No, these ten "can nots" are verbatim cut and paste out of one of McClintock's stock speeches, which he in turn lifted from somebody else. That doesn't stop other Republicans from cut and pasting it ad nauseum, but McCarpetbag must have sent out an email blast again that another crop of old folk think that this is the equivalent of re inventing the wheel.

It's not 1916 anymore.

8. keep out of trouble by spending more than income- McClintock ran his campaign deep into debt, obligating those special interests who were guaranteeing him they'd pay it off after the election

9. establish security on borrowed money- McClintock engineered the state law cutting the car tax, which ended up taking 7 billion out of the state budget in revenues, said state budget, having wrecked, which he also voted against EVERY year, because his goal in life is to destroy things not make them work. Got into DC, first thing he proclaims is the state doesn't deserve any Federal $ yet CA sends more to US than we get back.

10. help by doing for what they will not do for themselves.... yet McComplainer takes nothing but corporate money out of Southern CA and money from big banking and financial investors that are bleeding this country dry- yet refuses to work with Congress to regulate same- if the legislators refuse to do their jobs, then they should stop feeding at the government troughs and get out of the way instead of making a mockery of the process.

Did anyone watch the appearance of Geithner before the Committee yesterday? It was a good insight into the Admins. financial incompetence, it said a lot more than the letter writer and C-Rs comment which as usual point to good old McClintock. Yes, the market tanked as it usually does every time one of our Administration folks stick their foot in mouth, hop around subjects and questions and blame Budh. Hopefully today, they will all keep quiet and let the market play on it's own.

C-R, do you have a crush on McClintock? Boy, I hope you don't, you would make one heck of a stalker, you are obsessed with him. Let me tell you a little secret, he is just one minority vote, he's powerless against the Pelosi machine, any screwups comiong out of the House of Representatives is due to the Big Red Machine, not little old McClintock.

Bush, not Buch. In a hurry this morning.

loomis,

The market regularly sells off on Friday, so don't be surprised if it does today. That's not to say I disagree with the point you're making, because I do agree with it.

CR: What happened to 1 through 7?

Larry, Nice LTE and I do not care where the list originated from. I agree with those 10 items for the most part.

CR: Just another of your typical McClintock rants , you are really beginning to become another TruthFinder and his/her push to legalize MJ. Like I told TF. we get your point now go away. So I say the same to you regarding your endless rants against McClintock.... WE GET YOUR POINT.

LR: As GregC. stated I agree.

loomis

did you miss the part about Geithner's job before the US Treasury?

Instead of raging endlessly about the current admin why not check out some recent history for a change? I can only wonder if you were as critical of the last administration and idiot boys policies.

I am pretty sure that Canyon Rat, Ishmael, Fishdella, and joeshwingding are the same person.

How many times does one have to read the same old stuff verbatim out of his speeches, and you criticize ME for noticing that he says the same thing from a speech out of the pre industrialized era nearly a century ago, over and over again ? And then the Republicans start reciting it en masse like it's PROFOUND when it's just a rationalization for religious themed political greed.

blah, blah, blah.

Jon, I don't think they're the same person, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were related!:)

Aahhh ... there it is! the prototypical right wing meme that I have come to enjoy for over a decade.

When you can't refute the FACTS, make them up, obfuscate the issue, or my personal favorite ..... attack the messenger.

Besides everyone knows that Rethug's only share ONE brain...easier to stay on message.

Sorry boys there's a new voice in town that you will have to contend with. :o) .... flame away

chase2you - Rarely, if ever, have you bothered to post a fact, link, or statistic, just your opinion. Your blogs consist of pointing out the drunk driving arrest of a family member of a Democrat, and events in Holland. You hate Obama and hope the country fails just to feel vindicated, and you attack with the typical buzzwords and contempt that seems to prevail as of late on here. Your posts show this time and again, WE GET YOUR POINT, so by your criteria, now you, too, can go away.

to get to know Larry's best case scenario world better try reading "Hard Times" by Charles Dickens. The usual problem is that people like Larry probably lack the vocabulary necessary to read Dickens which correlates to the ability to think past the level of a 12 year old.

also other interesting literary tips for the Season of Light.

