The midterms may have saved a superpower -- an excellent political analysis!!

[Armed Aviator]

I've read numerous snide remarks about Beck in this thread. All Beck did was try to teach us History. Then, try to motivate us to not repeat it!. What is your beef with Beck in this matter? He performed a great service in doing those two items.

[Armed Aviator]

You all know how I feel about all polititians. They are all lying pieces of crap. That being said. The republicans and tea partiers wanted this mess, they got this mess so fix it or shut the f@$k up. Presumptive speaker Boner ( yeah BONER) is already starting to soften up after 2 years of talking crap. I was listening to Rush yesturday and there was a woman on the show that heard the same thing in Boners victory speech. None of these people want to led. Most in both parties just like the idea of having a title/power.

I also think that Boehner isn't my first choice for Speaker. We need to stand up for our principals and not give in, no compromise! The Tea Partiers are grass roots citizens who are trying to stop the growth of government and taxes. that's it. Also, it's interesting that this "RACEST" group happened to be instrumental in electing two Blacks, a Cuban, and an Indian(from India) Hmmmmm. Doesn't quite fit the drive-by media mold does it!

Edited November 4, 2010 by Armed Aviator

[Guest Jamie]

Quick rave:

Really think we could pay it down in 10-20 years with Fair Tax and just normal "efficiency expert" type cutting.

$700 Billion TARP kind of hurt, especially when it mostly bailed out criminals complicit in crime with capitol hill.

Get every dime of that back, however you can.

Foreign aid (that we know about) is about 23 Billion/yr. Zap it.

Dept. of Education budget is 69 billion/yr. Zap it.

Probably at least a couple of other cabinet departments could be eliminated, figure another 100 billion combined.

Iraq and Afghanistan, both due to no more than W's desperate erection, are around 250 Billion/yr.

We're looking at about half a TRILLION per year right off the bat. That would make a pretty good dent in the deficit.

And you KNOW there's at least another quarter trillion in chaff here and there.

That would at least get us down in the general ballpark of balancing income (about 2.3 trillion) with outgo (about 3.5 trillion).

Most estimates of the Fair Tax show that the gov would get more revenue than by taxing everyone in the US at a 30% income rate, and would possibly DOUBLE federal income. Not to mention that it would eliminate 95% of the IRS, another paltry 11 billion, but still pretty good pocket change.

Matter of fact, I predict that the next GOP nominee will run on basis of instituting the Fair Tax. But of course, it won't actually be enacted; the IRS is how the government actually controls the populace, and it won't give that up, Tea Party be damned.

To address your three areas:

Obviously, reforms in all aspects of "welfare" must be instituted, including strict immigration policies and enforcement -- in short, the US must stop financially rewarding failure and punishing success.

Worldwide military presence must be re-evaluated, and let's be honest about why we are where we are. If we're somewhere to protect the oil flow, let's by God do it and be up front about it, otherwise we are not the World Police. Plus, let's be frank, we've supported the Bad Guys about half the time anyway through the last 100 years.

Social security would have been fine if Congress had left it alone in its own retirement fund, would have earned its way no prob, but of course there's really no money there, 'cause they spent it all as part of the general budget years ago. So yeah, there will need to be some cut off point where folks are simply paid back what they put it with interest and the program ended. It doesn't even provide starvation living anymore anyway.

Again, just a quick diatribe, but I truly think it could be done with a relatively painless lowering of "quality of life" to most Americans over a decade or at most, two -- the alternative is ultimately going to be something that NO American will want to face.

- OS

Selling off some of this - U.S. Gold Stockpile - rather than letting it sit around and do nothing other than rack up storage costs wouldn't hurt either.

