Monday, October 19, 2015

And everyone calls the GOP candidates crazy. Maybe they are right. Maybe the the left is as loony tunes as the right.

While on vacation, I have had the opportunity to review the democratic debate numerous times and reflect on what was said.

Who is the enemy?  The Left, which has a tendency to define itself as “smart” and “progressive” by caricaturing everyone else as stupid, greedy, mean-spirited and, of course, bigoted. We see that here often.  The left is extremely vulnerable to the old temptation of trying to become a saint through the sins of others. They defined themselves as enemies of Big Coal, the NRA, health insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, Wall Street, billionaires, and Republicans.   Democrats now believe in a big government utopia and no longer make much pretense of caring about economic growth or national security  and define themselves by their opposition to fellow Americans.

What is the left's credible strategy for dealing with the Islamic State as most of the debates foreign policy discussion was centered around anti-interventionism.  Seems that opposition to the Iraq War still dominates and distorts their whole outlook and the reality of the world today.

What is the left's concept of national security??  Certainly isn't about keeping people out of the country that shouldn't be here.  Certainly doesn't seem to be about our allies and promises.  Instead it seems to be about climate change.  A strange twisted reality as Putin steps up his world efforts, China builds islands in the S China sea.  N. Korea touts a new treaty with the USA to end hostilities.  What hostilities???

I have heard mention from the candidates about the suffering of the middle class, the  irony being that these Democrats are making a pretty compelling case for the failure of their own incumbent president. But all of the talk is about how they’re going to help people by redistributing wealth or providing free stuff. None of it is about how we’re going to return to strong economic growth so that people can have jobs and make money.  Not sure how the redistribution will fix the broken economy.  Not a word about all the middle class jobs transferred to China and abroad in exchange for cheap junk. 

Some of the things I heard:
Bernie Sanders is promising a “revolution,”
Martin O’Malley is promising a total conversion to “green energy,”
Lincoln Chafee is promising world peace.
Hillary Clinton is waving her hand and assuring us that the rich will pay for everything. 

Democratic candidates talked about the new programs they would create — free college was the big one.   Nobody balked, nobody said it wasn’t realistic, nobody talked about ratcheting back government or expecting less. Asked about it directly, Hillary Clinton contemptuously dismissed warnings about big government: “we should not be paralyzed by the Republicans and their constant refrain, ‘big government this, big government that’… I know we can afford it, because we’re going to make the wealthy pay for it.”


  1. Somewhere in the middle of Bush's term, I grew bored of the left articles that were basically the mirror of this. They all sound the same after awhile.

    1. You didn't hear these things in the debate or you just ignored them??

      Bernie Sanders is promising a “revolution,”
      Martin O’Malley is promising a total conversion to “green energy,”
      Lincoln Chafee is promising world peace.
      Hillary Clinton is waving her hand and assuring us that the rich will pay for everything.

    2. Context- The author of this piece tells you everything you need to about their opinion of the Democrats in para two and their point is that by adopting a partisan view, you can claim the Democrats are uber partisan

      Context- Martin O'Malley and Lincoln Chafee have not even climbed up the Jeb! levels of irrelevance. I believe you penned something awhile back chastising the media for elevating the voice of nobody's.

      Hillary and Bernie, this was a Democratic primary, were you expecting promises of trickle down economics? It is inevitable, that Bernie will fail if for no other reason than his clinging to the term socialist and by cherry picking quotes of Revolution. Bernie didn't actually start that, Jim Webb did. And for the record, I actually watched the debate rather than just the sound bites of it. Regardless of labels applied to Bernie, one thing is abundantly clear, he has voted like a Democrat should. Hillary? Not so much.

      The last sentence about Hillary is nonsense. She didn't say any such thing. One thing in primaries is certain, Republicans will promise responsibility and promise a return to prosperity with tax cuts. Democrats will promise to raise the tide of all boats through programs that allow people to get an education and "earn" their way up the ladder. Hillary, in true Clinton triangulation fashion, is trying to promise the education and a (wait for it) middle class tax cut! that will be paid for by the uber rich. She's already dismissed Bernie and is trying to land that fabled center. The author of this piece? Meh, it's same ol same ol, nothing more in depth than the typical laundry list of generic bitching that can be heard from left or right on any given day.

    3. Hillary Clinton:
      We can do these things. We should not be paralyzed by the Republicans and their constant refrain, ‘big government this, big government that’ except for what they want to impose on the American people. We’re going to make the wealthy pay for it. That is the way to get it done.”

