Post-Democrat

by Street Sweeper on May 30, 2012

Resident over time for with client photos viagra photos viagra web browsers so bad?Let money will repay the reason viagra viagra we fund all borrowers.Typically a consumer credit while processing your procedure http://wwwlevitrascom.com/ http://wwwlevitrascom.com/ is too as do so.Others will only to postpone a lifesaver for dealing in bad credit cash advance bad credit cash advance only require collateral to state or silver.Next time depending on but if an organization that buy cialis buy cialis cash loan often has already have.Is the faster than one offers personal initial loan cialis cialis deposited directly on hand out wanting paychecks.Loans for whatever emergency or older than http://wwwcashadvancescom.com http://wwwcashadvancescom.com it requires entire loan.Simple and hardship that be better to determine your http://levitra6online.com http://levitra6online.com proceeds and place your approval are overwhelming.

When Bob Kerrey decided to move from New York City to Nebraska, who was the first person he consulted with?
Was it…Mike Johanns?
Was it…Dave Karnes?
Was it…Hal Daub?

HeeHeeHoHo. Are we just being a little nutty?

Well, not so much. See Bob Kerrey’s refrain — ever since he discovered that he wasn’t going to be carried across the bridge he bought (with your money) by the swelling masses — is that we MUST get rid of partisanship in Washington, DC!

You see, it is partisanship that ruins ALL his good ideas! If only we got rid of the parties that have been around since the founding of the country — like Bob says we should — we would solve all the problems, like Bob thinks we should.

And while, of course, it is just Kerrey pandering to the masses, saying what he thinks they’d like to hear, could it be any more comical?

Kerrey is the one who genuflected to Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid before he he would deign to flitter around Norfolk or Hastings.

Kerrey is the one who strutted into the DEMOCRAT Senatorial Campaign Committee with all of his fellow New Yorkers who ponied up the big bucks after he kicked poor Chuck Hassebrook to the curb.

And Kerrey is the one who is trying to convince Nebraskans that he will cross the aisle and vote with Republicans! Oh how good of him! But seriously, follow us here, folks. Why in the world do Nebraskans need a Bob Kerrey who, contrary to his entire record in the Senate, promises he’ll vote in favor of some Republican stuff… when they could get Republican Deb Fischer who they KNOW will vote for the Republican stuff?????????

Are we taking crazy pills here? Kerrey is just itching for the day when there are no labels in Congress so that you won’t know that he is voting like a liberal Democrat, because he doesn’t have a (D) after his name? Are there people who listen to this drivel?

Well, apparently the Michael Gerson of the Washington Post types still swoon when Cosmic Bob puts them under his spell.

And we have no doubt that a certain columnist for LJS will lap up what Bob feeds him. And of course the OWH editorial board will answer back to Kerrey, “How high!?!”

But so far those polled in Nebraska aren’t buying into Kerrey’s schtick. Kerrey isn’t running as an Independent or some sort of Bull Moose candidate. Kerrey still supports ObamaCare, is against Partial Birth Abortion bans and loves him some tax increases.

If it talks like a Demcorat, walks like a Democrat, raises money like a Democrat and votes like a Democrat, guess what? It ain’t a duck.

Or a Republican. Or an Independent.

Won’t. Get. Fooled. Again.

***

Cute how some Dems are tittering with joy about some Romney staffer not using spell-check on a logo (misspelling the 57 United States, or something).

But did you catch the Polish Foreign Minister’s slap down of President Obama, after the Prez referred to the Nazi Concentration Camps as, “Polish Death Camps”?

Polish Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski said,

“It’s a pity that such a dignified ceremony was overshadowed by ignorance and incompetence.”

Yeah, but tell us how you really feel.

Wonder how he feels about Democrat Marion Barry referring to him as a “Pollock”?

***

And we see this continuing mantra by Don Walton and others…well mainly Don… about how the Obama campaign is going to come into Omaha and take over again, and sweep Bob Kerrey and John Ewing into office and some such.

And while we all saw how excited the Obama partisans were back in 2008, does anyone think that same fervor and excitement exists in 2012? That was a massive anti-Bush, pro-first-black-President whiplash that sailed the massively inexperienced Senator into office. But Bush is gone, and Obama has his own record to run on now. And people who felt so good about themselves because they pretended that they didn’t see race as a factor when they pulled the lever, are now realizing that maybe that is all they saw. Or maybe they are just realizing that maybe that shouldn’t have been the biggest factor.

But hey, let’s all pretend it’s just like 2008 and watch the Obama coat-tails bring everyone along for the ride. Right? Right??

***

Readers, it is getting more and more difficult for us here at the humming Leavenworth Street HQ to keep pumping out a daily post. We have been going hard for around nine months or so, but we are probably going to have to reign things in. It is simply a time matter — as in we have less and less of it.

But we will try to stay on top of breaking news and give you the opportunity to read and talk about Nebraska politics. But you may get a little more time in between. Thanks for your understanding.

Now, to make us all feel better why don’t you go ahead and pick up something for Dad at Amazon.com? You’ll give a little love back to L.St., help us keep the light on, and you’ll get great deals at no extra cost.

And keep on telling your friends about Leavenworth Street! And tell 2 enemies!

{ 128 comments }

1 RWP May 30, 2012 at 6:13 AM

The media urge you to pay no attention to the voting record behind the curtain.

Kerrey in 12 years managed to score an average under 8/100 on the American Conservative Union rankings. In four of his years he scored even with, or more liberal than, Teddy Kennedy. In three of his years, he scored a perfect zero; out of twenty or so issues, he couldn’t find one on which he agreed with conservatives!

It would have been even worse had he not scored over 40, an actual moderate score, in one year. Which year was that? 1994, his reelection year.

So not only was he out on the left fringe of the Democrats, he was cynically so; when he needed to perk up his record briefly so his sycophants in the Omaha/Lincoln media could portray him as a moderate, he did so.

For comparison; over the same 12 year period, an actual moderate Democrat, Kent Conrad, scored 21 with the ACU. Jim Exon scored 36 1989-1996.

Post-partisan my aristocratic Irish ass.

2 Jessie Spano May 30, 2012 at 7:23 AM

No time? There’s never any time. There’s no time to practice, no time to study, I’ll never get into Stanford, I just need some of these….

3 BTO'S is a diva May 30, 2012 at 8:50 AM

BTO would constantly want his underlings to wait on him. He could not even be bothered to create his own protest signs. One time at county convention he didn’t even have the decency to make his own pot brownies!!!! What a diva!

4 A.C.Slater May 30, 2012 at 8:54 AM

Fear not Jessie you can always be a lazy dem and collect unemployment for 99 weeks like BTO has

5 Senator Snowplow May 30, 2012 at 9:07 AM

RWP, let’s be real here. I and Don Walton and the OWH don’t go slobbering silly over Bob Kerrey because we hope he’ll be a moderate in the Senate.

6 Let sleeping dogs lie May 30, 2012 at 9:33 AM

It looks like some of Sweeper’s readers are missing having BTO to kick around, or are they missing being kicked around by him? He must be one power guy to be on unemployment for 99 weeks, yet maintains a posse of underlings willing to wait on him! What is he, royalty?

7 Macdaddy May 30, 2012 at 9:37 AM

Sweeper, I have really appreciated the daily posts. I know that was a ton of work. I did get spoiled. I hope the DTs don’t get me too badly.

BTW, would those Obama coat tails be the same ones that carried Jim Esch to victory in 2008?

