Post a comment in this diary without a curse or an insult or a scatological reference, or just leave - - no one forces you to read my diaries. Comments of that nature reflect poorly on this site, and on you.
we complained of Bush's failure to balance the budget, his crazy spending, and his rejection of pay as you go. Now that we're in power, it seems like the folks in congress just tossed each other's play books across the aisle.
The Republicans are being phonies by now complaining of deficits. But, when did we adopt "deficits don't matter" or "deficits don't count"?
And, I didn't read that Rove thing. But, why knee jerk reject an idea out of hand because of who said it? That's what the Republicans always do, no?
I think I'm being consistent - - I was proud that Clinton balanced the budget, I agreed with Gore's plan to pay off the national debt with our surpluses, and I opposed Bush's crazy reversal of fiscal responsibility and crazy deficits - - those were all Democratic positions, right?
Howard Dean. They all contained spending, produced surpluses and led us to what history would say was our economic apex to date. It was Bush's borrow and spend reversal of this strategy that got us in the jam we're in. Why not do what worked rather than what didn't?
P.S. - And, let's not be like the Republicans - - let's say the same things, when we're in charge or not.
Do you not think it favors corporate wealth and power?
Do you not think it reflects corrupt corporate infuuence?
Do you not think individuals need more aid, but the lion's share is going to the institutions which caused the mess?
NEVER dismiss out of hand all your opponents' arguments. Thats what Bush did, isn't it?
remember when respectful dissent and protest, and consideration of minority views, were valued in the reality based community?
Democrats are in power because of Rovian triumphalism. I say we avoid triumphalism.
Mock the protesters if you want - - but then coopt their legitimate grievances.
Taxes are too high.
Deficits are too high.
Address those issues.
of the subcontinent, deadly sectarian riots, and mass ethnic and religious cleansing PRE-DATE the rise of the Kashmiri conflict? In fact, didn't the Muslim Kashmiri leadership of the '40's reject sectarianism, and alone among all Muslim regions stay with India rather than join Muslim-majority Pakistan? And, wasn't the most deadly and violent episode in the subcontinent's post partition history the war between the eastern and western halves of Muslim Pakistan, resulting in the death of millions of Muslims in what is now Bengladesh at the hands of Muslims from rump Pakistan? I don't think Kashmir was a factor in those episodes.
Sorry to toss facts into the discussion.
get the heck out of the region and cordon off the crazy as best we can. We're not going to convince them by guns or butter to because moderate socialists or liberal democrats or neo con capitalists or whatever today's dream may be.
it's LOONY! to think we should get our troops out of Iraq, even if the Iraqi leaders want to continue to use our troops as shields to hide behind. How silly of me to consider the safety of our troops before the safety of Maliki. Sorry, man, I'll work on it.
And when I saw the reference to his "dishwasher", I imagined an unpaid indentured servant doing his dishes by hand, in an iron kettle, over a wood fire, with lye, 12 hours a day, 7 days per week. But it's okay, because he considers her one of the family.
I'd be curious to find out the origin of what I assume was a sudden policy change. It seems real weird. And, stupid.
Generally speaking, you WANT LGBT consumers as customers. It's one of the more desirable consumer demographics.
No. I think class-ist intellectually snobbish gratuitous insults of our military men and women (i.e., assuming that only loser high school drop outs sign up) is out of bounds when we're still sending these kids to fight and risk their lives overseas ever day. There's loads of metaphors and allusions Pitts could have used. This one was really in bad taste.