Politicians to Watch For 2012, 2016

[Mike Steele]

I've never had a good feeling about Boehner, and this ain't helping.

 

I glad I'm not the only one.

[Jim Martin]

The problem with the Tea Party movement, and all these people screaming to cut the deficit, is I wonder how many of them realize what it's going to take to get spending under control. Google Paul Ryan's budget proposal, the GOP alternative. Medicare as we know it would end. I'm trying to find the specific article which talked about numbers, but essentially seniors would get a lump sum payment, varying depending on their income level, which could be used to purchase insurance. As one article says however:

 

the value of the voucher would grow significantly more slowly than CBO expects that Medicare spending per enrollee would grow under current law. Beneficiaries would therefore be likely to purchaseless comprehensive health plans or plans more heavily managed than traditional Medicare, resulting in some combination of less use of health care services and less use of technologically advanced treatments than under current law. Beneficiaries would also bear the financial risk for the cost of buying insurance policies or the cost of obtaining health care services beyond what would be covered by their insurance.

 

Also, Social Security would be ended, I believe anyone born after 2021 would no longer be eligible for it, starting in 2020 Soc. Security taxes would be ended, changed to a privatized retirement system. I honestly think that if someone really tries to put this through, you're going to see the same or worse protests at town halls as you saw this past summer. We're talking an inch away from assless chaps time. Many of those same Tea Partiers will go bananas if they see their Medicare comprehensive coverage go away. The fact of the matter is however, that's what's going to be needed--oh and yes, this plan would impact me. Of course, massive debts and an insolvent gov't is going to impact me as well. Many of these Tea Partiers probably really don't know what the percentages of government layouts are, or realize that their current or future healthcare is utterly at risk. The GOP has scored points of the opposition by accusing Obama of wanting to cut Medicare. Well...yeah that's going to have to happen REGARDLESS. You could take all the discretionary Fed spending out of the budget and we'd STILL be in the red. That means entitlements must be reigned in massively. I honestly think it may come to blood in the streets if/when the needed reforms are enacted.

[JOE BRENNAN]

The problem with the Tea Party movement, and all these people screaming to cut the deficit, is I wonder how many of them realize what it's going to take to get spending under control. Google Paul Ryan's budget proposal, the GOP alternative. Medicare as we know it would end. I'm trying to find the specific article which talked about numbers, but essentially seniors would get a lump sum payment, varying depending on their income level, which could be used to purchase insurance. As one article says however:

Also, Social Security would be ended,

I don't know if I read his proposal exactly that way, and it's so preliminary it doesn't make sense to debate it in detail, but basically right, it's balancing the budget over next 10 or so years without tax increases. That means big 'cuts' (at least relative to current projections) in entitlements, there's no other way. Medicare, Social Security and a whole raft of other smaller programs Congress has made 'mandatory', not subject to appropriation year by year, ie also entitlements (Medicaid, Pell Grants for college educations, etc, etc which all add up to similar in size to Social Security as of now), are the vast majority of the budget. Especially considering that not paying on interest on debt is default, the whole idea being to avoid that eventual calamity. And Ryan says don't touch the DoD and other security budgets (homeland sec and VA are significant too).

 

As I understand it the Medicare change, beside voucher/private aspect which Dems are already busy attacking (Ryan's probably a more important guy to discredit in the longrun than Sarah Palin, and Dems are beginning to realize that), the general idea is limit Medicare growth per person to the general inflation rate, way below what it's been growing at. The Social Security idea, again aside from privatizing aspect, is basically the idea that was on the table under Bush: decent income people get their future benefit increased at the rate of inflation, not the rate of general wage growth as now (now your SS payment ramps up by the rate of wage growth between now and when you retire, then at inflation *after* you start receiving it). That plus raising retirement age somewhat would make SS viable, but in Medicare's case there's got to be megapain to avoid huge tax increases.

 

Cynically/politically speaking, I think the GOP can probably get pretty far in 2010 without a lot of details what they'd do, but eventually somebody has to fix this or it will be a real, no hyperbole, national catastrophe. But I think most voters, not just Tea Party marchers, still believe that if the govt just stopped pork barrelling and earmarks and 'welfare' the budget would be fine, and it's just not so. So

1) there will be *lots* of unhappiness to really fix this

2) there is *no way* one party can force through its own uncompromised fix without then getting kicked out of office for years or decades in the backlash. Even if they accepted that fate on a principalled basis, the other party would then just reverse the changes once in total power. It's simply in neither party's interest, and never will be, to fix this problem totally its own way and totally own the backlash. It *has* to be bipartisan, or never get done. Therefore it will have to include less entitlement cuts than Ryan starts with, defense cuts, and tax increases, or never get done, but it *has* to get done. The key w/ taxes is to make the tax system less inefficient (Ryan's ideas are a good start there also) to at least somewhat offset the negative effect on growth from raising more money.