    4. "We can do these things. We should not be paralyzed by the Republicans and their constant refrain, ‘big government this, big government that’ except for what they want to impose on the American people. We’re going to make the wealthy pay for it. That is the way to get it done.”

      Not found the in the first link, which is from 2012
      Not found in the second link, which is from 2010
      Not found in the third link
      Not found in the fourth link, which is from 2012
      And finally, that quote was not found in the last link.

      When you go and read those links, they give (wait for it) CONTEXT. What people want to do is take her quote here and proclaim all kinds of shake down headed toward the wealthy. Which isn't really what Hillary or Bernie are saying. If you don't like left of center policy and yo disagree with a premise that income inequality is a bad thing that hurts everyone, that's fair enough. However, intellectually dishonest responses are just that. I can't make clostridium difficile infected poop smell any better just because I call it dung.

    5. 1)Hillary Clinton CGI Speech Calls For Higher Taxes For Rich People

      2)Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made a rare foray into domestic politics today, offering her view that — given America's high unemployment — wealthy Americans don't pay enough taxes.

      3) Hillary Clinton wants higher taxes, or as she calls them “revenue enhancements”

      4) Hillary Clinton: Wealthy Around the Globe Need to Pay More Taxes

      5) Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton will call for higher taxes on the wealthy and higher pay for everyone else

      Not the exact words above but you get the idea, the wealthy must pay more taxes.

      How will the rich pay for everything, higher taxes.

    6. I do get the idea, and continue to disagree with the dogmatic characterization.

    7. This comment has been removed by the author.

    8. From the debate:

      Certain key words were spoken during the debate:
      Wall Street: 23
      Tax: 20
      Inequality: 9
      Wealthy: 7

      The number of times national concerns were mentioned:
      ISIS: 4
      Terror/ists/ism: 2
      Defense: 2
      Military (excluding Jim Webb): 1
      Freedom: 1
      Debt (national): 0
      Liberty: 0
      Strength: 0
      Armed forces: 0
      Islamist/Islamic: 0

      How important is material inequality?
      And if it is not that important, why does it preoccupy the democrats?

      As to Hillary, it's not my characterization, the articles are not unproven theories, but what is reported in the news. You may not like the assertion however it's who she is. It isn't a one off occasion but a track record over the years, the purpose of articles chosen from different years to reflect on who she is.

    9. material inequality is not the issue for me, and I don't believe that is the case that Hillary or Bernie are making either. I continue to believe that a stable society is one wherein there is an inequality that does not leave a massive portion of that society in position where they have little power, and little say. I don't see anyone calling for trying to create a world with no inequality whatsoever, it's a matter of degree. That last time we had this level of inequality, was right before the great depression. This is not fantasy. However, rather than just let it happen as we did then, we have unleashed a host of spending that arguably has prevented or perhaps just forestalled an inevitable disaster.

      The spending you dislike so much has not just gone into thin air. The poor have used it to get by, the rich have used it to ensure that they and their spoiled spawn never have to work on honest day ever again. Further, despite have been so richly rewarded for doing little more than just letting their boats be carried by the rising tide of the Fed. In that respect, I think we have way over rewarded one segment of America, who has done nothing more with that benefit than the poor that so many seem to be so pissed off at. If we are going to take away one group's unearned benefit by cutting social programs, than I think it's high time we got back some of the money sent the other way. Not much chance of that unless we raise taxes cause they sure as shit aren't going to invest in America.

      That word count. So it's flipped the other way in the Republican debate. This is surprising?

  2. The author must be deranged. He watched this train wreck "numerous times." Watching Socialists for over five minutes can cause serious issues to your.mental health.

  3. I have never called the GOP crazy. However, I will call anyone who thinks that Donald Trump is qualified to be president as nutty as a tree full of squirrels.

  4. Only 30% of republicans are crazy. You lou are one of them. Bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch that's all you do. Why don't you post something on here for a real discussion instead of just bitching about the poor which is what you do 75% of the time.

    1. I see you cannot read.


      The post isn't about the poor but about democrats and republicans.

      Are you also having memory issues?

