Support NeoGAF

[siamesedreamer]

I'm honestly not seeing the comparison between catering and leaking the identity of a CIA agent...

Because that's not what I alluded to.

 

[User 10639]

Because that's not what I alluded to.

Scooter Libby is not main staff, therefore Scooter Libby didn't have anything to do with Bush (Libby defense? I dunno, I didn't follow the Plame leak)

Caterer is not part of Congress, therefore has no relation to Dem Supermajority?

Fact is, even if Pelosi was personally planning the catering herself, this would still be utterly insipid trolling on your part.

 

[Mandark]

The parsing and torturing of language by the media is the result of campaigns doggedly staying 'on message.' The press follows the candidate to every campaign stop and hears the same speech and the same spin from campaign surrogates over and over , so when they get anything that sounds just a little different and potentially interesting, they pounce on it like manna from heaven. In the old days candidates literally stayed on their front porch and occasionally made a speech to whoever wandered up when they had something to say, but obviously we're a long way from that now.

Right on.

The reporters who are most responsible for coverage of the election -- both for the cable news networks and the major daily papers -- are affected by physically following the campaigns around.

They can't really do investigative journalism in that context, and even longer analysis pieces are made difficult because of having to be with the campaign and trying to file daily stories. Anything that seems like a change or any comment that could be construed as aggressive or controversial (no matter how strained the interpretation) is fodder.

The media isn't a monolith and there are plenty of different and often conflicting institutional incentives and cultural tics at work.



PS I refuse to use the phrase MSM because I'll always associate it with the triumphalist bloggers who were going to usher in a new era of citizen journalism by totally exposing Jamil Hussein and whatever.

 

[speculawyer]

NYT

Pretty much a microcosm of what we can expect when they take over: money waste, over-regulation, and indecision.

I disagree with your conclusision . . . but the Bush years have been money waste, lack of regulation, and indecision.

There is no way Obama could possibly be worse than Bush.

BTW, you really do live up to your reputation.

 

[Synth_floyd]

NYT

Pretty much a microcosm of what we can expect when they take over: money waste, over-regulation, and indecision.

You mean "pretty much a microcosm of what we can expect from large bloated bureaucracies." This problem has no relation to ideology, whether liberal or conservative. When you have lots of power and money concentrated in one place this is quite common (see the current administration).

 

[Diablos]

I'm sure many of you would like to respond by saying "yes, for years now" but seriously:
Who else is getting SICK AND FUCKING TIRED of the media now more than ever?

For quite some time we have been a society obsessed with statistics, but like never before have I seen the networks obsess over the DUMBEST statistics that really don't matter. I get pissed off every time I watch CNN and MSNBC now. Like today, when they showed the percentage of Americans who thought Obama and McCain were patriotic. Both of them had a really high percentage, as they even admitted when presenting it... BUT OMG [guest who gets to sit there and act like a tool], COULD THIS STILL MEAN SOMETHING HERE????????? SHUT UP

I'd argue that half of the reason why the daily poll chart is up and down more than a manic 16 year old is that these networks trick the not-so-politically-aware into thinking this is SERIOUS BUSINESS, and so they react to it because they think it is appropriate to do so. During the primaries when tensions were high and there was a lot going on, it was easy to get worked up over stuff, and there were a lot of legitimate points made in the midst of all that craziness, love or hate it. That time is over. There is no need to overanalyze anything right now.

 

[StoOgE]

The convention is being organized by the Democratic National Committee, which is run by Howard Dean, with his chief of staff, the Rev. Leah D. Daughtry, leading the effort.

yeah, remember when these retards took control of both houses from the Republicans in 2006?

 

[Mandark]

I'd like to point out that a split government gave us both the biggest additions to regulatory law (Nixon) and the biggest deficits (Reagan).

Not that it matters. "Supermajorities do this, split governments do that" is just a really awful heuristic to base decisions on. Even poli sci professors who have published papers on split governments would agree.