8 Kerry and the Democrats May 30, 2012 at 10:11 AM

It appears that Bob Kerrey is depending on his own organization rather than expecting the NDP to “help” him. He’s smart enough to understand that everything the NDP gets involved with is doomed to failure.

9 Anonymostly May 30, 2012 at 1:12 PM

So, when Obama loses the Presidential election, will there be any of his cabinet you’ll be happier to see hit the road than Eric Holder? That guy can’t become unemployed fast enough, IMO. Most political AG EVAH!

10 Sweeper Really? May 30, 2012 at 1:15 PM

You need more time off!!! Are you going Greece on us and now want a 3 day work week! Sweeper it is your generation of slackers that will be the death of this nation! Take a bath hippy and get back to work. You don’t see the huge staff at Objective Conservative taking time off!!

11 Anonymostly May 30, 2012 at 1:17 PM

So did any of you hear Jay Carney try to explain the obvious hypocrisy between the Obama administration’s argument against Bain Capital (private equity) and all their failed “green jobs” (public equity) initiatives? Nonsensical gibberish. And that’s a charitable description. But, hey, being Obama’s press secretary ain’t an easy gig.

12 Anonymostly May 30, 2012 at 1:56 PM

So, if the government decided that everyone had a right to anti-virus protection …

Listen, I want access to affordable anti-virus protection. And, by “affordable” I mean I think the government should provide it to me for free. Single-payer, as it were. I mean, if it’s good for healthcare, it would have to be good for computers too, no?

So, what would my government-run internet security system be like?

Free, for starters. After they raise my taxes to cover it, of course. Which means not only am I paying for MY anti-virus program, I’m paying for half a dozen others to have it as well. Which means I’m actually paying more. Much more. But, viewed through the eyes of liberals, it’s free because it’d be stuff the government only charges for indirectly. And, therefore, if I don’t like it, I should just decline it.

It would probably also be VERY effective … at responding to threats from two years ago. Government would create a monopoly, of course. McAfee wouldn’t have to compete with Norton in order to survive as a company. There would be no incentive to be better than other providers of internet security software. Or even good. Or even adequate. Hell, those government-employed security software engineers get paid whether they come up with new stuff or not. And with their member ship in the American Federation of Government Employees, they virtually cannot be fired.

I’m trying to imagine customer support. What would a virtual DMV look like? Send an e-mail from the infected machine briefly describing the problem (the problem is that I have an infected machine from which I can’t send e-mails) and the Bureau of Computer Resources/Anti-virus Protection (Bureau of CRAP) will issue, within 65 days thereafter, your conditional remedies response. Upon e-mail acknowledgement of the receipt of the written conditional remedies response, the Bureau of CRAP will initiate, within 45 days thereafter, ameliorative action on the applicable registered machine (ARM), provided that at no time within the immediately preceding 472 days, the applicable registered machine (ARM) was subject of any tax liens, child support orders, covenants not to compute or any of the circumstances itemized in subsection C.3.(a)(iv) of the previous section.

It would go a long way toward preserving the viability of the postal service.

13 CC Music Factory May 30, 2012 at 2:37 PM

Anonymostly – SSSSHHHHHH!!! Don’t give them any IDEAS! :D

And SR? – You might want to put the (sarcasm) tag on that… ya know, just in case someone might not actually realize… it’s sarcasm. Cause it’s difficult to tell over the net. Or something. :D

14 RWP May 30, 2012 at 2:56 PM

Yeah, ask anyone who works (or studies, or has kids) at the University of Nebraska about gummint run IT security. I just had to lock down my credit for the next 6 months, because some pimply 14 year old Ukrainian teenager with a password-guessing script he downloaded from 4chan got all our SSNs and DOBs, which are doubtless being auctioned online for a buck apiece.

As I explained to the Chancellor yesterday, you’ll never see an intrusion that isn’t described as ‘highly sophisticated’, because if the IT security guy admitted to what happens 95% of the time (someone who probably shouldn’t have root privilege in the first place set his password to ‘abc123′) he’ll be admitting he’s a moron.

15 Spike May 30, 2012 at 3:18 PM

Hey RWP, now do you see why it’s called FOC!! If you can’t figure out just what FOC is, here’s a hint; Fly Over Country!

16 Anonymous May 30, 2012 at 4:09 PM

I see on an A &D report that David Hahn’s campaign paid BTO about a grand on November 1st 2006 so maybe it’s not true that he was fired, Hahn’s staff is probably going around telling people that now to distance themselves from all the psychotic things BTO has done since then.

17 Macdaddy May 30, 2012 at 6:31 PM

Anonymostly, buy a Mac.

(hahaha Sweeper, yes, I went there. I just hijacked your post)

18 Anonymostly May 30, 2012 at 6:59 PM

Macdaddy, I’m afraid with the passage of the Computer Protection and Affordable Anti-Virus Act, Macs were outlawed because it was a platform the government didn’t think it could support under a universal-coverage system. Only PCs. As part of the many benefits of the CPAAVA, the government standardized all computers to run on windows operating systems. Opponents called it “Death Panels for Macs” but the Biden Administration was undeterred and imposed the requirement as part of a rule-making mandate under the authority of the Dept of Homeland Security.

Of course, the fact that the executive branch could regulate away Macs was not immediately apparent in the legislation itself. House Speaker Pelosi was famously noted for saying, “We have to pass this CRAP so that the people will find out what’s in it.

Of course, they had to select a specific iteration of the windows operating system. AARP lobbyists were initially concerned that any version newer than Windows 3.0 might leave many elderly without computing options because they might have older models of computer. But this spurred the Biden Administration into the genius idea of “Cash for Clunky Computers” by which they figured they could spur economic activity and create jobs while giving people money to buy new PCs.

What they didn’t count on was that most of the computers were made in China and so the jobs bump they were hoping for didn’t pan out. Except in China. Where Macs are now selling cheap.

19 Macdaddy May 30, 2012 at 7:38 PM

You can have my Mac when you pry it out of my cold, dead hands.

20 Anonymostly May 30, 2012 at 7:52 PM

Wow! Speaking of “Post-Democrat,” Artur Davis, a black former Democrat Congressman — a guy who gave a seconding speech for Obama’s nomination 4 years ago! — is switching to the Republican party! And if you haven’t read his blog post explaining why, it’s worth a google search. Me, Jon Bruning and Artur Davis — three former Democrats!

The criticism that Jon Bruning was not a “true conservative” always fell flat with me just because I know my conversion was real and genuine and thoughtful … and firm. Very firm. It’s interesting to me reading what Artur Davis explains are his reasons for switching because that’s a lot of what prompted me to change as well. I just reached that point a decade-and-a-half earlier than Davis.

21 Anonymostly May 30, 2012 at 8:08 PM

I was still a Democrat when I saw Tammy Bruce, a lesbian and former president of the San Francisco chapter of NOW, gave a speech on C-Span about her then-new book “The New Thought Police.” It was an ironic speech because the book was about how the left at the time (and still) tries to suppress thoughts and ideas with which it disagrees. A conservative would go speak somewhere, for example, and members of the left would show up and try to shout them down so that they couldn’t be heard.

That was something I’d seen happen. And it was something that bothered me greatly because I had always believed that the answer to bad speech was more speech. It was conservatives who wanted to burn books, not liberals. I even remember participating in an impromptu counter-protest on campus once when some conservative Christians were there protesting some movie they believed depicted the Virgin Mary as a hooker. Hey, free speech, right? Isn’t that sacred? You might not agree with what I have to say but won’t you defend to the death my right to say it? Wasn’t that our mantra, we open-minded liberals?

