Say Anything Blog

Rob,

If they were numerate they wouldn’t be Democrats.

Out Here
Rodney G. Graves

Persia delenda est.
Latin: “Persia (modern day Iran) should be destoyed”

Obama is also proof for this point.  He wants to raise taxes on capital gains which will all but guarantee less tax revenue from capital gains will make it into the government coffers.

It’s also good to remember that the “healthy surplus” that Clinton was 100% responsible for bringing about vanished before GWBush was due to submit his first budget that October.  Figure that one out.

Fileitunder.com

I’m sure the half billion spent in MN building a light rail system that carries less traffic in a year than the I35W bridge carried in a day had nothing to do with Minnesota’s failure to replace they knw was defective for a decade.  Automobiles are not politically correct.

Actually, Jerry, it’s closer to a billion for Hiawatha so far, and there are two more planned lines coming in at around a cool billion apiece.  Or at least that’s what they’re saying now--the Hiawatha Line was supposed to come in at about half a billion, ended up at $774 million, and sucks down a few tens of millions each year in operating costs.  So another 2 billion per line is probably closer to the truth.

And think about it; your fair city has (had?) the People Mover--maybe Detroit can get in on the action!

(I hope and pray NOT, BTW)

One slight mistake; MNDOT did not know that 35W was ready for collapse; their surveys appear to have only monitored the condition of the structure, not whether the structure was designed properly.  So even if we’d skipped light rail, entitlements, AND the Iraq war, the 35W disaster probably would still have happened.

Unless, of course, eliminating light rail and entitlements would have been accomplished by bringing in clear-thinking people who would have realized that the bridge reports did not actually tell people if the bridge was fit to carry its load.  Then we might have escaped the problem.

rob
the iraq war has cost us 4,000+ lives. you are one sick pooch to not add that in. how much value should we put on each person? your interests would align with undervaluing those individuals. countless others will come home deranged, beat or kill their wives or girlfriends, as many already have, and go to jail. how much is each of those lives worth? 5 bucks? sick. also, add in the VA costs, hospital costs, food costs, and all the costs, not just the bullets.

also, a memory refresher. Lawrence Lindsey (white house econ adviser) back in 2002 claimed that a war in Iraq might cost as much as $200 billion. he was accused of being an alarmist by the rest of those idiots who grossly miscalculated everything about this ‘venture’.

the iraq war has cost us 4,000+ lives. you are one sick pooch to not add that in.

And you’re a dishonest schmuck to imply that I don’t think that matters.

It does matter, but the context of the discussion is fiscal.  If you want to talk about human cost of war we can, but right now we’re talking about the fiscal side of things.

But hey, nice try to change the subject.  And nice smear on our vets by implying that any sort of significant number of them are spousal abusers, etc.

I’m sure they appreciate it.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Also, Sparklie, go ahead and add in the cost of VA services, etc. to the price of the war in Iraq.  You still won’t touch that entitlements number.  You won’t even get to half.

Our entire national defense budget doesn’t touch what we spend on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

sparkless you ignorant twit,

The price of gained or continuing liberty is always paid in blood.  Treasure will only buy you Danegeld (and the votes of the innumerate).

Out Here
Rodney G. Graves

Persia delenda est.
Latin: “Persia (modern day Iran) should be destoyed”

Don’t we also have entitlement programs for our vets? I know the government is trying to get rid of anything that resembles it but it is very difficult for them. It’s very easy for vets to get jobs because they have a good reputation for professionalism and ability in comparison to private sector employees or those who have not done the strategy required in battle.

Also, to be convincing, maybe this is fuzzy math as I have been doing financials a lot and have missed a few zeros on occasion but you could say that the 583.6 billion is only 41.6% of the 1.4 trillion and so on. Looking above, I just realized I was doing a different comparison. But I’m sure it’s just as interesting.

Wow, two links to my dirty liberal blog in one day.  I’m on a roll. 

Thanks for linking.  I guess I’m going to have to be “by the books” now that you’re looking over my shoulder.