( I ran across a better article on this a couple of weeks back, but lost it before I could remember to post it. I realize a lot of what is mentioned in the above article is stored for other countries, banks, etc., but if you'll do some digging, you'll discover the U.S. has a few tons of the stuff it's self. )

Edited November 4, 2010 by Jamie

[mikegideon]

I also think that Boehner isn't my first choice for Speaker. We need to stand up for our principals and not give in, no compromise! The Tea Partiers are grass roots citizens who are trying to stop the growth of government and taxes. that's it. Also, it's interesting that this "RACEST" group happened to be instrumental in electing two Blacks, a Cuban, and an Indian(from India) Hmmmmm. Doesn't quite fit the drive-by media mold does it!

No comprimise? Isn't that the same as saying "ignore all the American people that don't agree with me"? Isn't that what we JUST got out of? The Tea Party had a big impact, and I think a positive impact. They were still a lot bigger on an idea than on nuts and bolts solutions. The burning question... where do you cut? One group isn't going to be allowed to pick.

[ftncityfatboy]

It certainly has been for every other nation that ever tried it.

Maybe a decade or so of Zimbabwean living will be good for our national ethos.

- OS

WHAT??????

[ftncityfatboy]

I also think that Boehner isn't my first choice for Speaker.

better than Nancy......Boehner, is that spelled "Bone ner"? Would hate to have that name.........

[Guest HvyMtl]

Sadly, this fellow, I believe, is not correct.

Basically put, the present level of spending vs the tax income of the government is way out of line. Most assuredly so. So, what are the Republicans doing about it? Well? One of the first things stated was to ensure the Bush tax cuts are re-upped. This will only speed the ever increasing deficit.

What have they stated to cut? Repeal the Obama Care? Would not make a dent in the deficit. Would "putting back" the Medicare Cuts? The GOP has promised this, too... Well, that increases the deficit.

So. How are they going to pay for the loss of tax revenue? Budget cuts? Ok. We are at war, so defense cannot be cut. Medicare is ever increasing, just try to cut this. (Notice their want to put back the Medicare Cuts... Pandering to their constituency - older boomers...) Social Security funds can no longer really be raided to cover the debt costs, as it is going into the red. (And try to cut this, as those who get SSI are loudly complaining about the no increase in benefits to cover inflation this year...) Education? Failing, and cutting this will make the GOP look like they are hurting the US in competing for jobs, so they probably wont cut this. Homeland Security? Will be beefed up to prevent illegal immigration under the GOP. An added expense not paid for. Welfare? It will be cut, but that, too is very unpopular right now, as more and more GOP voters are having to rely on Unemployment, food stamps, and housing aid to get by in this tough economy. (Again, cannot get too many voters against you, unless you want to get voted out next election...) Law enforcement? GOP will not cut that, they look to themselves as the enforcers of law, not like the "compromising" Dems. That wont get cut, but will probably see spending increases.

More Stimulus packages? Well. They want to cut that. Reality is, the stimulus was more of a safety net for the states, who also were having severe tax income deficits. The stimulus saved, for a time, literally thousands of cops, fire, emt, and teacher jobs. Nothing to replace the "stimulus?" Expect a huge wave of new unemployment, forced by the State Government's inability to pay for their own needs. The worst thing to happen for the GOP would be another large nation wide employment loss. Which also points to the GOP not truly cutting the Fed Government right now, as any deep cuts would create more unemployment, pointed directly at the GOP for the cuts. Remember, they were pushed in to create jobs, not end them. And they know creating a bunch of new unemployed will start a reversal of fortunes.

So. Reality is, if they cut like the Brits did, they would face a high probability of being voted out the next election. Remember, the intent of the two parties is to control, not get voted out. So anything which would run the risk of the GOP getting voted out will not occur. All one has to do is look at this election, and see how quickly the Dems got voted out. The GOP does not want to make the same mistake...

I think David Stockman makes a lot of sense. Who is he? He was Ronald Reagan's Director for the Office of Management and Budget. He was a key player in Reagan's tax adjustments and tax cut plan.

