Saturday, 9/10/11, Public Square

12 Comments

Filed under The Public Square

12 responses to “Saturday, 9/10/11, Public Square

  1. It’s a new day!

    Is the GOP still supporting tax breaks for everyone except average workers?

    Do they have all their excuses and talking points lined up and ready to go? I particularly laugh at the one they use about social security running out of money… They want to end social security until they need to use it as a talking point to defend the fact they’re still protecting the wealthy only.

    No matter the excuses or talking points they use, it ends up meaning they are only for tax breaks that help the wealthy and couldn’t care less about average working people!

    Same ole story, huh?

  2. About 60% of the $450 billion in the American Jobs Act is tax cuts.

    The republicans have been touting tax cuts as the way forward, the way to create jobs, reduce the deficit and cure America’s economic woes. In fact, tax cuts and doing away with regulations are the only ideas they have. Well other than doing away with social security, Medicare and Medicaid.

    Now we hear not all tax cuts are equal! Uh huh.

    We do understand! They never meant tax cuts for everyone! Certainly not for plain ole average workers!

    Only the wealthy deserve tax cuts and the republicans will fight tooth and nail against anyone else getting what only the wealthy should receive.

  3. indypendent

    Did we all see the video clip of Joe Biden and John Boehner talking golf before Obama’s speech? Biden pointed out his wife Jill (wearing a bright red dress) walking to her seat in the balcony – and Boehner made some comment that she was the cutest one in the row by far.

    Excuse me, boys, but you were sitting behind the podium in the House of Representatives awaiting a speech about the jobs crisis – YES, this is a crisis – by your president.

    I realize that elected officials do not live in the real world – but I have to wonder if all those unemployed or under-employed Americans really give a damn if Jill Biden is the cutest one in the row or whether John Boehner is a lousy golfer?

    Seriously, dudes.

    When I saw this I had to shake my head and just say – this is what is wrong with career politicians.

    We need term limits and we need them NOW. It sounds like these two are way too comfortable in their surroundings which – BTW – is a bubble off center from the real world.

    This golfing/wife watching conversation was caught on CNN

    • I’m not sure I can support term limits as I do think there’s a learning curve, but I am absolutely positive we need to cut the benefits of congress critters. We need to regulate the activities that allow them and their votes to be purchased, we need to make it a job that pays a decent wage and has expectations of qualified people filling the positions. All the perks of the job seem to attract the laziest, the most stupid, and the most crooked. Why not? Do next to nothing for a few years and live high on the hog at the government trough for life. Would honorable people who face themselves in the mirror and expect the person looking back to be someone they respect be interested?

      • Asher Bob White

        Yes, there is a learning curve: e.g., how to create and take corruption; how to ‘spin’ talking points to avoid addressing real issues or facts; how to keep common voters away from one’s constituent meetings; how to get on TV news and talk shows; how to develop mailings and questionaires for voters that predict your own, planned outcomes; how to cheat ‘big-time;’ etc. How can you oppose keeping common people in the elected positions of governing for the common people?

      • You’re right, those are lessons they seem to learn.

        sigh

        Never would I “oppose keeping common people in the elected positions of governing for the common people.” If there are no honest men and women, none who would learn the lessons of what is and how it could be improved to become more effective, then term limits might be the only solution. But if we don’t get more competent, more thoughtful, honest people to represent us won’t there be the scoundrels who will do damage in the limited time they would serve if their term was limited by law?

      • I remember being new in a job and needing to learn the ropes before being able to see whether it could be improved, and that’s what I was referring to when I used the term ‘learning curve.’

      • indypendent

        What do you think of not necessarily permanent term limits – but maybe limit the person to one term, then they have to sit out for the next term. Then if they want to run again – they are free to run.

        But no more than one full term per time.

        Because I have to wonder if the House Representatives know they only have two years to do their thing – and they are not having to worry about fundraising for their next election – maybe then we would get busy and really try to make a difference?

        As we all saw – the Freshmen Tea Party Republicans did not need a learning curve to push their agenda.

        The same goes for Senators – if they know they only get 6 years – then maybe they will be workign for their constituents more than their own career?

        But I definitely agree with fnord about cutting down on those benefits and perks of both the House Reps and Senators. We need to get rid of the lifetime health care and that damn pension plan.

  4. Here’s an interesting piece titled, “The GOP’s One-Sided War on Dems.”

    Pundits love to apportion blame for partisan hostility equally to both sides. But as Michael Tomasky shows, the GOP deserves the lion’s share of the blame.

    Go to the link for the details, here’s the wrap-up:

    Average Democratic Senate support for Bush: 45.5 percent.

    Average Democratic House support for Bush: 36.8 percent.

    Average combined Democratic support for Bush: 41.1 percent.

    Average Republican Senate support for Obama: 8.8 percent.

    Average Republican House support for Obama: 2.7 percent.

    Average combined Republican support for Obama: 5.75 percent.

    Well now. You see, both sides do do it. It just so happens that one side opposes the major proposals of the president from the other party seven times more intensely than the other side does it.

  5. WSClark

    Term limits is a ‘term’ (pun intended) that sounds good, but in practicality, is unneeded and unwise.

    First, we already have ‘term limits’ in the form of elections. The voters can and do decide who they want to represent them. Gerrymandering has distorted the impact of election to a degree, but voters have the ultimate say.

    Second, ‘term limits’ would unfairly penalize smaller states that have less of a population base to draw candidates from. Wyoming has a population of 500K. NYC has 1.1 million people that ride the subway each day. Wyoming already has a problem with the quality of folks they have to run for office. Let’s not handicap them any further.

    Unfortunately, being a Federal lawmaker today is a full time job that requires knowledge beyond what the average citizen possesses. Good or bad, it is a highly complex function. We saw what happened when Tea Cons got loose and had an impact on the Debt Ceiling debate. They simply did not understand that failing to raise the ceiling was not an option. With any sort of luck, most of the Tea Con freshmen will either lose their seats or learn during the next election.

    • indypendent

      But wehn the GOP is dominated by the Tea party – I really do not see these Freshmen Tea Con people going away anytime soon.

      • indypendent

        Fnord brought up the issue of getting quality people to run – but with our current ‘junior high popularity contest’ being the way most of our polticians are chosen – what quality person would even want to run?

        And then the intense personal lives scrutiny of these people – I do not know of many quality people that would even want to run for elected office. And not just scrutiny – but they are subjected to so much more gossip and innuendo – who wants to go through all that crap?

        But the bottom line though – I really think most people will say they want an honest and noncorrupt person in office – but these same folks really do not care if their elected official is dishonest and corrupt – as long as that person is giving them what they want from the government trough.

        For example – Jimmy Carter was an honest person (to a fault, sometimes) but many “Republicans wrongly accuse Carter of being weak – because he was too nice of a person.