 

[Diablos]

Speaking of being obsessed, has anyone checked out the Wikipedia article on Hillary Clinton's campaign?

:lol

 

[Incognito]

...all rolled into one. McCain promises to balance budget in 4 years

Anyone expecting a balanced budget at the end of 4 years better start stockpiling the bare necessities now. :lol

I wonder how Iraq and Afghanistan figure into this "plan"?

“The McCain administration would reserve all savings from victory in the Iraq and Afghanistan operations in the fight against Islamic extremists for reducing the deficit. Since all their costs were financed with deficit spending, all their savings must go to deficit reduction.”

....

 

[GhaleonEB]

His own budget proposals do not add up. What a liar. :lol

 

[siamesedreamer]

BTW, you really do live up to your reputation.

Reputation?

Oh...you must mean the juvenile phrase attached to my username a mod cooked up in the cloak of annonymity for the sole purpose of mocking me in a perpetual violation of their own terms of service. Otherwise known as my tag. Is that what you're referring to?

 

[User 10639]

Reputation?

Oh...you must mean the juvenile phrase attached to my username a mod cooked up in the cloak of annonymity for the sole purpose of mocking me in a perpetual violation of their own terms of service. Otherwise known as my tag. Is that what you're referring to?

In the immortal words of Richard Nixon: when a mod does it, that means it's not a TOS violation.

 

[siamesedreamer]

“In the long-term, the only way to keep the budget balanced is successful reform of the large spending pressures in Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid,” the McCain campaign says in a policy paper to be released Monday.

With this congress?

Yeah sure...and I'm starting in CF for the Braves tomorrow night.

 

[GhaleonEB]

In the immortal words of Richard Nixon: when a mod does it, that means it's not a TOS violation.

And to up the ante - the mods can't change your tag. Only an admin can. The guys that run the place.

 

[User 10639]

With this congress?

Yeah sure...and I'm starting in CF for the Braves tomorrow night.

Social security receipts and outlays are not counted in the regular budget unless they're running a surplus, in which case, superficially, they're actually helping reduce the deficit. Surely you've paid attention enough to realize that, no?

 

[Mandark]

Despite his bitching in the past, I have nothing to do with sd's tag.

I did make Scarlet's, though.

 

[theviolenthero]

...all rolled into one. McCain promises to balance budget in 4 years
....

He can't be serious. :lol

Only two things can balance the budget:

Not accepting lobbyist money which will bring the cost of EVERYTHING way down and ending the Iraq war.

 

[User 10639]

I'd like to point out that a split government gave us both the biggest additions to regulatory law (Nixon) and the biggest deficits (Reagan).

Not that it matters. "Supermajorities do this, split governments do that" is just a really awful heuristic to base decisions on. Even poli sci professors who have published papers on split governments would agree.

Also, the last time the budget was balanced prior to Clinton was, I believe, during LBJ's last year in the White House, during a Democratic supermajority in both houses, a war, and a major increase in domestic spending programs. It's hard to find a correlation between balanced budgets and split governments when you only have two data points in the last 40 years.

 

[siamesedreamer]

Social security receipts and outlays are not counted in the regular budget unless they're running a surplus, in which case, superficially, they're actually helping reduce the deficit.

Figuring out the US budget is a science in and of itself. And you've lost me here.

You're saying mandatory spending on entitlement programs such as SS is not included in the annual budget?

 

[User 10639]

Figuring out the US budget is a science in and of itself. And you've lost me here.

Only when we're talking about the DoD.

You're saying mandatory spending on entitlement programs such as SS is not included in the annual budget?

While I'm not sure what fits your personal definition of an "entitlement" program, programs that rely solely on FICA payroll taxes (SS, medicare) have their own separate system and, yes, do not rely on the regular budget. In fact, all that brouhaha about SS being in crisis was based on the idea that in 40 to 50 years, with no changes to the system, the payroll tax and treasury bonds would only pay for about 70-80% of the costs and SS would have to dip into the big budget.

