Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (110908)	12/11/2007 2:17:35 PM
From: DizzyG	Respond to of 173976

The Paygo Farce December 10, 2007; Page A18 'Democrats are committed to ending years of irresponsible budget policies that have produced historic deficits. Instead of compiling trillions of dollars of debt onto our children and grandchildren, we will restore pay-as-you-go budget discipline." --Speaker Nancy Pelosi, December 12, 2006 Well, as Emily Litella, the half-witted Gilda Radner character on Saturday Night Live, would have put it: "Never mind." Last week Congressional Democrats formally renounced their ballyhooed budget pledge to offset any new tax cuts with other tax increases or spending cuts. We're delighted to see this false promise go, but there's a larger lesson in this failure for the tax and spending battles of 2008. Senate Democrats gave up on "paygo," as it's called, when they realized they lacked the votes to offset the $50.6 billion cost of protecting more than 20 million middle-class taxpayers from getting whacked by the Alternative Minimum Tax this year. They've spent the year floating all kinds of tax increases to make up the difference. But in the end they passed an AMT relief bill without a penny to pay for it. Paygo is now pay gone. We should stress that this is the right decision for the economy and the federal budget. The AMT was never supposed to hit the middle class, and it only does so now because the Democrats who designed it failed to index it for inflation and raised AMT rates under Bill Clinton in 1993. With the economy in a slowdown, the last thing anyone needs now is a tax hike. The budget deficit is a little above 1% of GDP, which is below the 25-year average, and should remain so as long as the economy keeps growing. But paygo shouldn't be allowed to expire without everyone kicking sand on its grave. That's because it has been nothing but a confidence game from the very start. Paygo doesn't apply to domestic discretionary spending, and it doesn't restrain spending increases under current law in entitlements like Medicare and Medicaid. Its main goals are to make tax cutting all but impossible, while letting Democrats pretend to favor "fiscal discipline," a la Ms. Pelosi's boast above. In fact, the paygo farce has been unfolding all year. Since the day they took the gavel, Democrats have been using gimmick after gimmick to evade it. The Schip bill for health care, for example, includes a spending "cliff" that disguises its actual cost. It assumes spending would rise to $14 billion in 2012, but then pretends the costs would fall to less than half that level in 2013 -- which just so happens to fall outside the five-year budget scoring window. Some $60 billion in spending over the next 10 years were hidden through this ploy. Then there is the House farm bill awaiting action in the Senate. That spending marathon includes between $5 billion and $10 billion in fictitious paygo savings by shifting the date of farm aid payments from one year to another. If a Fortune 500 CEO did that sort of thing, he'd be indicted. House Democrats realize how humiliating this all is, so they're still vowing to make paygo work. Especially embarrassed are the so-called Blue Dog Democrats for whom "fiscal discipline" is a coat of political protection. John Tanner of Tennessee is so upset he says the Senate paygo abdication "is bordering on criminal," and about 30 Blue Dogs are threatening to vote against AMT repeal without offsetting tax increases. They'd have more credibility if they also opposed the various fiscal gimmicks in the Schip and farm bills, not to mention the 2008 Congressional budget outline that exceeded President Bush's budget request by $22 billion. In any case, they'll have to reckon with New York Democrat Chuck Schumer, who helped doom paygo in the Senate. Mr. Schumer runs the Senate Democratic campaign committee, and he's raised boatloads of cash from hedge funds and private equity while winking that he can block the House's tax increase on their "carried interest." Let's see: Paygo, or more cash to elect more Democrats. Which do you think wins? The larger relevance of this episode concerns the 2008 campaign. Hillary Clinton in particular has made paygo a major campaign theme because it makes her sound like a fiscal conservative while helping to justify tax increases. But, lo, guess who was missing on Thursday when the Senate voted 88-5 to ignore paygo on the AMT? None other than the candidate herself, along with Chris Dodd, Joe Biden and Barack Obama. To quote another Saturday Night Live character, "How convenient." Mr. Bush, and especially the GOP Presidential candidates, should be using this paygo collapse to explain to Americans what a charade this Democratic line is. The 2003 tax cuts expire in 2010, and paygo will make them all but impossible to extend. Now's the time to bury paygo for good. online.wsj.com

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (110908)	12/11/2007 2:31:52 PM
From: tonto	Respond to of 173976

LOLOL...Good one! The sad thing is that some people are stupid enough to believe that... The rest of the story. The Dems in the Senate were forced to abandon PayGo because of the Republicans filibuster.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (110908)	12/13/2007 6:42:47 PM
From: longnshort	Respond to of 173976

Democrats Blaming Each Other For Failures By Jonathan Weisman and Paul Kane Washington Post Staff Writers Thursday, December 13, 2007; A01 When Democrats took control of Congress in January, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) pledged to jointly push an ambitious agenda to counter 12 years of Republican control. Now, as Congress struggles to adjourn for Christmas, relations between House Democrats and their colleagues in the Senate have devolved into finger-pointing. House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles B. Rangel (D-N.Y.) accuses Senate Democratic leaders of developing "Stockholm syndrome," showing sympathy to their Republican captors by caving in on legislation to provide middle-class tax cuts paid for with tax increases on the super-rich, tying war funding to troop withdrawal timelines, and mandating renewable energy quotas. If Republicans want to filibuster a bill, Rangel said, Reid should keep the bill on the Senate floor and force the Republicans to talk it to death. Reid, in turn, has taken to the Senate floor to criticize what he called the speaker's "iron hand" style of governance. Democrats Blaming Each Other For Failures

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (110908)	12/13/2007 6:45:02 PM
From: longnshort	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 173976

MEDIA MISINFORMS: Fewer Soldiers Commit Suicide During Bush Years USA Today has the latest attempt by the media to try to shape opinion on the War in Iraq: A record number of soldiers — 109 — have killed themselves this year, according to Army statistics showing confirmed or suspected suicides. The deaths occur as soldiers serve longer combat deployments and the Army spends $100 million on support programs. The Army provided suicide statistics to Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash. Her staff shared them with USA TODAY. The Army updated those statistics Wednesday, confirming 85 suicides, including 27 in Iraq and four in Afghanistan. Of course, if there is a correlation between suicides and Iraq it is not clear from this article since the vast majority of the Army suicides did not occur in Iraq and no information is shared by Senator Murray on whether these soldiers ever spent time in Iraq. But, facts don't matter to Senator Murray or the media. It's all about agenda. Senator Murray knows better. A report released to Congress in July of this year showed that military suicides are much lower during the Bush years than the Clinton years. Here's a closer look at the official numbers: Click to Enlarge From page 11 of the CRS Report to Congress (pdf) -Hat Tip BG If you look at the numbers you see that the total official number of suicides in the military last year was 155. If you look further you see that there are less suicides in the military today than during the Clinton years! What do you suppose drove our soldiers to commit suicide when the Clintons were in office? And, how will the media explain this? And... US soldiers are also less likely to commit suicide than the general population. Poynter Online reported: The 17/100,000 rate is right on track with what the rate is for all males in the United States... When you consider that most serving in Iraq are young, you might find that the suicide rate among those serving in Iraq could be even less than their peers in the general population. The suicide rate for 20 to 24-year-old males in the United States is 20/100,000 [pdf]. And, this figure (18.4) reported by USA Today is actually lower than the general population for that age group. WORD TO THE WISE: Don't trust Patty Murray (D-Wash)! gatewaypundit.blogspot.com