Try "For Your Own Good" by Alice Miller This is a very readable psychology book about the effects of brutal parenting. It also has a great chapter about how Hitler became the guy he was.

Both of these books are readily available used on line for cheap. Or you may get very lucky at the used book store.

Canyon Rat: I didn't know that about McCain. Interesting.

There was a remarkable change in John McCain after he sold out on the torture issue in order to become the Republican candidate. He just looked like a vacant vessel. Very scary for us, very sad for him.

Kittyv, Yes, Like others here I post my opinion, sometimes like the event I posted in Holland is a fact, as for the post on D. Driving that was a fact, if you want me to bore you with the links I will, however I did not think it necessary as the stories expalined everything.

Do I hate Obama... nope, Do I hope the contry fails....nope, Do I need to be vindicated....nope.. Do I think our government is doing the right thing at this time? From time to time I do, and at times I don't. Do I think either of the sitmulus bills were necessary, nope, shoud have gov. bailed out the auto induestries, nope. Should gov. take over health care? perhaps in some respects yes, but this 2,000 plus page bill is way over the top. Should have or gov. bailed out all the Wall Street thieves... nope.. So there are some of my general thoughts and opinions on various matters and please do not tell me what I think..or should I ask you what I think before I post?

I was only trying to express that we get the point,,, someone does not like Mc... o.k. fine but we do not need to be reminded every day about it. And even if a artilce is posted and it is not about politics, Mc. will be injected into the conversation.. I look up the posts for yourself, their there.

Continued, like this post, the writter never mentioned Mc. but sure enough he was mentioned in the conversation. Though Mc, had not been mentioned in the LTE. So how did we get from a letter written in 1916 to Mc. today?????

chase2you - no silly, I don't want to tell you what to think, I appreciate a different opinion, and I think you should consider learning to do so as well. My point was merely to make you see that everyone here posts what they feel and believe and it is not up to you, me, or anyone else to tell them that they've made their point so they should go away. I found the post on Holland interesting, my entire comment here is an effort to get you to see why your comment was not appropriate. Just because you don't want to hear it anymore from CanyonRat and truthfinder doesn't mean there aren't others who do, and I resent you trying to "chase" those opinions away. It would be wrong to do to you, and it's wrong to do to them. See?

I'm a little reluctant to take my economic advice from a 1916 religious motivational speaker, but Rev. Boetcker also said "The difficulties and struggles of today are but the price we must pay for the accomplishments and victories of tomorrow."

Are you the same Larry C. Richardson who filed an appeal on his sentence after pleading guilty to conspiracy to engage in interstate

travel in aid of a racketeering enterprise to distribute of heroin? (UNITED STATES OF AMERICA versus LARRY C. RICHARDSON - 31May2005)

Just asking.

Oh, here we go, he's on one of those sites trying to defend the "Tea Party Express." He's mentioned on the Houston Tea Party Patriots page on boycotting the big 3 television networks.

quote from Larry C Richardson Auburn Nov 2 2009 "I quit watching these morons several years ago! " yeah, we can tell you're a low info sort of guy.

listed on another Freedomworks page (think Dick Armey) supporting Jeff Flake for Appropriations Committee.

joeswingding, what has Geithner done in your opinion that makes him competent for the position he's in. He just repeated the same old mantra during the hearing, nothing new, nothing exciting, it's Bush's fault, even dwelled into health care. Just a little parrot saying the lines he tried so hard to memorize. And to answer your question about the prior Administration, yes, I was very much opposed to some of their policies. But it was hard to find fault with an economy that was heading upward and with employment at an all time high. I felt there was a bubble somewhere, just like the dot.com one but all i could do was to try and protect my investments. I must say that I passed up some great money making opportunities but on the plus side I have to say that I kept my losses to a minimum. I did the same at the onset of the dot.com and made it through it with nary a scratch.

