dagblog - Comments for "Fact and Fiction in the “State of the Union” Debate"

This highlights a big problem

kgb999 — Wed, 02 Feb 2011 00:09:29 +0000

In reply to GOP Fires at the PentagonIn

This highlights a big problem with the current national debate. Policymakers from both parties are basically operating with default acceptance of the Norquistian concept that budgetary/taxation policy exists to "drown government a bathtub". Democrats have thus far failed at providing their own compelling counter-narrative integrating a balanced budget with a larger social-justice platform.

As such, the question of reallocating resources to more productive use is entirely absent from the national conversation. It's all about eliminating the role of government and handing the money that would have been spent directly to the millionaires by way of mega tax-cuts and loopholes.

Yay.

I don't really have anything

kgb999 — Tue, 01 Feb 2011 23:59:18 +0000

In reply to Fact and Fiction in the “State of the Union” Debate

I don't really have anything to add. Just wanted to note my appreciation for another great piece.

A sputnik moment is the

The Decider — Tue, 01 Feb 2011 02:36:40 +0000

In reply to Fact and Fiction in the “State of the Union” Debate

A sputnik moment is the moment that you realize that all you have to eat are sputs which is Russian for potatoes. Then you know that creeping socialicism has you by the balls. This was first written about by Alexander Soldierson, a Russian who wrote books to try to warn other Russians that only sputs was in there future.

Thanks for such an objective

CVille Dem — Mon, 31 Jan 2011 23:18:00 +0000

In reply to Fact and Fiction in the “State of the Union” Debate

Thanks for such an objective and informative post. It is the best commentary I have read.

GOP Fires at the PentagonIn

anonymous — Mon, 31 Jan 2011 21:33:51 +0000

In reply to Defense spending registers as

GOP Fires at the Pentagon

In this recent essay, Dreyfuss sounds excited at the potential of these conservatives unting with liberals against Neo-Con defense spenders. But he neglects thinking about what happens after the jobs related to that defense spending are gone-both governent jobs and related private sector jobs-when those conservatives might not be such friendlies.

Defense spending registers as

Verified Atheist — Mon, 31 Jan 2011 14:33:43 +0000

In reply to Fact and Fiction in the “State of the Union” Debate

Defense spending registers as larger (often substantially larger) than non-defense spending, and state-and-local–governments are responsible for almost two-thirds of total government spending.”

I find it ironic that many conservatives will credit Reagan's defense spending as the reason the Soviet Union collapsed - because trying to keep up broke their metaphorical back, but not consider the idea that it might one day break ours…

Great commentary, David, as

SleepinJeezus — Mon, 31 Jan 2011 13:15:20 +0000

In reply to Fact and Fiction in the “State of the Union” Debate

Great commentary, David, as usual.

In his SOTU speech, Obama was not talking to the issues confronting most of America, such as chronic joblessness, home foreclosures, etc.. He wasn't even talking to consumers, addressing their lack of confidence about their future prospects. Instead, he spoke to the "post-recovery" crowd. It was time to celebrate the improvement in our circumstance wherein "the stock market has come roaring back. Corporate profits are up. The economy is growing again."

The speech kinda' fell flat in my neighborhood. But I understand it was a hit on Wall Street and K Street.

Happy Days Are Here Again, eh?

dagblog - Comments for "Fact and Fiction in the “State of the Union” Debate"

This highlights a big problem

I don't really have anything

A sputnik moment is the

Thanks for such an objective

GOP Fires at the Pentagon﻿In

Defense spending registers as

Great commentary, David, as

GOP Fires at the PentagonIn