Now, could you please parse out your “entitlement” generalities, please?  Indeed, there are, most certainly, “entitlements” that are a direct result of the middle east skirmishes.  Doesn’t the government give 500K to each dead soldiers’ family?  How about Vet’s benefits?  These will, most certainly, increase with each added day, will they not?

I can be Sparkie too!

“Rob, how dishonest of you to count count the costs we have to pay about all those spousal abusers, murderers, rapists, thugs, and monsters that we send to war! How dare you?”

There is not a single person who is genuinely outraged over the deaths of our troops. Because to be angry over it...you have to think our troops are stupid children, too stupid to know what they’re signing up for. But that position, in and of itself, is filled with contempt for our armed men and women.

As I asked a friend recently “If the war was a lie to kill innocent Iraqis...why do you give a damn about the men and women who are perpetuating that lie and ACTUALLY doing the killing?” He sputtered for a little, then fell silent. Because, like Sparkie, his outrage was absolutely insincere.

Doesn’t the government give 500K to each dead soldiers’ family?

To the beneficiary if signed up for the insurance maybe it’s 400K, has been changed recently.

500K to each dead soldiers’ family?

The lack of service is showing…

SGLI (Serviceman’s Group Life Insurance) is just that, and the servicemen have a premium for it deducted from their pay.

Out Here
Rodney G. Graves

Persia delenda est.
Latin: “Persia (modern day Iran) should be destoyed”

I said something about this last night.

Must be nice to live in a world where one believes that the military takes up the bulk of the federal budget, instead of the under 20 percent it currently receives. That’s all the left ever talks about cutting. They never bring up their failing socialist Ponzi schemes sucking this country dry. Nope. Instead, the left focuses all of their time on cutting the most successful from the government roll - the United States military.

In short, the left wants to get rid of the successful Constitutionally-mandated military while keeping their failing Constitutional-runaround socialist programs. They live in an upside-down world.

Sparkie - the iraq war has cost us 4,000+ lives. you are one sick pooch to not add that in.

You’re one sick pooch to add it in.

You’re trading in the lives of warriors and undervaluing their mission. They died in support of their mission and most of the military, whether you recognize it or not, believe in their mission. You’re using their deaths to devalue a mission they believed in. Sick.

Not to mention that the Great Society costs us many more.

The streets of Detroit
DC
Chi-town
Philly
LA
Baltimore
and many many more,

are all war zones.

The Great Society costs this nation many more than 4,000 deaths in five years.

Maybe you are one sick pooch to not add that in or perhaps you are just one of the Liberals Who Can’t Do Math.

Dead Iraqi’s don’t count.

Dead Iraqi’s don’t count.

No, they don’t. If they weren’t ruled by madmen, there wouldn’t have been all of this death. Every death is entirely on them.

Let me guess: you blame America. Because you’re a “liberal” who is “reality based”.

You realize that programs like social security and medicare are not part of government spending. They are social contracts.

Maybe liberals and “black liberationists” are all right brained*? (illogical)

Communism is evil

You realize that programs like social security and medicare are not part of government spending. They are social contracts.

Predictable rhetorical gibberish from the Left.  Only a liberal would go to such surreal lengths to rationalize a financial pyramid scam of such magnitude.  Were anyone but government to perpetrate it they’d be charged with fraud.  The fact, of course, is that several have, from Charles Ponzi forward.

Your check is in the mail, Graeme!

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

Graeme,

If the programs you mention were indeed “social contracts” I’d be able to opt out of them and invest the money in something with a better return on interest than the promises of the Federal Government.

QED

Out Here
Rodney G. Graves

Persia delenda est.
Latin: “Persia (modern day Iran) should be destoyed”

Only a liberal would ignore the reality of which account the checks are drawn on in favor of the high-minded rhetorical construct of a “social contract”.

It is exactly this sort of “thinking” that has got the social democracies of “Old Europe” to the point of being effectively overdrawn at the bank.

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

To address Jay’s point about additional costs for Veteran’s services, I’d note that the 2009 appropriations request from the VA is $93.7 billion.