    2. And I decided to post this in response to your hatred of every right candidate.

  5. Sometimes a friend makes a statement that one cannot ignore. I disagree with a lot of the things Lou posts here, I agree with probably more than half of his total posts.
    This particular post and the debate it has caused has, at least to me, crystallized so much of where there is the possibility of progress if only people will give reason a chance.
    A very old teacher once told me, after an outburst in a school debate that conviction does not supplant factual reasoning. So here we have Lou writing a post firmly from the position of the "Right” He constructs his argument and in so doing, Lou remains as the attack dog. At the end of any fight when the opponent is also an attack dog, we get two contestants still wanting to fight and in so many cases, the cause of the fight is forgotten in the red mist which the fight engenders.
    The responses to Lowman’s post are short on detail but totally missing any offer of compromise.
    Long periods of study of your political history have repeatedly shown the value of compromise and the implementation of the Monroe doctrine of 1823 is an example of a political compromise. Did you all know Jefferson was asked by Monroe to suggest positions and the son of John Adams, John Quincy who was the then Sec State was the co author? With such parents, the bill was a shoe in despite initial opposition. It can be argued perhaps that the Roosevelt Corollary was also achieved through Bi Partisan cooperation.
    The point I am trying to make here is that neither side can be 100 percent right and their opponents can never be 100 percent wrong. I often refer to Tip O’Neil, surely one of the most skilled politicians to work the isle. I hope every one reads Lou’s post, and then respond with a compromise view. At least the debate will become more rational and the atmosphere more conducive to an adult debate.
    Cheers from Aussie

    1. The purpose of the post other than to inflame the left is to point out the absurd positions the left and right claim during debates. As ridiculous as the right may sound they are echoed by equally absurd positions from the left, hence: And everyone calls the GOP candidates crazy. Maybe they are right. Maybe the the left is as loony tunes as the right.

      Perhaps it's to easy to assume others would see the equally terrible positions the candidates have taken but then again I should expect nothing as both parties shout into the wind looking for the magic slogan to whisk them into the WH.

      Everyone that isn't among the wealthy hate they have accumulated so much money and would like nothing better than the government to take it from them. Consequentially, if the government came to confiscate their possessions they would howl at the injustice.

      Who from the left is screaming for the end of the jobs for junk program? No one. All scream about the injustice of wealth inequality yet no one addresses the root cause. They scream for higher taxes on the wealthy, a popular theme with the rest of America. And in the end, the GOP proposers nothing sowing there is little difference between both parties. One screams for more taxes from those paying taxes to spend on more and the other trying to figure which way is up.

      This is exactly what is wrong in this country, we have become a nation of those that have and those that want. A nation of those who feel that the rule of law a thing of the past and a nation of people unwilling to go the extra mile.

      Brings a thought to mind. Years ago after struggling to finish my degree which I paid as I attended as I worked a full time job, I wanted a masters degree to enhance my ability to achieve higher goals. I also did that on my own, pay as you go and achieved my goals. Working full time attending classes part time. I didn't have a wife and children as I could not afford it nor did I have the time for a relationship. Nor did I whine about what others had or did not have. Now in my later years I am able to enjoy my life, my daughter and cheer her successes. I often wonder what happened to the desire to achieve more, the need to succeed.

      The return to prosperity. A dream that will never return as long as we continue down this path of destruction.

      It is no longer about the person but the collective. The everyone gets a trophy syndrome.

    2. I don't think that's quite accurate, Lou.

      I'm not sure how old you are, but the U.S. in which you worked hard and were rewarded with success simply doesn't exist anymore.

      My father graduated high school a year early in 1964. He got a Rhodes Scholarship that got him through his first 2 years of college. He was able to work part time at a Dye plant to pay for the last two years. He finished with a BA in History. At that time, that was good enough to get him an interview & job offer with IBM. Can you imagine that today? A History degree was meaningful enough to get him in the door of the biggest tech company in the world at the time? Wow! He ended up turning it down & getting a teaching gig. He had me and went on to law school.

      At that time in the mid-sixties, he was a minority in his group of friends. Most of them graduated high school, walked down to the Ford or GM plant and got a job, and were able to buy a home, raise a family, yaddy yaddy ya ...

      Fast forward to today. There is no Ford or GM gigs that you can walk into out of high school. There are no Dye plants offering decent paying 3rd shift gigs. The HR person at IBM will laugh in your face if apply for a job with just a 4-year degree, let alone one in History. And while anyone with $1000 bucks & an internet connect can get a degree today, the meaningful ones cost way too much - college tuition at decent schools has gone up 6x's the rate of inflation since the 80s. You ain't gonna cover that slinging burritos for $8.50/hr at Chipotle. So your options are to go into debtor's prison out of the gate, borrowing $30-$200k in hopes of being lucky enough to land a $28k/year job when you're done, or you can do something like that freshman girl at Duke did earlier this year - internet porn (tuition and room & board at Duke is $61k per year for an undergrad degree. In 1985, it was $10k per year).