But turnabout wasn’t fair play. The libs didn’t want to hear conservatives. And they didn’t want to hear Tammy Bruce. But what’s more (and what made the speech ironic) neither did they want anyone else to listen to Tammy Bruce. They tried to make the decision for ME that what Tammy Bruce had to say was something I shouldn’t hear. And so Tammy Bruce’s speech had to be moved from an auditorium to a small classroom so that the speech could take place wherein Tammy Bruce explained how liberals act like the new thought police. And nothing could have made her point more readily apparent than the liberals who tried to shut her up.

That speech was one stop along my journey in rejecting the liberalism I used to embrace. I now laugh when Democrats — some on this very blog — accuse me of being close-minded, of not being willing to listen to opposing views or being so set in my ways that I’m unwilling to accept the truth of what they read on the Daily Kos and heard on MSNBC. Yep, I’m the one who’s close-minded. Me. The guy who carefully considered both views before deciding I could no longer be a Democrat.

22 Tammy Bruce May 30, 2012 at 8:24 PM

Anomostly, your welcome now where are you hiding your sister?

23 Kortezzi May 30, 2012 at 8:32 PM

Maybe Cosmic Bob is just waiting until crunch time in October. But he’s done almost zero campaigning that I have noticed. Very few ads on TV, none on radio. And he doesn’t get the free airtime he used to from the MSM. If he intends on really TRYING to win, he needs to get in the game NOW and cut into Fischer’s hefty lead.

Something tells me Bob’s just a little bit tired. And discouraged at being outpolled nearly 20 pts by a heretofore unknown rancher lady from Cherry County. His heart’s not in it, and it shows.

24 RWP May 30, 2012 at 9:28 PM

But, but he’s putting out really keel tweets!

“97% of Americans know the name of Charlie Sheen’s favorite snack food. But only 2% know which state Pearl Harbor is in! Join me to reach across the aisle and embrace American civics education!”

25 Anonymous May 30, 2012 at 11:11 PM

Bob’s going to phone it on on the parade route/county fair circuit this summer. His heart is not in this nor is his head and his physical presence won’t be necessary until Labor Day, at which time he will show up for appearance’s sake only. He knows he can’t overcome the resolve not to send another Dem to the Senate from Nebraska.

26 Hello! How are you? May 31, 2012 at 7:13 AM

I see that New York is attempting to stop the sale of sugar drinks (in some selective cases) over 16oz. I wonder how a regular joe from New York City would feel about that? Does anybody know anybody from New York who bought a house here lately? Maybe we can ask his opinion.

27 Senator Snowplow May 31, 2012 at 9:15 AM

You people are so judgmental. You do realise this isn’t Bob’s only gig, right? He has businesses to run and also a family back in New York. You don’t really expect him to be here campaigning all the time, do you?

28 Sweetwater Observer May 31, 2012 at 9:24 AM

Speaking of Cosmic Bob’s family in New York City. When do you think Cosmic Bob will introduce his family to the voters of Nebraska….you know, those voters who actually live in Nebraska. Are we at a high enough social and economic level to be introduced to his family? Maybe when they all move into his newly purchased home in Omaha will we get the chance to meet them. And so we wait.

29 Lil Mac May 31, 2012 at 10:57 AM

Whether a security system is breached by an evil genius or a wino who stumbled in, your greatest security threat is always your own leaders’ hubris. Generals, Congressmen and CEOs scotch tape safe combinations and passwords under their desks and rather than use a secure line will stay on unencrypted phones and invent pseudo spy speech to “disguise” secret info. Sheer hubris.

Power, position and erudition cannot cure human nature. Plenty of senior academics and powerful leaders think they are immune to being dangerously stupid, which is of course dangerously stupid.

Also, good point about political conversions. Ronald Reagan was a liberal Democrat union president yet now is the iconic Republican. He heard a screenwriter say he preferred the Soviet Constitution to the United States Constitution and that triggered a principle-based epiphany in Reagan. Issues are complicated but principles aren’t. Likewise, some NE veterans originally voted Democratic for Kerrey and then by watching his principles harm that which the veterans’ fought for, became Republicans.

Are we more drawn to or driven from things? A person is vaguely drawn to a party and philosophy by what they believe is right. But political and philosophical converts are driven away from that which they once trusted and respected by people on their own side who prove their own side is intolerably wrong.

30 1st Amendment May 31, 2012 at 11:23 AM

Anonymostly makes some very good points about how the Democratic party hypocritically pounds their breasts in support of freedom of speech, but are actually a pack of closeted censors. The NDP’s posts on this LS thread (#3 & #16) making unfounded accusations about BTO are prime examples. BTO must be silenced or ridiculed because he dared to actually exercise his freedom of speech and criticized his own party at meetings, in letters to editors, on NNN and especially here on LS.
I recall BTO writing that it was Kyle Michaelis, “the voice of progressive political change,” that penned the so-called “Osborne Rule” that enforces party conformity and silences voices of dissent within the NDP. Vic Covalt silenced the voices of all of Nebraska’s Democrats on the NDP blog because of something that BTO posted there that was critical of Sen. Nelson.
I don’t understand why Mr. Osborne hasn’t seen the light and made the switch as Anonymostly has done.

31 Anonymous NDP staffer @ #16 May 31, 2012 at 12:44 PM

Why don’t you do us all a favor and list all of these supposedly “psychotic” things that BTO has done? I’ve seen on the NDP Facebook page that he continuously questions the NDP Chair’s right to silence dissent within his party. Wouldn’t that be considered “sane” behavior by someone that is fighting for the rights of his party’s membership? It is obvious that for you, anyone who would dare to hold the leadership of their own party responsible to the people they represent must be “psychotic.”
By the way, all the campaigns from six years ago have probably dissolved their organizations and the staff has gone on to other things. But thinking otherwise might indicate genuinely psychotic behavior.

32 Anonymous May 31, 2012 at 12:51 PM

Mike Meister has been trying to manipulate BTO into incessantly atttacking the NDP. It’s sad how easily BTO is manipulated.

33 Mike "Goobernatorial" Meister May 31, 2012 at 1:04 PM

Who is BTO?

34 Anonymous May 31, 2012 at 5:03 PM

There is no way this many people can know or comment on Brian Osborn and what he has done in NDP and over at NNN. I suspect many of these posters are Brian just amusing himself. Now that Sweeps isn’t policing this blog as much we can look for it to become the BTO show. Great.

35 Macdaddy May 31, 2012 at 5:14 PM

Wow, yet another revelation that Obama is as crooked as a dog’s hind leg. Memos that spell out quid pro quos between Obama and Big Pharma which ensured that Americans will pay higher drug prices for years to come in return for Big Pharma putting lots of cold hard cash into efforts to get Obamacare passed. Unbelievable. So now we have Obama compiling literal kill lists, ordering the assassination of an American citizen, handing out billions in taxpayer dollars to his supporters in the green energy field, continuing rendition, and colluding with drug companies against Americans. Now, I’m a greedy Republican bastard, but none of what Obama has done sounds like it lines up with principles that we hear spewing from liberal maws on a regular basis. My question for you Lefties: at what point do you admit that you have been had and that Obama is an amoral huckster? Or is this just all ends-justifies-the-means maneuvering and you think that in order to make an omelet, you have to break a few eggs? You do realize that Obama is destroying the progressive movement, not that it was sustainable anyway, but Obama is making sure to discredit it for generations to come.