Read this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/01/opinion/01stockman.html?_r=1&pagewanted=1&sq=david%20stockman&st=cse&scp=1

Effectively, I believe this ever growing snowball effect has been in effect for decades, and we are now facing a very large hangover for our lack of forethought. Sadly, it seems the GOP, in its present form, has become the tax cut and spend party. Eschewing its roots as the tax cut and spend cut party, in an open attempt to regain power. Sad. Dangerous. And, if unchecked, deadly for this country.

Note: Democrats, too, are NOT guilt free. Rather, they are guilty of the same, "deficit be damned" mentality. One of Obama's first acts under the stimulus? HE CUT TAXES by the tune of over $100 Billion. The intent was simple. It was to be an "invisible" tax cut, so the people would not realize the cut occurred, and would spend the additional funds to stimulate the economy. It is unclear, at best, to see if the cuts actually impacted the economy. Then he spent and spent. Very Bush like.

BOTH parties are to blame and BOTH have NO active plan to focus on the causes.

Worse: WE ALL are to blame. WE have gotten TOO COZY with what the Government provides (bribed with our own money) and will fight against anything which takes away what we get. Remember this, to make the necessary sacrifices to end this deficit, we all will have to pay... Either by not getting the benefits we think we deserve (from SSI, to Medicare, to roads, to police protection, to ambulance service, down to the core benefits the politicians have gotten us accustomed to enjoying) or by paying more through taxes on us...

My predictions for 2012: Due to the active gridlock created by a Congress divided, I expect the loss of seats by the GOP. In addition, due to the new ability to "place blame" on the GOP House for being "Partisan," and blocking the Dems, Obama gets his second term. I base this prediction on what occurred in the Republican Revolution of the 1990's.

People forget: Congress and the President cannot quickly and effectively create jobs and improve the economy over a short period (ie. 5-10 years.) The present economy is partly due to the improper laws and spending by Congress over the past decades. From NAFTA, to the deregulation of Wall Street, to giving tax breaks to corporations who outsourced our industry, to the deregulation of mortgages, and on and on and on...

I do not see any change soon.

Edited November 5, 2010 by HvyMtl

[Guest 6.8 AR]

You get a little success by turning out a few Democrat socialists and all you can do is criticize

them before they are allowed to take office. I'm impressed. It's going to take a long time to fix

our problems and it will be several election cycles of the same kind of gains for the Republicans

if you can accept that. Weening a lot of spoiled rotten people off their government and getting

the constitutional house in order is going to take a while.

Terry Frymire is right about you clowns wanting to bash the Becks of the worlds. People like him

have put a lot of information in the public that could be had if people weren't so damned lazy to

pick books up and learn about their history. He has done a great job of that. So what the heck if

he makes a buck by doing it?

Things may go down the crapper before the Republicans get some things done, but they will go

down sooner if you give up in the process of getting your house in order. They won't be sworn in

until January, so why don't you save the criticism until then. I'd be watching what happens between

now and then, and be working towards future gains in the senate and getting the right president

in the White House. There is a lot that still needs to happen before we have a country I remember,

spring up, again.

Yeh, there are a lot of problems, but there are some opportunities building, also. Don't give up before

it gets started.

[mikegideon]

Terry Frymire is right about you clowns wanting to bash the Becks of the worlds. People like him

have put a lot of BS in the public that could be had if people weren't too damned smart to

buy into that huge gust of fart gas to begin with.

FTFY

[leroy]

Until all the citizens pay taxes in the country, entitlements are few, government spending is responsible, and foreign adventurism is realistic; there will be no appreciable change in the health of our country. This economic stuff aint too hard to grasp; its built on income vs expenditure. You cannot borrow $2, have an $8 income and give out $12 for very long. That is what we are doing.

Until a climate is created in this country which espouses fiscal responsibility in government (...and in individuals...), makes work honorable and rewarding (...again, it once was...), shrinks these idiotic bureaucratic regulations (...especially the enviornmental ones...), and creates a climate favorable to business expansion, there will be no prosperity in this country. If we continue the policies of the last 20 or so years; we are doomed to exactly what the British and French are dealing with now.

