Worth a read, in my opinion

[Panacea]

I sort of think everyone should read this. Pity only the insane/masochistic/brave on the forum will get to it past the diet new posts feature. :24:

http://www.mightyheaton.com/2012/06/14/i-dont-blame-congress-i-blame-you/

Thoughts?

 

[Alien Allen]

He makes some valid points

But misses on some too

I will give you an example..... The city I live in is recalling the newly elected mayor. The naysayers started with comments she made before running for office and then used some other stuff that has nothing to do with being fit for office just to shit stir.

Then they get to the juicy part which is what is in the recall petition. She voted against pissing away a lot of money to build a new train station. Now mind you this is a burb of Detroit. I think there are about 3 commuter stops a day scheduled if I am not mistaken. And 5 miles to the south there is a transportation hub. The city has to pay a percentage which I believe is about 20% and the feds mainly pick up the rest.

Now sure it is nice to have a pretty new transit center. But when your city manager says you will be insolvent within 5 years is it smart to invest money into anything non essential at this point under the current economy?

Well come hell or high water the usual crowd of activists want her kicked out. If it was not so sickening it would be funny because this was one of her main stump issues when running for office.

If I ever was going to use the word fucktard it would be to label voters. Friggin idiots they are and fickle does not come close to describing too many.

Having said that I think the writer misses the point that these elected officials almost universally start out at the local level with the clout of the political party behind them. They are bought and paid for long before they do there damage in Washington.

Idiot voters is one issue but money is the other. When a member of the house has to get elected every two years they are continually raising campaign funds. Instead of doing that they should be home for well over half the year so they are not so insulated from their constituents. And there should be federal funding of those elections so there is a more level playing field. Term limits is no answer from my experience in MI. But without public financing you almost need that to control these idiots at the State and Federal level.

 

[Panacea]

Surely term limits only serve to change the face on the poster, so to speak, not necessarily the agenda.

He also does nothing in the way of offering solutions or insight, but I suppose that's not his job.
I mostly like elaborated effort to remind us we're supposed to be steering the ship, and to put the nostalgia and morality war to bed a bit. We're being outsmarted I think.

The fundraising issue is an important one, though.

 

[Johnfromokc]

I got this when I clicked your link Pan:

Fraudulent Web Page Blocked You attempted to access: http://www.mightyheaton.com/2012/06/14/i-dont-blame-congress-i-blame-you/ This web page is a known fraudulent web page. It is recommended that you do NOT visit this page. For your protection, this web page has been blocked. Visit Symantec to learn more about phishing and internet security. Exit this site Continue to web page anyway

 

[Alien Allen]

Surely term limits only serve to change the face on the poster, so to speak, not necessarily the agenda.

He also does nothing in the way of offering solutions or insight, but I suppose that's not his job.
I mostly like elaborated effort to remind us we're supposed to be steering the ship, and to put the nostalgia and morality war to bed a bit. We're being outsmarted I think.

The fundraising issue is an important one, though.

MI has term limits and it has been a failure

It puts too much power in the persons working behind the scenes for the elected officials because those staffers move on to other officials. Even our lobbyist admitted it was a recipe for nothing but trouble leaving way too many people in office that relied too heavily on staff as these officials just do not have the experience to deal with some of the minutia

We had an interview with a company that was going to manage a trade association. They made the comment that connections with the staffers were more important than connections to the elected officials. I can attest that this is not far off the mark. We had to deal with some state senators on a big issue with our industry some time ago and by the time legislation was crafted it was a done deal and no way you got anywhere with the sponsors to do much to amend.

The right made an issue out of when Pelosi said Obamacare needed to pass so we could find out what was in it. There is sadly a lot of truth to that. And I use it only as example of where it was admitted. Make no mistake it is not a right or left issue it is across the board for both parties. When you have Omnibus bills it is a recipe for disaster because except for the rare elected official they never read it all. They leave it to staffers to parse thru it. Which is another issue that needs to be stopped. Quit bundling unrelated crap into bills. Make the bill a stand alone so it can be truly voted on its merits. There in lies a good part of where there is widespread corruption by all parties involved. They can justify their vote pro or con based on shit that does not even belong in the bill. So while he is right about voters being part of the problem I am not sure how you stop this kind of corruption.

