Bloggingheads Community

Bloggingheads Community (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/index.php)
-   Diavlog comments (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=9)
-   -   The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis) (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?t=6615)

Bloggingheads 04-01-2011 12:05 PM

The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 

Tara Davis 04-01-2011 12:46 PM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
The Congressional Joint Resolution 114, "Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq (AUMF)", passed the House by a vote of 296-133 on October 10 of 2002, and the Senate by a vote of 77-23 the following day. Bush The Younger did not act in Iraq prior to this authorization.

According to Bill, this is "lip service" to consulting with Congress, and Obama bombing the crap out of Libya before even SPEAKING to Congress amounts to pretty much exactly what "every Republican president has ever done."

You are engaging in naked Team Blue vs. Team Red cheerleading, Bill, and I think you're smart enough to know it.

bkjazfan 04-01-2011 01:48 PM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
The dems don't want any controls on the deficit and the repubs want a balance budget amendment/not raising the debt ceiling. Both are not pragmantic and there must be a middle way. Also, quibbling over a 30 billion dollar cut in a 1.3 trillion dollar deficit is laughable as is cutting off NPR and Planned Parenthood. Not being a finance type I am unsure of what they should do but I think the mandate from the last election is for them to get serious about the National Debt.

Sorry, I haven't read the "The Moment of Truth: Report On the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform" but I doubt this is what they had in mind.

AemJeff 04-01-2011 02:01 PM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bkjazfan (Post 202761)
The dems don't want any controls on the deficit and the repubs want a balance budget amendment. Both are not pragmantic and there must be a middle way. Also, quibbling over a 30 billion dollar cut in a 1.3 trillion dollar deficit is laughable as is cutting off NPR and Planned Parenthood. Not being a finance type I am unsure of what they should do but I think the mandate from the last election is for them to get serious about the National Debt.

That not really accurate, I think. The Republicans do seem to be, idiotically I think, closing in on unanimity regarding a BBA, but the Democrats' complaint isn't about "controls," it's about the fact that all of the effort at control is concentrated on clamping discretionary spending without any attention to revenue (must not tax!). The difference is about on whom the burden will placed. Republicans favor measures that hurt the people with the fewest defenses. Democrats prefer better load balancing.

Magic Flea 04-01-2011 02:19 PM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
Reject]:(_defaultRoot_,_defaultVHost_):Application(bloggi ngheads/flash)is no

Bill Scher 04-01-2011 02:32 PM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Tara Davis (Post 202756)
The Congressional Joint Resolution 114, "Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq (AUMF)", passed the House by a vote of 296-133 on October 10 of 2002, and the Senate by a vote of 77-23 the following day. Bush The Younger did not act in Iraq prior to this authorization.

According to Bill, this is "lip service" to consulting with Congress, and Obama bombing the crap out of Libya before even SPEAKING to Congress amounts to pretty much exactly what "every Republican president has ever done."

You are engaging in naked Team Blue vs. Team Red cheerleading, Bill, and I think you're smart enough to know it.

The AUMF was passed 160 prior to the actual invasion. Yes it was before. Waaaaaaaaay before. Before the UN inspections in fact, which couldn't find any WMD. Not exactly quality consultation. Let's not rewrite history.

bkjazfan 04-01-2011 02:34 PM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
Obama when a senator on December 20th, 2007, said the president did not have the constitutional authority to unilaterally decide to go to war without congressional approval. Searching back he made a similiar statement in 2002.

hamandcheese 04-01-2011 02:34 PM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Magic Flea (Post 202775)
Reject]:(_defaultRoot_,_defaultVHost_):Application(bloggi ngheads/flash)is no

My bet is that they tried to do something for April Fools and it buggered the flash player.

AemJeff 04-01-2011 02:39 PM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Scher (Post 202778)
The AUMF was passed 160 prior to the actual invasion. Yes it was before. Waaaaaaaaay before. Before the UN inspections in fact, which couldn't find any WMD. Not exactly quality consultation. Let's not rewrite history.

Let's not forget the mendacious public sales job the Bush Administration was concurrently engaged in regarding the nature and the quality of the evidence they held wrt Iraqi weapons programs.

DenvilleSteve 04-01-2011 02:47 PM

the forgotten soldiers
 
just in case anyone cares, we are losing people left and right in Afg:
http://www.unknownsoldiersblog.com/2...right-now.html

badhatharry 04-01-2011 06:47 PM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bkjazfan (Post 202761)
The dems don't want any controls on the deficit and the repubs want a balance budget amendment/not raising the debt ceiling. Both are not pragmantic and there must be a middle way. Also, quibbling over a 30 billion dollar cut in a 1.3 trillion dollar deficit is laughable as is cutting off NPR and Planned Parenthood. Not being a finance type I am unsure of what they should do but I think the mandate from the last election is for them to get serious about the National Debt.