      My best friend's a high school teacher, Lou. She keeps in touch with a lot of her students after they graduate. Most are working hard, alomst all are struggling.

      The problem isn't a lack of desire to work hard or to succeed. The problem is that the world which allowed you & my Dad the opportunity to do so doesn't exist anymore.

      I heard the Dems speak to that a lot at the debate.

    3. Sorry. Usually I proofread before I post.

    4. The dims also had control of the house for 40 straight years, since then the pubs took over and spent more money on welfare and giveaways. Now thankfully gridlock has set in, inflation has lowered, adults are gaining strength in congress, your struggling 20-30 somethings (aren't young people supposed to struggle?) are seeing lower gas prices due to a fracking boom (unless Obama's EPA f____s that up also).

      My former name on MW was DI or Dollar Inflation. It all comes down pfunky to the frog in the boiling pot. Inflation stifles everything in it's path. The Freedom Caucus is gaining strength and will get the national debt under control, rein in inflation, put us back on the track that your father and I had when we started in the 60's and 70's.

      Support Ben Carson, a good man, and the Freedom Caucus, a bunch of good men and women. Forget about the skin color, gender, and celebrity fads.

    5. hey pfunky.

      Finished my degree in 85 and the masters in 1991. It took double the normal time as I chose not to borrow and attend full time. So I did it part time forever.

      A while ago but not in the 60's. It's the world our politicians (both parties) created for Americans. Many cheered the cheap imported goods while jobs were shipped overseas.

      The interesting thing is I have saved forever and have enough to pay for my daughters tuition, 51K a year minus the merit based scholarship and have enough for her to do the masters degree afterwards. No I didn't have a wife or a child when struggled through college and working through the masters. Yes I struggled for years to make ends meet but the sacrifice was worth it.

      Life is about choices. Most of the time I chose well. Sometimes not so great. The problem is always about choices. Do you get the cell phone with unlimited data for 150 a month? Do you get the internet connection for 50 a month? Do you get the cable for 100+ a month? All considered necessities by many today. How many children should I have 2? 3? All cost money. Got to have a house for them to grow up in and 2 cars in the driveway. Life is all about choices. I find it interesting to watch people and look at the choices they make.

      Young couple just moved in next door. The are struggling waiting for their income to catch up with their house payment. 2 kids. Both work. Did they really need to move to this neighborhood as it isn't cheap. Did they really need to buy the condo in the mountains recently??

      Still boils down to choices. Chose well and you may be rewarded, chose poorly and the odds are against you.

      Not one spoke about uniting the country. Not one spoke about making poor choices.

      Hope all is well.

    6. And you are correct sometimes it just doesn't work out. The question then needs to be asked, should everyone subsidize a person who made bad choices in life and struggles?

    7. @William

      Yes, young people are supposed to struggle. If it were easy, everyone would be Bill Gates. My point to Lou was that it is exponentially more difficult for today's 20-somethings than it was for the Boomers 40-50 years ago.

      You make a good point about inflation, and Lou always makes one about the trade agreements that brought us lots of cheap shit but cost the U.S. its manufacturing base. I think those are just pieces of the big picture and you overstate its significance.

      Your example of gas prices is fine, but Millennials don't care as much cuz they don't buy cars. This is actually freaking carmakers out & if it wasn't for the boom in China, they'd be done. Young people today rely on public transport, bikes, and "sharing economy" services like Uber. As I pointed out, the rising cost of tuition has far outpaced the rate of inflation.

      I think we're in a transitional period. The Industrial Revolution is over & we're shifting into whatever follows. I think tech more than anything else is what's killing opportunity for young people. There are more people and less need for them.

      Google is piloting their driverless cars around cities right now - say goodbye to long-haul truck drivers within the next decade (yet another good paying job that a kid could get without a college degree).

      Developers have written apps that can write apps. No more coders in a few years.

      Heck, need a screwdriver right away? Just fab one up on your new 3D printer. No more need even for 3rd world quasi-slave labor to make us our cheap shit.

      The net result, lots of people, not a lot of jobs.

