Those poor, poor Republicans . . . . .

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Japher
everywhere you look more taxes = bad, less taxes = good.

But you're forgetting Zkribbler's First Law of Taxes: "The true tax rate isn't set by tax rates but by spending rates."

This is because for every dollar that's spent by the government, a dollar must come in....if not by a tax dollar, then by a borrowed dollar (which must be repaid with interest ) or by inflation (which is the most insidious form of taxes there is).

Once you realize you need to fund spending, then the true question becomes "What is the fairest way to obtain the necessary revenue?"

[GhengisFarb™]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
Once you realize you need to fund spending, then the true question becomes "What is the fairest way to obtain the necessary revenue?"

Knock over Switzerland.

[Elok]

Originally posted by Odin
Russ Feingold seems to be trying, but not effectively, it seems.

Uh, no, not very effectively at all. IIRC, Feingold is the guy who tried to get a congressional censure of Bush recently? Not very subtle, doomed to fail, and he reportedly screwed up the more careful maneuvering of his fellow Dems with that asinine stunt. When I first heard about the incident, I took a few seconds to reflect: "hmm, roughly two years before the next presidential election, a Democrat firebrand is causing a ruckus with outspoken, virulent criticisms of the administration."

If history is any guide, he should soon be hailed as the "front-runner" in the next presidential race, and very quickly gather momentum and excitement before, on the eve of the primaries, committing a faux pas on an unprecedented scale. I don't think he'll scream, but it's entirely possible that he'll explicitly compare Dubya to Hitler or something. Voters will be repelled, the DNC bigwigs will be in a tizzy, and when the dust settles they'll have nominated someone perfectly inoffensive and bland. That candidate, faced with running against a normal, competent politician instead of our current dud, will get completely buried instead of the near-tie of the last two elections.

[Zkribbler]

But, of course, my union will have endorsed him by then.

[Ramo]

Uh, no, not very effectively at all. IIRC, Feingold is the guy who tried to get a congressional censure of Bush recently? Not very subtle, doomed to fail, and he reportedly screwed up the more careful maneuvering of his fellow Dems with that asinine stunt. When I first heard about the incident, I took a few seconds to reflect: "hmm, roughly two years before the next presidential election, a Democrat firebrand is causing a ruckus with outspoken, virulent criticisms of the administration."

Senatorial censure.

You're totally misreading Feingold's actions, Elok. Pat Roberts (Chairman of the Senate Intel Cmte) was able to bury the investigation of the NSA domestic spying program by passing it off into a subcommittee that specifically excluded moderates Snowe and Hagel. Feingold proposed censure not for the hell of it, not to be vindictive, but to shed light on said coverup. It doesn't matter whether or not censure passes (it almost certainly won't, and Feingold knew that going in), what does matter is if there's congressional oversight. And he may very well succeed. Specter is holding hearings into the program, and has expressed support for a real investigation of the program, by either the full Senate or the full Intel Committee (so have other moderate Republicans like Chaffee). I don't know what "careful maneuvering" you're referring to, but while his colleagues were *****ing about a xenophobic nonissue that was about to die anyways - the DPW "scandal", Feingold had his eyes on the ball and was acting like a grown-up. This is well beyond partisan politics, but about what we stand for as a society: separation of powers, the rule of law, and the 4th Amendment.

And he just came out for gay marriage.

I have more than a few qualms about his Iraq agenda, but the man is awesome.

[Elok]

In other words, he threw a hissy-fit and expected it to do something useful, despite past evidence to the contrary. Pssht.

[Ramo]

Dude, did you even bother to read my post?

[GhengisFarb™]

Originally posted by Ramo
Dude, did you even bother to read my post?

Are we supposed to read other people's posts in this forum? I'm pretty sure that's a bannable offense in OT.

[Ramo]

In other words, he threw a hissy-fit and expected it to do something useful, despite past evidence to the contrary. Pssht.

The NSA program isn't going to be challenged in the courts since no one has standing. Schumer introduced legislation to give certain people standing, but it ain't going to pass Congress, and if by some miracle it did, Dear Leader certinaly ain't gonna sign it. The only oversight that's going to happen is going to come from Congress. Roberts helped to bury it. But Feingold single-handedly resurrected this issue into the public and Congressional debate (if you tune into C-Span 2 occasionally, you'll see Specter holding hearings in the Judiciary Committee over this matter). He's an American hero, and that's not hyperbole.

[MrFun]

Ramo

[Patroklos]

It's the circulation of money (i.e. commerce) that creates wealth. Sitting on a big pile of money doesn't do anyone any good.

Do you think rich people keep their money in a large money bin to go swimming in when it suits their fancy?

Though I have to say when they light their cigars with hundreds, that definetly reduces circulation.

[Japher]

5s burn better

[Patroklos]

But that is not nearly as wastful, which after all is what makes it so fun.

Peasants use 5s.

I use quarters.

[Japher]

that takes real skill

[Elok]

We'll see. Personally, though, I expect the hearings to quietly whimper away, because it takes more than just some "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" lone cowboy BS to get things done. I mean, C-SPAN 2, wow! That's going to be real hard to re-bury! For good or bad, he's going to need to learn to work with his party.

Patroklos: I think the money saved by using quarters is offset by the money spent on the thermite you need to light the quarters.