So if we round up a bit and put the cost of our middle eastern operations at about $210 billion/year...we’re still not even touching one year of entitlements.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

You realize that programs like social security and medicare are not part of government spending. They are social contracts.

Graeme, you do realize that the money for Socialist Insecurity and Medicare is collected by the government as taxes, and the checks are mailed out by government workers, no?  Exactly how one can argue that it’s not part of government spending is beyond me, unless psychoactive drugs are involved.

Here’s the rundown; about 800 billion each year for FICA related spending, and about half a trillion dollars or more for welfare programs, and a little bit here & there in other things.  You could even add a few hundred billion dollars in “corporate welfare"--things like farm subsidies, export subsidies, urban redevelopment, transit funding and such--to actually get closer to two trillion dollars in things that people see as “entitlements.”

(to be sure, some might differ on whether payments to producers and subsidies ought to be called “welfare,” but I would hope we would see that they are logically entitlements--try to take them away and tell me that the recipients don’t see them that way)

Yes, the Pareto Principle would tell us that unless we get entitlement spending under control, it might not matter what happens with military spending.  If only liberals could catch on.

Unfortunately, you haven’t addressed my point Rob.  You’ve parsed out Vet’s benefits.  What else is included in “entitlements”?  Everything spend domestically?  What exactly are we talking about?

Lik, my original argument was not about trashing the entire military budget.  My original argument was about the waste in the middle east. 

And you guys do realize that Medicare part D was created by the republicans right?  It’s not a “liberal ponzi scheme”.  Instead, it’s a republican-created, insurance company pocket padder.

Unfortunately, you haven’t addressed my point Rob.  You’ve parsed out Vet’s benefits.  What else is included in “entitlements”?  Everything spend domestically?  What exactly are we talking about?

So...you’re going to try to win this debate by feigning ignorance?

“Entitlements” are social spending, and you know as well as I do that the programs are too numerous to mention here but suffice it to say that the overwhelming bulk of that $1.4 trillion annual figure is Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

These programs are bleeding us dry, but all you want to do is cry a little tear over a relatively minuscule amount of funding going for a bit of foreign policy you disagree with.

Give me a break.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Jay, I gave the rundown.  Try reading.

So...you’re going to try to win this debate by feigning ignorance?

“Entitlements” are social spending, and you know as well as I do that the programs are too numerous to mention here but suffice it to say that the overwhelming bulk of that $1.4 trillion annual figure is Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

Aka, Rob bitches about someone “feigning ignorance” and then he “feigns ignorance”.  You can’t parse them out because it’s a stupid generality.  You and the rest of your buddies continue on with the baby and the bathwater argument without delineating what’s to be done. 

These programs are bleeding us dry, but all you want to do is cry a little tear over a relatively minuscule amount of funding going for a bit of foreign policy you disagree with.

You’re minimizing it.  It’s not just me.  This ain’t a popular war.  Most agree with me about the “foreign policy”.  And it’s a “relatively” miniscule to the generalities that you’ve concocted.  In normal terms...it’s a shitload of money and it’s wasted.

You and the rest of your buddies continue on with the baby and the bathwater argument without delineating what’s to be done.

Jay,

On the contrary, had you been paying attention you’d know that the conservative approach… the dynamic (as opposed to static) approach, is to put in place policies which encourage sustained economic growth, thus fostering increased federal tax revenues along with increased wealth for society.  Entitlement spending is on virtual auto-pilot regardless of which party is at fault for which particular program.  While the unfunded liabilities continue to increase with a population that is aging but living longer, we simply cannot afford the payments we have already committed to without sustained, long-term economic growth.  This isn’t rocket science… its arithmetic!

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

You can’t parse them out because it’s a stupid generality.  You and the rest of your buddies continue on with the baby and the bathwater argument without delineating what’s to be done.

I see.  So you win...because I’m not going to sit in front of my computer and type out the 25,000 different ways entitlement funds are spent.

Well that’s very convenient for you now, isn’t it Jay?  Ignore the sucking chest wound that is Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid and instead focus on the knee-scratch that is war and defense spending.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Jay,

Veterans “benefits” are a form of deferred compensation for those who have served (and done so at a rate of pay far lower than their civilian counterparts).