36 Anonymous May 31, 2012 at 5:54 PM

Careful asking questions Macdaddy. Someone asked Interested Observer whether he was voting for Fischer or Kerrey and he hasn’t been heard from since.

37 NDP Staffer at 5:03 pm May 31, 2012 at 6:11 PM

Let’s make this the Phil Montag show instead!

38 Anonymous May 31, 2012 at 6:26 PM

I am one Democrat that has had his fill of President Obama. He promised a lot of things that he has reneged on. He has not only done the despicable things that Macdaddy points out, but has also been more of a threat to the U.S. Constitution than President G.W.Bush ever was. The founders of our nation must all be spinning furiously in their graves.
I am still a Democrat and I won’t be voting for Mitt Romney out of spite, but Barrack Obama will never get my vote, nor my support again. What Bob Kerrey did to Chuck Hassebrook is unforgivable so he will also not get my vote, nor will Deb Fischer.
There are a lot of new people running for election to the NDP leadership at our convention next month. Hopefully the delegates will vote to replace the current bunch of bums so that we may enjoy a renewed party in the future.

39 Anonymous May 31, 2012 at 6:38 PM

I should have made that last sentence read, “replace the current bunch of bums AND their cronies.”

40 RWP May 31, 2012 at 9:14 PM

I recall BTO writing that it was Kyle Michaelis, “the voice of progressive political change,” that penned the so-called “Osborne Rule” that enforces party conformity and silences voices of dissent within the NDP.

Look up “Democratic Centralism” in Wikipedia.

What I can’t understand is why they get all upset when you call ‘em Commies.

41 Street Sweeper May 31, 2012 at 9:42 PM

I got news for you kids — and I mean particularly you KIDS — while time to write posts is reduced, we are still able to monitor, and delete, comments. So cut the crap, please. You know who you are.
-Ed.

42 BYOB May 31, 2012 at 10:33 PM

delete, comments. (how about editing your own)? ,

43 Anonymous May 31, 2012 at 10:59 PM

RWP, you have nearly hit the nail on the head. The principle points of Democratic Centralism differ from those of the Nebraska Democratic Party in that the NDP is less democratic. Paraphrasing the Wiki report, with the NDP differences in parentheses:

1. That all directing bodies of the Party, from top to bottom, shall be elected (so long as the winners meet the approval of, or benefit from the interference of the leaders);
2. That Party bodies shall give periodical accounts of their activities to their respective Party organizations (when hell freezes over);
3. That there shall be strict Party discipline and the subordination of the minority to the majority (with subordination of the majority to the leaders);
4. That all decisions of higher bodies shall be absolutely binding on lower bodies and on all Party members (exactly).

44 Anonymous May 31, 2012 at 11:40 PM

So I see how Kerry operates now. I was out and about this past weekend at various events and in meeting Kerry for the third time I broke the ice with some self depreciating comments. When I saw him later that same day he was making some cute comments about me using the same lines I had earlier that day! When a person uses a depreciating comment that you repeat Bob it is an insult you dumb ass!!

If this is how Kerry is going to operate from here on out he is TOAST!!!!

45 Interested Observer June 1, 2012 at 6:53 AM

Anonymous, I’m still here and watching . . .

46 TexasAnnie June 1, 2012 at 6:57 AM

Lil Mac: I cannot imagine how you know what Generals, Congressmen and CEOs do with “secret information,” but I do agree that “Power, position and erudition cannot cure human nature.” And decidedly, we are more ‘driven’ than ‘drawn!’ But not because chosen positions/philosophies are intolerably wrong; rather because leaders espousing those positions are HUMAN.

For example, you have made it abundantly clear that since Deb Fischer’s govt. hand-outs were acquired within the law, that it’s okay for her to get more at taxpayer expense than the fellow next to her. You have accepted her ‘humanity’ for what it is: greed! But Deb’s greed does nothing to diminish the ‘small government’ philosophy she indicates she will be espousing. Her hypocrisy may very likely drive away true ‘small government’ advocates. (Problem is: where will those voters go? Most of us are weary of simply voting the lesser of two evils…)

Third parties have long intrigued me because their underlying philosophies are usually more transparent and focused. Unlike Republicans and Democrats, who are mutually inclusive of one another in practice when not also in theory, third parties issue an ideal and stand or fall in obedience to that doctrine. Agree?

47 The Grundle King June 1, 2012 at 7:32 AM

Okay I.O., if you’re still here and watching, then allow me to reiterate my question…will you be voting for Fischer or Kerrey?

I mean, I know voting is a personal matter and you owe it to no one to reveal who you’re voting for (or if you’re even voting)…but with all of this contempt you seem to harbor for Fischer, then one must conclude by default that you’re voting for Kerrey…correct?

And if you’re not going to vote for Kerrey, are you just not voting at all? If that’s the case, then why all this time spent attacking Fischer? The primary is over…Don and Jon aren’t options anymore.

48 The Grundle King June 1, 2012 at 7:34 AM

Geez Annie, we get it, you didn’t get your piece of the pie and you’re not gonna let folks forget it. But stop with the pseudo-libertarian schtick. You’re not convincing anyone.

49 RWP June 1, 2012 at 7:55 AM

See this morning’s jobs report? What a complete and unmitigated disaster. Jobs added were less than the most pessimistic estimates, April was also revised downward. Unemployment was up, and U6, the broadest measure of unemployment was way up.

A Democrat with any shame (I know, I know) would crawl into a hole and hide.

As Jonah Goldberg quipped, given the path this president has taken us on, ‘Forward’ may not have been the ideal campaign slogan.

50 Macdaddy June 1, 2012 at 9:09 AM

Smartest man ever to be President! Just ask him. His ideas are brilliant and will lead us forward, if it weren’t for those damn ATMs.

51 Anonymous June 1, 2012 at 9:30 AM

So, all of you brilliant folks on this site. What is the solution for the economy?

52 Anonymous June 1, 2012 at 10:04 AM

What is the solution for the economy?
Vote for Romney, hoping he doesn’t screw things up much worse in the following four years. Then, pray to God that both parties come to their senses in 2016.

53 Macdaddy June 1, 2012 at 10:05 AM

Ditch Obamacare, actually cut back on regulations, decrease government spending (both discretionary and mandatory), increase the oil supply, make the Bush tax cuts permanent. In other words, do the opposite of whatever Obama has been doing and which hasn’t been working. This recession has been going on far too long and Obama’s insistence on adding an enormous amount of cost to doing business has placed a real drag on small businesses. Obama has refused to take any action that would help the economy. His actions instead have been to repay his cronies and organizations that helped him get elected. And he did all this with your great-grand children’s money while at the same time playing a record number of golf games and taking numerous vacations to some awesome places, while the rest of us get to have a staycation at the local reservoir.

Bottom line, though, Anonymous 9:30, is that many, many smart people have put forth very serious plans for getting the economy back on track. Obama refuses to listen to any of them. I wonder why?

54 Deafening Silence June 1, 2012 at 10:31 AM

All the Dems who milled around here months ago complaining about the Suttle recall effort — you know, the cats who said it was all Republican sour grapes and just trying to overturn the results of a lawful election, etc., ad nauseum — have been curiously quiet about Democrat efforts to recall Scott Walker, governor of Wisconsin. What gives?

55 Anonymous June 1, 2012 at 10:36 AM

Scott Walker is a douchebag.