Greg, I agree that the market sells off on Fridays, this market started the sell off on Tuesday and never stopped, all of Monday gains have been given back plus some. October was not a really good month and the volatility remains. Too many unanswered question and too many pots on the fire. The Chinese are nervous and if they pull the plug on us, our goose is cooked. This Country's economy and financial well being are in the hands of a former enemy, let's hope we don't really tee them off. So, Mr. Obama, please continue calling them sir.

loomis

Fair enough. But my first question was what was little Timmy Geithners job before Secretary of the Treasury? He was Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and one of the chief architects of the bank bailouts under Bush 2.

Make no mistake Geithner is a smart guy .. that being said, No, I do not agree with his economic policies... nor did I agree with W's. Do you not understand that the problems with the economy started in the last administration? This did not materialize overnight under Obama. What happened that you could not find fault with was artificial ... Wall Streets new highs, employment (was not at an all time high) was climbing, and there was a general "feeling" of prosperity brought on by the Federal Reserves loose monetary policy, artificially low interest rates and easy credit.

This economies problems started in 2001 when Greenspan lowered interest rates to an artificial level, at the behest of the Bush Admin, in order to hold off a recession. He then kept them there for over two years and allowed a RE bubble of historic proportions to take its place. It wasn't until 2004 that he started to raise rates at 1/4pt and a time that took nearly two years by then it was too late.

Were he to allow the blow up of the dot.com bubble to deflate we would 1. not have had Bush for a second term 2. not had a gigantic housing bubble and its fake wealth effect. 3. not be experiencing Great Depression 2.

That is great that …

that is great that you were able to protect yourself.

But our goose is already cooked. Its like there's a party going on and its turning bad .. countries are easing towards the door hoping nobody is noticing for fear of starting a stampede.

The best thing that could happen for us is if China stops supporting our debt and forces us to start saving and investing in our economy. The USD is going much lower, massive inflation is coming ... prepare yourself.

loomisresident - Since when is China "a former enemy"? Did we have a war with China?

The U.S. public debt stands at US $11.9 trillion and rising, all borrowed from China.

U.S. public debt is what the government borrows to fund the deficit. In 1980 it stood at about US $900 billion, which was manageable. But Reagan was into huge military spending and trickle-down tax cuts, so by 1990 the debt jumped to US $3.2 trillion. Bush the Lesser ballooned the debt up to US $10.3 trillion by offering huge tax cuts and by starting two wars, which he financed by more borrowing from China. GOP propagandists now call Obama a spendthrift because of the US $1.5 trillion added to the public debt, but the bank bailout and stimulus was actually done during the Bush presidency.

Anyway, try to be polite to the new "leader of the free world," communist China.

Skeptic,

Finances aside, how can we ever look at China as a leader of the "free world" when they are such a perfect example of political oppression of their people?

We could always do what so many other countries have done to the U.S. over the last 100 years. We could simply default on our debt to China and watch them tailspin into an economic heap!

The Chinese don't worry me now that they've had a serious taste of capitalism. Don't you find it rather ironic that the largest communist country remaining in the world is now deeply ensconced in capitalistic principles? We can thank the Brits for that.

I suspected that the urge to make money and improve their lot would catch hold quickly once the British gave up their hold on Hong Kong.

Capitalism was controlled for a short time after the English gave up control, but the villages in close proximity to Hong Kong were already hearing fantastic stories of Chinese entrepreneurs making a bundle of money following the capitalist path, and the word got out rather quickly from there.

It's hard to keep people down once they've been compensated for their work according to the amount of effort they put forth. It tends to make people want to work harder if they can earn more by doing more and the Chinese are just now learning that.

What will the new wealthy in China do with their new-found prosperity? That's the next question to be answered!

Will they continue to …

....support communism? Why would they?

Those "trickle down" tax cuts actually doubled revenue to the treasury thus helping to provide deficit relief.

-And that military spending helped break the Soviet Union and brought the Berlin Wall and communism is one fail swoop.

-It's just a shame that knuckle heads like yourself have such a twisted historical perspective. Ignorant people who propagate factual distortions of history are in essence building upon a false premise by which circular failure is inevitable.

kittyv,

First of all, I'm happy to see you posting a bit more these days.

Secondly, I won't speak for Chase2you, but I think you're either misunderstanding the point about CanyonRat, or you are purposely being too sensitive when CR is criticized.