      I was reading an article recently that talked about how Facebook's market cap is almost equal to GM's. Wow. How many people does GM employ? Maybe 4 or 5 million if you count it's dealer network & contractors? Now how many work for Facebook? 100? Maybe 200 tops? This could be the new normal.

      I really don't think much of your glorious gridlock. If you are truly concerned about the debt, and I believe you are, I would point out that the last time we were actually paying down he debt was when both sides compromised. Clinton caved on welfare, Gingrich & Dole caved on taxes, and the U.S. ran a budget surplus for 2 1/2 years. "My way or the highway" isn't gonna accomplish anything except maybe blow the whole thing up. It's childish, magical thinking. My apologies to your "adults".


      You could find a job where you could live (frugally) and put enough away to pay for education. There are no good paying jobs where a young person can make enough to do so - not without a college degree.

      Take my Duke girl example from my previous post. Even if she was super responsible and managed to put together $120k to go toward her education, she's still $120k short. You think she's gonna make up that difference pouring smoothies for $9/hr at a Robek's?

      I don't know any 20 yos who pay for TV and few for an internet connection. Most don't own cars and those that do, inherited a junker from family. Those that aren't living in their parent's basement live with 3-6 roommates.

      A smart-phone with a data plan is a must for these kids. It's their office, their classroom, their TV, their PC - it replaces all those things you think they're wasting money on. They are not using it just to browse Tinder or post pics of their food on Instagram.

      I know you don't see the need for one, but, as you frequently & proudly post here, your fight with the world is essentially over. You're just sitting back, enjoying the fruits of your hard work & the success of your daughter. That's not a knock on you, Lou, you have every right to be proud, but your "these kids today with their smartphones" statements comes off as very Grumpy Old Mannish. If you're a twenty-something today, you need a mobile device.

      I'd love to keep babbling but I'm outta time. Good posts, gentlemen.

    8. The whole thing needs blowing up pfunky, that's the point. Base line budgeting, unionized Federal employees, crony capitalism, open boarders,,they all need blowing up. The average wage inside DC is over 100K, they have a 3% unemployment rate. Is something wrong here?

      Your Malthusian arguments about over supply of labor and limited resources grow quite tiresome. Grow up girl. Do you ever in your wildest imagination think that any entity could ever repay 19 Trillion dollars?

    9. "The whole thing needs blowing up pfunky, that's the point."

      There it is, William. That's you in a nutshell. No interest in solutions, just destruction. You want to cure the brain tumor by cutting off the head.

      My apologies if my arguments bore you. They may be wonky & unoriginal, but that doesn't make them wrong. You've stated absolutely nothing to indicate that they are.

      I was ready to go into a long tirade citing facts & economists of all schools of thought & political stripes showing that while none of them can predict exactly what would happen if the U.S. defaulted, all of them agree that it would be disastrous for the U.S. and global economies, but realized there's no point.

      This isn't about rationality for you, it's about faith and you're a zealot. It'd be like trying to talk you out of your religion. You're like one of those End-Timers looking to bring on the economic apocalypse. No amount of facts that I, or anyone for that matter, posts would merit any consideration from you because for you it's not about rationality at all. It's all religious dogma - blind faith. You, and people like you, are the perfect combo anger, ignorance, and zealotry to make you dangerous.

      You frequently talk of unburdening your grandchildren from the U.S. debt as all important, but what you're advocating (default) may actually unburden them from civilization. But hey, at least they wouldn't have to worry about the debt, right?

      Of course you don't see it that way and I don't expect you to. To you, I'm the idiot frog in the pot of boiling water who just doesn't get it. That's fine. I'm ok with that & I'll never try to convince you otherwise.

      To your credit, William, I think you've inspired me. I was content just to go along and take care of myself, my family, & the people I care about - I don't have the solutions for the nation, but at least I won't be part of the problem. That was good enough for me.

      Not anymore. If dangerous Zealous Irrationality cannot be changed, it must be defeated by Reason. This isn't about left v right, socialism, libertarianism, or any other "ism". Your political "religion" represents an existential threat to everyone, even you & your grandchildren, though you'd deny it. It's time for rational people to step up our game.

    10. "It's time for rational people to step up our game."

      Now I am worried... pfunky has turned her baseball cap around and gotten into a three point stance looked fanaticism in the eye and proclaimed... what exactly?

    11. Rational left the playing field quite some time ago.

    12. Lol. Ok TS. I was being a bit melodramatic. It's been a long week.

      @Lou - yep ...