Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
|
Jan 16, 2011 - 08:30pm PT
|
I've been to 57 states. I think 3 left to go.
-Barrack Obama
I think I get your point, Skip. Think is, I think it is about the 10th time that it has been posted, if not more. That says to me that it is very difficult to find such mistakes.
However, I'd take a step further. I doubt that you are suggesting that when Obama said that, he really believed that there were 60 states. On the other hand, do you believe that the people who said the things that I quoted did not believe them, but simply made a slip of the tongue, as Obama clearly did?
It matters, Skip. Because these people are making such a point of the Constitution---it is a bedrock of what they are about, absolute knowledge of what it says, and what it means. If they were not, it would hardly be worth mentioning. We had a lot of fun with Dan Quayle, too, but his errors were not about fundamental governing, in the way that, for example, Palin's are.
|
|
rottingjohnny
Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
|
|
|
Jan 16, 2011 - 09:54pm PT
|
At least Obama didn't call North Korea our ally like Sarah Palin did...now there's a gaffe...doesn't she read the paper? rj
|
|
corniss chopper
climber
not my real name
|
|
|
Jan 17, 2011 - 01:12am PT
|
..and another thing that Liberals always do wrong is to ski on Conservative
tracks. Why can't they make their own? If you guessed its too hard for their wimpy physiques to break trail you're correct again. Free ride Libs!
Ick!
|
|
corniss chopper
climber
not my real name
|
|
|
Jan 17, 2011 - 02:49am PT
|
gf -
no worries. Just wanted to post a comment that makes fun of the crazy
left v right stupid-ness going on. Not any sticks and stones friend!
Skin to Voh-max and beyond!
Our right to express with words our feelings cannot be infringed by Obama.
edit - oops. you're not a Jets fan?
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
|
Jan 17, 2011 - 03:39am PT
|
Mister E - I and most others will not open links without some description of what they are. Been burned too many times.
Skip:
If you would like to take responsibility for all the signs at your side of the aisle's rallies then feel free.
Sure, I'll do that. Some of them are bad, wrong, embarrasing, stupid.
If you want to insinuate yours is the better description of the impact the tea party has had on this country, and worse to claim racism is the reason why, then really there is nothing to talk about.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean in the paragraph, above. I'm not opposing your statement, I just don't understand what you are saying.
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
|
Jan 17, 2011 - 03:48am PT
|
For those who might be interested, this was a talk I attended. In case you wonder how the joining of the conservative evangelicals with the GOP happened, this is the guy who was there, and was part of the equation, along with the major players like C Everett Koop, Jack Kemp, and now tells the story. His talk is about 20 minutes, with a very generous Q&A:
Church and State: The Role of Spirituality in Politics
Frank Schaeffer, author of the New York Times best selling memoir, Crazy For God: How I Grew Up as One of the Elect, Helped Found the Religious Right and Lived to Take All (or Almost All) of It Back, joins us to discuss his fiery evangelical past. The son of theologian Francis Schaeffer, Frank came of age with the Christian right, growing up in an evangelical/fundamentalist world with Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson at the kitchen table.
http://hammer.ucla.edu/watchlisten/watchlisten/show_id/206629/show_type/video?browse=none&category=0&search=
|
|
MH2
climber
|
|
|
Jan 17, 2011 - 11:48am PT
|
gf
The Canucks and the Stanley Cup?
Very nice illustration of how people of all political persuasions can live in delusion.
But this could be the year!
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
|
Jan 17, 2011 - 12:56pm PT
|
OK. I am ready.
|
|
Douglas Rhiner
Mountain climber
Truckee , CA
|
|
|
Jan 17, 2011 - 01:49pm PT
|
Come on AC,
Jeff is just wrong.
|
|
rottingjohnny
Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
|
|
|
Jan 17, 2011 - 01:49pm PT
|
Standard Republican Fare...Pull nonsense out of their corporate asses and tell the frothing right-wingers what they want to hear, then try to pass it off as the gospel...The republicans are not interested in containing health care costs , otherwise they would be reigning in the cause , but that would mean giving up campaign contributions from their corporate masters and losing their grip on power...can't have that now , can we...?
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
|
|
|
Jan 17, 2011 - 01:56pm PT
|
Paul Krugman is a hack...
His Az shooter story was the end of any credibility he had left.
Pffft!!!
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
|
|
|
Jan 17, 2011 - 02:05pm PT
|
You're a "hack" Bleuy...
I never claimed otherwise.
|
|
bookworm
Social climber
Falls Church, VA
|
|
|
Jan 17, 2011 - 04:01pm PT
|
again, i'll ask: why are the libs so enthusiastic to follow the economic advice of a man who made millions from the libs' icon of financial evil--enron?
Krugman's Contradiction
By Tom Bevan
Every time I read a Paul Krugman column I stop and wonder: what would America look like if this man were in charge of the country?
We know from his most recent writings that Krugman would have nationalized the entire banking system, that he would have enacted a significantly larger stimulus package than the $787 billion that passed, that he would move America to a single payer health care system, and that he'd enact much tougher environmental policy to deal with global warming.
Today, Krugman spends the first half of his column lamenting the fact that without an additional stimulus package we may be headed for a "jobless recovery." He writes:
Now, it's bad enough to be jobless for a few weeks; it's much worse being unemployed for months or years. Yet that's exactly what will happen to millions of Americans if the average forecast is right - which means that many of the unemployed will lose their savings, their homes and more.