Do i believe polititians will do all these things just because we've had one election that changed the balance of power in the House? -- No. But i believe it's a good start. If the polititians are smart (...and that's a big "if"---); they will start doing exactly what we've been discussing here and will expose (...and politically eliminate, or marginalize...) those who stand in their way, just like Reagan did.

If they are not smart; they will do the same ole thing; saying one thing and doing another. The problem with that (...for polititians, at least...) is that it's dangerous now, as the "big media" (...if there is such a thing anymore...) cant effectively supress the truth of things very well. I predict that if the Republicans continue to be polititians instead of conservatives; they will be thrown on the scrapheap of history and morph into the Demorat party. If that happens, the split will be complete. Conservative Libertarian vs Socialist. That is exactly where this country is at this juncture in history.

We have been flirting with socialism since Komrade Roosevelt was inagurated in the thirties. It has took us about 80 or so years to come to this "pseudo managed economy" that we have today. All the way, the results have been predictable. A downward spiral.

I firmly believe that folks need to get active in this political stuff instead of pontificating and third basing everybody so much; or we all will be (...in a very short while...) a lot poorer and more at risk than we are now. The Tea Party is a step in the right direction. If libertarian ideals (...specifically those of limited government, fiscal responsibility, and individual responsibility; as opposed of this komrade Roosevelt baloney of the "entitlement for the collective good" crap doled out by a "political elite" to us hapless, ignorant serfs---) are not maintained in this country; it is doomed to fail in every possible way, economically and politically.

Food for thought.

Leroy

[Guest 6.8 AR]

FTFY

No thanks!

[Guest 6.8 AR]

There is another problem that the Republicans have as a task that Ron Paul is wanting

to sink his teeth into that could break this country in to. That is this out of control FED

that announced another round of monetary policy that will probably end up in inflation

for all. The FED is printing money to put in its left hand to give to its right hand and all

it will do is further deflate the value of the dollar. Paul has been wanting to do something

about this for years and, now, if he is given the opportunity, he might get a chance to

gain a forum with the American people to deal with it. The Democrats wouldn't allow it,

and if it isn't stopped soon, you might need your guns because inflation kills ability to

buy basic necessities and keep a roof over your head if allowed to linger. We've been

there before, and it is ugly. Those Tea Party folks understand it and want to stop this

activity.

Otherwise, you should get on one of those planes with Obama and go to Mumbai,

because, if you think a trip costing 200 million a day is good, you've already lost the

battle in the arena of ideas and are running scared.

It's a dangerous practice to keep on doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome.

That kind of mentality has to go away.

[Daniel]

DoD blasts report of 34-ship armada to India - Military News | News From Afghanistan, Iraq And Around The World - Military Times

DoD blasts report of 34-ship armada to India

Staff report

Posted : Saturday Nov 6, 2010 10:37:23 EDT

Just how many “warships” does it take to protect the president when he’s overseas? That would be 34, if some news reports from India are believed.

President Obama was scheduled to start a 10-day trip to Asia on Nov. 5 when the Internet lit up with the news that the Navy would send 34 ships to India to provide security for his visit.

Also reported widely was that the cost of the trip would be $200 million per day.

That’s all bunk, spokesmen for both the White House and Pentagon said Nov. 4.

“The numbers reported in this article have no basis in reality,” White House spokesman Tommy Vietor said. “Due to security concerns, we are unable to outline details associated with security procedures and costs, but it’s safe to say these numbers are wildly inflated.”

Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said the Defense Department does not discuss details of the president’s security.

“But I will take the liberty this time of dismissing as absolutely absurd this notion that somehow we were deploying 10 percent of the Navy — some 34 ships and an aircraft carrier — in support of the president’s trip to Asia. That’s just comical. Nothing close to that is being done,” Morrell said.

The Navy’s deployable battle force as of Nov. 4 was 288 ships, with 147 already underway.

