Police and a former Topeka police chief. “But they’re not excited about it either.”
In December, then-Attorney General Paul Morrison issued an opinion saying Kansas law doesn’t allow sales of automatic weapons. The bill would put the law back in line with how it was previously understood and it also goes one step further. The legislation would give individuals the opportunity to purchase, for instance, a machine gun. Klumpp said his group supported the right of dealers and manufacturers to sell the weapons to law enforcement but was wary of expanding the bill to private citizens. “We just have failed to hear any valid reasons for expanding it to individuals,” he said. Do people need a reason? responded Rep.
Candy Ruff, D-Leavenworth. “If people want to possess it, it’s up to them,” she said.
Supporters of the bill pointed out that states surrounding Kansas already have this law, as does the federal government. Jordan Austin, lobbyist for the National Rifle Association, clicked off the laundry list of requirements for someone to be able to own an automatic weapon — a background check, local law enforcement approval, fingerprints, photographs, a $200 fee and a dictionary-sized book of regulations to follow. Tim McGill, whose Cine Specialists in Wichita provides firearms for the movie industry, said it isn’t unusual for a machine gun to cost upwards of $30,000, well out of the financial reach for most people.
“The idea that people are going around willy-nilly shooting is probably not a likelihood,” McGill said.
The committee did hear a bill last week that would have allowed dealers in Kansas to own and sell the weapons but not manufacturers or importers.
The committee is expected to vote on the measure next week.
IMMIGRATION BILLS BEING WORKED CONCURRENTLY IN EACH HOUSE
The Senate Federal and State Affairs Committee approved an immigration reform bill the chamber called “a giant step forward.” But supporters of the original bill were seething after the measure was stripped of virtually all penalties on businesses that knowingly hire undocumented workers, instead making that a civil offense. The bill now heads to the Senate floor for a vote. In addition to the removal of penalties for businesses, the Senate proposal also struck the requirement that employers use E-Verify, a federal database used to check the legal status of workers. Instead, businesses that voluntarily use the system can use that fact as a defense during legal proceedings.
The business community opposed requiring use of E-Verify, saying the system is unreliable.
The original senate bill mandated anywhere from a 10-day suspension of business licenses up to a permanent suspension for employers knowingly hiring undocumented workers. Business groups like the state chamber, the Farm Bureau, and Kansas Livestock Association said that provision could shut down entire industries.
During Wednesday’s meeting, Senator John Vratil, R-Leawood, offered an amendment striking that language, much to the displeasure of Sen.
Ralph Ostmeyer, R-Grinnell, one of the original measure’s sponsors. “We just destroyed the bill,” he said. Sen. Shirley Palmer, R-Augusta, another sponsor of the original bill went further, saying supporters of the new language were “on the side of power and money.” Vratil’s amendment also created the crime of using false identification to obtain a job and engaging in human trafficking.
Meanwhile, the House Federal and State Affairs Committee worked until about 9 p.m. Wednesday night on its version of immigration reform.
IMMIGRATION BILLS TO BE DEBATED NEXT WEEK IN HOUSE & SENATE
Lawmakers in House and Senate committees on Wednesday passed two watered-down illegal immigration reform bills with few sanctions for businesses that employ illegal immigrants. “We gave the problem a pass,” said Rep. Ann Mah, D-Topeka, in the House Committee on Federal and State Affairs. She called the proposal a “sucker punch.” The House committee, which met into the evening, rejected two amendments that would have removed the chance of a business losing its license for employing illegal immigrants. On Monday, House lawmakers had changed the bill to require only that businesses use the federal verification system e-Verify if a jury had found they knowingly employed illegal immigrants. Second and third violations could lead to the businesses temporarily losing their licenses. The House bill, House Substitute for SB 329, also includes a phase-in process under which first state agencies and contractors and then private businesses by 2010 would be required to use the e-Verify system.
The House committee cut a section requiring everyone who got a Kansas driver’s license to sign an affidavit stating that they were a U.S. citizen. But the bill still contains a provision under which state agencies — such as law enforcement departments — could lose their state funding in some circumstances for not enforcing immigration laws.
The Senate version had a similar fate in the Federal and State Affairs Committee, with one sponsor calling the revision “major surgery.” The bill’s two sponsors on the committee, Republican Sens.
Jim Barnett of Emporia and Ralph Ostmeyer of Grinnell, voted against the revised measure. Ed Hayes, chapter director for the Kansas Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, asked: “How can they gut this thing when the citizens of Kansas are calling 300 to one to leave it in its original form?” after the Senate committee met in the morning. The answer to that question is the strong opposition to the employer sanctions by the Kansas Chamber of Commerce & Industry, the Kansas Farm Bureau and the Kansas Livestock Association, three big powerful interest groups here in the Capitol. The Senate’s revised measure, now Substitute for SB 458, no longer requires businesses to check employees’ work eligibility through the federal e-Verify system. It also removes most penalties for businesses that violate the law. Jeffrey Glendening, vice president of the Kansas Chamber, called the revised Senate bill “a giant step forward.”
However, sponsor Sen. Peggy Palmer, R-Augusta, said the new bill took the side of big business and did nothing to solve the problem. An amendment offered by Sen. John Vratil, R-Leawood, eliminated broad swaths of Palmer’s original proposal and added three amendments. His changes cut out a section that would have required law enforcement officers to ask about the citizenship or immigration status of everyone they stopped. The House committee kept a similar provision but only required the request if an arrest was made. Vratil also added a section that made using false or misleading documents to get a job a felony and made it a felony to coerce another person to work.
Both measures now go to their respective chambers and ours comes up for debate next Thursday. Neither bill would eliminate in-state tuition for illegal immigrants children who graduated from Kansas high schools but there are expected to be efforts to add lots of stuff on the floor of the House.
(IT APPEARS THE KANSAS LEGISLATURE HAS WATERED DOWN A STRONG ANTI-ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION BILL. LEGISLATURES FROM BOTH SIDES ARE COMING ON STRONG IN PUBLIC, BUT IT APPEARS THEY WILL KNUCKLE UNDER NEXT WEEK AND DO LITTLE IF ANY CHANGES.)