 

[Kyle B]

He brings up some interesting points. The best in my opinion, is the paradox that exists in which people speak accolades of their Congressman yet trash Congress. It's not their Congressman that's the problem, it's all the other ones. If their Congressman brings revenue to their district, they're doing a good job doing work/representing the district, if any other Congressman does the same, it's pork.

Allen brings up a good point though. The author completely leaves out the issue of campaign spending and big corporations etc. The average voter is against huge political machines. It isn't fair to put all the blame on them for not being able to completely change the system. We need either A) A viable third party or B) R's and D's who actually represent the average person. Both require a huge transformation in the mindset of voters AND some sort of leadership to carry out collective action. Basically, what the TEA party was able to do, but throughout the US, which would basically be a revolution.

 

[Alien Allen]

He brings up some interesting points. The best in my opinion, is the paradox that exists in which people speak accolades of their Congressman yet trash Congress. It's not their Congressman that's the problem, it's all the other ones. If their Congressman brings revenue to their district, they're doing a good job doing work/representing the district, if any other Congressman does the same, it's pork.

Allen brings up a good point though. The author completely leaves out the issue of campaign spending and big corporations etc. The average voter is against huge political machines. It isn't fair to put all the blame on them for not being able to completely change the system. We need either A) A viable third party or B) R's and D's who actually represent the average person. Both require a huge transformation in the mindset of voters AND some sort of leadership to carry out collective action. Basically, what the TEA party was able to do, but throughout the US, which would basically be a revolution.

I can honestly say I have never voted based on the elected official being able to bring home the bacon so to speak. I am an equal opportunity basher. You likely will not see me say my official is ok and it is others that are the problem.

And look at how the left has demonized the Tea Party. The distortions are nothing more than emotional histrionics in most cases. IMO

 

[Johnfromokc]

He brings up some interesting points. The best in my opinion, is the paradox that exists in which people speak accolades of their Congressman yet trash Congress. It's not their Congressman that's the problem, it's all the other ones. If their Congressman brings revenue to their district, they're doing a good job doing work/representing the district, if any other Congressman does the same, it's pork.

This is exactly why we get the same recycled congressional asshats election after election.

Basically, what the TEA party was able to do, but throughout the US, which would basically be a revolution.

The TEA Party recycled REPUBLICANS who still push supply side Economics. I and all of us that are old enough have watched Reagans Supply Side Economic policy FAIL for 30 years, yet they keep pushing it. How is that change FFS?

I can honestly say I have never voted based on the elected official being able to bring home the bacon so to speak. I am an equal opportunity basher. You likely will not see me say my official is ok and it is others that are the problem.

How many times have you voted for a Democrat or an Independent?

And look at how the left has demonized the Tea Party. The distortions are nothing more than emotional histrionics in most cases. IMO

The TEA Party is a bunch of deluded right wingers pissed off at the world and misdirecting their anger. They were co-opted by the Koch Brothers, and conservative foundations like Freedomworks, and Americans for Prosperity IMMEDIATELY and are too ignorant to realize they are the big political monies useful idiots.

They blame unions which are at a 20:1 disadvantage over corporations as far as campaign spending, while themselves being funded and controlled by big money conservative PACS. How much sense does that make?

They fight against Universal Health Care which most desperatly need because many of them can barely afford their own insurance premiums presently. One prime example is Mary Brown, a 56-year-old Florida woman who owned a small auto repair shop but had no health insurance, became the lead plaintiff challenging President Obama's healthcare law because she was passionate about the issue.

Brown "doesn't have insurance. She doesn't want to pay for it. And she doesn't want the government to tell her she has to have it," said Karen Harned, a lawyer for the National Federation of Independent Business....

But court records reveal that Brown and her husband filed for bankruptcy last fall with $4,500 in unpaid medical bills.

Obamacare? Please. Once the Public Option was removed, "Obamacare" became the EXACT SAME BILL the Republicans presented in 1995 to counter Hillarycare. They (TEA Partiers) were for it in 1995 but are against it now. How much sense does that make?

The TEA Party is a joke. It is sad to see millions of well meaning Americans duped into becoming the Useful Idiots of the big money PAC's and convinced to vote against their own best economic interests.

