A Senate survivor on the Bush Régime, up close and personal

[thatcrazycajun]

Courtesy of StumbleUpon and Brown University's alumni magazine, former Vermont US Senator Lincoln Chafee (Ind.) reveals just how sociopathic Junior Bush and his coterie of Constitution-shredders have been in their (ab)use of the power they stole, from his own direct personal experience:
The Tax Cut That Neutered Congress
Now if only he'd had the cojones to say to Darth Cheney, after his 15-minute one-on-one harangue, "Okay, Mr. Vice President, I've listened to you. Now, damn it, sir, you are going to listen to me!..."

Comments

Simple math.

[a-phoenix-afire.livejournal.com]

There is no such thing as a surplus in the government. As soon as there is a penny unspent, someone will spend it.

There is no such thing in any budget (not even your household's) as a surplus, unless and until all of the bills are paid. The interest paid by you on borrowed money is always more than the interest paid to you by any bank account you can keep it in, so not paying off all debt while reserving money on the side is spending money foolishly.

The government doesn't make any money. Every penny comes from you and me. The government is not entitled to have a 'surplus' whatever that means given my first two observations. Even if it suddenly needed more money, unlikely given the extreme amount of pork already available to waste on pet projects, they would simply find some new tax to impose.

The idea that government knows better how to use our money than we do, or that it can do so at anything close to the efficiency of private entities and persons is poor thinking.

When the social security fund has all the money back in its account and earning interest, instead of it being used by the government as a never-ending loan, maybe we can talk about extra money. Until then, it is all borrowed, and the interest is becoming so large that it will soon be impossible to pay it. It is called the national debt, and the amount is around 9 trillion dollars. That's 30 thousand dollars for each man, woman and child legally in the US. And only about one third of that number are actually taxpayers.
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock

And no. I don't want to go off on the tangent of why it's so high in this post, or replies. The fact is that it needs to be reduced, and that happens not by taxing more, but by spending less. Giving government all your 'extra' money so they will have a 'surplus' doesn't encourage that.

When I smoked cigarettes we had a response to someone who asked if we had an extra cigarette. We would look in the pack and say, "Nope, only twenty in this one".

Surplus money is just as much an oxymoron, even when you're not discussing the government.

Re: Simple math.

[stevemb.livejournal.com]

"There is no such thing in any budget (not even your household's) as a surplus, unless and until all of the bills are paid. The interest paid by you on borrowed money is always more than the interest paid to you by any bank account you can keep it in, so not paying off all debt while reserving money on the side is spending money foolishly."

Well, then, shouldn't the Administration have continued using the surplus it inherited to pay down the national debt? (You do realize that that's the natural result of government running a surplus, and that the money doesn't just end up in a giant Mason jar buried out back of the Lincoln Memorial?)

Re: Simple math.

[a-phoenix-afire.livejournal.com]

You're phrasing makes me feel as if you think I would disagree. I don't.

I don't care which administration it is or what their arguments are. If there is ever anything which might be called a 'surplus' (and as I argued above, that's misnomer at best), it should immediately be used to either pay down the debt, repay the money borrowed from social security, or repay those to whom it rightfully belongs; us.

[redaxe.livejournal.com]

Wow. You have a pureblooded Randite commenter. That's unfortunate, for you. My sympathies; their asocial, selfish behavior, combined with unsupported assertions and an unwillingness to alter their position makes me glad I generally don't have to deal with them in my blog.

As to Chafee, he could have stood up far more strongly than he did. Granted, the 2001 attacks were a kick in the crotch to this country's reasoning, from the bottom up (the reasoning at the top was already, as we know, FUBAR); still passing the most ill-advised tax cuts in history, which changed the budget surplus (which term means, income exceeds bills -- which generally gets spent on debt interest piling up, and occasionally, on the principal of same) to the largest deficit in history. (That may be true in real dollars as well as current ones; I don't know, for certain.)

In any event, we're now in a hole that will likely take at least two, and possibly three, presidential administrations to dig out of. Not to mention the damage to the Constitution, inflicted by the same thieves and liars in the White House.

And then, having been adults and put things back together, making hard decisions, it's a lock that the media will point at the hardships caused by those decisions (because that what those decisions are: who will suffer, and who won't, not how to get everyone not to suffer immediately) and more gonifs who own the media (unless they happen to be ex-governors of Massachusetts :-) will get elected to pillage and rape some more.

But it's tired and I'm late. More anon.

I wouldn't waste my time.

[a-phoenix-afire.livejournal.com]

First, you never have anything intelligent to say. If it weren't for insults you couldn't think of two words in a row.

Second, I think it's rude even to reply to your personal attack on me in someone else's blog, let alone to initiate one as you always do, but if Matt doesn't think that a mindless SOB like you is breaking the rules, who am I to buck the system?

You are so blinded by your mindless hatred of anything you oppose politically, you can't even recognize a purely apolitical comment.

Tell us genius, who's money is it then, and if it belongs to the government, why haven't you sent them all of yours?


Don't bother answering. I don't debate with imbeciles. Like I said it's a waste of time. I do know you will though. Ego maniacs like you always have to think they had the last word.

Re: I wouldn't waste my time.

[thatcrazycajun.livejournal.com]

Vernon: In my journal, *I* get the last word and no one else...and I will NOT have you calling Bruce or anyone else who posts here unintelligent, whatever else you may think of what s/he posts. He is actually one of the most intelligent people I know, and has at least as high an IQ and education as you do. Name-calling and grammatical errors (you should have used "whose" rather than "who's") do not get you taken seriously.

And your comment, even if you did intend it to be apolitical, cannot possibly be so if it implies an opinion as to what ought to be done with public policy or monies. Such comments are by their very nature political, and Bruce was simply calling it as he sees it. I don't necessarily see it the same way, but you both are free to respond to what I put out there according to your worldviews. You are NOT free to insult each other and hurl groundless accusations...at least not without me having something to say about it.

If you feel he has characterized you or your views inaccurately, please explain how and provide proof. Otherwise, check your 'tude at the door.

Re: I wouldn't waste my time.

[a-phoenix-afire.livejournal.com]

So I say generically, that government has no right to a surplus, and he attacks me, -speaking about me in the third person as if sharing a private joke, and I'm an intruder- by saying "their asocial, selfish behavior, combined with unsupported assertions and an unwillingness to alter their position..." and I'm the one causing trouble?

Furthermore, this isn't the first time by a long shot that he has addressed me this way, and always before this I took the insult and either ignored it or invited him to not be so rude.

When you came to my house, if anyone, including my own family had talked to you, or about you like that I would have invited them to apologize or leave. I don't let family or guests in my house insult other guests unchallenged. You sure have a funny way of looking at things.

And if we're going to be picky about spelling and grammar then "Not to mention the damage to the Constitution, inflicted by the same thieves and liars in the White House." is not only a moronic opinion, but a sentence fragment as well.

Go ahead and take the last word. You deserve each other. Your lack of manners has obviously encouraged his.