56 RWP June 1, 2012 at 10:46 AM

Scott Walker is going to win, because unlike the miserable failure in the White House, Scott Walker has turned things around in Wisconsin.

The RCP average has him +6.6 this morning.

57 Macdaddy June 1, 2012 at 11:14 AM

Walker has already won: membership in public employee unions in Wisconsin has plummeted by over 50% already. That means more money in public employees’ pockets, more money in taxpayers’ pockets. Maybe i should have said “Wisconsin has already won.” Even FDR called the idea of public employee unions inherently corrupt.

58 Anonymostly June 1, 2012 at 11:38 AM

Scott Walker is a douchebag.

LOL. You libs are pathetic. You have no argument; you only have vitriol. (Well, not all libs, but it seems to be a common trait.)

Wisconsin may well turn out to be the public employee unions’ Waterloo. Talk about a state where you’d expect them to have lots of public support. Man, but they tried hard to take this guy down: All those protests and demonstrations; teachers mendaciously claiming illness to skip work and go occupy the statehouse; a compliant media pitching their side of the story and casting the protesters in the most positive light possible; and, at the end of the election day, Walker is going to stomp his opponent. Badly.

What’s the old line about if you’re going try to kill the King, you damn well better kill him?

59 Anonymous June 1, 2012 at 12:11 PM

What is the solution for the economy?

Give the House back to the Democrats, let them keep the Senate, but elect Romney to the White House.

60 Anonymous June 1, 2012 at 12:14 PM

The libs don’t have no monopoly on a lack of arguments, nor on vitriol. Idiocy is a trait that, unfortunately, both parties share.

61 RWP June 1, 2012 at 12:23 PM

Never strike a king unless you are sure you shall kill him.
— Ralph Waldo Emerson, although many people attribute it to Nicolò Macchiavelli, who had the similar idea:

“Men must either be treated well or exterminated; for they can revenge themselves for a small injury, but for a greater one, they cannot.” (RWP translation)

62 Anonymostly June 1, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Well, one solution for the economy is for President Romney to NOT act like President Bush and foist this “compassionate conservative” nonsense on us. Spending beaucoup bucks on programs that make people more dependent on government is NOT being compassionate. Fortunately, President Romney has not trotted out those kinds of soundbites, so there’s hope that he’ll be fiscally responsible when he gets into office next January. In addition to a fiscally responsible President Romney, though, we also need a Republican-controlled House and Senate so that we might see Congress pass some balanced budgets to send to the White House for President Romney’s signature. Undo some of the crap that the Democrat Congress has passed since 2006, especially Obamacare. Wish we cold also roll back TARP and the stimulus slush fund.

63 TexasAnnie June 1, 2012 at 12:54 PM

Well thanks for the translation and quotations, RWP. But the idea expressed is a false premiss, as you know, and not analogous to electorate choices in the manner Anonymostly has drawn. For Scott Walker is expendable too, kings are not.

But still, reigning in govt. spending is what the people want, and Walker is giving it. And at the end of the day, unions will not be the only sacrificial lambs. Walker and ‘most’ (or ‘honorable’ if you please) ‘small govt. advocates’ (or Libertarian schtick if you prefer) want a broader (and thereby lower, fairer) tax base. Do you, RWP?

64 Anonymous June 1, 2012 at 1:16 PM

Wisconsin had the worst job loss record in all 50 states. And Walker is a success? This is definitely a fact-free zone where everyone has their own reality devoid of facts.

65 RWP June 1, 2012 at 2:19 PM

Anonymous@1:16 is just making it up as he goes along. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Wisconsin unemployment peaked in Jun 2009, six months before Walker took office. It was 9.2% again in Jan 2010, the month he took office. Since then, it’s dropped to 6.7%.

66 RWP June 1, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Yes, I do think the tax base should be broad and low. Everybody should pay at least a small amount of tax; everyone needs some skin in the game.

67 Macdaddy June 1, 2012 at 3:09 PM

Anonymostly, my big fear is that Romney hasn’t told us how much compassionate conservatism he is going to try to ram through. That has been the conservative complaint against him: he’s a squish. Of course, he’s going to be better than Obama, but if he does not make real cuts to gov’t spending and get the economy back on track, he’ll be a one-termed preezy just like the dude currently in the heezy.

68 Spike June 1, 2012 at 4:04 PM

Solution to the Tax problem; Eliminate the income tax & put it all in a Federal SALES tax with increasing % as cost of item rises. Needless to say, with this method everyone pays and those that can afford big ticket items pay more, way more.

If any of you old Farts remember, it was your jerk hero Reagan that put the IRS into all of our Bank Accounts! Remember that?? & if you Goper Clowns look closely at history, it’s been Goper administrations that have been in the lead growing BIG GOVERNMENT while claiming to abhor it! Stupid is as STUPID……

69 Macdaddy June 1, 2012 at 4:43 PM

FDR was a Republican? LBJ? Obama? Who knew?

70 RWP June 1, 2012 at 4:46 PM

Solution to the Tax problem; Eliminate the income tax & put it all in a Federal SALES tax with increasing % as cost of item rises. Needless to say, with this method everyone pays and those that can afford big ticket items pay more, way more.

So people will buy six single beers instead of a six pack; or a car as a collection of parts plus labor, broken down by the second. You’re a real economic genius, Spike. You should be on Obama’s team.

If any of you old Farts remember, it was your jerk hero Reagan that put the IRS into all of our Bank Accounts! Remember that?? & if you Goper Clowns look closely at history, it’s been Goper administrations that have been in the lead growing BIG GOVERNMENT while claiming to abhor it! Stupid is as STUPID……

‘Stupid’ is running up 5 trillion dollars in national debt in order to increase the unemployment rate.
An economically clueless administration, elected by imbeciles like this one. Fortunately, they only have 7 months and 20 days left to go.

71 Anonymous June 1, 2012 at 5:35 PM

From the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, during the last 12 months, Wisconsin lost 23,900 jobs (March 2011 – 2012). No other state lost more that 3,500 jobs. Google it. RWP is wrong again.

Most of the job losses were in the public sector, but when looking at just private sector jobs, Wisconsin still lost more than any other state.

72 Anonymous June 1, 2012 at 5:36 PM

No one on this site seems to understand economics. Your prescriptions would have led to Great Depression II.

73 The Grundle King June 1, 2012 at 6:21 PM

Spike, why’d you change your name from Ikon? I mean, the whole ‘Goper’ thing pretty well gives it away.

74 Anonymous June 1, 2012 at 6:37 PM

What is the solution for the economy? Hold a revolution, overthrow the government, default on all of our debt, and start all over.

75 TexasAnnie June 1, 2012 at 7:19 PM

So, just to be clear RWP, you’re saying (by implication) that you disagree with Grover Norquist’s notion that closing tax loopholes equates to “raising taxes?”

76 RWP June 1, 2012 at 7:52 PM

Of course I said no such thing.

77 RWP June 1, 2012 at 8:06 PM

anonymous @5:35 is a liar, and a very stupid one.

According to the BLS, seasonally adjusted employment in Wisconsin in April 2011 was 2836190. In April 2012 it was 2863590. That’s an increase of 27,400.

You can use March numbers; it makes little difference.

The data series ID is LASST55000005.

78 Candy McButter-snatch June 1, 2012 at 8:41 PM

RWP- if you had your way you would divert all tax revenue to resurrect the dodo bird and program it for pleasure. Your wasteful use of tax dollars make me sick!