In addition to India, Obama was scheduled to visit Indonesia, South Korea and Japan before returning to Washington on Nov. 14.

[mikegideon]

No thanks!

I was only trying to help . Seriously, I'm glad Beck has loyal listeners. Profits are up!

[raydog1]

DoD blasts report of 34-ship armada to India - Military News | News From Afghanistan, Iraq And Around The World - Military Times

Who you gonna believe???

Glen Beck? (who got his info from Michelle Bachman who got her info from a tabloid who got its info from an article in an India newpaper who got its info from an anonymous source in India)

or

The Department of Defense? (Who might have first hand knowledge of what's actually going on with top secret security details.)

<sarcasm>Obviously, the DoD is in Obama's pocket.</sarcasm>

[mikegideon]

Who you gonna believe???

Glen Beck? (who got his info from Michelle Bachman who got her info from a tabloid who got its info from an article in an India newpaper who got its info from an anonymous source in India)

or

The Department of Defense? (Who might have first hand knowledge of what's actually going on with top secret security details.)

<sarcasm>Obviously, the DoD is in Obama's pocket.</sarcasm>

... the same DoD that's in charge of our military. I only got one thing to say... :panic:

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I'll go with the higher figure, not because of Beck, but because our government and it's

leader likes to live high on the hog, without accountability. It happens to often. I still don't

understand why he had to leave, except that he's a coward, or a traitor, anyway. More of

a ruler than a leader.

I'd rather have my citizenship back. He makes me feel like a subject, too much. Maybe he

should just stay gone.

[raydog1]

Come on, lol.

How many times have I read in this very forum about how much he hates the military and how much they hate him back?

Surely there would be BP-sized leaks all over the place if it really costs that much.

Besides, that number wouldn't just anger our citizens. It would make us look terrible in the eyes of the world. Remember, he's supposed to be constantly apologizing for American excess and exceptionalism. A $200 million/ day trip to India would certainly fly in the face of that perception.

Sent from my HTC Incredible using Tapatalk Pro

[Oh Shoot]

I'll go with the higher figure,...

You're not usually tin foil prone... entire US military effort in mideast for 100,000 troops is not 200 mil per day.

Likely it's like most presidential road shows, 4-5 million per day.

Original "source" in India might have been talking in rupees; indeed 200 million rupees would be about 4.5 million USD.

- OS

[Guest 6.8 AR]

You may be right, OS. It may be way off. But, like I said, he likes to go over the top.

Nothing is too good for the great messiah. But if you add up all the military backup

on top of all the usual Secret Service, it has to be more than the typical dog and

pony show, whatever the amount ends up. I don't really know much of the details,

but it sounded like a carrier group went with him.

[Oh Shoot]

You may be right, OS. It may be way off. But, like I said, he likes to go over the top.

Nothing is too good for the great messiah. But if you add up all the military backup

on top of all the usual Secret Service, it has to be more than the typical dog and

pony show, whatever the amount ends up. I don't really know much of the details,

but it sounded like a carrier group went with him.

Why would it be much if any different than all the other places in the world he has traveled since being in office?

- OS

[Daniel]

DoD blasts report of 34-ship armada to India - Military News | News From Afghanistan, Iraq And Around The World - Military Times

“But I will take the liberty this time of dismissing as absolutely absurd this notion that somehow we were deploying 10 percent of the Navy — some 34 ships and an aircraft carrier — in support of the president’s trip to Asia. That’s just comical. Nothing close to that is being done,†Morrell said.

L2Read

[Guest 6.8 AR]

There probably is no difference. This one is just getting more attention.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Daniel. That may be true. I don't know, but is his the last word? Since it is a

security issue, I would expect that person to say that.

Also, a carrier group is probably in the Indian Ocean for strategic reasons, anyway,

or at least in the region.

The dollar counts for these trips are probably speculative but expensive, nonetheless.

I'd rather question his reasons for going. His foreign policy has thus far sucked.