(IF THIS ISSUE CONCERNS YOU: BETTER MAKE YOUR TELEPHONE CALLS/EMAILS TO YOUR REPRESENTATIVES TOMORROW!)
(WITHOUT A PUBLIC OUTCRY, THE 2008 ACTIONS WILL BE LITTLE MORE THAN LIP SERVICE TO THE CITIZENS.)
“The only red flag he forgot was the 9 trillion dollar national debt, to which the sitting president added more to than all preceding presidents combined.”
Of course the poster says libs can deal with the truth. But the truth did not matter when Bill Clinton added 1.5 trillion dollars to the national debt. A record at THAT time. Libs never gave a rats ass about the national debt, until Bush came along.
Wanna talk earmarks? Libs decried the republicans 2006 earmarks. Then quietly passed 20 BILLION dollars of their own earmarks.
Ho-hum.
you are boring in your far reich wing fascist stupidity …………
Actually, I find him somewhat humorous. Nearly every one of his post screams “Cherry Boy”
BILL WOULD ALLOW SALE OF AUTOMATIC WEAPONS
Now we won’t see max at all the rest of the day. He’ll be holed up in the bathroom with his Guns ‘n’ Ammo mag in one hand and his little rifle in the other.
Max you must have struck a nerve.
You have the party which says they are above the personal attacks and name-calling….
.
well, reduced to personal attacks and name-calling.
Keep up the good work. They are so frustrated they can’t respond.
If that’s in reference to me, AmWay, I don’t have a party. Told you that many, many times.
Reviewing your post today, I’d guess you never get invited to any parties. :)
Probably none that you’d show up to. Only real people show up at parties I attend.
And I used to have a party. But they don’t stand for anything anymore. Hope Ron Paul goes independent. I’ll make my voice heard by voting for someone, instead of against someone.
I’ve noticed you’ve been much more moderate in the last few months, AmWay. That’s why I have such trouble understanding you being such an ardend defender of irrational fringe. You gotta admit, Max and a few others make it so easy to make fun of. If it took any effort at all, I wouldn’t bother.
“ardend defender of irrational fringe”
Ghotiphaze I don’t think Max is extreme. That he may appear extreme only reflects how for to the left this nation has become. Thoughts and beliefs which were held by our parents and forefathers are still reflected in the value system of many Americans. We used to call them the silent majority. I think there is a majority still out there. But they are now aligned between the far left and far right. Unfortunately, the dynamics of the two political parties do not allow us to align ourselves this way. If we support either party, we carry the unwanted baggage of the extremist on either side.
You have to admit, there are many extreme liberals on the WEBLOG. So naturally, a strong voice which is bold as brass from the conservative right - also is protrayed here as extreme.
But I also think there are libs here, like a very few conservatives, who are stuck in the middle. As the battle lines are drawn, we get sucked into the camp sticking up for the extremes on either side.
I have admitted there are big faults in the fabric of the Republican Party. I have often posted my displeasure at President Bush (but I have also defended him against the extreme hatred I see often see here).
What I find “irrational” is the fact that liberals find no fault at all within their party.
Almost as if they are afraid to break ranks.
Maybe if more of us broke ranks with the two parties, we would emerge with a party which reflects the best of both. But that would require compromise, and compromise is impossible if neither side will budge.
I still respond many times to the extreme, with the opposite extreme. Not always right, but to me it helps reveal the irrational of the opposite.
It appears to me that Max stands on his principles, even if they are unpopular here, or elsewhere. I respect that.
“Libs never gave a rats ass about the national debt, until Bush came along.”
Would you deny that the debt has became a categorically worse problem with the Bush-added debt and the upcoming retirement of baby-doomers?
Yes, the debt has long been a problem, but that can hardly be a justification for what has gone on the last few years.
“And I used to have a party. But they don’t stand for anything anymore.”
Amway, the only reason I am responding to you is that the above statement makes me think there might be hope for you - in as much as you have some semblence of contact with reality.
AmWay,
Your 10:44 post also had some useful points.
I do take exception with your statement that the Left won’t break with their talking points. I guess you have not noticed the near fist fights that have emerged between Obama and Clinton supporters around here late at night.
The Dems are not a united party and that is one of the few truthful points Max makes.
Steven I have posted many times in the past on the upcoming 77 million babyboomers retiring. Many times in relation to the Social Insecurity Trust Fund. (search last May-summer if you doubt me here.) Babyboomers are going to be the biggest mass of voting citizens this nation has EVER seen. The power we will weld together, will influence the future of this nation like never before. You think AARP (or whatever they call themselves these days) is strong now? Just wait.
And notice how the seniors do NOT budge on any loss of benefits, entitlements, and even seek MORE entitlements to satisfy their every whime.
We ain’t seen nothing yet.
This has always been an issue on the Right. But even when Bush proposed solutions (good or bad), the left denies there is even a problem. All of a sudden a flashlight has come on. Clinton proposes retirement savings accounts and libs wake up as if this is something new and we suddenly have a “problem”.
And there was zero concern about the national debt under Clinton. Libs bragged about surpluses, without understanding that despite the surpluse, the national debt grew 1.5 trillion under Clinton.
I have stated many times before Bush is screwing the pooch too on the deficit. I’m not denying it.
But if you don’t admit we’ve had this problem since the 1960’s, you are denying the truth. Without a truthful examination on debt, debt service, spending, as well as taxes and the relationship to 200 billion new entitlement programs - I don’t think we will resolve the problem.
As I said before, both parties point fingers at each other. Nothing gets done.
I tried not to say “all”. It gets me into trouble every time. I thought I had that covered though by my subject matter expressing how we each get caught up in positions of the extremes. Oh well.
The cat fight between Obama and Clinton has been noticed (and enjoyed). But unfortunately, I’m seeing disagreement on personalities - not the content of the two candidates positions.
It would be a rewarding and interesting to read about the contrasting positions on the issues Obama and Clinton have. Maybe I’m skim reading and just missed it.