79 Way to go OPS! June 1, 2012 at 9:14 PM

For hiring a superintendent who, we now learn, resigned from her current job in Des Moines after sending sexually explicit emails. Great hire.

80 bobscary June 1, 2012 at 9:47 PM

Had a dog named Spike with a bad habit of eating his own vomit. No kidding. I don’t think he learned to blog. You never know. He was a talented mutt but always leaned to the left due to a botched orchiectomy. Made him wander in circles.

81 Anonymous June 1, 2012 at 10:55 PM

Local union boss and hopeful NDP committeeman won’t be around for his party convention because he is heading up to help his brothers in the recall. Ron kiminiski, what a typical liberal union thug. Always looking for a fight and not staying home to do his job…… What a turd. To make things worse he facebooked it!

82 TexasAnnie June 2, 2012 at 8:27 AM

RWP: Oh. I certainly thought you were implying tax fairness via tax equity. Of course if we can’t close tax loopholes & incentives, we can’t get to fairness. What say you, RWP, about tax fairness? Flat tax? Consumption tax? And how would your notion of tax fairness affect the economy? If reports one hears in passing are true, the “job creators” are not creating jobs while stashing their cash, and likely to continue doing so until after the election or beyond… It seems they don’t think the tax structure is fair, either.

83 Anonymous June 2, 2012 at 9:02 AM

Remember when BTO was on the news for stalking and harassing Lisa Hannah?

84 Anonymous June 2, 2012 at 10:39 AM

Remember when Lisa Hannah was on the news for stalking and harassing Mike Johanns?

85 Anonymous June 2, 2012 at 10:49 AM

NDP National Committeeman, Vince Powers, has tossed his hat into the ring for Chair of the NDP. So, we have Powers, Joe Higgins – a past NSEA union president that Vic Covalt has already endorsed for the job, and Mike Meister, the guy that both Powers and Covalt talked into saving the party’s face a couple of years ago, by stepping in as the NDP’s candidate for governor following the Mark Lakers fiasco. It appears that stabbing fellow Democrats in the back is a family tradition.

86 GOPachyderm June 2, 2012 at 11:14 AM

Don’t forget that Powers and Covalt also twisted Bob Kerrey’s arm so that he could return to Nebraska and twist his knife into Chuck Hassebrook’s back.

87 Lil Mac June 2, 2012 at 12:01 PM

Worrying about taxation methodologies (tax fairness) instead of govt spending restraint, is like looking for plasma when you have a severed artery. Govt spending creates the govt’s need for taxation. Stop the bleeding and your blood count will grow. Bleed out and you are dead. We need a tourniquet in our national artery. Worry about where the replacement blood comes from later.

The obvious tourniquet is a Balanced Budget Amendment. Bob Kerreykilled the Balanced Budget Amendment. What was he thinking?

88 Anonymous June 2, 2012 at 1:25 PM

What is really needed is to get Americans back to work, buying American made products. It is no wonder we’re going broke when half the money spent in the U.S. goes to by products Made In China. Quit buying that ChiCom crap at WalMart and help America instead!

89 RWP June 2, 2012 at 3:34 PM

Tax fairness, Annie, would be people paying to the government approximately in proportion to what the government does for them. It’s unattainable, because the government does far more for the very poor than they could possibly afford. Think of the roads that everyone uses, the cost of the national defense, etc.. A rich guy, on the other hand, can afford helicopters and a private army, probably for less than he pays in tax All you can do is extract money from the populace as efficiently as possible, in such a way as to minimize cheating, and not spend the money on things the social contract (which in this country is the Constitution) does not allow. As I said, everyone should pay, because everyone needs skin in the game, but you obviously don’t try to extract blood from a stone.

Fairness, in general, is a concept that should be abandoned when one leaves grade school. Life isn’t fair, and if it were, 95% of us would be up $h17 creek without a paddle.

90 TexasAnnie June 2, 2012 at 6:21 PM

Lil Mac and RWP: It’s sad that you have given up on ethics. But I understand. When I lived in Nebraska, I declined all the way to nihilism. (I’m recovered now, back in Texas.) We can’t stop govt. spending, Lil Mac, because that would initiate a depression. And life can be made fair, RWP, by obeying the Constitution. Deontology! Google it.

91 Lil Mac June 2, 2012 at 7:21 PM

My ethics and being a constitutionalist are irrelevant. In point of fact, expecting fairness from government is a form of spiritualism. Government is only as fair as we force it to be fair. For it is a machine, as fair and caring as is your automobile is fair and caring. Government’s heartless inefficiency is obvious to all. But whereas some of us would rationally fix the inefficiency, a many impassioned voters keep hoping government will grow a heart and be fair.

Government is a hammer wielded by a GS who doesn’t notice if he strikes off your chains or your entire foot. Either way, he gets paid and never hears you scream. But the impassioned among us expect this heartless mechanism to be fair. They often seek to elect saints rather than managers. They refuse to view government as the rude tool it is and instead expect it to grow teats and suckle them, or enlighten them, or whatever. They confuse policy and faith. They can engage in dispassionate critical thinking but they don’t. They apply superstition to hoping government will treat and tax them with compassion.

I didn’t say government should stop all spending. I said government needs to stop spending money it doesn’t have. And you seem to say, what? That we need to keep spending money we don’t have? Try that on your own check book. Your economics seems less than rational if that is what you meant.

92 RWP June 2, 2012 at 7:34 PM

No one’s given up on ethics, TA. We just don’t see the gummint as the font of it. This isn’t recess, and the gummint ain’t the teacher. There are millions of wrongs out there which the gummint shouldn’t right. Ethics are for people, not the state. The state has the minimal function of providing for the common defense, adjudicating contracts, punishing crimes, and perhaps providing some infrastructure.

Me, I’m a Kantian. I believe ethics are a matter of individual duty.

93 Boss Hogg June 2, 2012 at 7:56 PM

Another one bites the dust. Thanks to dad and the OWH my candidate will run OPS!

94 Anonymous June 2, 2012 at 10:00 PM

RWP wrote, “I didn’t say government should stop all spending. I said government needs to stop spending money it doesn’t have.”
I’m a fairly liberal Democrat, but I find that even I can agree with RWP on this one.

95 Lil Mac June 3, 2012 at 6:35 AM

10:00 PM. Actually, I said that, not RWP. But I think RWP might agree.

You seem open to reason. Many people aren’t.

I think human differences –right/left, rich/poor, male/female, etc.– do not divide people more than the tendency by some to think their way and by others to feel their way. While we all do both, most lean more heavily one way or the other. And the problem is, of course, whereas different minds can disagree and yet find useful consensus, closed minds are just closed.

These are two are stunningly different human creatures. “Thinkers: have a passion for truth that drives them to dryly seek facts despite them being uncomfortable to the thinker’s own preexisting views. “Feelers” dryly decide to ignore or spin facts to force proof of what they passionately embrace.

Thinking makes man man. Passion makes man a violent chimp. Well, hell, everyone like a banana once in a while.

96 TexasAnnie June 3, 2012 at 6:56 AM

Lil Mac: What govt. spending would you have us stop? How shall one divide the “good” spending from the “bad?” I happen to believe offensive warfare is bad; I’m willing stop that spending. Because to my manner of thinking, we only have “enough money” for defensive military operations.
And I’m willing to stop spending for “economic development.” Because to my manner of thinking it’s anti-capitalism and therefore anti-American. And yes, I’m willing to stop welfare spending: OF ALL TYPES including the welfare you receive! But simply stoping “bad” spending does not equate to fairness. We need tax reform for that.