 

Joe

[Old Tanker]

The problem with the Tea Party movement, and all these people screaming to cut the deficit, is I wonder how many of them realize what it's going to take to get spending under control. Google Paul Ryan's budget proposal, the GOP alternative. Medicare as we know it would end. I'm trying to find the specific article which talked about numbers, but essentially seniors would get a lump sum payment, varying depending on their income level, which could be used to purchase insurance. As one article says however:

 

I benefit very nicely from Medicare and SS...no doubt about it. But it's been obvious to me for 30+ years all is going to go bankrupt as the demographics cannot support it.

 

As to Medicare , I don't know how much I really benefit. My corp. use to give retiree health coverage and no longer has to so corp America has made out big time . Right now I get a $1500 credit to buy Medicare Advantage . One plan costs $1500 and I have it , others with added bells n' whistles cost more. The corp offer for drug coverage is about the same as Medicare D so I keep Med D at $16 a month down from $24 a month last year.

 

It's not the over 55 that will get the shaft it's the under 55 that will.

[Stargrunt6]

I think getting the deficit down in a sensible way would take a gradual, stair-stepping process. If it happened in one fell swoop, it'd be chaos, pandelirium, dogs and cats getting along, etc.

[Archie Pellagio]

Sorry, that dog won't hunt. There are plenty of people here who are ostensibly R's who do plenty of criticizing of them themselves.

 

Then why is the standard tank-net response for criticising someone like Palin to immediately go for the 'Well Obama is bad too" even then the person making the criticism clearly has no love for the latter?

 

It happens time and time again whenever the cookie cutter politics test is tested.

'He is against something I like, OMG he's a communist! He must love Obama!'

 

The cartoonish nature of it speaks volumes.

 

BTW on the subject of Palin and Couric, to put things into perspective, Ahmedinejahd managed to make a complete chump out of her only days after ordering dozens shot, including a 19 year old girl who's death was published on youtube, she isn't exactly a heavyweight to start with.

Palin's millstone around her neck for all eternity will be that as soon as the going gets tough, she runs away and blames it all on liberal bias.

That may work well on the talk-show circuit and in conservative action group circles, but that won't hold water anywhere else. Politics is tough, I've said before I thought she copped a rough deal in the 08 election, but at the end of the day she showed that she also couldn't hack it.

[m1a1mg]

F***ing spot on Luke.

[Mike Steele]

...

 

BTW on the subject of Palin and Couric, to put things into perspective, Ahmedinejahd managed to make a complete chump out of her only days after ordering dozens shot, including a 19 year old girl who's death was published on youtube, she isn't exactly a heavyweight to start with.

Palin's millstone around her neck for all eternity will be that as soon as the going gets tough, she runs away and blames it all on liberal bias.

That may work well on the talk-show circuit and in conservative action group circles, but that won't hold water anywhere else. Politics is tough, I've said before I thought she copped a rough deal in the 08 election, but at the end of the day she showed that she also couldn't hack it.

My impression on the Couric interview was that She (Palin) went in with the idea that it was going to be a Non Confrontational interview, Couric was gunning for her (as she learned to her dismay) and there were NO softball questions. She was NOT preped by the McCain staff and it showed. You (and lots of other folks) place lots of emphasis on ONE interview, she is past that. Her Interviews with Hannity(not cheer leading by any stretch of the imagination), for example she gave as good as she got and handled herself well, you(and some others here) need to catch up with the here and now and quit bringing up the past.

That's all well and good, you say, but she is a FOX contributor now, and we all (should) be aware of what America is watching, And it ain't NBC, CBS, and ABC (and their affiliates)CNN is about equal with MSNBC in terms of viewers. That is to say abysmal. So get up to date, and that could apply to lots of folks here.

[m1a1mg]

So, do you really believe Hannity doesn't give her questions in advance?

[Mike Steele]

So, do you really believe Hannity doesn't give her questions in advance?

 

[Old Tanker]

Couric also did a job on Beck.

 

He had perviously stated Obama was anti-White culture and when Couric asked him was is white culture he couldn't comeup with an answer. She then added some people may think you are racist .

 

Beck blew that one.

