tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759913671101666257.post3396516144651292883..comments2023-05-24T06:02:06.480-05:00Comments on Chuck's Chatter: Oh, the Agony of It All!Chuck Doswellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03099345055614900157noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759913671101666257.post-53556541924019678282013-06-10T23:10:45.090-05:002013-06-10T23:10:45.090-05:00Henry,
Thanks for your source information. It do...Henry,<br /><br />Thanks for your source information. It does indeed depend on just what you choose to use. You use your sources ... I use mine.Chuck Doswellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03099345055614900157noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759913671101666257.post-63565603082263583602013-06-10T22:07:23.944-05:002013-06-10T22:07:23.944-05:00On the question of who's guiltier of deficit s...On the question of who's guiltier of deficit spending during the post-WWII years, Democrats or Republicans, the answer is that it depends on what measure you use:<br /><br />* In constant 2005 dollars, Democrats have racked up $7.56 trillion and Republicans $6.11 trillion.<br /><br />* In constant 2005 dollars per capita, Republicans have done $24,000 per person and Democrats $21,000.<br /><br />* In constant 2005 dollars per year, Democrats have averaged $244 billion per year and Republicans $170 billion.<br /><br />* In constant 2005 dollars per capita per year, it's pretty much a tie: Democrats $675 per capita per year and Republicans $668.<br /><br />However, bear in mind that Obama has another 4 years to generate deficits, and that, based on past experience, there's a high probability that the next president will be a Republican (only once in the post-WWII era did the same party retain the presidency for more than 8 years in a row).<br /><br />So these numbers are likely to continue to be fluid and confusing.<br /><br />References:<br /><br />http://www.measuringworth.com/usgdp/<br />http://www.measuringworth.com/datasets/usgdp/result.php<br />http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/us_deficit<br />http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htmHenry Neemannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759913671101666257.post-84666927298077051472013-06-05T12:49:58.543-05:002013-06-05T12:49:58.543-05:00I think a big part of the problem is that American...I think a big part of the problem is that Americans don't pay enough attention to what is really going on--they get all their political information through sound bites or (worse, since Citizens United) paid political ads. Practically everyone I know has become either an "Obama-doesn't-go-far-enough" lefty liberal or, worse, a blithering Tea Party cryptofascist. Voices of reason like your own are becoming few and far between.<br /><br />A case in point can be seen here in Wisconsin, where people elected our village-idiot governor (kicked out of college for rigging student elections) not once but twice. He has virtually destroyed the state in three years and managed to turn Wisconsinites against each other in ways never seen before. Wisconsin has experienced <i>none</i> of the post-recession economic recovery; things have actually gotten much worse.<br /><br />And here's the kicker... by all appearances, Scott Walker is a shoo-in to be reelected in 2014 and he makes no secret of the fact that he intends to run for President. What does that tell you about peoples' knowledge of the actual state of affairs? Hell, they'd have to look at pie graphs and bar charts and that's, like, <i>too hard.</i>Peter Felknorhttp://www.graefental.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759913671101666257.post-53511308505263421152013-05-26T12:40:19.525-05:002013-05-26T12:40:19.525-05:00President Obama's achievements are actually ma...President Obama's achievements are actually many. Emphasizing the failures is honest. However, to leave out his substantial achievements in the area of gay rights is unfair. I believe in retrospect it will remain a large turning point in American history. I am also critical that we still have a presence in Guantanamo. However,the Far Right's stance stated in the last two days that they will oppose its closing shows the wall of intolerance and bricked-off minds he's had to face his entire presidency. I understand how Chuck feels, but I am still proudly a supporter of President Obama. I don't agree with everything he's done, but given the hatred and the entrenched positions of the Far Right in the House, for example, I think he's done a wonderful job.John Monteverdi and Thom Trimblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01619917498436669077noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759913671101666257.post-22804662696007685412013-05-25T10:19:49.341-05:002013-05-25T10:19:49.341-05:00Got it Chuck, i.e., "read the blog" (esp...Got it Chuck, i.e., "read the blog" (especially the opening paragraph)! Yeah, it's a total outrage that only two choices were on your ballot, and you couldn't even write in another name if you so prefered. The ballot I had also offered the Libertarian, Constitution, Green, and a couple of other party candidates. And I do agree that one statement we could make is to flush the toilet on the entire House, and those Senators up for re-election, in 2014. At least that would make a statement. I never used to be a proponent of term limits, but now I am for Congress. And maybe the limit ought to be a single term of some established length (to preclude the proverbial corrupt process of running for re-election). I don't know how to fix the problem, but the status quo is unacceptable. And yet that is what a vote for either democrats or republicans for Congress and the White House seems to perpetuate. Don Bakernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759913671101666257.post-36705158684809556762013-05-24T23:10:35.272-05:002013-05-24T23:10:35.272-05:00Don,