I am/have been a constant critic of CR. I make no bones about it. But I am not being critical of the factual content of many of her comments, I'm critical of her inability to swerve even slightly from her obvious dislike for Tom McClintock. She turns every story or blog post into a referendum against anything to do with Republicans and specifically, Rep McClintock. Sure, she can go on this way, and no one is trying to stop her. Criticism does not mean intended censorship.

As far as I'm concerned CanyonRat COULD be a very effective commentator on this board, but she blows herself out of the water with her rants. She blows herself out of the water with her obviously hateful words. If you're simply looking for a big-mouth to represent your ideals and beliefs, then you've got your gal!

If, on the other hand, you have a desire to effectively communicate your position in a way that might possibly sway the thinking of the opposition, then you might consider how much damage someone like CanyonRat does every day to the Liberal Democrat way of thinking....

....Her comments don't offend, irritate, infuriate, or otherwise make me uncomfortable with my beliefs. No, they just illustrate how little respect she has for any opinion other than her own.

It also shows how intolerant she is of other ideas. Isn't that the antithesis of liberalism? Or is it just the obvious, perfect illustration of a hypocrite?

FreedTinkerton

Wow talk about factual distortions.

You must have missed the part about trickle down did not work. He gutted our industrial base, blew up the federal deficit and turned us into a debtor nation. National debt increased under Reagan from $700B to over $3T. Much of that due to military spending.

Reagan did not break the Soviet Union... like any empire its time had come. The US empire experiment is fast coming to an end. Check out history ... all empires crumble under the weight of their own DEBT.

Twisted indeed.

gregcalac

Clearly you do not understand economics as well as you think;

"We could always do what so many other countries have done to the U.S. over the last 100 years. We could simply default on our debt to China and watch them tailspin into an economic heap!"

China is large and in charge. They don't even have to cash in their US debt instruments ... all they need to do is stop buying and we will be crushed under the weight of our own debt. China has an industrial base, and to think we are their only customers is naive. They are already making trade deals with other countries outside of the U$D.

If we just defaulted on our debt it would be catastrophic to the US. Who would trade with us? Who would buy our debt? What would the U$D be worth? What would interest rates be?

Try to gain some perspective before you make comments like that.

JonGreen,

Although they have similarities, I don't for a minute believe CR, Ishy, or Fishy are the same nut. Fell from and rotted at the foot of the same tree, but that's where it all ends.

joeshwingding,

Thanks for bringing me back from the edge of delusional economic thinking. I should have realized there a children at home reading this board who are impressionable.

Of course, you're correct about the Chinese. I'm sorry my comment was so off-handed.

I realize the Chinese have other trade partners and I didn't say we are their only customers.

So, are you upset about my other comments concerning the way Communist China is turning into a capitalistic country? Or, are you just picking at this one point?

Skeptic, "Since when is China "a former enemy"? Did we have a war with China?" China has been an enemy of the US for years. They furnished hardware and manpower in both Korea and Vietnam. You are correct that there has never been a declared war, but to assume that we have not had them as a military adversary is ludicrous. They are the new leader of the communist world and it appears our current administration would like to swing that way and join them.

joeshwingding, I believe you forgot to include both "secretary of the treasury" under Clinton, Robert Rubin and Larry Summers. Rubin by far is the most responsible individual that caused the banking industries rise and fall. Summers, like Paulson as well as most of the financial advisers in the last 20 years are all from the same "school" of Rubinomics. Go Goldman Sachs! Broke that is.

gregcalac,

I have no issue with the Chinese people turning to a capitalistic economy. I believe it is quite natural for them to do so. Why wouldn't the average person want something better for themselves or the family?

To believe that America has an exclusive lock on Capitalism is ridiculous. Neither is the belief that democracy and capitalism are somehow linked ... these are mutually exclusive.

But how do you think that China's internal economic policy benefits the US, outside of them recycling U$D back into US debt instruments? This is a precarious event for America should it discontinue and an American default would only spell our demise. We are a victim of their generosity and are no longer in control of our own economy.

fourgen

Now we are getting somewhere ..... or nowhere.