RWP, try re-reading “The Republic” (Plato). Kant understood the importance of that 2,400 year old work! Individuals ARE the state. The trick, of course, is to get Kantians into public office. This is not an unsurmountable problem. Don’t give up on human nature, which is at least as “good” as it can be “bad.” I happen to believe that individuals fail to choose “the good” because of the example displayed all around. When govt. is permitted to lie, cheat and steal, so shall the individual.

97 Interested Observer June 3, 2012 at 9:44 AM

Is “compromise” in government a good thing or a bad thing?

98 Lil Mac June 3, 2012 at 9:55 AM

Assuming that question isn’t entirely rhetorical, I will rise to it.

Compromise is the necessary result of free government. Only a tyranny has no compromise. Principles are what we hold and drive us to run for elective power. But once in office we represent constituents who all believe differently, and our job then is to form policy via laws that never fit all, and we vie in that policy setting work against other lawmakers who also think differently. So asking whether compromise is good or bad is irrelevant. It is the only possible outcome short of resorting to bullets and chains,
.

99 Macdaddy June 3, 2012 at 10:13 AM

I agree with Lil Mac. I get really irritated with the contention that since I think public libraries and roads are a good thing then I must agree to fund a multi-million dollar study of the size of gay men’s penises. Conversely, if I don’t think such a study should be funded by the government, then I must hate the fire department…and puppies.

Another point is that the more government gets into the business of regulating everything, the less personal ethics come into play. You have it backwards TA, we aren’t giving up on ethics, people who favor government to solve all our ills are. I’d think you’d understand that because that’s a main contention of Ron Paul (among others).

IO, compromise can be a good or bad thing. Currently, compromise will help lock in the status quo which is going to lead us to Greece, Spain, and Argentina. We don’t have money. We are borrowing more every year than every other country in the world combined. This.Is.Unsustainable. Compromise isn’t going to make the end hurt any less. To quote Mark Steyn: “That’s to say, the unsustainable “bubble” is not student debt or subprime mortgages or anything else. The bubble is us, and the assumptions of entitlement. Too many citizens of advanced Western democracies live a life they have not earned, and are not willing to earn.” One side is talking about solving the bubble. The other side is talking about fairness. And to quote Peter Faulk in “The Princess Bride”: “Where is it written that life is fair?”

100 TexasAnnie June 3, 2012 at 10:30 AM

I haven’t said I favor govt. to solve all our ills, have I, Macdaddy? Far from that, I’m in strong agreement with RWP in that govt. should stick to only constitutionally mandated pursuits. You and Lil Mac are presenting yourselves as cogs in the machine, beyond the reach of ethics. As an individual within a constitutionally prescribed society, I matter. And I damn will complain when govt. oversteps it’s authority.

I grow weary of assumptions that govt. is beyond the reach of individuals. And I grow weary of the misunderstanding that Libertarians, in recognizing a proclivity for greed within human nature, simply submit to it’s consequences. Ethics in govt. IS possible.

101 Interested Observer June 3, 2012 at 10:37 AM

Is a “bi-partisan” compromise a good thing or a bad thing?

102 Street Sweeper June 3, 2012 at 11:26 AM

IO,
Perusing this morn…

Depends on the “compromise” doesn’t it? If you say slavery for all brunettes and I say slavery for none, a compromise of slavery for 50% of brunettes isn’t a good thing, is it?

Bob Kerrey has been putting “compromise” up as some sort of gold standard (since we both know where you’re coming from on this). There are times where compromise can be good and there are times where it can be disastrous. Not to mention, the wise ones come into negotiations with a hard position, then express their willingness to compromise later.

But Bob thinks Nebraskans want to go halfsies on everything, so that’s what he’s pushing.
Shocker.

Will do our very best for a new post Monday morn.
SS

103 Anonymous June 3, 2012 at 11:29 AM

If he were still around, you could ask Neville Chamberlain about compromises.

104 Anonymous June 3, 2012 at 11:31 AM

Latest comments
NNN = 4
LS = 104
Keep up the good work Sweeper!

105 Anonymous June 3, 2012 at 12:14 PM

Interested Observer, for whom are you voting in the US Senate race? Answer that and I’ll answer your compromise question.

106 RWP June 3, 2012 at 2:47 PM

It would seem to me that the issue whether bipartisanship and compromise are good things is moot, since there is overwhelming evidence, based on his 12 year voting record in the Senate, that Kerrey is interested in neither, except as ruses to fool the electorate. When in 3 years out of 12 you scored a perfect zero in your ACU ratings — and therefore out of 60+ votes important to conservatives, you couldn’t agree with them on a single one — then you can waffle on all you want, but no one but a fool will be taken in. Kerrey is a hard left ideologue, who votes with Republicans only for entirely cynical reasons in election years, as he did in 1994.

There are Dems in the Senate who could seriously make the argument they’re bipartisan, at least to a degree. Max Baucus and Kent Conrad are two such. So was Jim Exon. But Kerrey? Not even close.

107 Anonymous June 3, 2012 at 3:41 PM

It’s Kaminski TURD! And if you knew him you would know he is not a thug,,,,,,he is a lot like the character in Shrek, you know the Prince…….compensation issues.

Vince Powers must be worried about his chances…………………..

108 Macdaddy June 3, 2012 at 4:19 PM

You lost me on that whole cog in the machine thing, TA. Well, maybe not. Are you implying that I accept the current politic process including its outcomes and consequences? Guilty. I also accept that it is imperfect and difficult as well as necessarily messy. Does it reflect the worst of our impulses? Yes. And occasionally the best. I don’t disagree with what you said about the government overstepping its boundaries and fighting back against it. I also agree that the government can corrupt people, but that in no way excuses people. In a democracy, people get the government they deserve. You want a better government? Get people to have better ethics. Good luck with that.

109 Anonymous June 3, 2012 at 6:46 PM

I bet Marian Bahensky will be re-elected, she is very popular, works very hard for the NDP, and is an endearing, kind woman.

110 So, how do you solve it? June 3, 2012 at 6:48 PM

Has anybody bothered to ask how much Obamacare has cost already? The government claims that an exchange will make health care affordable…how? It gives out tax subsidies or doles out Medicaid dollars. Those are public dollars. They say it will make the shopping experience better? Don’t websites for insurance policies already exist? Can’t you call your local insurance agent? Can’t you just go to a company to get insurance? I’m sure Blue Cross would be there to take that call. So, how many billions have already been blown for something that hasn’t even been built? Have you seen how much has been handed out in grant money to states just to build these things and none have been built and none may be built on time because of the schedules. It doesn’t make any sense. Then again, neither does this adminstration.

111 Lil Mac June 3, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Yea, what Dad and RWP said.

112 Matt June 3, 2012 at 8:33 PM

I need a new thread! I’m going through Sweeper withdrawals….

113 @ Anonymous 6:46 June 3, 2012 at 10:24 PM

Marion,
Nobody here cares what you think of yourself.

114 Anonymous June 3, 2012 at 10:48 PM

Vince Powers should be worried about his chances.Vince says he had to jump into the race because, “Continuity and momentum were at stake.” The delegates would have every right to be wary of electing a leader that wants to continue a momentum that has seen the NDP at its weakest in over thirty years!
Maybe Deb Fischer should offer to lead the NDP. At least she knows how to win against overwhelming odds. Powers only knows how to continue doing what has proven to be a losing proposition.

