Current Article

Bush’s Tax Cuts = Deficit

By SusanUnPC on June 27, 2007 at 9:51 PM in Current Affairs

By LESLIE, a regular contributor to this blog

From Rep. Nancy Pelosi’s blog The Gavel:

Rep. Edwards: “I find it interesting that we’re holding this hearing today on the impact of foreign-held US national debt and on the same day on the front page of the Washington Post there is the third part of a four part series talking about how behind the scenes it was Vice President Cheney who was the architect of the Bush economic policies that led to the largest deficits in American history. My hope is today’s hearing will debunk Mr. Cheney’s flat-out wrong statement, or declaration that deficits don’t matter. I think while we disagree on the origins of the deficit, I would hope there would be bipartisan agreement that deficits do matter, that Vice President Cheney, the architect of the Bush economic policy, was dead wrong in his declaration. [Republican Rep. Paul Ryan] talked a little bit, Mr. Orszag about the basis of the deficit. He made a statement, I wrote it down – tax relief isn’t the reason for deficit. Let me ask you a question: based on your analysis for fiscal year 2007, what percent of this year’s deficits is the result of the tax cuts passed since 2001?”

Dr. Orszag: “I’m going to have to give you the exact number later, and it depends how you do the accounting, but the revenue effect of the 2001 and 2003 tax legislation is roughly one and a half percent of GDP, which is about the size of the federal deficit today.”

Rep. Edwards: “So put that in lay terms, had we not had the tax cuts passed since 2001, according to CBO analysis, the deficit would be how much smaller?”

Dr. Orszag: “If you just do a simple accounting exercise that takes that estimated revenue effect from the Joint Committee on Taxation and compare it to today’s deficit, it would roughly eliminate the deficit.”

Rep. Xavier Becerra (CA-31) questions the Director of the Congressional Budget Office on whether the United States has ever given out tax cuts to the wealthy during a time of war….here.

According to the Center for American Progress:

One in eight Americans now lives in poverty. A family of four is considered poor if the family’s income is below $19,971—a bar far below what most people believe a family needs to get by. Still, using this measure, 12.6 percent of all Americans were poor in 2005, and more than 90 million people (31 percent of all Americans) had incomes below 200 percent of federal poverty thresholds.
Millions of Americans will spend at least one year in poverty at some point in their lives. One third of all Americans will experience poverty within a 13-year period. In that period, one in 10 Americans are poor for most of the time, and one in 20 are poor for 10 or more years.
Poverty in the United States is far higher than in many other developed nations. At the turn of the 21st century, the United States ranked 24th among 25 countries when measuring the share of the population below 50 percent of median income.
Inequality has reached record highs. The richest 1 percent of Americans in 2005 held the largest share of the nation’s income (19 percent) since 1929. At the same time, the poorest 20 percent of Americans held only 3.4 percent of the nation’s income.

Guthman Bey

Leslie’s graph is completely misleading. What matters aren’t absolute deficit numbers, but the deficit relative to GDP. The US Federal deficit for 2007 is expected to come in at around 1% of GDP, which is astonishingly low, given that we have a war going on and haad a tax cut. Hate Bush all you like, but his economy is on steroids.
Name

Buffet of praise, cash for Hil at Buffett dinner

Billionaire Warren Buffett called Hillary Clinton “the person to run this country” at a private dinner in Manhattan last night, according to one attendee.

“Hillary Rodham Clinton has the same goals that I do,” said Buffett, according to New School Dean Fred Hochberg. “She is the person for the White House.”

Asked how the markets would fare under her administration, Buffett said, “Ten years out, they’ll be far more up with Hillary than any of the Republicans running now,” according to Hochberg.

http://tinyurl.com/yog3wu
Patrick Henry

Another worthy FOCUS Susan..

I keep track of our growing National Debt
and the Mindless Burden the Bush administration has put on the Middle class..Poor and elderly..
while exercising Policys that help the Rich and Select Corporate and his Supporters..

I wonder if he even realizes How much He has Undermined the United States through His Domestic and Foreign Policys..or at what point of this crisis..the main stream media and America will Wake Up and get Focused and Resolved ..

There has been more than enough Information now Made public and exposed
that justifys the VALID Concerns many like You…Larry..Pat Lang and others have been Raising for a long time Now..

and the Dangers and threats go far beyond what we discuss it..all one has to do is Read or hear Most major News Storys and Headlines..

As Pat lang once said..”Something Wicked this Way Cometh..”

That is not overblow or Alarmist..that is Reality..

We need the Best Minds and Leadership America can find ..

this is beyond Partisan politics and Bickering..or racial or Ethnical Differences..

Events will now Effect All of Us..together..Indiscriminately..

Just like they did on 9/11..and during other Disasters..

The collapse of the American dollar and Economy are not Unrealistic..

Neither are America losing Friends and Allies around the World..