Do you guys ever discuss costs of some of their proposals - instead of just bringing up the Iraq war cost as a comparison? (The Afghan/Iraq War are big contributers to the national debt you are concerned about. We cannot just replace one program with another - and expect the debt to “go away”.
AmWay,
I admit I am late coming to the party of doom and gloom on the the debt. Until I read this book, I had no idea about the extent of this problem:
http://www.publicagenda.com/wheredoesthemoneygo/
The simple truth is we will have to raise ages of eligibility for Medicare and Social Security (cut back on benefits), allow the 2010 reversal of tax cuts, and likely raise more taxes on less wealthy tax payers to deal with the debt. But to do otherwise would be criminal in terms of shackling my children and grandchildren with unmanagble debt that will reduce their choices. This latter is fundamentally unfair. My children and future grandchildren had nothing to do with creating this problem.
Difficult choices that must be faced are in our near future.
I wrote a rather long letter to the Editor to the Eagle a few weeks ago on this subject. I have been disappointed that they have not seen fit to use it. Perhaps another example of the media choosing not to cover an upleasant subject - especially when we can gossip about Obama’s minister - surely a more important subject - the point of Crowson’s cartoon, today.
Challenging the Radical Left and their fraudulent claims against our brave troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Today, fraudulent war-crimes claims are again being circulated and given unquestioned credibility by certain Members of Congress. We intend to expose these unfair accusations against our troops in Iraq. The American people have the right to know the truth, as it was then, and as it is now. More importantly, they need to be alerted to the grave danger faced by our country if we elect officials who have declared their intention to repeat the worst mistake of the Vietnam War: legislating defeat.
This group of highly decorated Veterans just delivered this letter to all 535 members of congress demanding that the truth be told. Help us force Congress to face the truth.
To: United States Congress
From: Vietnam Veterans Legacy Foundation
Re: Iraq Veterans Against the War
A group calling themselves “Iraq Veterans Against the War” (IVAW) will march on Washington, DC, similar to the one staged in April, 1971 by their forebears, “Vietnam Veterans Against the War” (VVAW). Like their predecessors, IVAW will claim that several in their group have either participated in or witnessed war crimes committed by their fellow American troops in Iraq. According to news reports, the IVAW intends to have their claims of war crimes read into the Congressional Record.
Before you listen to or acknowledge them, you would do well to fact-check their stories, verify that the accusers actually served in combat units in Iraq at the times they claim, and determine if there is any support for and corroborating evidence of their war crime and atrocity claims. Many members of Congress were embarrassed by the VVAW some 37 years ago because they failed to conduct any investigation, instead accepting these allegations without question.
Click here to read the rest of the letter.
American pilots do not conduct air-raids on villages, killing civilians, nor are our troops cold-blooded murderers or terrorists. But, if you believe some current members of Congress who have accused our men and women in uniform of all that and worse, you would have to conclude our military is a barbarian horde, just as John Kerry had previously said.
It was a lie then, and it’s an even bigger lie today. The truth is that some in the U.S. Congress and their mouthpieces in the media now represent a much bigger threat to the lives of our men and women in combat, and our national security, than any foreign enemy.
Over the last few months, the “Liberal’s War on America” has gone badly.
* MoveOn, the New York Times, and Senators who accused Gen. Petraeus of being a traitor and a liar have been exposed and repudiated;
* The media’s attempted flim-flam to portray Iran’s Terrorist Dictator as a “Statesman,” tripped on Columbia University’s red carpet;
* The brave combat Marines whom Congressman Murtha and the press eagerly charged with “cold-blooded murders” in Iraq are being found innocent, acquitted one by one.
The “War” is not going well … the “War On America,” that is.
Those who claimed they “Supported the Troops” are finally being unmasked, shown for being the cowards they are. But, it won’t be long before they regroup, begin their own “Surge” in this decades-long “War On America.” We won’t stand by quietly when they do, nor should you.
My fellow POWs and I have long known the contempt the extreme Left has for our military. We felt the crush of rifle butts in our faces, beatings and unspeakable torture in the Hanoi Hilton Prison when we refused to kowtow to American traitors who traveled to these countries for propaganda “photo-ops” with our Communist jailors.
The so-called “anti-war movement,” lead by the likes of Lt. John Kerry and his mentor, Sen. Ted Kennedy, also said they “supported the troops”. What they didn’t say is whose “troops.”
We knew the answer then, we were witnesses and victims. It’s the same today. They “support” America’s enemies, any Communist Regime, Dictator or Terrorists that vow to kill and maim American soldiers and innocent civilians.
Today, our sons, daughters and grandchildren serving in uniform stand accused of being “terrorists,” “Nazis,” “cold-blooded murderers,” people who wantonly conduct “air raids on villages” bombing and killing civilians.
Every one of those spurious accusations were spewed from the Halls of Congress, most often by the same men and women who voted to send America’s youth to war, only to denounce, vilify and abandon them later, when the opportunity for personal, political advantage presented itself.
When I and my fellow veterans - POWs, Soldiers, Airmen, Marines and Sailors, all combat veterans alike - attempted to warn America about one of the most notorious turncoats from the Vietnam era, we were initially ignored by the mainstream media.
The treatment accorded General Petraeus by the same radicals in Congress and the media was strikingly similar to our experiences in 2004. Before he uttered a single word, this highly decorated combat veteran, this “Soldiers General”, a man of great honor who has and continues to risk his life in the defense of our country, stood accused, disparaged and berated by a pack of power-hungry shirkers and slackers unworthy to polish his combat medals. Contribute
Veterans who attempted to expose Sen. Kerry in were treated no better. But, Kerry and his band of Leftist comrades had something special in store for me and my fellow POWs and their wives.
We were sued repeatedly for three long years, forced to spend over $1 million just to defend ourselves in several frivolous lawsuits.
What did we do to cause such a prolonged, vindictive assault? We told the truth no Mainstream Media news operation had the courage to print nor wanted the American public to know, then or now.