Go back to my earlier blog, and re-read wha...Don, <br /><br />Go back to my earlier blog, and re-read what your comment was there:<br /><br />http://cadiiitalk.blogspot.com/2013/04/a-pox-on-both-of-them.html<br /><br />I wasn't given the option to vote for a third party candidate ... hence, the lesser of two evils was my ONLY choice!Chuck Doswellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03099345055614900157noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759913671101666257.post-40804114705131257582013-05-24T22:19:16.220-05:002013-05-24T22:19:16.220-05:00Chuck, I'm not sure how my feeling that a vote...Chuck, I'm not sure how my feeling that a vote for someone not deemed best is a wasted vote fails to deal with "lesser of two evils" problem. Maybe I'm not getting a point you're making here. There are far more than two candidates running for president. And if considering only the two main candidates, clearly one is going to be judged worse than another (in most cases). I was trying to suggest that if someone believed, for example, the Green Party candidate was the best of all the candidates running, and then they voted for Obama because Romney would be worse, then that is the wasted vote. In my opinion. But I know that most people feel that a vote for someone who "can't win" is actually the wasted vote.Don Bakernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759913671101666257.post-2448243041713460222013-05-16T14:12:14.331-05:002013-05-16T14:12:14.331-05:00Don,
Your comment "I make the case that any ...Don,<br /><br />Your comment "I make the case that any vote for someone not deemed the best candidate in the voter's mind is the wasted vote." fails to deal with the "lesser of two evils" problem - being the best of a bad choice is precisely what we have been presented with for decades. Obama sucks but Romney would have been worse!Chuck Doswellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03099345055614900157noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759913671101666257.post-45224984419374338912013-05-15T21:12:11.143-05:002013-05-15T21:12:11.143-05:00I suppose Faux News would be acceptable? Actually...I suppose Faux News would be acceptable? Actually see:<br /><br />http://zfacts.com/p/318.html<br /><br />or <br /><br />http://useconomy.about.com/od/usdebtanddeficit/p/US-Debt-by-President.htmChuck Doswellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03099345055614900157noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759913671101666257.post-28595162941770016242013-05-15T19:35:25.552-05:002013-05-15T19:35:25.552-05:00The right-wing extremists continue to howl about t...<i>The right-wing extremists continue to howl about the national debt, as they conveniently ignore the reality that their conservative GOP administrations have been the biggest contributors to that debt since WWII.</i><br /><br />Would love to see a source on this info! (msnbc and cnn do not count haha!)Chad Davisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759913671101666257.post-56036662531799035482013-05-14T20:32:23.318-05:002013-05-14T20:32:23.318-05:00I have not voted democrat or republican in quite s...I have not voted democrat or republican in quite some time (beginning in 1988 after the Iran-Contra scandal). I look at various candidates running for president, try and research them at least to some extent, and then pick who I think will be best. And for quite some time that has been other than a D or R. When telling people who I plan to vote for I can't begin to count how many times I've heard "I can't vote for xxx because xxx can't win", or, "I don't want to waste my vote". And in some of those cases the person agreed that who I was voting for was actually better, but he/she had to vote for one of the main party candidates because the other one was seen as intolerable. I make the case that any vote for someone not deemed the best candidate in the voter's mind is the wasted vote. Of course, the issue is that any candidate other than a D or R can't get into the debates and is covered very little by the media. In recent memory only one other independent candidate has been able to make inroads, and that was Ross Perot in 1992, because he had enough of his own money to buy some prime time TV ads where he could explain why neither of the other two candidates were (in his opinion) any good. The result was that Perot was outpolling both major candidates as late as mid summer 1992. Of course, he flaked out, withdrew, and then got back in. If you are (1) neither a D or R, or (2) not very wealthy, there seems to be little hope of getting your message out. And that's just how the two establishment parties want it. Today, it's all about party loyalty. Most liberals will support Obama despite evidence that he's not all that "liberal" in practice, and in fact has decided he likes all the increased federal power his predecessor instituted after 9/11. Most conservatives will vote republican, even though the GOP cannot even *pretend* to be fiscally conservative anymore. The GOP is very socially conservative now, to an increasing level. Methinks a winning choice may be someone who is fiscally conservative and socially moderate. Bottom line is that I agree with the sentiment with which you ended this essay - we have got to stop blindly sending individuals from the two major corrupt political machines to Washington. The hypocrisy of both parties today is astounding, yet, the vast majority of voters keep choosing between them. I know many republicans and democrats who are good intelligent people and who truly believe in their party. Fine. All I ask is that people vote for who they truly think is best. If that happens to be a D or R, that's fine. Vote not wasted. The wasted vote is for someone who is not deemed best (or even liked), but, voted for anyway. And I suspect the percent of all such votes cast these days is quite high, unfortunately.Don Bakernoreply@blogger.com