Neither is America waking up to its false and Assumed Sense of Security..

What is the Full extent of the Bush Legacy..?

or comparisons with past Historical Events..?

Time will tell..

Thank you who Keep Watch..
Leslie

Guthman,
The Congressional Budget Office created the graph, not me. The chart is based on the CBO’s numbers, so take it up with them.

The economy is on “steroids”? For whom?!
http://noquarter.typepad.com susanUnPC

Not for the poor who need to buy milk, and all milk products — the prices are going to shoot up.
http://cujo359.blogspot.com Cujo359

Guthman’s first point is a good one, I think, The deficit relative to the GDP is a more meaningful number. His second assertion, that the economy is on steroids, is pure nonsense. When it hasn’t been flat the economy’s been looking like a punch-drunk boxer about to go down. Now that the housing market’s gone flat, I think it’s about to hit the canvas.
Montag

Look, the big worry during the 2000 election was that if Gore was elected he would pay off the deficit TOO FAST! We would be forced to buy back government bonds before they had reached maturity and have to pay a penalty, thus losing money. Mr. Bush promised NOT to do that and he’s kept his promise. Retiring government debt is NOT a problem now. He’s truly a “reformer with results.”
J

the gop’s tax cuts actually are a gutting of our national infrastructure at the expense of the many for the profit of but a few. its called legalized stealing from the majority for the benefit of but a handful.

the french had a good system of handling such types who stole from the nation, its’ called the guillotine, just ask Marie Antoinette.
Guthman Bey

Cujo,
where are the record tax revenues coming from that have brought the deficit back down to an estimated 1%/GDP for 2007? From people who are making money clearly. Collectively these people and companies are called “the economy”. An economy that has managed to produce enough tax revenue to completely offset the giant fiscal double whammies that are the Iraq War and Bush’s tax cuts is certainly doing exceedingly well (much better than anyone expected) and is certainly not punch drunk. Why deny it?
MJW

You liberals are profoundly astonishing. Let me see if I get this right, Rich people are evil, they in fact pay much more in taxes and stimulate the economy far better than the lot of us, but again they’re evil. Ok, I got it, umm.. only we are able to enjoy freedom, all others be damned…. Ok, I get that. Ann Coulter is evil but Bill Maher is a saint. (Nothing Said about wanting Republicans to die, but as soon as Ann says Edwards should die you get whinny liberals in a huff) You’ve had control of congress for over 6 months, and haven’t done anything you promised (big shocker) Oh, and Ted Kennedy is still a drunken SOB that got away with murder. Be proud my liberal dolts!!!
mudkitty

Then GB…if we have “enough” tax revenue, as you say, why not fund SSI, rather than run around like chickens yelling the sky is falling? If there’s enough tax revenue, why cut back funding on Head Start and school lunches. Why no Manhatten Project when it comes to renewable energy sources?

As for the economy on steroids…are you a paid propagandist? Why can’t ordinary people save? And now that the housing mkt has gone south, the 2% for whom the economy is going well, will sweep in and bottom feed, just like at the turn of the previous century. It’s a land grab folks. And the Bushies are just running out the clock, raiding the tresury.

And that ain’t the half of it.

GB, I think you are full of baloney.
Leslie

MJW,
Please quote the section of my post that says “the rich are evil”?
mudkitty

MJW, every single word in you comment is a lie, including the “ands and the thes.”

Liberals don’t think rich people are evil. There are lots of liberals who are rich, dufus.

It’s always been false that the rich pay more taxes than the middle class per capita. Especially under Republicans. Rupert Murdoch, just for starters, hasn’t paid taxes in two years…the rich-right know how to get away with it.

Ann Coulter IS evil. Bill Marer is no saint, but he’s funny without being cruel. And he’s truthful, where as Coulter is a lying bully, who debates by being loud and intimidating…loud, confident and wrong.

Pelosi’s congress passed their 100 day legislation in 39 days, ignoramus!

And Ted Kennedy has been sober for years now, you gossipy, know-nobody.

As for TK – and murder; there’s no statute of limitations on murder, so if you have any evidence that the Gonzales, or the Cappaquidick DA’s don’t have, then I suggest you bring it forward, otherwise you’re obstructing justice. If TK is a murderer, why does Bushie like him so much, and why does he try to buddy up to him?

On the other hand, if you don’t have any evidence, and your just spouting your ancient rightwing bullshit, let me tell you, it’s irrelevant to the subject at hand, meaning, since I have to point it out to you, the topic of the post.

If you don’t like liberals, you don’t have to come here, MJW, but you obviously take perverse pleasure in having your ass handed to you.
mudkitty

Then GB…if we have “enough” tax revenue, as you say, why not fund SSI, rather than run around like chickens yelling the sky is falling? If there’s enough tax revenue, why cut back funding on Head Start and school lunches. Why no Manhatten Project when it comes to renewable energy sources?