We can go back and forth through the recent decades and blame one administration after another ... but what would that accomplish but to prove my point.

This is not a left/right issue. Let me repeat that, The liberal/ conservative argument is redundant and only serves to distract from the real culprit in this mess. Turn off FAUX news and corporate media and think for yourself using only the facts and not the "No Spin Zone " meme ...... Monetary policy is set by the independent Federal Reserve.

There is plenty of blame to be tossed around but lets be really succinct about this point .... The merger of Corporate America and Government is NOT communism, or socialism .... it is Fascism.

(btw- I would attribute Greenspan with credit as the most responsible, followed closely by Paulson)

joeshwingding,

I don't believe America has an exclusive lock on capitalism and obviously neither do you.

My greatest concern for America is not the emergence of China as a world leader due to their economic power. Neither am I afraid of their million plus standing armed force. If we are ever in an outright fight with them I doubt it's going to matter whether they have more foot soldiers than us.

I'm more concerned with the condition of an average American and our inability to save money and pay cash for our large and small purchases.

If we weren't borrowing so much against our future worth we probably wouldn't find ourselves in the same predicament we are in today.

China is definitely benefiting as we consume their goods, but despite their ability to produce those consumer goods on the cheap, they still have rising costs that tend to flatten out their profits.

Once the Chinese govt. stopped subsidizing the price of oil their industrial and individual consumers were faced with the reality of world market pricing of fuel. That's gotta cut into their profits and make the Chinese fell more vulnerable. I know it has that effect on our people.

......No, we don't want the Chinese as enemies. Even if they have traditionally helped other smaller communist countries fight against us it appears they would rather defeat us economically rather than militarily The only reason they'll be able to accomplish that will be our own fault for being such borrowers and spenders.

swingding, He isn't smart enough to know how to report his income on a 1099 or was he?

JonGreen

Thanks for stopping by and contributing nothing to the conversation.

I would have thought somebody as mature as you would have some pearls of wisdom to share. Apparently it is true about old dogs.

greg

Interesting .... but let me provide you with a more plausible scenario regarding commodity prices.

Once the Chinese stop pegging their currency to our own they will experience increased purchasing power while the U$D begins its final decent into third world status. The Chinese will soon be able to afford all the products they produce and enjoy an increasingly better lifestyle. Meanwhile the US consumer will increasingly find that there are shortages of all consumer goods, prices will be reflected by Zimbabwe style hyper-inflation, and the US will plunge into third world status of all great debtor nations. See British Sterling following WW1

fourgen - Chinese military superiority? You ain't seen nothing yet.

Imagine if in the next few years China forcibly tok over Taiwan. If the United States rushed to support Taiwan (as our treaty says we must), China would likely threaten to dump its U.S. dollars in the open market, which would create chaos in global financial markets. This would threaten the U.S. economic structure (52 percent of which goes to our military) so we would be forced to roll over and kiss off Taiwan to communist China.

China's excessive influence on the world stage is unlikely to diminish any time soon thanks to the USA infusing China with huge amounts of foreign direct investment, as well as importing everything we want from China.

All this is unfolding because the USA allowed China to gain an irreversible economic advantage. In the past 20 years the Chinese have relocated almost all U.S. manufacturing to mainland China. This has built up their exports and created a huge pile of cash reserves. As China became the world's biggest exporter, it began to deposit its surplus export earnings in U.S. banks. With this cash they also bought U.S. Treasury bonds. At present China holds about US 1.4 trillion in U.S. Treasury bonds. With this China can dictate US policy.

The letter is right on. Which has the libs all riled up about everything BUT the letter itself. Skeptic- while you're busy digging things up, why don't you bone up on how our government works. Then you'll know how ignorant it is to blame Reagan for spending that a liberal Democrat congress is actually responsible for. Reagan's tax cuts doubled the revenue from personal income tax paid to the treasury. Tip O'Niel and Co. still spent it all and plenty more buying votes. I'm sure yours went pretty cheap though.

Joesh- As far as the deficit increasing due to military spending under Reagan, you are absolutely correct on that count. However, aside from federal highways, national defense is the #1 responsibility of the federal government under the U.S. Constitution. Check all credible historical accounts, it was a massive arms race which Reagan engaged the Soviets in that ended up breaking the bank and the preverbial back of the Soiviet Union. It was purposeful, and strategic.

