MOBILE USERS: m.isthmus.com
Connect with Isthmus on Twitter · Facebook · Flickr · Newsletters · Instagram 
Tuesday, September 23, 2014 |  Madison, WI: 56.0° F  A Few Clouds
Collapse Photo Bar

Waz up with Woodward?

Races for the Senate, U.S. House, etc. and other issues of national importance.

Re: Waz up with Woodward?

Postby rabble » Fri Mar 01, 2013 10:16 pm

Bland wrote:Am I really the only one here who cannot understand a single fucking thing MH posts?

I don't know. I understand quite a bit of it now that I'm kinda used to it.

But there are so many people here who are easy to understand and are such damned stupid hateful backstabbing heartless assholes that Howler doesn't even show up on my list of frustrations.
rabble
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6178
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:50 pm

Re: Waz up with Woodward?

Postby Mad Howler » Fri Mar 01, 2013 10:24 pm

Well this tread seems to have turned off topic. Sandi's yelling at us to look over there and Mr. Bland is doesn't get it. Mr. Bland you do not need to read things I post, that is your choice.
Mad Howler
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1355
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2012 8:36 pm

Re: Waz up with Woodward?

Postby Sandi » Fri Mar 01, 2013 11:29 pm

Stebben84 wrote:You have the Nook Book version of "I'm a conservative sheeple and I'm gonna tow the party line and I'm gonna spew talking points like everyone else" It's just the same shit you complain us "progressives" do.


Ok lets try the rational approach.

The sequester was entirely Obama's idea. He asked congress to pass it and they did. He signed it. Now he wants to change history and say it was a Republican idea. Pfft!

Jay Carney: “and as has been reported, it was an idea that the White House put forward.”

Now he wants to move the goal posts on HIS idea, by offsetting the sequester cuts with taxes in the form of tax reform. I am all for tax reform, but that is for another bill, this one has already been signed and gone into effect.
Sandi
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1558
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 11:31 pm

Re: Waz up with Woodward?

Postby Mad Howler » Sat Mar 02, 2013 12:56 am

When rains it pours, they say.
Mad Howler
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1355
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2012 8:36 pm

Re: Waz up with Woodward?

Postby Galoot » Sat Mar 02, 2013 6:25 am

No, Bland, you're not the only one. While interested in the recent news about Woodward, when I saw that MH had posted it, I skipped over. I figured it would be incomprehensible, and I was right.
Galoot
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1452
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 1:10 pm

Re: Waz up with Woodward?

Postby HawkHead » Sat Mar 02, 2013 10:44 am

So our country was on the edge of not paying our bills and having to shut down. No one could come up with a compromise. The President floats an idea that we have forced tax increases and forced spending cuts to give the Congress more time to fix the problem and put in a possibility so severe that both parties would have to come to the table.

If I was President Obama I would claim the effort and remind the people what was happening when the deal was struck; that the Republican Party was willing to destroy our credit rating and shut down functioing Government.

But by reminding the people what happened I would be called this!

Sandi wrote:I respect the office of President. I have no respect for Obama's always-in-campaign-mode lying ass.
HawkHead
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 796
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2012 1:29 pm

Re: Waz up with Woodward?

Postby DCB » Sat Mar 02, 2013 11:58 am

Sandi wrote:Now he wants to move the goal posts on HIS idea, by offsetting the sequester cuts with taxes in the form of tax reform. I am all for tax reform, but that is for another bill, this one has already been signed and gone into effect.

No, he wants to replace the sequester with something better. That was the whole point - the sequester should be so godawfulstupid that both sides would be forced to come up with something better.

But that hasn't happened.

And its worth noting that in the year and a half since the both sides agreed to the sequester deal, there was a prolonged debate that I would frame as the benefits of maintaining gross income inequality. One side decisively won that debate. So it shouldn't be too surprising that the winning side wants to set the terms of the deal to replace the sequester.
DCB
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2658
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 5:08 pm

Re: Waz up with Woodward?

Postby DCB » Sat Mar 02, 2013 12:40 pm

This is the simplest explantion of why we're in this mess:
The sequester can't be stopped because John Boehner thinks taxes are too high. But as we have seen, America's real problem is that taxes are too low. Historically low tax receipts go a long way toward explaining why the federal government is so broke right now. The Republicans' refusal to acknowledge this is pretty much the whole problem.

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/1125 ... reduction#

And this is the simplest solution:
Text of the Cancel the Sequester Act: "Section 251A of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 is repealed."

https://twitter.com/AlanGrayson/status/ ... 8554230785
DCB
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2658
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 5:08 pm

Re: Waz up with Woodward?

