— Which, I’m assuming, means some light GOP grousing and fraught finger wagging followed inevitably by capitulation — with that followed by an explanation detailing how the party’s ostensible capitulation is really part of a super-smart strategic long-term plan to win elections. So that the Republicans can govern just like Democrats. Only with more Jesus. And some lower taxes.
Amen.
Yeah, I’m a cynic, I know. Sue me.
I kind of thought the government had too much land as it is. I think Obama would the like the government to own all the land, and then lease it to people. More largess for the people who think and donate properly, more punishment for those who don’t.
You know, it would be nice if the Republicans could come up with a set of massive new proposals to cut many hundreds of billions, and then bargain down from there in exchange for Barry dropping his plan to spend more of our money to put land out of our use. Just an idea. Of course, Barry will naturally get some of his proposed brand-new additional spending for land-snatching; all pragmatic Republicans understand this. Having only one third of one half of government in Republican paws means they can accomplish very little, which is somehow simultaneously a historic victory for Republican power.
I’m still trying to figure that one out. That is, the notion that on the one hand no one can realistically demand much of the GOP when they have so little power, so we cannot complain when they achieve so few cuts and passed no riders; yet on the other hand we are negative nabobs of wingnuttery if we don’t celebrate this selfsame small achievement as An Historic Victory for True Conservatism, And No Grousing.
Ah, we proles have such limited vision. Thank Gaia we have top men working on our behalf in DC. Top. Men.
So, they’re hiring and buying land.
Just what broke entities are supposed to do.
Assholes.
Why doesn’t he use his borrowed money to buy up some land in a country that ISN’T on the verge of bankruptcy?
He’s creating jobs, Carin. Just look around you. Jobs everywhere.
…
LOOK HARDER!!
BHO’s buying land? Did he get permissions from the Chinese?
It’s a damn good time to buy real estate — buy low, sell high. And it creates jobs for real estate agents! WINNING!
A roughly eight hundred billion dollar “stimulus”. A trillion-plus in overruns for 2011. Some fifteen trillion in debt. A hundred trillion dollar shortfall in federal medicine. Another hundred fifty trillion dollars in aggregate shortfalls at the state level.
Public union rioting in the streets. And the Senate majority leader lying his bony ass off about all; willfully scaring seniors to keep the partisanship and the inevitable FAIL rolling until a Soros can install new cronies and catch the whole thing on the crash cycle.
And what; thirty billion in one-time cuts?
Rock on, Republicans. You jackasses. Can’t wait to see what you’ll do with land management under, say, the guise of conservationism.
Carin – 2 hours and 15 minutes. No hurling.
Marathon Man!
He should buy Detroit. Lots of bargains.
Charlie Martin, ever wrong on anything involving numbers and dollar signs, signs off on BoehnerPlan, and shoots him some conservatives in the comments in one of the more facile bits to disgrace PJM. Which is saying something for the eternally fiscally facile Martin but I repeat myself.
All completely true except the part between “if” and “off”.
It’s this rot that proves JG’s point.
And stays the course. Nice job, progressive.
Re: Detroit, Democrats, Pottery Barn Rule.
JH
Good God, didn’t the guy look at Ryan’s plan? Even with that one (which the Proggies are rubbing their hands and calling it a “suicide note”) the budget isn’t balanced until 2050.
My first thought, Darleen. My second was how cool it was that a rising debt was a falling debt. With pictures.
Charlie Martin uses numbers, JH. Math. Science!
You’re too stupid to understand.
Charlie sniffs at the doom and gloomers. With math as his Greek chorus.
Here, JHo. Allow me to rework Mr Martin’s assertion: If spending still increases, but somehow, magically, the economy recovers and grows the GDP, the government will bring in more in tax revenues. And if the GDP, like, really really really super magically grows — say by a thousand fold — during a period of hyperinflation and a very weak dollar, then we can pay off the deficit and the debt super-dooper quickly, because it’s not like a government flush with new revenues would ever ever spend them! #WINNING!
Chuck also never conflates the budget — that thing housing the Stimulus™ — with the Fed’s QE three through QE fifty nine. Because what surely Dingy Harry can be reasoned into passing through the Senate and A Good Man can be reasoned with to sign in the way of a balanced freaking budget, would never ever be trumped by the Fed. Or vice versa.