From what I have heard this scuffle over last year's budget is simply a prelude to rolling out next year's budget. I think it's been instructive to those on both sides as far as gauging how things will go.

Ryan and Colburn were on the debt commission:


badhatharry 04-01-2011 06:55 PM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
Quote:

Quoting Aemjeff: Republicans favor measures that hurt the people with the fewest defenses.
Washington bureaucrats, you mean?

Billions in Bloat Uncovered in Beltway

Quote:

Sen. Tom Coburn (R., Okla.), who pushed for the report, estimated it identifies between $100 billion and $200 billion in duplicative spending. The GAO didn't put a specific figure on the spending overlap.
But what's a few hundred billion when the Cowboy Poet's Convention is at risk?

AemJeff 04-01-2011 07:26 PM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by badhatharry (Post 202835)
Washington bureaucrats, you mean?

Billions in Bloat Uncovered in Beltway



But what's a few hundred billion when the Cowboy Poet's Convention is at risk?

If some smart, intellectually honest people (on the R, who does that leave, Alan Simpson?) wanted to take that GAO report and untangle that mess, I'd be happy. Right now it's Cantor and Ryan, and the lumpenteebeutel wing in the House is having hissy fits trying to make the process even stupider. "Waste fraud and abuse" has been the rallying cry of incompetent reformers for most of our adult lives - we need a better strategy.

badhatharry 04-01-2011 07:26 PM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Scher (Post 202778)
The AUMF was passed 160 prior to the actual invasion. Yes it was before. Waaaaaaaaay before. Before the UN inspections in fact, which couldn't find any WMD. Not exactly quality consultation. Let's not rewrite history.

So is the standard a matter of timing? Are you saying that there would have been a different outcome if the vote had taken place closer to the invasion? say February 2003?

badhatharry 04-01-2011 07:28 PM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by AemJeff (Post 202841)
If some smart, intellectually honest people (on the R, who does that leave, Alan Simpson?) wanted to take that GAO report and untangle that mess, I'd be happy. Right now it's Cantor and Ryan, and the lumpenteebeutel wing in the House is having hissy fits trying to make the process even stupider. "Waste fraud and abuse" has been the rallying cry of incompetent reformers for most of our adult lives - we need a better strategy.

Wait! I know, tax the rich!

AemJeff 04-01-2011 07:42 PM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by badhatharry (Post 202843)
Wait! I know, tax the rich!

Solve your revenue problems where the revenue exists! It's a start.

badhatharry 04-01-2011 07:48 PM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
These two are great!

But I'm with Bill on the hoops. The law is the law. If you don't like it change it.

badhatharry 04-01-2011 07:50 PM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by AemJeff (Post 202847)
Solve your revenue problems where the revenue exists! It's a start.

From each...to each.

stephanie 04-01-2011 07:58 PM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by badhatharry (Post 202849)
From each...to each.

Yep, a return to the Clinton tax rates is, in fact, identical to socialism.

Indeed, a progressive tax code is socialism.

Now that we've established that the US has been socialist for quite some time (we were superduper socialist during the McCarthy era, oddly enough), could we stop acting as if calling something "socialist" (under this new, rather meaningless definition) was a substantive political argument?

Bill Scher 04-01-2011 09:19 PM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by badhatharry (Post 202842)
So is the standard a matter of timing? Are you saying that there would have been a different outcome if the vote had taken place closer to the invasion? say February 2003?

I don't know what you mean by "the standard." But my comments in the thread are not about technical legal standards, just about the argument whether Bush seriously "consulted" Congress before decided to attack Iraq. And in that instance, it's not just that the AUMF vote happened 160 days prior to the attack. It's that a major development happened between the vote and the attack -- a UN inspection that came up empty -- and that did not trigger any formal revisiting of the AUMF. If the Bush administration really felt that they could not launch an attack without a real endorsement from Congress, and it returned to Congress for a vote in March 2003 without any WMD found, sure, the outcome could have been different.

badhatharry 04-01-2011 09:35 PM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by stephanie (Post 202853)
Yep, a return to the Clinton tax rates is, in fact, identical to socialism.

Indeed, a progressive tax code is socialism.

Now that we've established that the US has been socialist for quite some time (we were superduper socialist during the McCarthy era, oddly enough), could we stop acting as if calling something "socialist" (under this new, rather meaningless definition) was a substantive political argument?

Actually that would be Marxist

Would increasing tax rates really solve anything? What some people are afraid of is that tax hikes will give a green light to more government spending. Agree with it or not, that's the reasoning behind holding the tax rates where they are.