Out Here
Rodney G. Graves

Persia delenda est.
Latin: “Persia (modern day Iran) should be destoyed”

I see.  So you win...because I’m not going to sit in front of my computer and type out the 25,000 different ways entitlement funds are spent.

No, it’s not a matter of “win”.  I don’t agree with your conclusion that “entitlements” need to be slashed in favor of continued spending on a war of ideology in Iraq.  You continue to generalize “entitlements” because it’s convenient for you to dismiss all of them as bathwater.  You know as well as I do that there are numerous programs that are included in your generality that aren’t “welfare” in nature or that the GOP would just as soon NOT cut.  Without telling me, or anyone else, what the numbers represent, they mean nothing.  My numbers, 3 trillion estimated, represents the money predictted to be spent in Iraq.  What do yours stand for? 

the dynamic (as opposed to static) approach, is to put in place policies which encourage sustained economic growth, thus fostering increased federal tax revenues along with increased wealth for society.  Entitlement spending is on virtual auto-pilot regardless of which party is at fault for which particular program.  While the unfunded liabilities continue to increase with a population that is aging but living longer, we simply cannot afford the payments we have already committed to without sustained, long-term economic growth.

This does plenty to figure out how to get more money.  It does nothing, however, about cutting the amount of money spent.  I believe the arguments being championed by your colleagues include doing away with certain programs.  Rob’s not arguing about where he’s going to get the money.  He’s arguing about where he believes the money shouldn’t go...you know...poor people, disabled, seniors etc...because he simply can’t imagine not spending 3 trillion trying to kill an ideology.

Your post obviously doesn’t address this.  In fact, it brushes it under the rug.  This is evidenced by your statement that “regardless of which party is at fault for which particular program” the system is broken.  Indeed, the problems associated with seniors and Medicare D is a republican creation...obviously their method of “reforming” the program.  Is this the type of “reform” that Rob envisions?

Jay bloviates:

...can’t imagine not spending 3 trillion trying to kill an ideology.

How much did we spend (in 2008 dollars) “killing” the Nazi ideology and occupying Germany to ensure it did not regenerate?  Was that money ill spent?

Out Here
Rodney G. Graves

Persia delenda est.
Latin: “Persia (modern day Iran) should be destoyed”

No, it’s not a matter of “win”.  I don’t agree with your conclusion that “entitlements” need to be slashed in favor of continued spending on a war of ideology in Iraq.

Ok, would you agree that they need to be slashed because growth in entitlement spending is not sustainable?

We simply cannot afford it.  Is that a good enough reason?

My numbers, 3 trillion estimated, represents the money predictted to be spent in Iraq.  What do yours stand for?

Is it really fair to work off of predicted numbers?  Because I don’t agree with that $3 trillion number at all.  Why don’t we just go off of money actually spent.

For last year Iraq war spending was at $116 billion. Adding in the entire VA budget (which isn’t just for Iraq war vets, but I’m willing to toss it in for the sake of argument) we’re at $210 billion.

Entitlements were $1.4 trillion last year.

Now, you’re trying to obfuscate by saying that “entitlements” is too general.  You’re talking about a specific war, I’m talking about our nations cradle-to-grave entitlements.

But since you’re going to continue to feign ignorance here, let’s get specific.

Medicare is facing $36 trillion in unfunded obligations, and President Bush is getting flak for trying to shrink the rate of growth of spending on the program from 7.2% to 5%.

The rate of growth.

Meanwhile, you’ve got your panties in a twist over $200 billion/year for the war in Iraq.

I understand that you disagree with the war in Iraq, but the gist of your original post was that conservatives are hypocrites because we’re more concerned with entitlement spending than war spending.  I’m pointing out that entitlement spending is the much bigger problem.

And I’m exactly right.  That you can’t see that it’s a bigger problem is exactly why you’re a big-government, tax-and-spend liberal who apparently thinks our national budget is a bottomless pot of other people’s money that can be used to fund all the altruism you can muster.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Jay again and again uses the $3 trillion number to make his point, yet a) that number is hardly substantiated and b) even if it were true it’s for a multi-year war and thus is still a minor fraction of our yearly entitlements bill.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

If the programs you mention were indeed “social contracts” I’d be able to opt out of them and invest the money in something with a better return on interest than the promises of the Federal Government.

