If you don’t like someone’s idea, be sure to call it an ‘agenda’.

March 4, 2013

No argument necessary. Forming an argument will not improve your chances of winning.

I caught this one on the twitter. It’s called, Gifquester: The Story of Sequestration in Handy GIF Form, and is brought to us courtesy of the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees union. It purports to be a cutesy little history on the sequestration, which is government’s pathetic attempt to shave a little acceleration from its spending increases. The good stuff—and by that I mean the empty-headed drivel that makes for fun blogging—begins two steps in:

Now, every so often Congress authorizes how much money the government can borrow. This is called the debt ceiling. Tea partiers claimed that the debt ceiling was too damn high.

But they were actually using the debt ceiling as leverage to advance their agenda of shrinking government services and cutting programs like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

After taking the U.S. economy to the brink of default, the right wing agreed … .

That’s the entire discussion on why the Tea Party wants to shrink government services. They, just, have this, agenda. That’s, just, what they do. That’s their thing. They shrink government. They’re government shrinkers. That’s their agenda. All you need to know about the economics of it is that the Tea Partiers have an agenda, and the good guys—the AFSCME—oppose that agenda.  Read the rest of this entry »

Advertisements

Links for August 1, 2011: Debt Stuff; A Block of MoJo; others….

August 1, 2011
  1. Hitting a debt limit is not the same as defaulting.

  2. Failure to raise the debt ceiling need not entail default; but it would still ding Uncle Sam’s credit rating.

    A more in depth discussion on the limit vs. default issue. I have not yet fully evaluated it.

  3. This is how Congress has been behaving for quite some time. Creditors may start to call soon.  Read the rest of this entry »


Links for March 15, 2011: Backlog O’Links #1

February 13, 2011
  • One way to stimulate an economy is to get your foot off of it’s neck.

  • It is a crime, work? So I guess I’m a criminal. It is a crime to be working. lol.

  • I’m glad this point of view is getting out there. On one hand, I can see how the gold standard would constrain a growing economy. On the other hand, no, I don’t trust those people with the printing press.

  • Read the rest of this entry »

  • Links for January 17, 2011: “An American Conversation” on Tucson, Drug Prohibition, etc.

    January 16, 2011
  • Reason.tv once again lives up to its name.

  • On January 5, 2011, a gang of gun-wielding thugs rampaged into a private residence and killed a grandfather of 12. My question is: Were the killers inspired by violent “drug war” rhetoric, or were they simply crazy? It is time for an American Conversation on the tragedy in Framingham. Raids like this are conducted over 100 times each day across America. Yes, people die.

  • Vodpod videos no longer available.

    ANN COULTER: I have one statement for you: the welfare state. No, people can not do whatever they want to do and live however they want to live, as long as Ann has to pay for it, when they can’t hold a job and raise their own kids and buy their own food and pay for their own rent. You get rid of the welfare state and we’ll talk about people sitting home and shooting heroin all day, but right now, oh, and now I have to pay for their health care!

    JOHN STOSSEL: So because we have a social welfare system, we have to give up these other freedoms?

    ANN: Yeah, as long as Ann is paying for it.

    Ann Coulter is a little more forthright than the average prohibitionist. Her argument is that since the government is forcing her to pay for something, then it might as well be what she wants most of all, which is to bastille her fellow citizens when she disapproves of their private, personal conduct. If she weren’t forced to pay for something, she might then be open to not paying out of her own pocket to imprison people who have committed no crimes against her or others.

    If Ann doesn’t want government health care money and living expenses to go to drug addicts, then her solution is counter-productive. Even prior to ObamaCare, the only people in the United States of America who have been constitutionally entitled to state-funded health care have been prisoners. Her argument, essentially, is: “I don’t want to pay for drug addicts’ health care food, room, and board, but I love throwing them all in jail, where I’m guaranteed to pay for all of their health care, food, room, and board. It is more important to Ann that we throw drug users in jail than it is that we save Ann’s tax money.”

    That is the logic of prohibition. For more hemming, hawing, evading, and stammering, see part 2:

    Vodpod videos no longer available.

    You can decide for yourselves whether the logic of prohibition wins the day. Read the rest of this entry »


  • Links for October 25, 2010: Interview with Marakay Rogers, Libertarian Candidate for Pennsylvania Governor; More “Quantitative Easing” to Come; others….

    October 24, 2010

      Marakay Rogers (OurCampaigns.com)

    1. Not a great interview; It sticks mainly to some few libertarian talking points, but you won’t hear from her during the gubernatorial debate tonight.

    2. The BBC explains “quantitative easing”.

    3. For those who aren’t in the know, “quantitative easing” is doublespeak for printing money.

    4. Read the rest of this entry »


    Links for September 27, 2010: Much Ado about the Tea Party, Unequal Justice Before the Law, others…

    September 26, 2010

    Anyone for Tea? (photo: miya)

    1. One sign of the tea party movement’s success is that the term “tea party” is becoming an all-purpose smear term for any more-or-less right-wing person or activity that the writer doesn’t like. In fact, I think “Tea Party” is replacing “neocon” as an all-purpose word for “the people I hate.”

    2. I’m glad we got that out of the way. Maybe after tea-partiers learn to “eye” people correctly, we can graduate to talking about the real issues.

    3. No longer content with bellowing accusations of racism, I see we’ve graduated to accusations of terrorism. Is Jen Phillips seems more interested in having the whole of the Tea Party movement added to the list of terror threats than she is in having Climate Ground Zero removed—for little more than supporting and defending the Second Amendment. Read the rest of this entry »


    Backlog O’Links for August 30, 2010: Old stuff that’s not even newsworthy anymore.

    July 25, 2010
    1. World Socialist Party (US) | Making Bread

      Daryl Larson, who farms 1,500 acres in Kansas sold nearly half of his wheat crop but will keep the rest in the silo in the expectation that the prices will at least climb further. Most analysts would concur with Mr Larson’s strategy of holding on to some grain for added profit. The [Socialist Party of Great Britain] only asks: why do some in this world face destitution and hunger, while others hoard food to obtain higher profits?

      Farm subsidies complicate the issue, but the simple answer is: Daryl Larson, the producer of the food, has the perfect right to do anything he pleases with it. He was under no obligation to make the food. Similarly, he is under no obligation to distribute the food. If Mr. Larson were forced to sell his grain at prices he did find agreeable, he probably not stay in the wheat business for very long.

      If we added farm subsidies into the mix, then, depending on why the subsidies were paid in the first place, there could be a basis upon which to demand that Mr. Larson make some concessions to taxpayers….

    2. AFL-CIO NOW BLOG | Public to Lawmakers: Tax the Rich1) Aren’t you glad that the public has no authority to confiscate and redistribute your private property?? 2)Never trust anyone who classifies tax cuts as ‘spending’. 3) This article quotes labor secretary Robert Reich who believes that the ‘fundamental cause’ of the financial crisis is wealth disparity. If not for wealth disparity, the argument goes, Americans would not have needed to borrow so much. I’ve never heard this one before…  Read the rest of this entry »