Some people are alarmed at the growth of the government. I think that is a substantive politcal point of view. Jeff believes taxing the rich is the perfect solution. I disagree. I would much rather decrease the size and scope of government.

I replied to his post with the offhand phrase from each...to each. which is to me the idea behind wanting to tax the rich (who pay the majority of taxes anyway) instead of cutting the cost of government.

This just in! the unemployment rate is 8.8% and the US is pulling out of the Libyan conflict.

handle 04-01-2011 09:39 PM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by badhatharry (Post 202862)

This just in! the unemployment rate is 8.8% and the US is pulling out of the Libyan conflict.

Guess the stimulus might not be "failed" after all?

How about if we raise taxes under a program designed to also limit spending with the goal of reducing, or eliminating the deficit?

badhatharry 04-01-2011 09:41 PM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Scher (Post 202860)
I don't know what you mean by "the standard." But my comments in the thread are not about technical legal standards, just about the argument whether Bush seriously "consulted" Congress before decided to attack Iraq. And in that instance, it's not just that the AUMF vote happened 160 days prior to the attack. It's that a major development happened between the vote and the attack -- a UN inspection that came up empty -- and that did not trigger any formal revisiting of the AUMF. If the Bush administration really felt that they could not launch an attack without a real endorsement from Congress, and it returned to Congress for a vote in March 2003 without any WMD found, sure, the outcome could have been different.

OK. So could the Congress have revisited the issue on its own? And since it didn't couldn't it be construed that the Congress wanted to stand pat? I'm not arguing, just really interested in your view on this 'cause I wasn't following that closely in those dark days.

badhatharry 04-01-2011 09:48 PM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by handle (Post 202863)
Guess the stimulus might not be "failed" after all?

No, American business wrested itself from the bonds of enslavement brought about by a liberal administration.

Quote:

How about if we raise taxes under a program designed to also limit spending with the goal of reducing, or eliminating the deficit
That was tried during the Reagan administration. He cut taxes, Congress didn't cut spending. I know! there was Starwars.

I would go for that. Who goes first?

bkjazfan 04-01-2011 09:52 PM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
The talk on the streets is that many of the jobs people are getting are either not well paying or they are temporary. There will be structural high unemployment for years to come. Even Robert Reich said the unemployment stat is bogus - it's way too low. He said this when he was Secretary of Labor under Clinton and obviously was this was not well received.

handle 04-01-2011 09:59 PM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by badhatharry (Post 202865)
No, American business wrested itself from the bonds of enslavement brought about by a liberal administration.

LOL That and around 1.4 trillion in government money can buy you 8.8% employment, and a cup of coffee....starbucks even... oh, and maybe, just maybe (we will never know), avoid a very long, and very serious depression.


Quote:

Originally Posted by badhatharry (Post 202865)
That was tried during the Reagan administration. He cut taxes, Congress didn't cut spending. I know! there was Starwars.

I would go for that. Who goes first?

The goal needs to be balance the budget.. not kill the Fed. Do I need to say Clinton?

Clinton!! I know! There was hanky panky!

handle 04-01-2011 10:07 PM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bkjazfan (Post 202866)
The talk on the streets is that many of the jobs people are getting are either not well paying or they are temporary. There will be structural high unemployment for years to come. Even Robert Reich said the unemployment stat is bogus - it's way too low. He said this when he was Secretary of Labor under Clinton and obviously was this was not well received.

Buzzkill.

Bill Scher 04-01-2011 10:29 PM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by badhatharry (Post 202864)
OK. So could the Congress have revisited the issue on its own? And since it didn't couldn't it be construed that the Congress wanted to stand pat? I'm not arguing, just really interested in your view on this 'cause I wasn't following that closely in those dark days.

Well, yes, that is a fair point as far as Congress exercising its own responsibility and legal authority -- a bit separate from the (not necessarily legal) question of what amounts to sufficient "consultation" by the president with Congress. And it applies to Congress today as well as in 2003. In other words, for a member of Congress to publicly whine about no formal consultation before a military action, then do nothing themselves regarding the funding of that military action, is a complete abdication of his or her own responsibilities.

Though in 2003, the Senate had just flipped to the Republicans and the House was already Republican, so I don't think they were all that inclined to insist upon a fresh round of formal consultation before the bombs dropped.

badhatharry 04-01-2011 10:46 PM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bkjazfan (Post 202866)
The talk on the streets is that many of the jobs people are getting are either not well paying or they are temporary. There will be structural high unemployment for years to come. Even Robert Reich said the unemployment stat is bogus - it's way too low. He said this when he was Secretary of Labor under Clinton and obviously was this was not well received.