Worse of all, Kerry’s self-aggrandizing, false accusations against American soldiers who had born the brunt of the bleeding and dying in Vietnam, spawned the myths our young men and women in Iraq today are forced to defend against, even as they fight for their lives on the battlefield each and every day.
You can draw a straight line from the deceitful Leftist tactics used to bring America’s defeat and dishonor in Vietnam to Iraq today.
America’s military didn’t lose the Vietnam War. Congress declared defeat, voted to abandon South Vietnam nearly two years after our last combat troops left. That sell-out, not only of our South Vietnam ally, but the nearly 60,000 Americans who gave their lives on the battlefield, ignited a genocidal holocaust throughout Southeast Asia that can still only be measured in the millions, an estimated three to five million innocent civilians brutally murdered.
We cannot let that happen again. You and I must not let that happen. You can stand shoulder to shoulder with us to prevent that from happening.
Four years ago, I and my fellow POWs and combat veterans created a non-profit organization, “The Vietnam Veterans Legacy Foundation”. Our goal is simple, to set the record straight about how gallant our mothers, fathers, sons and daughters served with honor as members of our Armed Forces. Little did we know then we’d be slapped with multiple lawsuits for daring to uncover the layer upon layer of lies that constitute the false history and not the truth.
Nor, could we know then the Left’s plans to use the same blueprint for defeat in Iraq.
But, in order to show that, to prove that and to reach the widest public audience we need your help. Three years of litigation and research has put us deeply in debt, $250,000.00 in legal fees alone. We do not have MoveOn.Org’s deep pockets, nor will we get a discount from The New York Times.
Anything you can afford to help us complete our mission, to set the record straight about Vietnam and, now, Iraq, is desperately needed and greatly appreciated. But, time is running short.
Once we get the truth out to the American people, there will be winners. Those winners will be every man and woman who has served in our Armed Forces. To them and their families, this is a war we cannot lose.
The “Liberal War On America” is just heating up again. What we do now will dictate America’s future, whether it is one of victory over terrorism, or, decades more of defeat, humiliation in a lost, but noble cause.
God Bless You and America,
Col. Bud Day
Among his many decorations from World War II, Korea and Vietnam, Col. Day is a Medal of Honor recipient and a combat pilot held captive for more than five years in the infamous Hanoi Hilton prison. Human Events
The above letter is not the opinion of Human Events, but Colonel Bud Day’s.
The cat fight between Obama and Clinton has been noticed (and enjoyed). But unfortunately, I’m seeing disagreement on personalities - not the content of the two candidates positions.
Amen from this atheist on that one, AW.
http://www.theonion.com/content/video/poll_bullshit_is_most_important
I thought you said viet nam vets are a bunch of pot smoking cowards —– now you change your tune —-
you ARE a loser —-
“Libs never gave a rats ass about the national debt, until Bush came along.”
It has never been so enormous and growing so fast before either. Reagan ran against Carter’s deficit - then proceeeded to vastly increase it. Bush 1 did Reagan one better by increasing it even more. Bill Clinton took steps to restrain the deficits - even getting to the point where the OPERATING surpluses were enough to cover debt service and begin to pay it down a bit.
Then along came Bush 2 …
I am going to post my letter to the editor that did not get published here. We can end the Iraq war tomorrow and that will not make any difference in the debt problems we now have. I think few people know that. There is no way we can promise for the government to cover health care costs of more people and expect the responsible paying down of the debt. I think your complaints about people not getting these facts are accurate. I used to not and my life was simplier in many ways when I did not.
Here is the LTTE:
There is one campaign slogan we won’t hear this 2008 election season: “If elected, I will cut popular entitlement programs and raise your taxes!” Politicians, who are consummate people-pleasers prefer to make promises of good news: “We will make the middle class our priority”; “We will give all people health insurance”; “No new taxes”; “We can grow out of this deficit”, etc. As responsible citizens, we have to demand that our politicians level with us on how they plan to change our national habit of deficit spending and tell us their specific proposals on how they plan to pay down the debt.
Some Facts: 1) our national debt is now $9,000,000,000,000 – that is nine trillion, with a t dollars – which is the same as every man, woman and child in this country owing $30,000; 2) in the last 31 of 35 years we have run deficit spending budgets (we took in less than we spent); 3) in the fiscal year 2006, our interest payment on the national debt made up 8.5% of the federal budget ( a mere 266.6 billion – with a b dollars); twenty four percent of our national debt is owed to foreign countries. Compounding the above difficult numbers is the fact that we will soon be experiencing a time of unprecedented stress on our tax base as baby boomers retire, and start drawing Medicare and Social Security. Unless we make substantial changes by 2040 nearly every penny collected in taxes will go toward paying Medicare, Social Security and interest on the debt.
Factors that make the boomer demographic retiring problem worse include: people are living longer; medical expenses are rising at rates beyond the rate of inflation; health care research advances mean that each year there is more health care to purchase; the Bush administration expanded the Medicare benefits by including prescription benefits.
Some myths that need busting with respect to solving our budget deficit and national debt are: 1) stopping the war in Iraq will not save enough money to solve our deficit/debt problems; 2) ending Bush’s tax cuts on the wealthiest Americans will help with revenue, but will not be enough to produce non-deficit spending and pay down the debt; 3) eliminating all waste and fraud in government spending, while a good idea, will not be sufficient to reverse our desperate budgetary situation.
“So why should I care about this budget deficit/debt issue?” some of you may ask. If the government’s resources are all directed at Social Security, Medicare, and the debt, there will be no money to invest in research, offer help with college loans, enforce health and safety laws, take care of national parks, provide a military, assure our safety from external threats and other functions we generally expect the government to carry out. If the current trend continues, these problems will be foisted off on our children and grandchildren, who had no part in creating these dire circumstances.
Blithely, ignoring this problem is not a viable option either. As Federal Reserve Chairman, Ben S. Bernanke, said about deficit spending and the debt in January, 2007:
“The longer we wait, the more severe, the more draconian, the more difficult, the adjustment is going to be. I think the right time to start is about 10 years ago.”