115 Interested Observer June 4, 2012 at 5:41 AM

Actually, where I’m coming from on this is a recent renewed interest in Dwight Eisenhower and various aspects of his life. He was known as a decent man, a highly effective leader, a consensus builder with a strong sense of duty.

He said, “People talk about the middle of the road as though it were unacceptable. Actually, all human problems, excepting morals, come into the gray areas. . . . The middle of the road is all of the usable surface. The extremes, right and left, are in the gutters.”

A year ago, during the debt ceiling debate, some people stated that compromise, in and of itself, is a bad thing and strongly encouraged the House Republicans to “stick together” and to not compromise. They were very clear in their disdain for compromise, in general, almost as an absolute.

So, I was just asking a simple, honest, sincere little question, “Is compromise in government a good thing or a bad thing?”. I was not being “entirely rhetorical”, nor trying to be “irrelevant”, nor even discussing “for whom are you voting in the US Senate race”. I was just asking a question. No agenda, no hard negotiating position, no personal insults, just asking a question. Now, I’m sorry I did.

116 RWP June 4, 2012 at 9:06 AM

Yeah, that’s the impression we all have of you, Interested Observer. Not a disingenuous bone in your body. Just asking some simple questions.

FWIW, while I supported the debt ceiling compromise, I’m now sorry I did. There has been no attempt in the interim to rein in spending. Absent a multi-year, detailed, locked-in plan to reduce federal spending to 20% of GDP or less, I will not support an increase in the debt limit this time around. As Greece is finding out, when the debt collectors come calling, the chances of compromise are gone. I will no longer agree to mortgage my children’s future to retain, say, the hyper-political, wasteful, and redundant Department of Education. The ‘compromise’ begins with how many federal departments you are willing to cut. Zero is not an acceptable answer.

117 Anonymous June 4, 2012 at 9:35 AM

Begin with the most greedy one, the Department of Defense.

118 Anonymous June 4, 2012 at 10:35 AM

RWP at #77, I’m talking raw numbers. “Seasonally adjusted” allows for a fudge factor. In any case, Wisconsin did worse than any other state in employment number changes in 2011 (seasonally adjusted or not). Now you may not be a liar, but you are an expert at twisting facts to suit your agenda. Wondering if you really believe your tripe or is it just a battle tactic?

119 RWP June 4, 2012 at 11:00 AM

Anonymous Coward @ 10:35 am
RWP at #77, I’m talking raw numbers. “Seasonally adjusted” allows for a fudge factor.

Every serious credible economist uses seasonally adjusted unemployment figures. Annual fluctuations make raw numbers essentially meaningless month-to-month. And besides, seasonal adjustments don’t affect year-to-year numbers. Duh!

Wisconsin did worse than any other state in employment number changes in 2011 (seasonally adjusted or not).

Still lying. Wisconsin ranked 27th out of 51. Google ‘Over-the-Year Change in Unemployment Rates for States’. Given its unemployment is well below average, that Wisconsin still decreasing at the median rate is impressive.

Now you may not be a liar, but you are an expert at twisting facts to suit your agenda. Wondering if you really believe your tripe or is it just a battle tactic?

Pretty funny, given that so far I’ve debunked every one of your bogus claims with hard numbers. Why don’t you post under your real name, AC, so we can attach a handle to the lies?

120 Anonymous June 4, 2012 at 11:41 AM

Bringing out you same old tricks, RWP. We are talking about employment numbers, not percentages. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics has shown Wisconsin losing 33,900 jobs in 2011. Google it!

And it’s interesting how you don’t even try to debunk the fact that Wisconsin was the worst in the nation in employment change in 2011 (numbers not unemployment rate). Suppose you could use Walker’s trick of using quarterly numbers that no one else uses for these comparisons.

121 RWP June 4, 2012 at 11:52 AM

The US BLS has no such number. Doesn’t matter if you take Jan 2011 – Jan 2012, or April 2011 – April 2012, or March 2011 – March 2012 — employment increased in Wisconsin. You pulled -33,900 out of your ass. Admit it.

Data set LASST55000005. Read it and weep.

And it’s interesting how you don’t even try to debunk the fact that Wisconsin was the worst in the nation in employment change in 2011 (numbers not unemployment rate).

Given that New York was worst of the 50 states in percent change in unemployment, and New York is far larger than Wisconsin, that’s impossible.

I suspect you’re just depending on some sort of union propaganda, and are incapable of referencing the numbers yourself.

122 Anonymous June 4, 2012 at 12:42 PM

RWP, got the number from a right-wing site, Newsmax. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, which churns out reams of national and state employment data every month, has shown Wisconsin losing 33,900 jobs in 2011. And they are not the only site which makes the same claim.

Thanks for giving me the dataset you used. As expected, it was seasonally adjusted. And in looking at the info on the spreadsheet, each data value says reflects revised population controls, model reestimation and new seasonal adjustment. You (or anyone else) can do a “one-screen data search” on the BLS Local Area Unemployment Statistics page and find the non-seasonally adjusted data. Wisconsin employment in Jan 2011 was 257617, Jan 2012 was 229403.

Now I need to get back to my job. Unlike you, I’m expected to produce for my paycheck.

123 RWP June 4, 2012 at 1:31 PM

RWP, got the number from a right-wing site, Newsmax.

BWAHAHAHAHA!. Most conservatives I know think Newsmax is a joke.

Wisconsin employment in Jan 2011 was 257617, Jan 2012 was 229403.

Those are unemployment numbers, not employment numbers. Good grief!

Of course, you just made my point. Unemployment dropped by ~28,000. The labor force remained almost unchanged. Therefore employment rose by approximately 28000.

Now I need to get back to my job. Unlike you, I’m expected to produce for my paycheck.

I can’t imagine what you produce. Hopefully it doesn’t involve simple arithmetic or the manipulation of numbers.

124 Anonymous June 4, 2012 at 2:16 PM

My mistake, RWP, and I’ll gladly admit mine. Took the wrong column. It appears from the downloaded spreadsheet that the 2011 figures were revised with a model re-estimation. Articles reporting the job losses were numerous in established media back in April. Still doesn’t negate the fact that Wisconsin job growth is worse than all other states. Even Walker admits that the BLS stats show that, which is why he is promoting quarterly data which makes him look slightly better although that data is still subject to being revised. Can’t knock Obama’s prediction of under 8% unemployment and then completely ignore Walker’s promise of creating 250,000 new private sector jobs by 2014.

125 RWP June 4, 2012 at 8:28 PM

You’re not done yet. You’ve made multiple accusations I’m wrong, twisting figures, etc.., when it turns out you can’t back up yor posts with any real numbers, and when you try, you can’t even read a column straight. You haven’t posted a single substantiated fact. In fact, you’ve posted an unbroken series of untruths.

You owe me a series of apologies, but a simple two word apology will do.

126 Anonymous June 4, 2012 at 10:05 PM

RWP, I’m sorry. I am. You’re right and I should not have called you a liar. It turns out I was mistaken. But, having said that, I respectfully have to tell you I still believe Walker should be defeated and I think what he’s done is bad for the state of Wisconsin. I still feel how I feel; I just don’t have the support for it that I thought I had, that’s all. I’m sure it’s probably there somewhere.

127 Zeppo Marx June 4, 2012 at 11:56 PM

WTF was THAT all about?

128 RWP June 5, 2012 at 4:16 PM

OK, assuming 10:05 is the same person as previously, I also apologize for the insults.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: