I don't get how this is so hard to understand. Ending the wars reduces the deficit by their cost. All they are saying is "Hey, remember all that money we were spending on the wars? Let's use it for stimulus instead for the next 10 years"

"I can blatantly misinterpret something, and then breathlessly shout about it as much as I want? Sign me up for this "Blogging" thing right away!"

Let us note in passing that, according to the official CBO estimates, a whole decade's worth of war in both Iraq and Afghanistan adds up to little more than Obama's 2009 stimulus bill.

Or the recent extension of Bush tax cuts. However he doesn't use that to compare it to. Funny I wonder why.

I am so farking sick of pejoratives being applied to only one side - if you're going to be mocking people then apply it to everyone. Own the shiat you write.

CPennypacker: I don't get how this is so hard to understand. Ending the wars reduces the deficit by their cost. All they are saying is "Hey, remember all that money we were spending on the wars? Let's use it for stimulus instead for the next 10 years"

How about this idea.

Hey, remember all of that money we were spending on the wars? Let's not spend that money any more.

That writer has "beat me with a tire iron" written all over his face.

So.. the entire premise of his piece is his interpretation of the phrase "over the decade" without digging into the details, isn't it?

MugzyBrown: CPennypacker: I don't get how this is so hard to understand. Ending the wars reduces the deficit by their cost. All they are saying is "Hey, remember all that money we were spending on the wars? Let's use it for stimulus instead for the next 10 years"

How about this idea.

Hey, remember all of that money we were spending on the wars? Let's not spend that money any more.

That's fine. And we'll pay for the stimulus from our newly reduced deficit. What's the difference? none.

MugzyBrown: CPennypacker: I don't get how this is so hard to understand. Ending the wars reduces the deficit by their cost. All they are saying is "Hey, remember all that money we were spending on the wars? Let's use it for stimulus instead for the next 10 years"

How about this idea.

Hey, remember all of that money we were spending on the wars? Let's not spend that money any more.

Right, which is still a savings.

If you were spending X and then you are paying X-Y, Y is still a "cut"!

"...There's Spender Woman (Patty Murray)
Incumbent Boy (Max Baucus)
Kept Man (John Kerry) ..."

Oooo, clever. But there's 9 others on the committee that need clever nicknames:

• Jon Kyl
• Rob Portman
• Pat Toomey
• Jeb Hensarling
• Fred Upton
• Dave Camp
• Xavier Becerra
• Jim Clyburn
• Chris Van Hollen

Get to work.

Corvus: Let us note in passing that, according to the official CBO estimates, a whole decade's worth of war in both Iraq and Afghanistan adds up to little more than Obama's 2009 stimulus bill.

Or the recent extension of Bush tax cuts. However he doesn't use that to compare it to. Funny I wonder why.
So redirecting money from the wars to a stimulus will add to the deficit = BAD
End the Bush tax cuts is a "raising taxes" and that = bad?

Has investors business daily ever been a resource for investment research, or is it just a platform for biatching about Democrats?

The truth will probably end up being stranger than this fiction.

Mike Chewbacca: such as, say, slowing the increase in spending by raising the age for lowering the age of Medicare eligibility from 47 to 49 by the year 2137

[3.bp.blogspot.com image 326x304]

Republicans like to pretend the Medicare and Social Security are part of the general fund so they can rob it to pay for tax cuts for the rich.

Lost Thought 00: That writer has "beat me with a tire iron" written all over his face.

He looks like a typical Republican: emotionally empty, constantly confused, and filled with bile. The pejoratives he uses are childish. I'm sure he might have an easily-disproved point, but I didn't get that far before I had to laugh. Here stands the Republican party, the ones who boast about being the heart of America, the 'real' Americans....biatchy, arrogant, full of lies and more concerned with scoring points in a game only one side is playing.

If America's status quo is that, then we definitely need change. Change away from bearded, insecure losers who buy into their own marketing.

From the comments: How long will the Republicans continue to play the role of Charlie Brown to the Dems Lucy? No matter what they say to the contrary, they will ALWAYS pull the 'football' EVERY single time just before our Charlie Brown tries to kick it. 'Compromise' to the Democrats is "Our way or no way!". The Repubs have got to stop caving whenever the Dems falsely accuse them of only working for the so-called 'rich'. Deficit spending hurts ALL Americans.

The comments under TFA were like a funhouse mirror held up to the Politics tab.

Ayn Rand's Cervix: Corvus: Let us note in passing that, according to the official CBO estimates, a whole decade's worth of war in both Iraq and Afghanistan adds up to little more than Obama's 2009 stimulus bill.

Or the recent extension of Bush tax cuts. However he doesn't use that to compare it to. Funny I wonder why.
So redirecting money from the wars to a stimulus will add to the deficit = BAD
End the Bush tax cuts is a "raising taxes" and that = bad?

I am saying he unfairly compared it with the Obama stimulus which was 40% tax cuts. while ignoring the trillions in costs that Bush and the Republicans has added to the deficit/debt.

Stile4aly: Has investors business daily ever been a resource for investment research, or is it just a platform for biatching about Democrats?

My business teacher in HS was big on IBD. He was kind of a jerk though. That was 10+ years ago, so it was the print edition.

Stile4aly: Has investors business daily ever been a resource for investment research, or is it just a platform for biatching about Democrats?

They're primarily involved in claiming that the NHS would kill Stephen Hawking, with the occasional foray into conservabiatching.

Corvus: Mike Chewbacca: such as, say, slowing the increase in spending by raising the age for lowering the age of Medicare eligibility from 47 to 49 by the year 2137

[3.bp.blogspot.com image 326x304]

Republicans like to pretend the Medicare and Social Security are part of the general fund so they can rob it to pay for tax cuts for the rich.

I was mostly commenting on the poor sentence structure: "raising the age for lowering the age." I don't even know what that's supposed to mean. Normally if it's just a typo I can figure it out, but not this time.

fsbilly: From the comments: How long will the Republicans continue to play the role of Charlie Brown to the Dems Lucy? No matter what they say to the contrary, they will ALWAYS pull the 'football' EVERY single time just before our Charlie Brown tries to kick it. 'Compromise' to the Democrats is "Our way or no way!". The Repubs have got to stop caving whenever the Dems falsely accuse them of only working for the so-called 'rich'. Deficit spending hurts ALL Americans.

That's a lot of projecting right there.

phaseolus: "...There's Spender Woman (Patty Murray)
Incumbent Boy (Max Baucus)
Kept Man (John Kerry) ..."

Oooo, clever. But there's 9 others on the committee that need clever nicknames:

• Jon Kyl
• Rob Portman
• Pat Toomey
• Jeb Hensarling
• Fred Upton
• Dave Camp
• Xavier Becerra
• Jim Clyburn
• Chris Van Hollen

Get to work.

Should we continue with the mock-superhero theme (Rob Port-man) or the Chris Berman method (Pat "Talk Dirty" Toomey)?

Mock superhero, please.

fruitloop: phaseolus: "...There's Spender Woman (Patty Murray)
Incumbent Boy (Max Baucus)
Kept Man (John Kerry) ..."

Oooo, clever. But there's 9 others on the committee that need clever nicknames:

• Jon Kyl
• Rob Portman
• Pat Toomey
• Jeb Hensarling
• Fred Upton
• Dave Camp
• Xavier Becerra
• Jim Clyburn
• Chris Van Hollen

Get to work.

Should we continue with the mock-superhero theme (Rob Port-man) or the Chris Berman method (Pat "Talk Dirty" Toomey)?

Xavier Becerra (Professor X)?