Krugman describes the prospect of lingering high unemployment as a "slow-motion human and social disaster." Fair enough.
But then Krugman spends the second half of his column arguing that the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill that just passed the House "fell well short of what the planet really needs."
Krugman doesn't elaborate on what type of additional environmental regulations are needed to avert the "utter catastrophe" heading our way, but he makes clear that we need much, much more than we have and that we need it fast.
How can we reconcile the two pieces of Krugman's argument? I'm not a Nobel Prize winning professor from Princeton, but it doesn't take more than a basic understanding of economics to know that the kind of stricter environmental policies Krugman is talking about (carbon taxes, capping emissions, additional regulations, etc) will come at a cost to the economy. The discussion is, and always has been, all about balance: how do we implement policies aimed at addressing the issue of climate change without putting additional undue burdens on the economy and stifling growth?
To achieve the kind of dramatic, fast-acting results Krugman envisions would obliterate any such balance (unless Krugman believes further massive government spending can somehow offset the havoc such legislation would wreak on the economy) and one byproduct of Krugman's prescription would almost certainly be higher unemployment.
It really doesn't make much sense. Krugman frames his argument with the colorful analogy of the slowly boiling frog. But, ironically, Krugman's solution for saving the frog is to pull him out of the boiling pot and strangle him to death.
|
|
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
|
Jan 17, 2011 - 04:22pm PT
|
Fat wrote: Krugman is full of bullsh#t, the CBO does not score things properly.
They pretty much nailed the Bush tax cuts, the wars and his prescription plan...all that added to the deficit.
|
|
bookworm
Social climber
Falls Church, VA
|
|
|
Jan 18, 2011 - 08:58am PT
|
actually, bob, W's prescription plan came in well under budget:
http://www.newsmax.com/US/Bush--Drug--Plan--Cost/2010/08/17/id/367665
now, one might wonder how the cbo manages to remain "non-partisan"; allow me to explain AGAIN how the cbo works...
the cbo was created by CONGRESS to evaluate legislation created by CONGRESS--that should be your first red flag...you might notice that the cbo typically produces favorable assessments of legislation regardless of which party is in power, giving it the appearance of neutrality--that should be your second red flag...think: how is it possible that an inherently partisan (and self serving) body could neutral create a committee to oversee itself and have that committee consistently provide favorable assessments of legislation sponsored by both parties?
again...the cbo operates under rules created by CONGRESS...the cbo MUST evaluate legislation AS IT IS WRITTEN...the cbo cannot correct or even acknowledge accounting errors contained in the legislation...so, the cbo must use the numbers exactly as they are provided by CONGRESS to evaluate the projected costs of the legislation as determined by CONGRESS
the health care bill is only the most recent example...the legislation uses double-accounting to cover costs; that is, it counts PROJECTED savings from medicare TWICE to cover PROJECTED costs from TWO different programs...and PROJECTED savings are NOT guaranteed savings...
ok, congress can claim they will balance the budget by eliminating all the wasteful programs--looks good on paper...but what happens if congress does not limit spending on the rest of government? the cbo cannot, in its assessment, say, "wait, you haven't accounted for increased spending on existing programs or projected spending on any new programs"...the cbo can simply say, "yep, your numbers indicate this will balance the budget"
imagine bob telling his wife that he wants to take a climbing trip to thailand in may; he claims he'll cover the estimated cost by cutting back on his drinking for the next three months...say, the trip to thailand will cost around $1,200 and he estimates that he can save about $1,200 from less drinking--great; then he tells his wife that he wants to take a climbing trip to europe in june, which will cost around $900 and that he plans to pay for this second trip with the money he will save by cutting back on his drinking for the next three months; in fact, this second trip will actually save money because he's sure he'll save $1,200 by cutting back on his drinking and the europe trip will only cost around $900 so he'll net $300, which he will use to treat his wife to a day at the spa
under the cbo's rules, bob's wife would have no choice but to approve bob's plan
now, go to the cbo's website and read the director's blog where he can offer his own opinion; you'll see that he freely admits that the cbo simply doesn't know how much any legislation will actually cost; the chances for savings are as likely as the chances for overruns...of course, those of us who prefer to look at the facts of the past rather than the hopes of the future argue that the government is, always has been, and always will be the worse financial manager
again, name one government program (besides W's prescription plan) that came in under--or even at--budget
if government spending is so wonderful, why are europe, cali, ny, and illinois on the brink of bankruptcy? and why do you libs keep encouraging us to follow their example
|
|
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
|
Jan 18, 2011 - 09:27am PT
|
Imagine bookie ever telling the truth??
How that union treating you??
SUMMARY: The Los Angeles Times and The Wall Street Journal reported on February 3 that the revised 10-year cost estimates of President Bush's Medicare prescription drug plan were less than earlier projected -- $678 billion, as opposed to $737 billion estimated in August 2005. In fact, while they were less than August 2005 projections, they were far more than the $400 billion estimate the administration provided Congress when trying to get the votes to approve the plan.
|
|
rottingjohnny
Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
|
|
|
Jan 18, 2011 - 09:31am PT
|
Yeah Bob , but those big profits will trickle down to the middle class and if the poor pray hard enough , maybe them..?
|
|
philo
Trad climber
Somewhere halfway over the rainbow
|
|
|
Jan 18, 2011 - 11:24am PT
|
Did someone say trickle down?
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!