As for the economy on steroids…are you a paid propagandist? Why can’t ordinary people save? And now that the housing mkt has gone south, the 2% for whom the economy is going well, will sweep in and bottom feed, just like at the turn of the previous century. It’s a land grab folks. And the Bushies are just running out the clock, raiding the tresury.

And that ain’t the half of it.

GB, I think you are full of baloney.
mudkitty

Then GB…if we have “enough” tax revenue, as you say, why not fund SSI, rather than run around like chickens yelling the sky is falling? If there’s enough tax revenue, why cut back funding on Head Start and school lunches. Why no Manhatten Project when it comes to renewable energy sources?

As for the economy on steroids…are you a paid propagandist? Why can’t ordinary people save? And now that the housing mkt has gone south, the 2% for whom the economy is going well, will sweep in and bottom feed, just like at the turn of the previous century. It’s a land grab folks. And the Bushies are just running out the clock, raiding the tresury.

And that ain’t the half of it.

GB, I think you are full of baloney.
mudkitty

Apologies for the multiple postings…my bad.
Leslie

MJW writes: “Rich people…in fact pay much more in taxes and stimulate the economy far better than the lot of us….”
–

Warren Buffett, the third-richest person in the world recently said, “he was taxed at 17.7 percent on his taxable income of more than $46 million. His receptionist was taxed at about 30 percent.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/27/AR2007062700097.html

There are far more middle income and low income people, such as Buffet’s secretary, paying their fair share in taxes than there are Warren Buffets, who pay about half as much in taxes. So please explain, why you think rich people pay more in taxes?

Have you considered who benefits the most from the taxes we pay? For example: How much of our tax money goes to private defense companies, such as Boeing, thus shifting public wealth from ordinary taxpayers to private owners. Consider the $15 billion bailout of the airlines right after 9/11. Consider how many no-bid contracts Halliburton has received, and how much of those billions in our tax dollars have been allegedly wasted.

Consider that CEOs are making something like 200x what their employees are making, while the minimum wage received its first increase in 10 years.

Consider what it takes to achieve wealth: It can only be achieved using other people’s money through infrastructure [roads, highways, internet, satellites, etc.] paid for with our tax dollars, through the transfers of wealth [see above], through government subsidies such as tax breaks, no-bid contracts, etc. For example: Where would Silicon Valley be if it hadn’t been for all the government support it received in research and development, infrastructure, etc.

The rich and the poor each ought to pay their fair share in taxes. Asking for fair treatment doesn’t make anyone evil.
Leslie

To Guthman Bey,
who believes the economy is on “steroids,” comes this report from WaPo:

“Economic Growth Slows to 0.7 Percent Pace in 1st Quarter, Weakest in More Than 4 Years”

http://rawstory.com/showarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fbiz.yahoo.com%2Fap%2F070628%2Feconomy.html%3F.v%3D6
http://noquarter.typepad.com susanUnPC

TO PONDER:

[QUOTE] Drive across the empty reaches of the Great Plains, from the lost promise of Valentine, Neb., to the shadowless side roads into Sunray, Tex., and what you see is a land that has lost its purpose. Many of the towns set in this infinity of flat have a listless look, with shuttered main streets and schools given over to the grave.

With upwards of $20 billion a year in federal payments going to a select few in farm country, you would think that these troubled counties would have a more vigorous pulse. After all, corn and wheat prices are at record highs, and big manses here and there, with Hummers in limestone driveways, indicate that somebody is doing well.

It would be one thing if the despair and disparity in farm country were the sole products of history, if time had simply passed it all by. But it comes as a jolt to realize that government policy is much to blame.

The Red State welfare program, also known as the farm subsidy system, showers most of its tax dollars on the richest farmers, often people with no dirt under their fingernails, at the expense of everybody else trying to work the land. Like urban welfare before reform, agriculture subsidies reward those who can work the system — farming the government, as they call it around the diner.

And when you dare ask about the farmer in Colorado who received more than $2 million in handouts, or all those absentee landowners collecting their $150,000 government checks in gilded urban ZIP codes, the reaction is: it’s none of your business.[/QUOTE]

From Tim Egan’s column in today’s NYT:
http://select.nytimes.com/2007/06/28/opinion/28egan.html?hp

(If anyone wants to read it in full, but hasn’t access, send me an e-mail and I’ll e-mail it to you.)
Patrick Henry

Mudkitty..

Thanks for your comments..They were very well said..and right on..

Yes..The economy may appear to be on Steroids..Drugging up of the numbers to make People feel good.. and keep the Market Stimulated and Sedated..just like all the other Pill pushing..Feel good..Paths to happiness..we see in Advertising..

I think the economy is just as Artifical as everything else in America…People and The Government are Borrowing from YING to pay YANG for Goods Cheaply made in Foreign Countries so they can get the money back ..one way or the other..

