“…neutering the military with drastic cuts….”

Have any specific example on that, Sam?

Huh, after 5 minutes on here, most folks can figure it out.

Others need a $10,000 Government grant, and another year of Publik Edukashion.

I don’t mean this with any hostility, but that is just plain silly. To ignore such an employment affiliation as if it matters not just flies in the face of simple logic.

I have no problem with advocates acting on behalf of any entity. Just be honest about it. Otherwise, everything they write is suspect, and any sense they might make is lost in the conflicting interests.

In the war of words, it seems the cons are so much more willing to deceive, and regardless of their veracity on some issues, that nullifies their claim to any high ground they pretend to own.

Yes, and it’s not as if I haven’t seen this tendancy in the counselor before.

“If you support cutting spending, then why not support that?”

Actually, I do support cutting spending where it counts (defense and long term entitlements). What is a pipe dream is the idea that you can just cut spending first, then raise revenues. One informs the other. That is Budget 101.

“Taxes need not be raised simultaneously to support spending cuts.”

Taxes aren’t raised to support spending cuts, they are raised on increase revenues. That is how they reduce the deficit, just as how spending cuts reduce the deficit by reducing spending. Are you arguing that we can reduce the deficit first by spending cuts? If you are, that is wrong on several counts.

1) Many of the spending cuts that will count are in entitlement reform, and that will be phased in gradually. Military spending is much the same way.

2) Discretionary spending, where cuts can presumably be made much more quickly, won’t impact the deficit much, and in fact their impact on deficit spending is much more difficult to predict than is commonly thought. Much of the discretionary spending generates substantial return in economic activity and future development, more than even most self proclaimed liberals and moderates realize, much less conservatives, especially faux fiscal conservatives. Cutting spending on the wrong infrastructure or basic as well as applied research can cost billions in economic activity, increasing rather than reducing the deficit.

3) Cutting spending will be painful, as painful as raising taxes. Both require a political courage and constituant sacrifice I sure haven’t seen yet. The idea that we can do one painful thing and defer the other is wishful thinking.

Raise taxes, cut spending, all else is bullsh*t.

Enough blame to go around. Including citizens who wanted more, more, more and elected the politicians who would see to it that they got it.

I thought that was obvious from their constant advocacy?

Actually, I’d like to know more, though, MHawk, do you have a link or two to help me study this a bit closer?

Anything would help. I read somewhere that same thing happened across the internet, “professional trolls” were being paid to game the system, especially at Digg, where they skewed the approval/disapproval honor system mercilessly until it was completely out of whack.

Really, tell me more, and give me a link to it if you have it handy.

I don’t expect them to consider the blogs worthy of honesty, but I was simply appalled at the depth of their deceit, and their ability to justify it as some sort of culture war.

It is a wonder they are passing it in this era of partisan posturing.

Are we actually seeing real patriots at work?

Courageous Republicans who are willing to defy their hard-hearted, myopic fellows in order to do what’s right, not what’s rightwing?

Considering the import of this vote and the potential sum-of-all-fears consequences of taking the route AZ Sen. Kyle and his ilk have proposed, if ever there was an issue where cooler heads and common sense would prevail over partisan posturing, it is this one.

Still, just the fact that so many Republicans used this vote as a profane tool to extort their ideological pound of tax-cut flesh from the public proves that they are much less concerned about the welfare of their every day constituents than they are the rich and powerful interests that have owed them since long before they went to Washington.

The shame of every lawmaker who played games with the security of our nation and the world at large can never be washed away. If Justice was truly served, they would all be compelled to wear a red nuke mushroom tattoo over their hearts like some bloody scarlet letter, a constant reminder that they were willing to turn our worst fears into a game piece on their political chessboards.

Their shame can never be forgotten.

You might think it is the governments job to take care of you now and that is your perogative.

I would suggest that if you spent as much energy in taking care of yourself as you did expecting others to do so, well…

What many of us on the right do not agree with is some of the extreme views some on the left have in regards to not just cutting military spending, but practically neutering the military with drastic cuts. Which has more to do with your ideology on the military strength and power we have in general and less to do with any kind of care about the budget.

It also seems that the left is not quite as willing to consider much of anything else when it comes to cuts, other than the military.

If you support cutting spending, then why not support that? Taxes need not be raised simultaneously to support spending cuts.

It is very telling though, where the left is at on the issue, when their idea of a deal to not raise taxes involved billions in spending…

Problem is the Government is the only one stupid enough to Pay “Big Labor” wages.

Okay. No one really likes change, but we can get through this thing. A lot of the previous format’s advantages came to be user-friendly and the Eagle IT people screwed the pooch just thrusting it on everyone without an explanation or links to better understanding.

If WE Blog CONs have such a perfect understanding of macro-economics, certainly they can figure out how to insert a link into a post.

I really didn’t think much about the “Recent Comments” side-bar until young ol’ “Shocker_1″ advocated getting rid of it.

I wonder if the change in formats is the Eagle’s response to sock-puppets. You could knock me over with a truck the day we learn most WE Blog CONs are on salary with Koch Industries.

I really haven’t figured out the Archives of the new format. But It might be interesting if the new people acknowledged all the posts which have been removed by request.

Now if Hawker could just figure out a way to make a product people want to buy.

If only Wichita had an industrial infrastructure, fully-tooled manufacturing facilities and a trained experienced workforce capable of shaping metal and composites to capture the power of the wind….