Postby Sandi » Sat Mar 02, 2013 1:01 pm

But as we have seen, America's real problem is that taxes are too low.


That anyone can be so ill informed is unbelievable.

One cannot argue with ignorance, so I leave you to your cool-aid.
Sandi
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1558
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 11:31 pm

Re: Waz up with Woodward?

Postby DCB » Sat Mar 02, 2013 1:25 pm

Nate Silver wrote:
But the House Republicans are very unlikely to capitulate on their no-tax pledge. And Democrats have little reason to capitulate either: they are on the right side of public opinion.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.co ... ainstream/

Shockingly, 47 percent of Republicans preferred the House Progressive plan to the sequester. This means that Republicans supported the House Progressive plan just as much as they supported their own party's plan.


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/sequeste ... z2MPI0lIkS

Greg Sargent wrote:Here’s what this means: Even if the parties reach a deal in the third round of deficit reduction to avert the sequester with something approaching an equivalent sum of spending cuts and new revenues, the overall deficit reduction balance would still be heavily lopsided towards Republicans. Yet they continue to insist on resolving round three only through cuts, anyway.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plu ... one-chart/

Looking at the latest CBO Budget projects, Garafolo and Spross conclude
The report clearly shows that, despite the ongoing deficit hysteria in Washington, the far more pressing problem is growth and jobs.


Meanwhile, the inside-the-beltway gang are discussing whether the Woodwards imaginary "threat".
DCB
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2658
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 5:08 pm

Re: Waz up with Woodward?

Postby DCB » Sat Mar 02, 2013 1:33 pm

Sandi wrote:
But as we have seen, America's real problem is that taxes are too low.


That anyone can be so ill informed is unbelievable.

One cannot argue with ignorance, so I leave you to your cool-aid.

More crazy talk from those ignorant sluts over at the CBO!
The overall average federal tax rates of 18.0 percent in 2008 and 17.4 percent in 2009 were the lowest in the 1979–2009 period and were well below the previous low of 19.4 percent in 2003 and the average of 21.0 percent over that period


Why believe in facts when truthiness is so much more comforting?
DCB
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2658
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 5:08 pm

Re: Waz up with Woodward?

Postby Henry Vilas » Sat Mar 02, 2013 3:22 pm

Sandi wrote:
But as we have seen, America's real problem is that taxes are too low.


That anyone can be so ill informed is unbelievable.

Look in a mirror. During the Bush administration, Congress budgeted for two wars (at least one which was unnecessary) and at the same time gave tax breaks to large, profitable corporations and to the super rich. For the first time in U.S. history taxes were cut during wartime.

We still owe that debt (much to Chinese bondholders) and interest on it is still accuring. How should the government pay that off?
Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 19899
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all

Re: Waz up with Woodward?

Postby snoqueen » Sat Mar 02, 2013 3:37 pm

Image
from http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3151

Income taxes are near a historic low, and Sandi thinks they're too high.

OK, Sandi. Tell us what you'd remove from the services and supports our government provides, if you want taxes to go lower.

I'm not expecting a lot, since the congressional Republicans haven't come up with specifics either.

I'd say cut whatever funding allows us to maintain a military presence in Afghanistan, along with lots of other fancy military toys. Why do we have to be cop of the world? Without handling that little self-assigned task, I think we'd come into balance pretty easily. We should do this gradually -- like over ten years -- to help various industries and regions settle into a new economic model. But we should start now.

Image

from http://www.pgpf.org/Chart-Archive/0053_ ... rison.aspx
snoqueen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 11510
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 11:42 pm

Re: Waz up with Woodward?

Postby rabble » Sat Mar 02, 2013 3:48 pm

Sandi is spelling "kool-aid" with a c solely to infuriate me. Doing a good job of it too.
rabble
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6178
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:50 pm

Re: Waz up with Woodward?

Postby Sandi » Sat Mar 02, 2013 4:03 pm

snoqueen wrote:Income taxes are near a historic low, and Sandi thinks they're too high.


No, you are confusing tax receipts with tax rates. Tax receipts are at a all time low because of high unemployment, over regulation on business, and business fear of Obamacare.

snoqueen wrote:I'm not expecting a lot, since the congressional Republicans haven't come up with specifics either.


There we agree, the Rs are no better than Ds when it comes to cutting spending where it isn't needed. We all know that there is a lot of government waste, especially in the Military. Neither Rs or Ds are willing to cut waste and non-essential programs.
Sandi
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1558
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 11:31 pm

PreviousNext

Return to National Politics & Government

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

moviesmusiceats
Select a Movie
Select a Theater


commentsViewedForum
  ISTHMUS FLICKR

Promotions Contact us Privacy Policy Jobs Newsletters RSS
Collapse Photo Bar