The more information a citizen a citizen can obtain on this complex subject can only be helpful. A simplified introduction to this problem and solution alternatives is the recently published book, Where Does the Money Go? Your Guided Tour of the Federal Budget Crisis by Scott Bittle and Jean Johnson – Collins publishers (2008). [Much of the facts and figures quoted in this article come from the preceding book]. These websites also include extensive information and tips on being an informed voter and what activities you can do that will help address this problem:
The Concord Coalition’s website: http://www.concordcoalition.org
Bittle & Johnson’s two websites are quite useful: http://www.facingup.org and http://www.publicagenda.org
If we are willing to make sacrifices, we can resolve this admittedly large problem. We owe our children and grandchildren nothing less.
Yeah, AW, don’t take our word for it–the figures are publicly available. The public debt actually tripled under Reagan. Bush I ran on “read my lips–no new taxes!”
Then the stock market crashed. As usual, Wall Street came first, and he broke his pledge, infuriating his conservative base.
One can claim some congressional complicity, but the difference is simple: Dems actually believe in paying for their programs.
Republicans prefer to borrow the money.
In the book I link above, Bush I was listed as a hero for raising taxes in spite of the political suicide of that action given his “no new taxes” pledge.
I fear we don’t have any politicians today willing to do what is needed due to the blow-back from such actions. Those politicians won’t answer the pointed questions of how they plan to give us their promises (which are ludicris) unless we ask them. And they may not even then.
“My children and future grandchildren had nothing to do with creating this problem.”
And neither did you or I. But why should we pay the price to resolve it? Why should we have to work more years - before we get to enjoy the fruits of our labor, just like our parents do at 65? This is not progressive society. This is a decrease in benefit and a step backward in time.
Please don’t use the standard, “we are living longer”. Look at the actuarial tables the government uses for social security, medicare, IRS, and insurance industry uses.
Yes Americans are living longer. Those born TODAY, live longer than those born before.
But look at your year of birth.
For instance, if you are born in 1955, a male average is 66.7. A female 72.8 at birth.
So yes, if you change the retirement age, the government should do so - for YOUNGER workers who truly will be living much longer.
Further, is it fair to those in their fifties today, who have been saving all their lives for retirement, have made plans based upon social security - to pull the rug out from under those near retirement? How do we get younger and restart saving/investing?
http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/NOTES/as116/as116_V.html
http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/TR/TR02/lr5A3-h.html
But the issue is still a loss of entitlements for future generations.
You can also increase the 15% combined in FICA employees and employers are paying in now.
You can also allow younger workers to set up individual retirement accounts (Clinton), with a declining entitlement under SS.
Raising the retirement age is the “quick” answer, but it means many of us will die before receiving a penny (many will die before reaching the new age requirement).
It also means we will taking older blue collar workers, many who work manual labor - and forcing them to work when they are frail and medically have more problems. Insurance costs? Liability?
Maybe working until you die is the answer. Then we don’t need any benefits.
And neither did you or I. But why should we pay the price to resolve it?
For the same reason we’re still responsible for the debts incurred by, say, George Washington. That’s how it works.
I’m pretty pissed about it, too, AW. I was complaining about it a quarter-century ago–for all the good it did.
I love having my taxes raised, along with flagellating myself with a heavy steel chain…
Bring back the pre Reagan tax codes.
It really is very simple. We have a handful of folks who are living VERY well on the backs of everyone else. TAX ‘em!
I’m not against being part of the SS solution. There should be a number of measures taken to protect the solvency of the SS for everyone.
Shared measures by all age groups. Like first, stop spending the SS dollars in the general fund!
I think the reason Rage is correct, is because each side blames the other, and nothing ever gets changed. Politicians like that.
AmWay,
I am a little concerned about the plan of passing this on to the next generation.
For there to be the widespread public support that isneeded to address this problem, there will have to be a perception of “fairness” in the solution.
I did not vote for the administrations who produced the greatest amount of deficit spending, but given that my generation did, in MY country, I think it is part of my responsibility. I wonder if you recovering Republicans understand that if Americans see sacrifices as fair for one and all, they are willing to participate. If they see that The AmWays of the country get a free ride because they think they should, the people tend not to so whole-heartedly support the solutions.
The solution to this problem is going to require all of our participation, poor, rich, and middle class.
I hope I get to work until I die. This would be harder for some workers. There are solution alternatives that can be put on the table with varying impacts on different groups. It is vitally important, I think, that we continue to look at solution alternatives. And then implement what we can agree upon.
Raise the age for Social Security?
Hell NO!
Lower it.
A reduced working pool forces employers to pay more. Thus more revenue for Social Security.
AmWay - being 60 I agree with much of what you say. Actually, even we are living substantially longer than our parents - that is why the modest increase in age to 66 makes sense for us. However, as you correctly note, we have been paying on our ‘contract’ for many decades now so making massive changes just doesn’t wash.
One fairly modest change I would like to see - raise the ‘cap’ on earnings to be taxed. It might just be eliminated altogether but at least raise to 150% the current level. My reasonong for that: It is the high wage-earner who is more likely to use spousal benefits. Most of us below that amount are in 2-earner families and each spouse collects his-her own account. Thus the high earner can collect 150% of what he would otherwise collect.
Hey,
To slightly change the subject, this is the first anniversary of the first WE Blg meet-up. What year was that? I honestly can’t remember.
Thanks again to Hank and Mary Caruso for their hospitality on that windy March day.
If in our household budget we withdraw the money set aside for our vacation and spend it to buy a new wide screen TV who is at blame when we can’t take a family vacation?
We are, just as congress is in expecting to fullfill the promises made to older Americans from an empty ‘lockbox’. Only Algore ever thought there was one of those.
We have to bite the bullet and rebuild our vacation reserve just as the gov has to rebuild the SS reserve. For a family this means eating out less often, fewer movies, etc.. For our gov it means fewer entitlement programs not introducing new ones. It means not raising taxes especially on businesses so job growth will occur. In short it means tightening our belts and not expecting all of the answers to come from gov. They are clueless.
“Thoughts and beliefs which were held by our parents and forefathers are still reflected in the value system of many Americans.”