Look at Credit Card debt..or savings Habits..Look at the growing cost of Living..Housing Costs..Tax Demands…Levys..and burdens on People and taxpayers…especially the Middle class and Poor.. while Bush and the republicans started a WAR..Cut Taxs for the Rich..gave Corporations more breaks..Created HUGH Debt..and Doubled the Cost of Living in several areas..

When the Bubble Breaks from all that Pressure..

It will look Worse that All Those Floods Combined in TEXAS..

But The Rich and priviledged don’t Care..they think they are protected and Have the High ground..and will never have to Wade..Waist Deep through the Polluted Waters..

There are many Ways ofDrugging up..and DOPING and DUPPING..People…….

Steroids and all..

Our whole Country Needs REHAB..
Leslie

MJW wrote: “Ok, I get that. Ann Coulter is evil but Bill Maher is a saint. (Nothing Said about wanting Republicans to die, but as soon as Ann says Edwards should die you get whinny liberals in a huff)”

Please tell us who you’re referring to? Who on the left has appeared on MSNBC’s Hardball or any of the other national media affiliates expressing the wish that Republicans die?
Leslie

Just in case anyone needs a reminder, here are quotes by Ann Coulter asking that Democrats be murdered, calling them traitors and equating them with terrorists that deserve to be treated the same way, etc.:

“If I’m going to say anything about John Edwards in the future, I’ll just wish he had been killed in a terrorist assassination plot.”

“My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building.”

“When contemplating college liberals, you really regret once again that John Walker is not getting the death penalty. We need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals, by making them realize that they can be killed, too. Otherwise, they will turn out to be outright traitors.”

Liberalism And Terrorism: Different Stages Of Same Disease.” Yes, this is the real title of an Ann Coulter essay July 2002.

“Liberals have a preternatural gift for striking a position on the side of treason,” she writes on the first page of the book [Treason]. “Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence.” (p. 1)

“Whether they are defending the Soviet Union or bleating for Saddam Hussein, liberals are always against America. They are either traitors or idiots, and on the matter of America’s self-preservation, the difference is irrelevant. Fifty years of treason hasn’t slowed them down.” (p. 16, Treason)

“Liberals become indignant when you question their patriotism, but simultaneously work overtime to give terrorists a cushion for the next attack and laugh at dumb Americans who love their country and hate the enemy.”

“While the form of treachery varies slightly from case to case, liberals always manage to take the position that most undermines American security.”
http://noquarter.typepad.com susanUnPC

Tom Shales, WaPo:

[QUOTE] To look at the spectacle from yet another perspective, watching Hilton for an hour was in its way more edifying and encouraging than enduring more hateful rants from publicity hound Ann Coulter on MSNBC’s “Hardball With Chris Matthews” the night before. Matthews was still discussing the Coulter appearance on his show last night. Next to Coulter, Paris Hilton is pure refreshment. [/QUOTE]

Appalling as Coulter’s remarks were, it was astounding how much people at Daily Kos got exercised about her tripe. There were numerous badly-written, over-the-top, hyper-emotional diaries in the Rec list on Coulter v. Edwards.

Ann Coulter is simply selling books. She sold a lot more on Tuesday.

Elizabeth and John Edwards seized on the opportunity to raise money for their campaign. (They’re fine people, but their reactions were transparently about getting attention for his flagging candidacy.)

Elizabeth Edwards wrote a four- or five-sentence diary at Daily Kos last evening that said NOTHING… yet it shot to the top of the Rec list. It was kind of obvious. (The Daily Kos crowd overwhelmingly supports Edwards’ candidacy, far more than Obama’s, by the way.)

(I really like Mrs. Edwards, and think she’s a true brain and highly articulate, so it was a shock to see her post a diary *devoid* of content except that she and John were taking calls from house parties — which are all about raising money.)

If we shut up about Coulter, we won’t abet her selling books. Chris Matthews should know that, but is too desperate to raise his own paltry ratings. And, if Edwards’ campaign were going well, he wouldn’t use Coulter to raise money and get attention.
Leslie

Susan,
Unbelievable…Tom Shales. So if we get upset when Ann Coulter gets TV face time to call for a presidential candidates’ murder, mocks their dead children, calls them fags–we’re just being hysterical or we have ulterior $$ motives. But Coulter is simply selling books. Nothing else. Right.
Crackers

Susan, do you ever critically examine your own candidate, Hillary, and post it here? If I didn’t do it, would it get done?

I was fully expecting you to jump on this one, and you did. My take is that Hillary has tons more baggage than both the Edwards, but by God, SHE’S A WOMAN and is therefore pure.

I’m sorry to say that I’ve had enough of this blog. You are patently transparent, and I’m feeling more and more that is not a “Larry” blog, but a “Susan” one.

Fund-raising is a fact of life for all candidates, including your own Hillary, who takes money from THOSE WOULD HARM US. Dammit all, get real.