As for the tax cuts, it is historical fact that the Reagan tax cuts more than doubled revenue to the treasury by dramatically increasing the employment rates, thus creating many more tax payers(trickle down economics). Those are the facts. The real fault of the Reagan administration as with all administrations(both republican and democrat), is that the domestic spending increased dramatically due to a democratic house and senate. Reagan compromised with Tip O'Neal far too much and signed many a spending bills into law to "keep harmony in the ranks". It was a mistake.

Skeptic, you sound enthralled at the aspect. Have bought your green underwear and a big red star to emblazon on the shirt? How tough is it to "goose" step?

joeshwingding, You seem to be an articulate and reasonable person that has figured out that the financial industry in this country has sold us out through government legislation that they lobbied for and got. I'm not blaming either party but both. Rubin is the guy with the black hat, you need to look a little closer at his actions during the Clinton years and beyond. He and Citibank have quite a history.

"Robert Rubin (AKA “The Accountant”): Former executive with Goldman-Sachs and 70th Secretary of the Treasury. He now works for Citigroup. He spearheaded the Clinton Administration effort to repeal the Glass-Steagall Act and exempt derivatives.

Larry Summers (AKA “The Apprentice”): Currently the Chief Economic Advisor to the President, former 71st Secretary of the Treasury and former assistant to Robert Rubin. He assured that derivatives would be exempted from regulations and was a big proponent of allowing Wall St. to “self-regulate”. How did that work out, Larry?

Henry Paulson (AKA “The Don”): the power behind the organization. He was the former CEO of Goldman-Sachs and 74th Secretary of Treasury. " Feiger Times among others

Most of the letters from the wing nutters show up here after McCarpetbagger sends out another email blast or does one of his scripted TeaBagger appearances with his carefully selected groups of very old, wealthy, and racist retired folk.

Most of the really, really poor, virulently racist and gender bashing blog posts are done from his supporters. They are done to make the President look horrible so McCarpetbagger looks like a cheap tin hero for windbagging against this current administration.

McClintock ran on the exact same playbook as the previous idiot who rubber stamped the failed Bush administration.

McCarpetbagger's contempt for half the district he can't fleece is pretty obvious.

And your point of focusing on my observations that he's nothing more than just another Republican grifter, is..... ?

Freed

you are correct about one thing. National Security is the one of the governments primary duties. But

Interesting you should use the term breaking the bank by military spending. Lets look a little closer to home.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/spending.htm

You will see that the US far outspends the rest of the world when it comes to military spending. The rest of the world combined! Now check all historical accounts when it comes to the end of empires. Every one of them bankrupted their country due to military spending trying to maintain the empire. (Rome, Spain, Dutch, French, Britain, etc.) What is happening to our country right now?

It may have been purposeful and strategic but it was also dumb. Lets name our recent allies turned advisaries - Osama Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein.

Tax base facts were 15 years in Vietnam broke the bank, took the US off the gold standard, a sever recession in 81-82 employment had nowhere to go but up. Meanwhile gutting the industrial base and sending jobs overseas. An ever growing deficit which led to another recession less than 10 years later using that same trickle down theory for Bush the elder and didn't work for Bush the Lessor this decade.

fourgen

you got most of the usual suspects but you failed to mention the Godfather(s) Alan "Bubbles" Greenspan, and Ben Bernanke.

The Fed Chairmen are responsible to setting monetary policy.... or more appropriately "blowing bubbles".

joeshwingding,

What is your view of NAFTA?

Joesh, When coupled with unconstitutional domestic spending, I tend to agree with you.

-however I think the fact that we spend more on our military than anybody else in the world belies the fact that we are by far the most prosperous due to our (once) free market economic system. There are some disturbing trends afoot with the current administration that may infact cripple those capabilities, thus making the "doomsday" scenario which you've described much more plausible.