Well the talk in SanFrancisco from my daughter is that there a lot more ads than when she was looking three months ago. I'm just glad she found a position with (hold your breath) full benefits.

badhatharry 04-01-2011 10:47 PM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Scher (Post 202869)
Though in 2003, the Senate had just flipped to the Republicans and the House was already Republican, so I don't think they were all that inclined to insist upon a fresh round of formal consultation before the bombs dropped.

Probably not.

Thanks.

piscivorous 04-02-2011 01:55 AM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
You do realize, according to the OECD,
Quote:

... that when it comes to household taxes (income taxes and employee social security contributions) the U.S. "has the most progressive tax system and collects the largest share of taxes from the richest 10% of the population."...

that the U.S. collects more household tax revenue from the top 10 percent of households than any other country and extracts the most from that income group relative to their share of the nation's income
But lets not let facts interfere with one's talking points.

Unit 04-02-2011 02:53 AM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by badhatharry (Post 202848)
These two are great!

But I'm with Bill on the hoops. The law is the law. If you don't like it change it.

Believe it or not I'm with Bill Scher on this one, but not because "the law is the law". I couldn't believe how seriously Kristen was taking this peripheral story.
Sure the cops might have had the law on their side but what happened to sound judgement? (the pole in question had been there for decades apparently). I'm sure there are laws on the books in Delaware that are actually not applied to the letter.

piscivorous 04-02-2011 03:03 AM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
The U5 or U6 rate gives one a much better picture of what employment conditions are really like. The rate you always see quoted can go down even when more people are actually unemployed as individuals give up and just quit looking for work.

Florian 04-02-2011 04:37 AM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
Thanks pisc. That is interesting. However nota bene:

"Of course, these measures do not include the litany of other taxes households pay in each country, such as Value Added Taxes, corporate income taxes and excise taxes, but they do give a good indication that our system places a heavier tax burden on high-income households than other industrialized countries."

In Europe there is a VAT on most purchases, including such essentials as utilities, amounting to as much as 19%. If the US had a tax on gas and fuel equal to that of European countries and imposed serious corporate taxes, all your deficit problems would vanish overnight. Just think: the rich could continue to live high on the hog, the military could continue to build useless weapons systems and invade any "rogue" country at will, and there would still probably be enough money left over to provide decent public services for everyone.

AemJeff 04-02-2011 10:21 AM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by piscivorous (Post 202876)
You do realize, according to the OECD,

But lets not let facts interfere with one's talking points.

Let the Bush tax cuts expire and most of our fiscal problems are solved, et voilŕ! As Florian has already pointed out, you're depending on a narrowly defined definition of "taxes."

badhatharry 04-02-2011 11:19 AM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by AemJeff (Post 202889)
Let the Bush tax cuts expire and most of our fiscal problems are solved, et voilŕ! As Florian has already pointed out, you're depending on a narrowly defined definition of "taxes."

You can't possibly believe getting rid of tax cuts will solve our fiscal problems.

silly!
Quote:

Income taxes on individuals are $1.1 trillion. Though many on the liberal side of things like the idea of ‘soaking the rich’ by raising income tax rates, a look at the numbers above makes it clear that covering our deficit from income taxes alone would require more than a 100% increase.
But maybe we should add VAT and all kinds of other taxes, because Europe is doing so well.

DenvilleSteve 04-02-2011 11:42 AM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by badhatharry (Post 202898)
But maybe we should add VAT and all kinds of other taxes, because Europe is doing so well.

the advantage of a national sales tax is you can't move your purchases of stuff overseas like you can your investments. States and localities are able to rake in a ton of money thru sales and property taxes. Going forward, I see income taxes being less and less effective because investors are more and more internationally based.

I suggest eliminating the income tax and replace with whatever level of national sales tax is needed to balance the budget.

joe_mask 04-02-2011 11:44 AM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
Hey, just a quick note to congratulate Bill and Kristen on another lively and informative conversation. Thanks.

DenvilleSteve 04-02-2011 11:49 AM

Re: the forgotten soldiers
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by DenvilleSteve (Post 202784)
just in case anyone cares, we are losing people left and right in Afg:
http://www.unknownsoldiersblog.com/2...right-now.html

front page article in the WSJ today on Marines in Afg. Horrible tasks the Marines are being given to do. After someone is blown up no one wants to walk point on a patrol. Maybe Susan and Hillary and Barack can lead by example. Once a month lead a patrol in Afg.

AemJeff 04-02-2011 11:58 AM

Re: The Week in Blog: Pols, Polls, and Poles (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by badhatharry (Post 202898)
You can't possibly believe getting rid of tax cuts will solve our fiscal problems.

silly!


But maybe we should add VAT and all kinds of other taxes, because Europe is doing so well.

I'm posting from my phone so data will have to wait, but all you need to do is look at federal revenue against time over the last decade and a half understand. I'm all for VATs so long they have some progressivity built into them.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:45 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.