============
And those parents and forefathers are all DEAD now too!!
Uh Steven?
The FIRST meetup was in February 2 years ago.
The last meetup (as far as I know) was in January of last year at the Eagle.
I don’t think the Eagle will host anymore meetups because of certain posters.
I might try to organize one some time. But it will be back channel.
JR please help yourself and take in economics.
=take a class. Excuse my poor right wing.
“Thoughts and beliefs which were held by our parents and forefathers are still reflected in the value system of many Americans.”
Lots of those beliefs and thoughts were fringe extremist when those folks were living, and they are STILL on the fringe extreme now..
Some things just wont go away!! LOL
:: Chas you blew your cover bigtime yesterday when you referred to a post from Chas and it was posted by ::. Please be honest in your postings.
Excuse me - I dont believe Chas. is here now. I have no idea what you are talking about. What does it matter if Chas. responds to something I post? I also responded to something Chas. posted too. Your stupid point would be what?
“Raise the age for Social Security?
“Hell NO!
“Lower it.
“A reduced working pool forces employers to pay more. Thus more revenue for Social Security.”
J R,
Email me and tell me how I can get a book to you that I think you need to read. Thanks.
Ben,
If I understand you correctly, you are advocating a “means testing” of sorts on social security? There might be a variety of viable options in that area.
I still can’t accept the argument that we are not more responsible for this mess than future generations. We are. We allowed it to happen. Isn’t it only right that we fix it?
Ben
Posted March 16, 2008 at 12:11 pm | Permalink
AmWay - being 60 I agree with much of what you say.
——————
Clamps the age calipers on Ben. :)
Actually, Al Gore (you betray yourself as a Rushbot when you say Algore) had the right idea.
Social Security would be fine. IF it were not being used as government funds.
This really IS very simple. We have a very small number of folks who have much.
And a whole LOT of folks who have little.
Now, time has a way of taking care of this. But it generally does not end well for the “haves”.
Frankly I am stunned that those who have so much DON’T feel obligated to pay their share.
Ksgrm, since you have been on more for the last few days does that mean the hand is better?
AmWay, the fact that many Radical Libs reside on this Blog in Wichita is harly evidence of a nationwide trend toward radical liberalism/socialism.
Compared to the rest of America, the radical libs here are but the bottom of the Liberal cesspool as it drains away to the sea.
I think the reason Rage is correct, is because each side blames the other, and nothing ever gets changed. Politicians like that.
There’s some truth to that. I remember seeing Jim Slattery in a House budget committee meeting (on CSPAN): “Let’s just say the Republicans are 50% responsible, and the Democrats are 50% responsible, and get on with the rat killing!”
It didn’t work.
Let’s bring the tax rates under Eisenhower (boy, the comfortably affluent would hate that!). :)
“We have to bite the bullet and rebuild our vacation reserve just as the gov has to rebuild the SS reserve. For a family this means eating out less often, fewer movies, etc.. For our gov it means fewer entitlement programs not introducing new ones. It means not raising taxes especially on businesses so job growth will occur. In short it means tightening our belts and not expecting all of the answers to come from gov. They are clueless.”
For anything to work, it will have to be perceived as fair - meaning everybody has to make a sacrifice. You are at least 90% accurate here, grm. The only place we diverge, is that business while important, is not a sacred cow that doesn’t have to make sacrifices, too. In my lexicon, everybody, means everybody.
Lest I forget, the alternative miniumu tax will have to be maintained, too. Would I b*tch like a wounded cat, if I had to pay that tax. You bet, I would. But, we need all the tax revenue we can get.
oops .. miniumu should be “minimum”
Didn’t realize you had an injured wing ksgrm!
Hope you are feeling better. :)
Maybe Hank’s Doctor wife can do the voodoo…er accupuncture thing and make the pain go away. :)
“If I understand you correctly, you are advocating a “means testing” of sorts on social security? There might be a variety of viable options in that area.”
This should be a non-starter. If you paid in, you were part of the “contract” in place since FDR. You have a reasonable expectation to receive a return of the money paid in. You planned on it. You invested on it.
Let me use myself as an example (always the worst, but it works here).
I consider myself lucky to have a very good job. Actually a couple of them. My wife and I have managed to raise our kids, put them through college without school loans (in the kids names, not ours as FAFSA says we didn’t qualify), and saved for retirement. Although we have what we consider a very good income between our three jobs, we still cut coupons and budget for a modest lifestyle. We only owe for our mortgage and we are paying additional amounts to get that gone.
Meanwhile, I work with guys who have saved nothing. They have big boats on the lake, big SUV’s and pick ups, snow mobiles, jet skies, and a cabin at the lake. They are entitled to. I’m happy for them!
But here is the crux of my problem. As these are friends and business acquaintences, we talk about the company 401K, DRIPS, and Stock Purchase Plan. I cannot believe many of my peers in my age group - have saved nothing for retirement. Their kids went to school with student loans (they qualified because they had no investments). We are on the same pay scale. They buy a new truck/car every year, while I drive mine until they fall apart.
So we both arrive at that retirement door (age 62 looks good) at the same time.
The saver: Has much income/investments
The spender: Has nothing
So if you “means” test us, I will take a cut in SS benefits, while the guy who saved nothing gets more?
“or anything to work, it will have to be perceived as fair - meaning everybody has to make a sacrifice.”
And that includes everyone on the economic scale.
Not just punish the rich. Desperate times remember?
We need to cut the Unearned Income Credit which provides more money from our nations revenue system than receipients paid in.
As you say, this is totally unfair.
How would you get less, Amway?? YOU will get your SSA benefit, PLUS the dividends from your investments… Your work buddies will only have their SSA benefit. They should end up with a LOT less monthly income than you will, because of your investment income…
. . and nobody can live on Social Security alone. It’s not much.
Hud it means my hunt and peck is faster but only two fingers on r hand work and they wear out guickly.
The burden of solving the Social Security fiscal crisis should fall on all Americans, but it won’t.