 

Blue Jeans are white culture and by seeing what Obama wore at a season opening game , dime to a dollar that was the first time he ever wore jeans. They looked as though they came off the womens rack at the Salvation Army store.

 

Obviously pick-up trucks are white culture as his triple reference to Brown's pick-up truck.

 

Palin knows it also as when she showed up at NASCAR Daytona as did Michael Steele.

[BP]

My impression on the Couric interview was that She (Palin) went in with the idea that it was going to be a Non Confrontational interview, Couric was gunning for her (as she learned to her dismay) and there were NO softball questions. She was NOT preped by the McCain staff and it showed. You (and lots of other folks) place lots of emphasis on ONE interview, she is past that.

 

C'mon bubba, that's just stoopid. A "non-confrontational interview"? With the MSM? And she's the Republican Vice Presidential candidate?!? Nobody could be that naive, let alone need to be spun up to speed.

 

That in itself is completely damning reasoning for DXing any future national-level political career. A "non-confrontational arms control agreement with the Russians". A "non-confrontational economic summit with the Chinese". A "non-confrontational peace conference with the Iraqis".

[Old Tanker]

Dumb question..

 

The Obamaites are claiming 300 terrorists tried by civilian courts. Who has the list ?

Was the list made up by those who count jobs added or saved ?

 

Yes we know Reid was convited in a civilian court. We also know his incident was 2 months after 911.

 

It took the Bushies about 3-4 years to setup a tribunal for terrorists. Do the Obamaites know the difference ?

[Old Tanker]

C'mon bubba, that's just stoopid. A "non-confrontational interview"? With the MSM? And she's the Republican Vice Presidential candidate?!? Nobody could be that naive, let alone need to be spun up to speed.

 

That in itself is completely damning reasoning for DXing any future national-level political career. A "non-confrontational arms control agreement with the Russians". A "non-confrontational economic summit with the Chinese". A "non-confrontational peace conference with the Iraqis".

 

A whole shyte load of Dems purposely skipped Town Hall meetings being afraid of confrontation or they were canned events right out of Ozzie n' Harriet canned laughter tracks.

 

Obama sure did a skip over debating Paul Ryan at the GOP retreat. Plus Obama has cut live sceduled press conferences to nearly non-existing.

[BP]

A whole shyte load of Dems purposely skipped Town Hall meetings being afraid of confrontation or they were canned events right out of Ozzie n' Harriet canned laughter tracks.

 

Obama sure did a skip over debating Paul Ryan at the GOP retreat. Plus Obama has cut live sceduled press conferences to nearly non-existing.

 

Yeah, but if Our Guys™ can't win the war of ideas one-on-one (they won't win the media war), we don't deserve to win.

 

We have to be better than that: more concise, more lucid and clearly enunciated, more grounded in the classical truths. We're not the ones flying in the face of human nature. Notes on only a few "core principles" written on hand palms don't count.

[Archie Pellagio]

My impression on the Couric interview was that She (Palin) went in with the idea that it was going to be a Non Confrontational interview, Couric was gunning for her (as she learned to her dismay) and there were NO softball questions. She was NOT preped by the McCain staff and it showed. You (and lots of other folks) place lots of emphasis on ONE interview, she is past that. Her Interviews with Hannity(not cheer leading by any stretch of the imagination), for example she gave as good as she got and handled herself well, you(and some others here) need to catch up with the here and now and quit bringing up the past.

That's all well and good, you say, but she is a FOX contributor now, and we all (should) be aware of what America is watching, And it ain't NBC, CBS, and ABC (and their affiliates)CNN is about equal with MSNBC in terms of viewers. That is to say abysmal. So get up to date, and that could apply to lots of folks here.

 

If she was stupid enough to think that an interview on NBC/CBS/ABC was going to be pitching softball questions to her and fawning over her like she was Obama, that is grounds for instant failure.

At the same time, the questions, while obviously narky and an attempt at a hit-job, weren't exactly difficult, and anyone who couldn't handle them, would be worrisome if trying to talk with the Russians, Iranians, Chinese etc.

 

As for the interview, it isnt being obsessed with one interview, but it was probably one of the most telling episodes.

It isn't harping on the past, but since the election she has been catering to a very different audience, with different desires. Telling a bunch of conservatives that Obama is bad, deficit is bad, marriage is for men and women only etc isn't exactly outlining presidential policy, especially when you've got a trashed reputation for being not the brightest bulb on the tree.

On the flip side, name one time - an interview, speech, paper, anything - where she has spelled out reasoned, detailed policy proposals, not just folksy one-liners like 'Hows that hopey changey stuff goin' for ya?' and 'You betcha'.