I’m all for you being able to opt out of participating in society, or life, for that matter. The fact still stands that those programs aren’t part of government spending. Look it up.

The fact still stands that those programs aren’t part of government spending. Look it up.

How positively vague of you, Graeme.

Here’s a thought: You’re making the assertion, why don’t you back up your nonsense with fact?

And by the way, opting out of entitlement programs I have no use for is not opting out of society though I’m not surprised that a socialist like you would think otherwise.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Jay - Lik, my original argument was not about trashing the entire military budget.  My original argument was about the waste in the middle east.

Oh, okay. The “war of ideology” gibberish. Whatever, dude. You’re not a serious person.

He’s arguing about where he believes the money shouldn’t go...you know...poor people, disabled, seniors etc...

You’re a socialist who demonizes those who don’t worship at the alter of big government.

Socialism, like the ancient idea from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.

-- Frederic Bastiat, “The Law” 1850

Graeme the Marxist makes up reality, The fact still stands that those programs aren’t part of government spending. Look it up.

So according to Graeme, the US Congress isn’t a part of the government. “Look it up.”

Can socialists tell the truth? Is it even possible?

Graeme,

Taxation is a taking.  It is using the implied force of the state to enforce collection, and the actual force of the state when collection does not happen.  The funds which pay for what you describe as social contracts, which are instead laws passed by the Congress, are moneys raised via taxation.

Nor for that matter is the “social contract” enshrined in the Constitution of the United States.  The phrase appears nowhere in the text.  Nor does the word “social”, and the word contract (and derivatives thereof) appears only twice.  The statutes which allow these transfer payments (the forced taking from one citizen to pay another citizen other than for services rendered) are like any other law, and subject to repeal.

Out Here
Rodney G. Graves

Persia delenda est.
Latin: “Persia (modern day Iran) should be destoyed”

Lik,

All of the child ideologies descended from Progressivism (socialism, fascism, modern liberalism) are unconcerned with facts as facts.  The truth or falseness of an idea or fact lies only with its utility in furtherance of the cause or desired outcome.  Those ideas and facts which forward the cause are of necessity true, those which fail to forward the cause are of necessity false.

Out Here
Rodney G. Graves

Persia delenda est.
Latin: “Persia (modern day Iran) should be destoyed”

How much did we spend (in 2008 dollars) “killing” the Nazi ideology and occupying Germany to ensure it did not regenerate?

Oh look, another clueless douchebag equating a failed system of government (hitler’s facism) with a religious ideology (fundamentalist muslim).  Doesn’t surprise me.  When all else fails, just say Nazi.  It’s so scary.  By the way, you got those numbers?  Or a link to them maybe?

Oh, okay. The “war of ideology” gibberish. Whatever, dude. You’re not a serious person.

Lik responds the only way he knows how, without making a single point.  What does this mean anyway?

Ok, would you agree that they need to be slashed because growth in entitlement spending is not sustainable?

I’ve never made the argument otherwise.  In fact, in my post, I admitted that the system was flawed and that there are things that need to fixed.  I simply don’t agree that slashing funding for domestic programs should come before eliminating the black hole in the middle east.  I feel that republicans use domestic spending issues as a smokescreen for this waste in defense spending.  You’ve proven my point. 

“you’re a big-government, tax-and-spend liberal who apparently thinks our national budget is a bottomless pot of other people’s money that can be used to fund all the altruism you can muster.”

And you’re conservative/GOP minion who apparently thinks that our national budget is a bottomless pot of China’s money that can be used to fund a 5+ year Iraqi money-burning fest. 

Now, you’re trying to obfuscate by saying that “entitlements” is too general.  You’re talking about a specific war, I’m talking about our nations cradle-to-grave entitlements.