"Greenspan, who calls himself a "libertarian Republican" but had an eight-year alliance with Clinton and Democratic Treasury secretaries in the 1990s, praises Clinton's mind and his tough anti-deficit policies, calling the former president's 1993 economic plan "an act of political courage." Seattle Times

Greenspan shows that he also bought into Rubinomics.

The elites: Summers, Paulson, Rubin, Geithner, Bernanke, Liddy, and Blankfein are still taking advantage of the taxpayer and giving to the banking industry. This has to be stopped. It is beyond our current elected officials on both sides to produce legislation that will stop the "bubbles". They are too well paid by the industries that they are supposed to regulate.

Joesh, I think where we fundamentally disagree is your equating communist or socialist style economic systems to our economic system based on individual liberty/private property. One has boundless prosperity potential and one does not.

So...Canyonmousie. If I want to talk about the societal costs of illegal immiration; the many extremely radical czar appointments, protest the votes of a drunken-sailor Congress or talk about the lousy policies of the Obama Administration; does that make me racist? While someone can use any racial epithet against me and it doesn't count as a "hate crime" because I'm caucasian? Gee, fairness and equality is really in your blood isn't it?

Larry. Nice LTE. You have the hammer and hit the nail right on the head with this one.

And don't worry about the economy folks. With this Administration and Congress in place, the future will be more about our nation and citizens working and scrambling like mad just to survive.

China holds 12 Trillion of our debt and can fold us any time it would be worst for us and most advantageous to them and the rest of the world.

And Freetinker? National Defense is THE # 1 priority for our country. Not transportation. Unless we secure our national defense, none of the rest means anything. If we don't secure our country, we'll all speak the language of our conquerors and like it.

Freed

LOL .. You're going to have to define.. "unconstitutional domestic spending".

The bottom line is its all unconstitutional if you want to base your argument on the US Constitution.

Aside from your obvious political bias the fact remains that our military spending is not 'just' more than everyone else in the world ... its more than everybody else in the world COMBINED. We outspend China (#2) by ten times as much!

We are not the only free market economy in the world. Our prosperity stems from the Bretton Woods agreement almost 70 years ago. You are trying to link a political ideaology to economics and the two are not related in any way. Communism, Socialism or Fascism are political schools of thought. Capitalism is an economic theory and the US Democracy does not have a stranglehold on it.

If there is any trend developing it is not FAUX News screaming SOCIALISM... the merging of state and corporate powers is defined as FASCISM.

The trends are baked in the cake and it has nothing to do with the "current administration"... the only question at this point is how bad will it get?

fourgen

you keep trying to make a foundation based on a political ideology and prejudice .... hence you are missing the bigger picture.

We can argue Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan .... on and on and on .... and all it will do is prove my point.

This is not a left/right argument. You seem to be reasonable enough to understand this. Stop looking at the X axis and open your mind to the Y axis. It is the basic fact throughout human history.

Greenspan was appointed by Reagan .... served under three Republican Presidents for 12 years. To yammer about it was all Clintons fault is really stupid at this point. Bought into Rubinomics? Please .... according to the general consensus the FED is an independent body and establishes monetary policy on its own. Which explains they're paranoid reaction to the current HR1207.

JWD, naive or just buying in: "according to the general consensus the FED is an independent body" My point was Greenspan bought into Rubins theory. Why are you trying to make it a "R" thing. The whole bunch of investment bankers are taking care of number one and it all smells like Rubin. Check any Obama economic advisor and their relationship to Rubin.

2/26/2009--Introduced. Ron Paul, R, Tx

Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2009 - Repeals the authority of the Comptroller General to carry out an onsite examination of an open insured bank or bank holding company only if the appropriate federal regulatory agency has consented in writing. (Retains the authority of the Comptroller General to audit a federal agency.) Directs the Comptroller General to complete, before the end of 2010, an audit of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and of the federal reserve banks, followed by a detailed report to Congress.

"WASHINGTON, Jan. 15, 1997 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Following is a transcript of a White House press briefing held today by Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, Assistant to the President for International and Economic Policy Daniel K. Tarullo and Deputy Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers (Part 1 of 2): The Briefing Room

Daniel K. Tarullo one of the (2009) 7 FRS board members and the beat goes on.

Greenspan also served 8 years under a Democrat. What's your point?