Your “They’re fine people BUT” patronizing is just too much to stomach.

See ya.
http://noquarter.typepad.com susanUnPC

Her remarks surely are upsetting. But it’s her modus operandi — she says something outrageous that the left reacts to, and ‘wingers notice and buy her books.

I wasn’t referring to comments here about Coulter. It’s doubtful that’d help her sell books. But the fairly hysterical reactions at Daily Kos are sopped up by the right and Coulter, who regularly check DK for “juice” with which to mock the left.

It’d be better to starve her of the attention she craves and needs to make money.

It’s not like there’s a prayer of shaming her for her remarks. Sad, yes. But she’s a sicko goofball best left marginalized as much as possible.
Leslie

I dunno Susan, Coulter appears to sell books pretty well whether we get upset or not. And she doesn’t need DK’s help getting attention either. Chris Matthews and others are willing to give it to her on national TV, on the news for chrissakes. So she’s not being marginalized at all. That’s why she deserves to be called out.
Leslie

On the other hand, I hear what you’re saying about sounding hysterical.
Leslie

Susan,
Heh, one thing about bullies, they don’t like to be on the receiving end of their own treatment. Apparently, Elizabeth Edwards’ call to Coulter on MSNBC’s Hardball is causing Coulter to have a meltdown.

http://electioncentral.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2007/jun/28/ann_coulter_losing_it_under_pressure_calls_elizabeth_edwards_a_harridan
http://noquarter.typepad.com susanUnPC

That’s interesting, Leslie. I just listened. The thing is that, if one listened to it as a “fan” of Coulter’s, one would feel sympathy for her being upset and feeling attacked. Just because Election Central says she’s losing it, doesn’t mean that’s how it came off to her supporters.

::::::

Crackers, I’m truly sorry that you make my case that some on the left are as hard-headed and -hearted as those on the right. You’ve been on a warpath since I dared mentioned I support Hilltary, and it’s unacceptable to you. Talk about a chilling effect.

My biggest fear is that that kind of hard-headed rejection-ism is what will install a Mitt Romney or Fred Thompson as president in ’09.

Support the Edwards. You’ve made a reasonable choice. They ARE fine people. No disrespect was intended. I was thrilled when Kerry chose Edwards as his running mate. I gave Edwards long consideration myself. And Bill Richardson. And Obama. I decided to back Sen. Clinton. It is, or was, a free country.
http://noquarter.typepad.com susanUnPC

Btw, Crackers. I’m human too, and your post hurt my feelings.

This is Larry’s blog but he’s clearly very busy or he’d post every day. I’m just “filler,” and would like to be regarded as nothing more … I try to make it worthwhile, but I sure don’t expect anyone to find it of more import than that.

It’s really great that Leslie sends me items to post. I’ve asked others to do so, but haven’t heard back.

And we’re trying to get Angry Rakkasan to post more here, but he’s having technical issues.

Soon enough, I’ll be out of commission for a while — probably weeks — and you’ll get a break.
Patrick Henry

Crackers…I enjoy your input here buddy..but your comment above to susan was not like you and out of line..I can understand tht she felt it hurtful..Susan makes a great contribution to this Site..every day…and she is Committed..and caring..

She is able to Keep NQ going with Her Threads and research only because she is basically house bound with a very painful Disability..and she just can’t enjoy Life in the Way most of us take for grant..

so she still is trying to Make a contribution..and i appreciate every word she writes..in such an Intelligent and Thoughful way..

She has my Best Wishes and RESPECT Always..
lester

the tax cuts are fine. there should be more of them. the problem is there weren’t spending cuts to go along with them. we play PLENTY of taxes. the problem is the budget: about 3 trillion this year. I realize there are mainly lefties at this board, but believe me when I tell you the department of education and the department of enrgy are about as uselful to us as the iraq war. It’s ALL gotta go.
Shirin

Look, Crackers, I don’t like Hillary either, for lots of very substantive reasons, but get real! Susan is absolutely entitled to express her support for Hillary, and her reasons for that support. By the same token, she is not obligated to post criticisms of her, and is quite right to leave that job for those like you and I, who are opposed to her.

Stop getting personal, and stop attacking on people just because you disagree with them.
http://noquarter.typepad.com susanUnPC

Thanks, Patrick Henry and Shirin. I’m not having a good time these days and it’s very hard to think, let alone write.

BTW: There’s a Democratic presidential debate tonight. Sadly, the Seattle/Tacoma PBS stations aren’t showing it live — many PBS affiliates are airing it at a later time. But people can watch live here:
All-American Presidential Forums
Tune in tonight at 9:00 pm ET for a live Q&A with Democratic presidential candidates, moderated by Tavis Smiley.
http://www.pbs.org/
Butters

Crack,

Give the gal a break. Argue the issue not the person. Comments don’t get censored here — you have a friendly place to speak and be considered…so go ahead! Let’s have a nice pro’s and cons argument on potential Bush replacements.