Jon "Not Intended to be Factual, Man" Kyl
Rob Port-man (thanks whoever suggested that upthread)
Pat "*sigh* Yes, THAT Pennsylvania" Toomey
Jeb "Redneck Man" Hensarling
Fred "Lock-Step Republican" Upton
Dave "Budget Man" Camp
Xavier "Minority Man" Becerra
Jim "The Whip" Clyburn
Chris "Joe Six-pack" Van Hollen (he's my Rep - he just looks so much like an Everyman - I'd also go with "a Carcetti for a new era", but he doesn't have Carcetti's moxie)

BKITU: Xavier Becerra

Congressman X

Corvus: I am saying he unfairly compared it with the Obama stimulus which was 40% tax cuts. while ignoring the trillions in costs that Bush and the Republicans has added to the deficit/debt.

Yeah but those 40% of cuts were targeted at the lower 80% of income earners, which means it was welfare or something.

fruitloop: Should we continue with the mock-superhero theme (Rob Port-man) or the Chris Berman method (Pat "Talk Dirty" Toomey)?

Heh, this (new window) is oddly appropriate, and also hilarious.

Hmmmm... I'd much rather read an article written by someone who doesn't intend on misrepresenting almost everything.

Corvus: I am saying he unfairly compared it with the Obama stimulus which was 40% tax cuts. while ignoring the trillions in costs that Bush and the Republicans has added to the deficit/debt.

This

The article was rubbish, but the comments are pure gold, in a carnival freak-show sort of way.

CPennypacker: I don't get how this is so hard to understand. Ending the wars reduces the deficit by their cost. All they are saying is "Hey, remember all that money we were spending on the wars? Let's use it for stimulus instead for the next 10 years"

He might of forgot the Obama actually put the wars on budget rather then just adding them straight to the debt. If your using the accounting of the Bush admin, ending the wars would have no defect on the deficit. Lets be fair though, he is a douche bag, so he already knew that.

Investors Business Daily?

No page click for you, cretins.

CPennypacker: MugzyBrown: CPennypacker: I don't get how this is so hard to understand. Ending the wars reduces the deficit by their cost. All they are saying is "Hey, remember all that money we were spending on the wars? Let's use it for stimulus instead for the next 10 years"

How about this idea.

Hey, remember all of that money we were spending on the wars? Let's not spend that money any more.

That's fine. And we'll pay for the stimulus from our newly reduced deficit. What's the difference? none.

You don't understand "Let's not spend that money" do you?

phaseolus: Oooo, clever. But there's 9 others on the committee that need clever nicknames:

• Jon Kyl big asshole
• Rob Portman dumb asshole
• Pat Toomey ugly asshole
• Jeb Hensarling corrupt, lying asshole
• Fred Upton total asshole
• Dave Camp stupid asshole
• Xavier Becerra raging asshole
• Jim Clyburn major asshole
• Chris Van Hollen douchebag

Get to work.

What do I win?!? What do I win??!!!!???

MugzyBrown: You don't understand "Let's not spend that money" do you?

Well, I think the conventional wisdom is that the ruling party would like to get out of recessions as quick as possible. So running an increased deficit but with the benefit of economic stimulus is superior to reducing the deficit, but slowing the economy.

Of course, there is a large part of of congress who would like to put off recovery as much as possible until at least the next election cycle.

Mercutio74: but with the benefit of economic stimulus

We're currently benefiting for economic stimulus. Isn't it grrreat?

MugzyBrown: Mercutio74: but with the benefit of economic stimulus

We're currently benefiting for economic stimulus. Isn't it grrreat?

I thought it was pretty much spent at this point, no? Also, wasn't an unreasonable amount of the "stimulus" in the form of tax cuts?

MugzyBrown: Mercutio74: but with the benefit of economic stimulus

We're currently benefiting for economic stimulus. Isn't it grrreat?

Grrrrreat Scott! (new window) As Mercutio pointed out, it could have been better with less tax cuts.

partisan hack blog is partisan

Inability to balance a budget is one of the signs of a Failed State.

Lawlessness is another.

Check and check.