Is JP gone?

Joesh- If your premise is that adherence and fidelity to the U.S Constitution ( which is the governing contract in which our society is based) is my political bias then I can accept that.

- So are you therefore defending unconstitutional domestic spending? And if so, based on what? The political winds? The whims of politicians? Public sentiment at any given time? And if so, then why is a constitution even necessary anymore? Why not abolish the central tenats of it and have a pure democracy, whereby decisions are based on popular sentiment at any given spot on the timeline of history?

-Capitolism is nothing more than an extension of human liberty, and to the extent that human beings are free to make individual choices about their own welfare, and self interest under a stable rule of law, capitolism stems from the ability to engage with other human beings in mutually beneficial transactions. And if you don't get that as being the root of the dynamic economic system which is now emulated by all the up and comers of the world, then you my friend are the one skewed by political bias!

Yeah I get your point Obama is recycling the same banksters from under the Clinton Team .... I'm not disagreeing with that nor is that any type of news to me. No different when Bush the lessor recycled daddy's advisors and cabinet members into the WH.

I am not making this a R thing as much as you seem to be making this a D thing.

My point is they are all in on it. The R/D argument is the distraction. This is the Washington Wrestling Federation ... the small brains get wrapped up in the left/right issue which is fluff and shiny objects. They pose and posture... fein outrage for the cameras ... then go backstage to drink their martini's and plan to loot the Treasury.

My point is the real truth falls on the Y axis. Left/Right is crap stop arguing about it. Stepping back from preconceived prejudices of liberal/conservative politics and analyzing just the facts .... just the facts. Follow the money

Freed,

I think you misunderstood my statement here when referring to your unconstitutional domestic spending

The bottom line is its all unconstitutional if you want to base your argument on the US Constitution. Any spending since 1913 has been unconstitutional. That is why I asked you to define unconsti .... domes.... spen...

I'm not arguing against the Constitution .... in fact I am railing in support of it.

Your trying to use Capitalism and Democracy as interchangeable and that is not the case. One is an economic system the other is a form of government. The two are mutually exclusive and are not tied together.

Nobody would argue that China has a capitalistic economy but they are not a Democracy.

No Joesh, I'm not using Capitalism and Democracy as interchangeably. It's Liberty and Capitalism that are in fact interchangeable. The greater degree of liberty a society has, the greater the force capitalism is.

-China is trying to cope with incrementally more economic liberty, basically out of neccessity to fuel the government and feed its people. It is a delicate dance between Communism and free market economics. It's my belief through historical evidence that the dance can only go on so long before the people reject communist rule categorically. Stay tuned!

China also has a huge standing army (in excess of a million people) to which thay pay pennies a day for their soliders. We on the other hand, rely heavily upon quality, professionalism and technology. When any of those are going to let us down is anyone's guess. My point is that military expenditures between the US and China is an apples and oranges comparison. If you're looking at sheer troop strength, then China is #1. If you're looking at all around professionalism and versatility (and maybe combined arms discipline lethality) then we've got an edge. (Albeit a slight one.)

Our major problem now is that we're 12 Trillion in hock to a nation that has no reason to wish us well and who were secondary opponents in Korea, Vietnam and which sits astride the Panama Canal right now.

While spendthrift Legislatures (on BOTH sides of the aisle) at both State and Federal level continue to pump money out of the taxpayer well like there's no bottom.

In any event, socialism and two trillion more debt isn't goint to help. A tax rate in the 80th percentile as socialist countries have in the EU isn't going to make the "recession" end. Jobs that help put an end to the recession aren't created by government. They're created by small businesses and taxes. And the tax structure, laws and "fees" nowadays, seem designed to destroy small business and personal initiative.

By all means obey the Constitution. Especially the one which Congress massively ignores. The 10th Amendment.

We as a nation might also want to pass a 28th Amendment which limits Federal Legislators to two terms. And which requires Legislators and their staffers to have no exhorbitant pensions and perks. Legislators would also be put on Social Security. Meantime, they'll be required to carry the same medical plan the voters have.

If it's so good for all of us, then what basis would Legislators' have for objecting?