 

[Alien Allen]

I honestly do not recall the Chaffee bill. Must not have ever got out of committee?

It does have many similarites to Obamacare

Pretty easy to speculate it was drafted to provide cover for the republicans and they had no interest in passing it.

Tis another example of where when one party presents a good idea (in their mind) the other side condemns it because that is how they do it in DC.

So yes the republicans are hypocrites for supporting Chaffee's bill back then and not working to amend Obamacare to make it a better package. But then so are the democrats for not supporting Chaffee back in the day.

Both sides want complete control and accolades for passing legislation. Sucks the way that works.

 

[Johnfromokc]

But you are still going to pull the Republican lever in november aren't you Allen?

 

[Minor Axis]

I sort of think everyone should read this. Pity only the insane/masochistic/brave on the forum will get to it past the diet new posts feature. :24:

http://www.mightyheaton.com/2012/06/14/i-dont-blame-congress-i-blame-you/

Thoughts?

My thought is that I blame the assholes who are voting in assholes to represent them. Basically I agree (with the premise of your link) and I acknowledge my definition of an asshole will not match approximately 50% of U.S. voter population. I think we are hosed, and nothing will change until a general breakdown forces a change.

 

[Johnfromokc]

I think we are hosed, and nothing will change until a general breakdown forces a change.

I think so as well. There are enough "outraged" TEAPublicans out there voting against their own best economic interests to recycle relabeled Rebublican's back to congress to keep the race to the bottom going. Maybe when enough TEAbots have to file for medical bankruptcy, things will begin to change.

 

[Alien Allen]

Sorry Johnny but I don't fit in the box you made for me

I have voted for democrats and independents

Many times

You mention all the time about the last 30 years and rightfully so. Things could have been done differently. Same applies for the 20-30 years before that.

Been a long downward spiral and it did not just suddenly start on Reagans watch.

 

[Johnfromokc]

Sorry Johnny but I don't fit in the box you made for me

I have voted for democrats and independents

Many times

You mention all the time about the last 30 years and rightfully so. Things could have been done differently. Same applies for the 20-30 years before that.

Been a long downward spiral and it did not just suddenly start on Reagans watch.

I'll agree it did not start on Reagans watch - but it damned sure accelerated with Saint Ronnies "Supply side Economics" though, didn't it Alice?

 

[Alien Allen]

I'll agree it did not start on Reagans watch - but it damned sure accelerated with Saint Ronnies "Supply side Economics" though, didn't it Alice?

and what did Clinton do to stop it?

not much I can see

You liberals love to rant about Regan. Some of it is very justified.

Tell me if you honestly think the options were going to make a difference. Carter was until Bush probably the worst president we had in 100 years. You can not tell me without a smirk that things would have been better with 4 more years of Carter.

 

[Johnfromokc]

and what did Clinton do to stop it?

Clinton raised marginal tax rates and actually had a running budget surlplus.

You liberals love to rant about Regan. Some of it is very justified.

I can't recall much of any lasting good from his legacy.

Tell me if you honestly think the options were going to make a difference. Carter was until Bush probably the worst president we had in 100 years. You can not tell me without a smirk that things would have been better with 4 more years of Carter.

Pure speculation. It could not have possibly resulted in the economic destruction Reagan caused. You right wingers rant about Carter ad nausium - but really, looking back and comparing the two with 20/20 hindsight I'd damned sure take 4 more years of JC.

 

[Alien Allen]

Clinton raised marginal tax rates and actually had a running budget surlplus.

It was voodoo economics. You don't really believe all of a sudden the budget was truly balanced do you?

I can't recall much of any lasting good from his legacy.

of course you don't. You were probably in mourning for his 8 years in office.
Much like the left whines that the right blames everything on Obama the same can be said for the left blaming all the ills on Reagan. IMO

Pure speculation. It could not have possibly resulted in the economic destruction Reagan caused. You right wingers rant about Carter ad nausium - but really, looking back and comparing the two with 20/20 hindsight I'd damned sure take 4 more years of JC.

You liberals really are funny with the hyperbole

It must really grind you that Reagan brought us out of that great malaise that Carter gave us.