Over the months, NQ has dealt with the gory details of why almost any candidate is an improvement — and Susan has put in a lot of legwork doing so (so much so that she now needs both joints replaced

P.S. I prefer Obama, but Hillary sure would piss off the correct type. I have no idea on what the Bloomberg candidacy will do. He’s no Ross Perot, so who does he cut into? Add to that, I don’t think Hillary can win in a general election…why? I don’t know, just a gut thing.
Shirin

Obama is not much better than Hillary. He has made it clear he would leave troops in Iraq, and worse yet, he has drunk so much of the Iran Kool Aid that he thinks nuking them is an option.

Ron Paul is looking much better than either one of them.
Shirin

For what it’s worth, I don’t think sympathy for Susan’s current medical troubles should be the biggest reason – or even a major reason for treating her decently.

Treat her right because she is an intelligent, thinking, committed, caring human being who helps us stay informed and in touch, and gives us lots of interesting ideas and information to chew on. Suggesting that people should be nice to her because she is going through some tough personal things is more than a tad patronizing in my view.
http://noquarter.typepad.com susanUnPC

One reason I posted the link to David Talbot’s piece on JFK is that he gets into great detail on how JFK had to come across as very tough on national defense and standing up to other nations — he’d seen how Adlai Stevenson was decimated for being perceived as too much of a pacifist intellectual. The first reason was so he could get elected … a peacenik wouldn’t have a prayer. The second reason is he had to deal with the vehement war hawks by not appearing like a complete pansy in contrast.

(Talbot also describes in depth Kennedy’s intimate famliarity with war, the deaths of his family members in WWII, and his utter disdain for war.)

I think that Obama understands that game too. So does Hillary Clinton.

And I guarantee you that if Richardson or any other candidates who’ve promised immediate total withdrawal got the presidency, they’d take some time to accomplish it. Otherwise, it’d be disastrous politically and for relationships with the military and to stave off critics, so they must go about it cautiously but deliberately. They’d get there. I have no doubt about that.

Richardson has said he’d dispense with Iraq on Day One. Let’s say he does. Besides it taking up to a year to pull out the troops, let’s say Baghdad erupts citywide in flames … the attacks on Richardson would be relentless and he’d be so embattled he couldn’t get to his Day Two objective.

I.e., it requires truly complex strategic thinking to accomplish objectives and sometimes a lot of sleight of hand, as well as a bit of time.

P.S. I’m not worried that a President Obama would bomb, bomb, bomb Iran. But he knows he has to talk tough. My hunch is that that’s what he’s doing. And I’m sure he would launch extensive diplomatic initiatives. So would Clinton, Edwards, Richardson, etc.
Shirin

Susan, at this point, I don’t know how to judge any candidate’s position on Iraq or Iran except for 1) their history on Iraq, 2) a few other factors, such as how much they grovel in front of AIPAC and Israel, 3) what they are saying they would or would not do.

Hillary Clinton has a dismal record on Iraq. In fact, it has only been recently that she began to back away from a position that looked for all the world like supporting it. And she hasn’t backed far enough away, since she has stated explicitly that she would maintain a troop presence there (in other words, she would fulfill the neocon dream of keeping those permanent – excuse me, enduring – bases filled with troops, war machines, and materiel. As far as I know she has not said anything one way or the other about the Regional Imperial Command and Control Center in Baghdad, or, as important, oil and that onerous oil law.

She kowtows to AIPAC and other Israel interests every chance she gets, even to the point of publicly humiliating Muslim supporters by making a P.R. stunt out of returning their campaign donations in response to expressions of “concern” by pro-Israel supporters. She appears quite enamoured of Israel, and totally permissive of its atrociously criminal behavour. AND she has all but explicitly stated that she thinks nuking Iraq is a perfectly good option.

Obama really doesn’t have much of a history on Iraq. he SAYS he would have voted against the invasion, and chances are he would have, but we will never know. He has indicated that he would maintain a troop presence there – again fulfilling the neocon dream of permanent bases. He seems more restrained than Hillary is in his kowtowing to AIPAC et al., and his adulation of Israel and its right to act virtuous while ethnically cleansing both in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, and even its own “equal” Palestinian citizens inside its own borders, destroying everything Palestinian, and killing Palestinian kids on a regular basis (oh, but Israel doesn’t TARGET civilians, its troops just have terrible TERRIBLE aim with their bombs and bullets, so they just accidentally kill a lot of them on a regular basis).

Based on the only things I can judge by, Obama is only marginally better than Hillary, and neither one is someone I can support.

I really wish someone would draft Rocky Anderson!
Shirin

PS Either Hillary and Obama are telling the truth about their positions and what they would do, in which case they are dangerous, or they are lying, in which case they are just like every other politician – liars with no integrity at all.