Yeah, I noticed.  Perhaps that’s why the numbers are a little skewed my friend.  I’m talking one place in the world and one sector of government.  You’re talking about every domestic spending issue, in every agency, affecting every person in every state.  The numbers are only relative because you say so.

And STILL noone comments on the shitstorm that Republican “reforms” have done to Medicare.  If it was messed up before, it’s truly cocked up now.  Is this their idea of “fixing” the problems?

And I’m exactly right.

Nope.  I am.  See how that works?

And STILL noone comments on the shitstorm that Republican “reforms” have done to Medicare.

Jay, just what is the ‘shitstorm’ reform that you are refering to?  Being a medicare recipient for many years, I’d really like to know how the Republicans have screwed me.

Being liberal is never having to admit you’re wrong

Jay’s mask slips…

[Jay quotes me in part] How much did we spend (in 2008 dollars) “killing” the Nazi ideology and occupying Germany to ensure it did not regenerate?

[Jay responds] Oh look, another clueless douchebag equating a failed system of government (hitler’s facism) with a religious ideology (fundamentalist muslim).

Two masks fall at once!  The mask of civility and the mask of knowledge! 

Fascism in general, and Nazism in particular, actively sought to replace religion with the state.  Totalitarianism, as defined by Mussolini (who coined the term) is the state as all things, nothing outside the state.  Nazism was thus a new humanist cult of the state, whereas Islam is a more established cult seeking to impose itself as the arbiter of law (sharia) to the state.

Doesn’t surprise me. When all else fails, just say Nazi. It’s so scary.

You suggested that spending 3 trillion (a number you in no way support) to kill an ideology was unprecedented.  You were of course wrong.

By the way, you got those numbers? Or a link to them maybe?

I’ll be glad to provide the numbers you have requested when you provide a source for yours, but no sooner.

Oh, okay. The “war of ideology” gibberish.

You raised the issue.  If you find to be “gibberish” then why did you raise it?

Whatever, dude.  You’re not a serious person.

He who speaks of “dude” accuses others of being “not a serious person.” Get back to us when you grow your first beard, child.

Out Here
Rodney G. Graves

Persia delenda est.
Latin: “Persia (modern day Iran) should be destoyed”

Fascism in general, and Nazism in particular, actively sought to replace religion with the state.  Totalitarianism, as defined by Mussolini (who coined the term) is the state as all things, nothing outside the state.  Nazism was thus a new humanist cult of the state, whereas Islam is a more established cult seeking to impose itself as the arbiter of law (sharia) to the state.

Big words.  Too bad your analysis is tragically flawed.  The nazi’s sought to replace religion with government.  Radical Islam is trying to replace government (or rule of law) with religion.  You won’t admit that this “war on terror” is just as impossible to win as would a war on any other intangible thing..."war on happiness” etc.

I’ll be glad to provide the numbers you have requested when you provide a source for yours, but no sooner.

I would imagine you mean my 3 trillion figure?  You’ll dismiss him.  He doesn’t agree with you.  But Ok. 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article3419840.ece

Oh, okay. The “war of ideology” gibberish.

You raised the issue.  If you find to be “gibberish” then why did you raise it?

Whatever, dude.  You’re not a serious person.

He who speaks of “dude” accuses others of being “not a serious person.” Get back to us when you grow your first beard, child.

Sport, maybe you should re-read a few of the previous posts.  You just cold-cocked one of your own.  Granted, I may not have used the internets in a way that was easy for you to understand.  My bad, your’e an idiot.  But thanks for getting my back on the whole “Lik is a dumbass” position.  I appreciate it. 

Lik, you getting this?  Douchebag just called you a beardless child...I couldn’t agree more. 

I’ve got an idea Rodney, why don’t you come back when you get a clue.

Jay informs us:

The nazi’s sought to replace religion with government.

No, fascism is government AS religion.

Radical Islam is trying to replace government (or rule of law) with religion.

In both cases religion and government become one.  Your inability to recognize these as two paths to the same destination speaks very poorly for your reasoning.

You won’t admit that this “war on terror” is just as impossible to win as would a war on any other intangible thing..."war on happiness” etc.

