Comments on: About those Spending “Cuts”

By: b2

b2 — Sun, 10 May 2009 17:01:00 +0000

re “Rove’s stupidity”

In the context of his work, IE winning elections for his boss, I wouldn’t say he’s stupid.

As to what you said referring to the Repubs, well Grumpy in Joisey, I’d say we’ll all be out in the wilderness until folks like yourselves (gently) take your head out of your a$$es and make the party of Lincoln viable once more. Wanking and postulating from the sidelines don’t help. As I’ve said a million times hereabouts you can’t win the big one without a political party organization, despite how many times you watch “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington”.

By: Quartermaster

Quartermaster — Sun, 10 May 2009 00:27:14 +0000

Sure can. Starting with the one himself. Alas, his position is mandated by the constitution. That would be $400K/year by itself.

By: Marine6

Marine6 — Sat, 09 May 2009 21:05:46 +0000

I find it amusing that the media seems to totally ignore the fact that when John McCain suggested saving 1/2 of 1% of the budget by banning earmarks, his opponent totally belittled the amount as irrevelant.

Now, when President Obama suggests cutting 1/2 of 1% of the budget he is roundly lauded for “making the hard decisions” on the budget.

I’ll bet anyone here could find ten times as much waste in the federal budget in a heartbeat.

But the difference is that we would actually be serious about cutting waste. Obama’s “cuts” appear to be suspiciously cosmetic. They are virtually all strongly supported in the Congress, and, therefore, will mysteriously survive the budget process.

By: Quartermaster

Quartermaster — Sat, 09 May 2009 17:13:06 +0000

Alas, Rove was an arrogant a$$ himself. The Reps went on an illegal alien amnesty binge, coupled with poor political decisions on Iraq, that paid merry hell with the elections in 2006 and 8.

Rove’s stupidity was much of the problem. The party hasn’t recovered yet, and I don’t see them doing so anytime soon. So many issues could be used by the Reps to hammer Obama and the McGovern/Neo-Marxist wing of the Dems, who dominate the party these days. But the Reps are simply too hammered from the Neo-Con Rum they can’t see straight. And, they aren’t listening to the grassroots of the party. The outlook is kinda grim from here.

By: b2

b2 — Sat, 09 May 2009 16:15:48 +0000

Hey don’t forget, he cut out the prayer breakfast, too! That would cost 50-100 K to attend or host. Give him credit..LOL.

BTW, don’t you wish Karl Rove was correct then?

By: OregonGuy

OregonGuy — Fri, 08 May 2009 22:24:45 +0000

Had this thought this morning, “how much is our current financial outlook consistent with the outlook of Lesser Developed Country borrowings during the 1970′s and 80′s?”

I’ve been too busy to post recently, but if you look at the conditions surrounding the defaults of these LDC governments and their impact on the world banking community, how is it that our current crop of policy makers can’t make the connection–or connect the dots–that borrowing like a third-world kleptocracy is an unsustainable policy choice?

Fed info, and a really informative backgrounder, here:

http://www.fdic.gov/bank/historical/history/191_210.pdf
.