Either option is bad.

PPS I also do not care for the fact that Hillary is trying to blame the Iraqis for not fixing everything all nice after what the Bush regime has done to the country and the society. That’s the criminal blaming the victim, and it is – dare I say it? – racist.
http://noquarter.typepad.com susanUnPC

Rocky IS cool. It’s amazing he got elected in SLC.

It’s really hard to tell if people mean what they say or say what they mean. They’re ALL worried about the general election and have to avoid being decimated by the GOP for being pacifists. Tricky.

Then there’s the big X factor. If they were president, could they really accomplish what they advocate?

It’s one thing to talk a good game. It’s quite another to be able to deliver. Because that takes clever political savvy — including some mind games and sleight of hand — and lots of established alliances in Congress and internationally.

(Which is another reason I never understood the people who were for Nader. Nader would have had no alliances in Congress or any party constituency, and that would have crippled him, no matter how loudly he proclaimed his views.)

Hey, I’m going to support the Democratic nominee. If I could bring myself to support Kerry after being a diehard Dean supporter (his anti-Iraq-war stance was the first big reason I went for Dean), I can bring myself to support any of these people.
Butters

Thoughts on Wesley Clark?

http://www.draftwesleyclark.com/clark_2008.htm
taters

Susan,
You’re a gem and you really hold it together here. However, regarding what you wrote –
“I’m just “filler,” and would like to be regarded as nothing more ..” I never thought I would say this to you but that is blatantly untrue. You’re one of my faves in the blogosphere and I hold you in very high regard for the qualities that I tend to admire in my fellow human beings. Things like intelligence, fairness, talent, warmth, a sense of humor, compassion and there’s a few I missed.

You and Larry are a team, a great team. And Susan, I’m a fan so when I read those words of yours, it tore me up.
You’re gold, not filler.
taters

Butters,
That’s my guy. I’ll be happy to weigh in tomorrow.
Chris Vosburg

Guthman Bey writes: “Leslie’s graph is completely misleading. What matters aren’t absolute deficit numbers, but the deficit relative to GDP.”

[sigh] There’s an old joke, punchline of which is “yes, we lose money on everything we sell, but we make it up in volume.” And then there’s the one about the guys who go into business selling tomatoes, buying them at a dime each and selling them at a dime each. They conclude after review that need a bigger truck.

Guthman, you won’t find these jokes funny, I guess, because exactly like the guys in them we are laughing at, you claim that gross is significant and profit is not.

In other words, you’re either a fool or a liar.

Which is it?
Patrick Henry

Taters.

Beautifully said..and I agree with every word..I an’t say enough good things about Susan..except that she is a wonderful human being and everything you said and more..

I look up to BOTH of you..
http://cujo359.blogspot.com Cujo359

SusanUnPC, I’d say shake it off. You’re doing fine here. I don’t see Crackers advertising a blog of his own here. I’m willing to bet that he doesn’t have one, or he’d appreciate the work involved and leave quietly if it weren’t to his liking.

I disagree with you about Anne Coulter, though. Ignoring her just let her get where she is now. She and her fans need to realize what she and they are, and we’re just the guys (and gals) to explain it to them. Extra points if you can be as nice about it as Elizabeth Edwards was.

Guthman Bey, the best growth this economy has managed in the last six years is anemic. Usually, it’s barely grown at all, as for instance in the article Leslie pointed out. And Mudkitty’s right, too. I wouldn’t be crowing about deficits that don’t include the SSI and Medicare entitlements obligations, which those numbers almost certainly do. During Clinton’s presidency there was a surplus that was almost as large as the current deficit, and the only people who paid more taxes were the rich.
taters

Thanks PH. I like what you said upstream.

Leslie,
Peter Orszag is brilliant. ( I like Gene Sperling too. ) He has a remarkable ability to take something complex and make it understandable to a lay person such as me.
I saw him debate Michael Tanner of the Cato Institute on Social Security. It was well done and Orszag shined. Thanks for posting this Leslie.

Cujo, well said. It looks like Susan shook it off by her next post.

Messr. Vosburgh – Did you see what Retired wrote to you on the Swamp Fox thread?

Crackers,
I regret that you feel that way, I would hope that you might consider sticking around. But stay or go – I believe you owe an apology.
Leslie

Thanks Taters, Vosburgh et al for your economic comments. Especially because I’m a lay person also and couldn’t counter Guthman’s remarks about GDP.

Will look up Peter Orszag and Gene Sperling.

Crackers,
Agree with Taters and the others. You really do owe Susan an apology. She works very hard and she doesn’t get paid for her efforts. There’s a lot of research and writing work involved in putting up meaningful, well-written posts. Each one can take a couple hours at least. Plus, Susan has been very busy on a special surprise project for us all. A summer Christmas present! [Sorry, no hints, I've been sworn to secrecy.]
Leslie

LOL, I actually do read my own posts…regarding Dr. Orszag….just didn’t realize he was director of the CBO. Whoops.