The current retirees are among the wealthiest of Americans. And since they have $$$ and almost all of them vote, they will refuse to consider any types of means test for themselves. This is the last generation of Americans who will receive back more from Social Security then what they paid in.
The current boomers born 1946 to 1964 who haven’t yet retired, will ultimately have some means test and/or increased retirement age. Those who didn’t work much and didn’t save a dime, will see no cuts, other then the cut the retirement age will bring to them. SS tax increases will also impact this group.
(Prediction: There will be a means test on the retirement age. Those who didn’t work much or save much will retire at 62, the rest of us at 67 for early retirement. Normal retirement will be raised to age 70)
Those born after 1964, now that will be an interesting story. They will be asked to pay higher taxes, get lower benefits, and retire later then anyone else. The question is not IF, but WHEN will this group have enough political capital to shred Social Security and screw the older generations?
It’s nice to know that some Democrats, (ie Davis above, good post at 11:31), have finally admited that there IS a Social Security/Medicare fiscal crisis.
Recognizing the problem is the first step. Arriving at a solution shared by all generations is the next challenge. Political infighting between parties and between generations, will make for a butt ugly solution.
There likely will be little or no solution enacted until after 2020 when the bulk of the baby boomers have retired, and the annual $5 Trillion budget deficits hit. At that time, the political capital of those born after 1964, will approach or equal their elders.
Should be a good show to watch. Course the current retirees today are safe and sound in not sharing in any part of the solution to the problem which THEIR generation created. They will all be dead when the shit hits the fan.
Interesting that the only Democrat solutions are to raise taxes. NEVER, not once, has Federal Spending be cut. I say try that approach first, before going back to the old approach.
: :
Posted March 15, 2008 at 7:31 am | Permalink
Ponderings for Palm Sunday >>>>
A poem by Rev. G. A. Studdert-Kennedy, titled:
“Indifference.”
When Jesus came to Golgotha
they hanged Him on a tree,
They drove great nails through hands and feet, and made a Calvary;
They crowned Him with a crown of thorns,
red were His wounds and deep,
For those were crude and cruel days,
and human flesh was cheap.
When Jesus came to our town,
they simply passed Him by,
They never hurt a hair of him,
they only let Him die;
For men had grown more tender,
and they would not give Him pain,
They only just passed down the street,
and left Him in the rain.
Still Jesus cried, “Forgive them,
for they know not what they do,”
And still it rained the winter rain
that drenched Him through and through;
The crowds went home and left the streets
without a soul to see,
And Jesus crouched against a wall
and cried for Calvary.
Oh yea!!
: :
Posted March 15, 2008 at 7:32 am | Permalink
I think Chas. had a good thought for the weekend. The poet is an early 20th Century British Clergyman, of the Anglican tradition.
Chas, As you can see you are busted. My eyes work well. This is what hurts the blog. You had a good thought as :: and then posted as if Chas had posted it.
Busted Chas!!!
Busted ::!!!
Nice catch KSGRM.
(Wait for :: to post in all CAPS next!)
AmWay,
I, of course, don’t know about your situation, but say in the case of Bill Gates and Oprah, they get no Social Security. Sorry guy and gal, don’t think you will even notice that sacrifice. Of course this raises the question where should the means testing boundry be? And will it make that much difference? - maybe it won’t. Don’t have enough data for an informed opinion on this one.
I did not use to be, but I am now, in favor of a gradual introduction of allowances for younger workers to pay into private accounts if they want. This is trickier than it sounds - would like to have more data on this, too.
Steve I agree with Amway that while we were driving a 15 year old PU our neighbors and friends who got new vehicles every 3 years will draw more ss because they less savings,
http://www.cato.org/subtopic_display_new.php?topic_id=66&ra_id=2
The Cato Institute has addressed the Social Security issue for at least 15 years. Many good studies Social Security solutions can be found here.
Paul Revere keeps riding and screaming, and nobody listens.
Steve private accounts would be the answer for me also. This rewards those who actually work and doesn’t put the gove in the business of deciding who gets what.
KU needs to step up the pace. Get the crowd involved.
Thanks Reg. Have 5 more weeks in cast. Might be left handed by then. Something like Blackberry thumb.
Paul Revere keeps riding and screaming
he only rode for 3 miles. I think you’re thinking of Israel Bissell.
who alerted the American colonists of the British attack on April 19, 1775. He rode for four days and six hours covering the 345 miles from Watertown, Massachusetts to Philadelphia along the Old Post Road, shouting “To arms, to arms, the war has begun,” and carrying a message from General Joseph Palmer which was copied at each of his stops and redistributed:
revere merely had a neat sounding name that would work great in prose.
I think natural forces will work this out.
Lots of angry, poor younger folks.
Lots of old folks making their living on the young folks’s back.
Mix well and let stand.
ksgrm,
Actually, Chas posted the poem here, March 14, 10:06 pm,
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/03/open-thread-314/#comment-313440
Then :: re-posted it March 15, 7:31 am
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/03/open-thread-315/#comment-313540
and commented that Chas had (past tense) a “good thought for the weekend”, at 7:32 am.
JR how much have you contributed to SS? I don’t need to know but I wonder where you put yourself in this scenario.
Not that I ever plan on seein’ a cent of SS, but isn’t it a ‘the more you pay in the more you draw out’ sorta deal?
I’ll probably be one of those who has to work until they die at the young age of 150
Sure OK Cosmos I’ll put that lame excuse right up there with your GW peer reviews. Gotcha.
Ok, granny, I’ll admit that excuse can be contrived to be a tad bit lame considering that everything on this blog is SUPPOSED to be anonymous. But you gotta admit, compared to excuses coming out of this administration the last 6 years or so, that excuse does the 3 second 100 meter dash.
Ghot the problem is that SS is still called an unfunded mandate by the left. Hardly. Put that same amount in a savings account with compounded dividends and interest and you would have far more than you will ever draw from SS. And you could leave anything left to your survivors.
If the gov continues to collect the money they owe retirees they must pay. It must be changed now for future ‘investors’.