You always claim to know what others think so I will do the same speculation on you. You are and always have been a disgruntled hard core liberal apologist/sympathizer that never was a republican.

 

[Alien Allen]

Sorry Johnny but I don't fit in the box you made for me

I have voted for democrats and independents

Many times

You mention all the time about the last 30 years and rightfully so. Things could have been done differently. Same applies for the 20-30 years before that.

Been a long downward spiral and it did not just suddenly start on Reagans watch.

Moonie sent me rep that made me rethink and clarify this a bit.

While I am not sure the downward spiral started right after the country was established I do believe there were some things done about 100 years ago that did a lot to solidify the power of the banking industry. I believe it was Jefferson who warned about the bankers needing to be controlled. Our current mess we are trying to move past is an indicator of how much power the bankers have. If there is one thing the govt should have done years ago it would have been to not allow consolidation of so many banks. There were enough that became too large to allow to fail that they had a gun held to the govt instead of it being the other way around. And you can thank both parties for allowing that to happen. Bush gave the banks a pass with TARP and then Obama had the chance to clean things up with TARP II. Congress was already bought and paid for so this IMO was one instance where a president could have wielded power to control congress from irrational acts.

 

[Johnfromokc]

It was voodoo economics. You don't really believe all of a sudden the budget was truly balanced do you?

You got evidence otherwise?

of course you don't. You were probably in mourning for his 8 years in office.

I was in the Marine Corps 4 of those years. Lost 220 Brothers in Beirut. Reagan pulled us out without a fight. That left the Islamist terrorists with the impression that the United States would turn tail and run if inflicted with casualties. We got hit all over the world after that.

So much for the Commander-in-Cheif role.

Much like the left whines that the right blames everything on Obama the same can be said for the left blaming all the ills on Reagan. IMO

Except their is actual evidence that Reagan's trickle down is still fucking over the middle class. You deluded conservobots still believe it will eventually work.

You liberals really are funny with the hyperbole

You conservobots have mega billion $$$$ propaganda machines that have brainwashed you. That's why you all repeat the same drivel.

It must really grind you that Reagan brought us out of that great malaise that Carter gave us.

Did Carter give us a "malaise" or was that Nixon's legacy?

You always claim to know what others think so I will do the same speculation on you. You are and always have been a disgruntled hard core liberal apologist/sympathizer that never was a republican.

I know you are a grumpy old fart right winger that has listened to too many hours of right wing talk radio. You now claim to be a libertarian because you realize it is obvious you get all your talking points from Limbaugh and Hannity and the various and sundry right wing blogs and you are making an attempt to be different. The reason I know that is because I used to be a brainwashed conservobot just like you. The difference is I eventually saw through the lies, but you refuse to. You know trickle down has failed but just won't admit it. You bitch about government but will sign up for social Security and Medicare as soon as you are elgible - if you have not signed up already.

See - you conservobots can't bullshit me or baffle me with botshit. I've already read all the books, listened to all the radio shows and watched FOX for years. You guys are like a rerun.

 

[Johnfromokc]

Moonie sent me rep that made me rethink and clarify this a bit.

While I am not sure the downward spiral started right after the country was established I do believe there were some things done about 100 years ago that did a lot to solidify the power of the banking industry. I believe it was Jefferson who warned about the bankers needing to be controlled. Our current mess we are trying to move past is an indicator of how much power the bankers have. If there is one thing the govt should have done years ago it would have been to not allow consolidation of so many banks. There were enough that became too large to allow to fail that they had a gun held to the govt instead of it being the other way around. And you can thank both parties for allowing that to happen. Bush gave the banks a pass with TARP and then Obama had the chance to clean things up with TARP II. Congress was already bought and paid for so this IMO was one instance where a president could have wielded power to control congress from irrational acts.

This is the closest you've come to making sense. Congratulations.

Jefferson was the last president to wrest control from the banks. The regained control in 1913.

Republicans will have no part of banking regulation. Libertarians want no regulation. Democrats suck too, but they are the only party willing to regulate the banks, but you conservobots fight them every step of the way.

Wonder why we are completely fucked? It's becasue the brainwashed bots and TEAPublicans blame the "evil liberals" for all of societies ills instead of the banks and the politicians they own.