I think the war is poorly named.  Then again, most are.  The first global war was the Seven Years War, not what is commonly referred to as the First World War, just as a single example.  I prefer to refer to the current war as “The War against Global Jihad.” Sadly, that name has not caught the popular immagination.  Our enemies are real and concrete.

I read the source for your 3 Trillion figure.  It is not self consistent (failing to do the same accounting for lives and productivity lost for the earlier wars it compares with) nor clear in how it arrives at its final figure.  Absent a detailed line item break down, it is hand waving which would only appear concrete to the innumerative.

That same article, you should have noted, provides the data you demanded of me.  So consider your demand satisfied.

And Jay, you are an uncouth, innumerative, ill educated and apparently illiterate child.  I was here before you, and when you ultimately emulate the numerous petulent children who drive through this site, I will remain after you become a rapidly fading unpleasant memory.

Don’t go away mad, now…

Out Here
Rodney G. Graves

Persia delenda est.
Latin: “Persia (modern day Iran) should be destoyed”

Jay, you may not be able to do math and you may nonsensically find radical Muslims to be an “intangible thing”, but you certainly have the name calling down.

You may now carry on about how killing Saddam was a “waste” and how those who disagree with you are “dumbasses”.

*shrug* Let me know if you decide to become a serious person.

lik,

Don’t hold your breath waiting on Jay to hit puberty, let alone adulthood.

Out Here
Rodney G. Graves

Persia delenda est.
Latin: “Persia (modern day Iran) should be destoyed”

Hey lik,

Did you notice the many profound and thoughtful comments on Jay’s blog about the post Rob linked to?  Just about the quantity and quality I would expect on the blog of such a deep thinker!

1 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said…

Does anyone ever talk about the biggest entitlement program in existence today passed by the Republican Congress in the middle of the night? MEDICARE D people- if the war isn’t going to bankrupt the country, leave it to Medicare D- the only people getting rich are the fat cats at the insurance companies and PBMS. Nobody talks about anything relevant- period
5/1/08 12:31 PM

Post a Comment
Links to this post:

Liberals Who Can’t Do Math
I had to chuckle when I read this from fellow North Dakota blogger “Jay” over at The Rural Bus Route in response to John McCain’s assertion that the Minneapolis bridge collapse wasn’t caused by a lack of taxation: ...
posted by @ 5/1/08 8:01 PM

Create a Link

Heh.

Out Here
Rodney G. Graves

Persia delenda est.
Latin: “Persia (modern day Iran) should be destoyed”

I’ve got an idea Rodney, why don’t you come back when you get a clue.

jay, speaking of clueless, you apparently crawled out of your troll hole to be a first time commenter on this blog and then procede to insult all the regular posters with your ‘superior’ knowledge.  Reading your comments, you do not seem to have given much thought to any of your biased opinions which were probably formed from leftist sources.  In short, I tnink I can speak for the majority here when I say I don’t give a flying f**k for you or your b.s. opinions and advise you to take them and lour vulgarity some where they might be appreciated, like DKos or Huffington.

Being liberal is never having to admit you’re wrong

uh oh.  I’ve upset the 5 heads.  I’ve read a lot worse here boys.  You’re faux outrage at “name calling” is unbecoming. 

Rodney, you forgot to apologize to Lik.  ‘member...you called him a beardless child.  And your reasoning on facism v. islam is still ass backwards.  However, I wouldn’t expect you to realize this.  Hell, you’re not even sure who you’re responding to half the time. 

As for pulling comments from my site and not commenting yourself...you’re cowards just like Rob.  Too afraid to step out on your own without the ok from the other yes men.  Schoolyard bullies.  I predict now that you’re all on the same page, it’s ok to come on over and post.  My advice though....leave Rodney at home.  He’s lost.

In short, I tnink I can speak for the majority here when I say I don’t give a flying f**k for you or your b.s. opinions and advise you to take them and lour [sic] vulgarity some where they might be appreciated, like DKos or Huffington.

Doc, you do realize that I’m RESPONDING to a post by Rob, right?  I didn’t just come here on a whim, hoping to enjoy a little neocon banter, did you?  I won’t be leaving anytime soon, thank you very much.  Because unlike you all, I am not a coward. 