Ahhh but granny — I posted the poem first on FRIDAY… not Saturday!! Go look again… your eyes arent what they used to be!! LOL Just tooo darned funny!!
I remember Bill Gates, some time back, talking about his wealth, observing that you can only have so nice a house, eat so well, do so many things you want to do, and beyond a certain point the extra extra money doesn’t do anything more
The people in Dick Cheney’s crowd beg to differ, unfortunately. Crushing democracy is one thing that huge sums of money does quite well. Too bad we never learned the lessons of the past.
Chas did you get a call from Cosmos and ::? Get over it. You are fooling no one.
The Clinton V. Obama fight is getting ugly. This from another blog:
From the Chicago Sun Times:
For more than five weeks during the brutal winter of 1997, tenants shivered without heat in a government-subsidized apartment building on Chicago’s South Side.
It was just four years after the landlords — Antoin “Tony” Rezko and his partner Daniel Mahru — had rehabbed the 31-unit building in Englewood with a loan from Chicago taxpayers.
Rezko and Mahru couldn’t find money to get the heat back on.
But their company, Rezmar Corp., did come up with $1,000 to give to the political campaign fund of Barack Obama, the newly elected state senator whose district included the unheated building….
The building in Englewood was one of 30 Rezmar rehabbed in a series of troubled deals largely financed by taxpayers. Every project ran into financial difficulty. More than half went into foreclosure, a Chicago Sun-Times investigation has found.
“Their buildings were falling apart,” said a former city official. “They just didn’t pay attention to the condition of these buildings.”
Eleven of Rezko’s buildings were in Obama’s state Senate district….
Rezko and Mahru had no construction experience when they created Rezmar in 1989 to rehabilitate apartments for the poor under the Daley administration. Between 1989 and 1998, Rezmar made deals to rehab 30 buildings, a total of 1,025 apartments. The last 15 buildings involved Davis Miner Barnhill & Galland during Obama’s time with the firm.
Rezko and Mahru also managed the buildings, which were supposed to provide homes for poor people for 30 years. Every one of the projects ran into trouble:
* Seventeen buildings — many beset with code violations, including a lack of heat — ended up in foreclosure.
* Six buildings are currently boarded up.
* Hundreds of the apartments are vacant, in need of major repairs.
* Taxpayers have been stuck with millions in unpaid loans.
* At least a dozen times, the city of Chicago sued Rezmar for failure to heat buildings.
*****
In fairness Repubs aren’t the only ones who do the “guilt by association” fallacy.
Yep, Steven. Such questions are legitimate– as questions–but some people seem to think they’re answers.
State Senator Obama had a public record. Maybe we should take a look at it.
So if I put a dollar a week into a savings account my employer would match that? And I’d get the same interest rate the gov’t gets for that money put in? For some reason I have trouble with the logic of this. Maybe it’s as simple as some people just couldn’t afford to put the $ into savings. Maybe some just WON’T (yeah, I know there are those out there, but not everyone in lower soc/econ rungs are wastrels). I guess I just stupidly still believe the gov’t has more sense than I do and that’s why there is SS.
BTW, isn’t the biggest prob of SS that it’s been borrowed so drastically for the last several decades? Kinda like pension funds before the CEOs abscond with the funds and companies fold?
You know, KsGrm/B***h/W*nch, I have just about had it with your self righteous arrogance… And especially since it’s HOLY WEEK… NOW EAT your freiggin words!!! >>>>
Chas.
Posted March 14, 2008 at 10:06 pm | Permalink
A poem by Rev. G. A. Studdert-Kennedy, titled:
“Indifference.”
When Jesus came to Golgotha
they hanged Him on a tree,
They drove great nails through hands and feet, and made a Calvary;
They crowned Him with a crown of thorns,
red were His wounds and deep,
For those were crude and cruel days,
and human flesh was cheap.
When Jesus came to our town,
they simply passed Him by,
They never hurt a hair of him,
they only let Him die;
For men had grown more tender,
and they would not give Him pain,
They only just passed down the street,
and left Him in the rain.
Still Jesus cried, “Forgive them,
for they know not what they do,”
And still it rained the winter rain
that drenched Him through and through;
The crowds went home and left the streets
without a soul to see,
And Jesus crouched against a wall
and cried for Calvary.
Oh yea!!
NOW — Smart A$$ — WHEN did I first post that wonderful poem??? And WHEN was iot that Square Peg later re-posted it??
And now WHO is it that is BUSTED???
Granny you arer a friggin phony!!!
Rage, Steven - correct. This issue just might have ‘legs’ - we shall see. As I noted above - PA will be telling in many ways. As will the re-dos coming later.
Steven I said months ago there would be enough dirt in this election to make a 4 lane road from the east to west coast. Both sides of the aisle.
Unfortunately I haven’t been disapponted.
eat so well, do so many things you want to do, and beyond a certain point the extra extra money doesn’t do anything more
anything more than you can spend in 50 lifetimes is nothing more than bragging rights.
Rage, I remember something in the paper on a Bill Gates article. It alluded that donating %5 of your net worth provided exemptions from most taxes. The paper didn’t elaborate all the ins and outs. I just can’t help drool…If I donated 5% of my net worth the gov’t would be PAYING me big time. I’d just have a hard time figuring who’d need the two rolls of toilet paper.
Ghop I have seen spreadsheets on this premise. They show that it does benefit the retiree. The problem as you mentioned is those who won’t save. You can’t legislate responsibility.
I can’t really afford my 1/2 of the SS I pay in; no way I could kick in my employers share, too. I’d say a few more months and one more kid hits the streets (graduation), but the last one ended up costing me more money since he moved out. Seems they always forget to bring diapers when we watch the grandkids, are no longer at home, and we have to toodle to Wal-Mart.
ksgrm,
Those are not “my” GW peer reviews.
That’s part of the methodology of science, just like accounting follows certain procedures.
You are so deep in AGW denial that you refuse to accept how science is done.
GOOOO Hawks!!!!
One thing not accounted for, though, it’s reasonably sure you’ll probably get the SS whereas if your bank, and enough other banks fold, FDIC will flounder and you may