Just give us a two cent dollar to replace our four cent dollar. And then a one cent dollar. Using new RepubliProgg math, we’ll be rich by 2012 going dead broke.
Do I detect a note of sarcasm there, Jeff?
When the Government is the buyer, there is no such thing as a truly “willing” seller.
“Rep. Norm Dicks, called the land-buying program a good one”
I was thinking about adding something witty to that but instead I think I’ll just extract it and let it marinate for a while;)
I always thought there was something wrong with any individual actually being able to own land (even though if they didn’t pay their taxes it could be confiscated).
Now the Imperial One has confirmed my concern, and in a brilliant stroke of progressivism, he is taking bold steps to borrow from the Chinese to buy privately owned land so that eventually we the peons will be permitted to visit our collective land holdings on government approved appropriate holidays (say yearly on Obama’s Birthday).
In a rational world, I think Obama should be considering SELLING some of that land for development (mining, natural gas, oil, and coal come to mind), but what do I know, especially since I did not graduate from an Ivy League institution of higher learning.
Mark Levin has a Facebook note up. Have to log in to see it.
Just got sent a no sign-in link to the Levin piece.
With both HuffPo.
And Politico.
Pushing the same theme of how the Republicans had a great big win I’m of the belief that the professional left sees an advantage for themselves in having Republicans thinking that way. Perhaps it is to fire up their base or to get the Republicans into an overconfident state of mind that will make it easier to crush them.
More likely though is the take of Mark Levin I linked above that Obama will now try to take the deficit reduction issue as his own with a proposal in his Wednesday speech which will be a convoluted thing that only serves the ends of the Progressive Left while looking on the surface as if it does reductions. Probably this will be used to disguise huge tax increases which will further drive down the economy. Republicans will be blamed for that somehow no doubt.
I guess that now puts me on the Jeff G. side of this dispute.
“I guess that now puts me on the Jeff G. side of this dispute.”
Intentionalist!!!
I do have an intent. I intend for the conservative side to beat the socialist progressive left.
Carin – 2 hours and 15 minutes. No hurling.
OMG, that’s awesome!!!! Great job JD!!!
(secretly notes times as “the time” to beat when I run my half)
That’s awesome.
Despite my 18 months of running and years of working out, I’m not a very fast runner, and I would be tickled pink to maintain 10 min miles. A feat you did after no previous running and a couple months of training.
Good job. Bastard.
I always thought there was something wrong with any individual actually being able to own land (even though if they didn’t pay their taxes it could be confiscated).
there lies the paradox.
No one (individual) owns land. We lease it from the government. We buy the rights to rent it from the government.
I’m of the belief that the professional left sees an advantage for themselves in having Republicans thinking that way. Perhaps it is to fire up their base or to get the Republicans into an overconfident state of mind that will make it easier to crush them.
I see it as just another flavor of the old “Shut up, they explained” tactic they always take. Convince the fiscal hawks that they’ve won, and maybe they’ll take their trophy and go home. The last thing these jokers want is for a serious reform to go through. To that end, they need to convince the uninformed that they’ve won, and that it’s safe to stop paying attention.
I respectfully disagree.
Thank you, Carin. I am pretty sore today. My pre-race kind of screwed me up, as it consisted of 3 flights, customs, and a 4 hour drive, arriving 4 hours before the run.
So, are you going to keep running ? Do more half-marathons this year?
Yes. Indy half marathon in 3 or 4 weeks. Maybe the Rock & Roll Half in St Louis in Oct
OT: Anybody want to learn Russian? http://hotforwords.rt.com/
Happiness is borrowing more than 40% of the money you spend in perpetuity.
if(!1)
printf(“Win!\n”);
end
I actually cannot make head nor tail of Martin’s piece. He’s saying that if spending increases less quickly than GDP (really, the “still increases” bit is nearly superfluous) then eventually we’ll be in the black and out of debt.
Nearly tautological, in other words. As if some onetime reduction in spending somehow signified a trend.
Remember back in the ’90s when GDP outpaced spending for a while? If we’d only extrapolated linearly from there as Martin seems inclined to do, here, we could have won. All we’d have had to do was do a bit of graphing, and the hard part would have been over.