 

She is what she is, and she is very good at it, I won't criticise her for it because she's too busy counting her money and revelling in the celebrity to care what I think, but a national leader? God help up all...

to care what any of us think.

Edited February 17, 2010 by Luke Y

[DKTanker]

Yes we know Reid was convited pled guilty in a civilian court. We also know his incident was 2 months after 911.

 

It took the Bushies about 3-4 years to setup a tribunal for terrorists. Do the Obamaites know the difference ?

Perhaps a minor point.

[Mike Steele]

Dumb question..

 

The Obamaites are claiming 300 terrorists tried by civilian courts. Who has the list ?

Was the list made up by those who count jobs added or saved ?

 

Yes we know Reid was convited in a civilian court. We also know his incident was 2 months after 911.

 

It took the Bushies about 3-4 years to setup a tribunal for terrorists. Do the Obamaites know the difference ?

Not so. Ann Coulter was on Oreilly and she researched that claim, and the bottom line, it's been tied up in court since the Bush years. Reid plead out.

Edited February 17, 2010 by Mike Steele

[Jim Martin]

C'mon bubba, that's just stoopid. A "non-confrontational interview"? With the MSM? And she's the Republican Vice Presidential candidate?!? Nobody could be that naive, let alone need to be spun up to speed.

 

 

Errrr...McCain went into the contest expecting the MSM's luv fest with him to keep going. Sorry Mac, they only luv Republicans who are throwing their own party under the bus. When you try to run the country, you're done.

[Ivanhoe]

Errrr...McCain went into the contest expecting the MSM's luv fest with him to keep going. Sorry Mac, they only luv Republicans who are throwing their own party under the bus. When you try to run the country, you're done.

 

Yep, and McCain and his campaign staff were not rookies from rural Alaska, they had all been inside the Beltway for decades.

[Jeff]

Palin's millstone around her neck for all eternity will be that as soon as the going gets tough, she runs away and blames it all on liberal bias.

That may work well on the talk-show circuit and in conservative action group circles, but that won't hold water anywhere else. Politics is tough, I've said before I thought she copped a rough deal in the 08 election, but at the end of the day she showed that she also couldn't hack it.

As I've stated above we shall see, if she chooses to run, as the primary process runs its course. I have my doubts as I've stated above. So much for the Palin Cabal.

[Jeff]

So, do you really believe Hannity doesn't give her questions in advance?

Softball yes, in advance? I highly doubt it.

[Jeff]

Dumb question..

 

The Obamaites are claiming 300 terrorists tried by civilian courts. Who has the list ?

Was the list made up by those who count jobs added or saved ?

 

Yes we know Reid was convited in a civilian court. We also know his incident was 2 months after 911.

 

It took the Bushies about 3-4 years to setup a tribunal for terrorists. Do the Obamaites know the difference ?

Exactly, I've never seen this list.

[Jim Martin]

Profile of Paul Ryan

 

Such frugality is fitting for a politician who, as he sips ice water, frets that America is "sleep-walking toward a debt crisis." Ryan tells me: "Within a few years a sale of government bonds will fail. The capital markets will go crazy, and the Fed and Treasury will run to Capitol Hill demanding a giant bailout. Adding Obamacare would make the crisis go deeper and arrive faster."

I do love this bit:

 

Obama noted that Ryan had "made a serious proposal" to rein in the deficit and then praised him for at least addressing entitlement spending. Following those apparently peaceful words, Democrats launched a withering assault over the next three days as budget director Peter Orszag, Democratic Congressional Campaign chairman Chris Van Hollen, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi all pummeled Ryan for threatening the safety net for the elderly and providing tax breaks for the rich.

 

Yeah I've heard this scaremongering horseshit from DemoRats since the '80s. Want to means-test SocSec? Maybe index SocSec increases to inflation rather than to average wage increases? "ZOMG THE REPUBLICANS ARE GONNA TURN OLD PEOPLE INTO SOILENT GREEN SO RICH PEOPLE CAN EAT THEM!!!"

 

Which is why we're headed toward Govt spending of 35% of GDP and higher, and a massive debt crisis. Thanks, demagoguing, lying motherfcukers. Rot in Hell, every single one of you.

[BansheeOne]

Just saw in the coverage about Ted Cruz' candidacy that he was actually born in Canada. Isn't there some clause that POTUS must be US-born? I would usually translate that to "natural-born American" which I guess Cruz is via his mother, but I remember there was some debate in 2008 about McCain having been born in Panama which was not a problem in the end because the Canal Zone was considered US territory.