Any comments about my original post anywhere but this web page? 

*crickets*

Jay,

The power of your intellect is exceeded only by your level of civility, and the traffic on your site.  The only bus to your site is a short one.

Rob,

If I were you, I’d de-link this turd.  You just gave him more traffic than he’s had so far this quarter, and he’s just not worth it.

Out Here
Rodney G. Graves

Persia delenda est.
Latin: “Persia (modern day Iran) should be destoyed”

Jay,

The power of your intellect is exceeded only by your level of civility, and the traffic on your site.  The only bus to your site is a short one.

Rodney, just give up.  This doesn’t make any sense.  You’ve even dicked up your own analogy.  Nice attempt at a joke too.  Yeah, haven’t heard that one before. 

Rob,

If I were you, I’d de-link this turd.  You just gave him more traffic than he’s had so far this quarter, and he’s just not worth it.

Rodney opines:

“Raaaawwwwbbbb!!!  Raaaaawwwwbbb!!!  There’s a guy who’s site you’ve quoted and of which you’d like us to make fun, and he won’t quit hanging around and...like...not agreeing with me and stuff.  Please get rid of him.”

If my site bumped for traffic, it certainly didn’t bump for comments, because you’re all cowards.  And Rodney, I’ve seen your site.  A cloverleaf of traffic it is not.  You’ve got lots of latin and long winded manifestos.  But then again, so did the unibomber.  (insert Rodney’s retarded equation that the unibomber is somehow a “liberal” here).  Rodney...without hesitation...you are a douche.

Rodney, just for kicks, I checked the sitemeter count.  I’ve gotten two links from Rob’s site.  TWO.  Cowards.

Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid are not part of government spending. They don’t add to the nation’s GDP, they are what’s called transfer payments. they all have their own tax. Did you guys have the football coach teach you government?

I am all for allowing those that want to opt out the ability to. Just don’t fuck with my benefits.

that reminds me. We should be asking for the rich to give us our money back. In the early eighties the payroll taxes were upped to create a surplus in programs like Social Security in anticipation of the large amount of baby boomers retiring. Reagan, may he rot in hell, decided to slash income tax for the rich and use the payroll taxes surplus to keep government going. you guys are only against wealth redistribution when the money doesn’t go to you.

They don’t add to the nation’s GDP…

Of course they don’t; they’re expenses, not products.  The govt can only spend what they first take from us.

It was LBJ who looted the SS trust fund, btw, and cutting tax rates increases revenues to the Treasury, but the Dems in Congress spent it all and more.  Reagan cut tax rates for everyone.

"If the good men are silent only the wicked are heard.” - Edmund Burke

Graeme,

While it is true that SS, Medicare, and MedicAid each have “their own tax” only a liberal coward would hide behind that distinction and insist that those programs are thus not government spending.  Granted such entitlement spending is not considered discretionary, but your attempt at using nomenclature to hide the fact of your hand in someone else’s pocket is not going unnoticed.

As for Reagan and the Social Security surplus, the use of those “excess” funds by the government, technically they are “borrowed” into the general fund in exchange for special Treasury Bills issued to Social Security, is a matter of law, a typical Democrat-inspired bit of accounting fraud called Unified Budget Accounting put in place in 1969 by LBJ.

The “rich” don’t owe you a damn thing, and for myself, I am against any sort of income redistribution, much less a system for which we cannot pay.  I’m over 50 with a prodigious memory, and I don’t recall voting for any “social contract.

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

As I said before, I’m all for you guys being able to opt out of government programs.

What I don’t get about you all is your hatred for the government, but love for the state. You’ll take a bullet the red, white and blue (well, besides pussies like Rob who is too busy blogging to “defend his freedom” in Iraq), but will raise holy hell if the someone gets a marginal paycheck from the government for getting knocked up a few times.

I’m completely the opposite, I think the government does some good; but the state is an idea that has outlived its use.

Graeme lies in typical fashion - We should be asking for the rich to give us our money back.

The r