Here’s his bio: He’s the director of the Congressional Budget Office. Prior to that, he was the deputy director of economic studies at the Brookings Institute.
http://www.cbo.gov/aboutcbo/organization/od.htm

Here’s Gene Sperling’s bio: He’s a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, served under Clinton as his national economic adviser and director of the National Economic Council.
http://www.americanprogress.org/experts/SperlingGene.html
shargash

The deficit/GDP ratio isn’t the only factor, maybe not even the most important nowadays. What is important is the availability of money to finance the deficit (i.e. to buy government bonds). Back when we financed most of our own debt, our GDP was more important. A bigger GDP meant more money to buy bonds. However, so much of our debt is held by foreigners now, and the US is so saturated in private debt, that we are forced to look overseas finance our deficit. If/when foreigners (many of whom are becoming concerned about our belligerence) say “no mas”, we’d better have a smaller deficit than we have now.

In addition, we are not so far away from having to do something we’ve never really had to do before — re-finance our old debts. As Leslie’s chart shows, deficits started getting bigger in the late 70s and really took off under Reagan. All that debt was financed with 30-year notes. Those notes will have to be paid off starting around now, and really gathering steam starting in 2011.

Bush changed that practice after taking office in 2001. Between 2001 and February 2006, we financed our deficit with 10 year notes. Those 10 year notes will start coming due around 2011.

So, the next couple presidents will have to simultaneously re-finance the Reagan debt and most of the Bush debt. We’d better hope we don’t have to finance a Bush-sized deficit at the same time. Interest rates are going up. And, because the high interest rates won’t be because the US economy is overheated, it won’t help when the US economy slows. It could get very ugly.

P.S. Hugs to Susan. Don’t let the turkeys get you down.
rock9ford

The U.S. is the only country in the world where the poor people are fat.
http://cujo359.blogspot.com Cujo359

I didn’t know about the ten-year notes, shargash. One less reason to be proud of the “smaller” deficit. You can always make your budget look better if you leave it to your successors to pay the bills.
Shirin

“The U.S. is the only country in the world where the poor people are fat.”

That’s demonstrable nonsense. In fact, poor people generally eat a diet higher in calorie-dense foods – fats, starches – because they are less expensive, and therefore they tend to be fatter than people who can afford a better diet.
Montag

Shirin,
You know who used to say that? Texas Senator Phil Gramm! Gramm’s claim to fame was a putative friend of his named Dickey Flatt who lived in Mexia, Texas. Gramm had a stump speech where he said AD NAUSEUM that whenever he voted on a spending bill he would ask if it was worth spending Dickie Flatt’s hard-earned money on.

Well a journalist called Dickey Flatt one time and read him a list of government spending that his ole buddy Phil Gramm had voted for, and asked Dickie whether he agreed that each one was worth spending his hard-earned money on. And Dickie just kept saying, “No, no, NO! no, no, NO!!!! no, no….”

So we learned to take anything Phil Gramm says with a bushel basket’s worth of salt.
mudkitty

Phil Graham?! Does anyone still take that fetal looking dufus seriously?

Hey Right Wingers…China owns our ass thanks to you. Leave it to the Republicans to make things so bad, that a communist country has to float our boat.
lester

shirin- I’m with you, ron paul all the way. i’m going to write him in if he’s not nominated. i don’t see why everyone is supporting the democrats. They all voted for the war, they all want war with iran. All these beltway guys are just treading water, soing as little as possible to get a win for their side.

put the government in it’s coffin . and shut the lid
lester

shargash- in fact, the minute we went off the gold standard is when that debt began to skyrocket
shargash

Lester,

We went off the gold standard in 1971 (August 15th, to be precise). The first run up in debt was several years after that and corresponded better with the Arab oil embargo. But even that debt would have been manageable. The problems really started when the Republicans under Reagan decided there really WAS such a thing as a free lunch.

It was really the first time I remember Republicans exhibiting their now-trademarked reality-denying ostrich trick of burying their heads in the sand and reapeating over and over, in deviance of all evidence, “Tax cuts do so work! Tax cuts do so work!” They’re still at it, of course, with tax cuts, the Iraq war, and just about anything that smacks of science.

BTW, I’m not necessarily opposed to getting rid of fiat currency. However, there are only two ways the US is going to get rid of its debt now — inflate it away or default. There isn’t going to be another Clinton miracle, and the chances of going back to a gold standard are nil.
lester

shargash- have you read “politically incorrect guide to capitalism”? it’s probably more of an introductory thing than you would appear to need, but i’ve been learning about it via the Ron Paul campaign. it’s pretty crazy book.
shargash

Lester,

No I haven’t. I’ll check it out though. Thanks for the tip.