Actually, I have no idea how medicare works at all, but that's how it goes with Social Security.

edit: meant to add that when social security runs a surplus, it's sometimes counted in as revenue for the regular budget so that the deficit doesn't look as bad (or so you can achieve a balance/surplus, as Clinton did)

 

[StoOgE]

Figuring out the US budget is a science in and of itself. And you've lost me here.

You're saying mandatory spending on entitlement programs such as SS is not included in the annual budget?

FICA is it's own fun game.

 

[slidewinder]

edit: meant to add that when social security runs a surplus, it's sometimes counted in as revenue for the regular budget so that the deficit doesn't look as bad (or so you can achieve a balance/surplus, as Clinton did)

It's been reported that way since some time in the early 80s, I think. I remember searching for when the changeover happened some time back and having a heck of a time finding anything really definite. And SS has always run a surplus (and quite a large one) since inception so far.

With that sort of accounting, FWIW, Nixon would have had a year of balanced budgets if I remember right.

 

[User 10639]

FICA is it's own fun game.

It's not really that hard, though. What's on your paycheck? Some FICA taxes taken out. What else is on there? Your social security number. Somehow, those two things must be related. Perhaps the SSA tracks how much you pay into the system during your working years so they can adjust the amount paid out when you start collecting during your retirement.

Hrmmmmmmmmm

And SS has always run a surplus (and quite a large one) since inception so far.

When was it started, 1935? That's pretty amazing.

 

[sc0la]

Reputation?

Oh...you must mean the juvenile phrase attached to my username a mod cooked up in the cloak of annonymity for the sole purpose of mocking me in a perpetual violation of their own terms of service. Otherwise known as my tag. Is that what you're referring to?

Ah...the Libby Dyack defense.

Speaking of being obsessed, has anyone checked out the Wikipedia article on Hillary Clinton's campaign?

http://i25.tinypic.com/14m9jyf.gif *snip*

:lol

Its missing "Sexism on the campaign trail," or is that the "Gender" section? ;p

The parsing and torturing of language by the media is the result of campaigns doggedly staying 'on message.' The press follows the candidate to every campaign stop and hears the same speech and the same spin from campaign surrogates over and over , so when they get anything that sounds just a little different and potentially interesting, they pounce on it like manna from heaven. In the old days candidates literally stayed on their front porch and occasionally made a speech to whoever wandered up when they had something to say, but obviously we're a long way from that now.

You and I once had a 3 page argument on these boards about the Iraq war just before or around its breakout. Complete diametrically opposed arguments IIRC. I can't say that I have disagreed with a damn thing you have said in this thread though (not that I claim to have read it all). :lol good to see you again despite past differences.

 

[slidewinder]

When was it started, 1935? That's pretty amazing.

Yeah, it would be if it were true :lol Actually, I was very wrong; there have been 11 years so far when they've dipped into the "trust fund". I think I was remembering the fact that the trust fund itself has always been in the black, and confused that with what I said.

 

[User 10639]

Yeah, it would be if it were true :lol Actually, I was very wrong; there have been 11 years so far when they've dipped into the "trust fund". I think I was remembering the fact that the trust fund itself has always been in the black, and confused that with what I said.

That's not bad, though. I wonder why there was that weird run of red years in the 70s, as the rest of the dip years seem to be few and far between.

 

[siamesedreamer]

While I'm not sure what fits your personal definition of an "entitlement" program, programs that rely solely on FICA payroll taxes (SS, medicare) have their own separate system and, yes, do not rely on the regular budget.

Could you provide a link for this?

Going by the $3.1 trillion 2009 Budget, $644 billion of that is Social Security expenses. I'm not seeing where it appears off budget.

 

[User 10639]

Could you provide a link for this?

Going by the $3.1 trillion 2009 Budget, $644 billion of that is Social Security expenses. I'm not seeing where it appears off budget.

Nuh uh, I've been warned already.

 

[ToxicAdam]

Despite his bitching in the past, I have nothing to do with sd's tag.

I did make Scarlet's, though.

With the odd manner of capitalization, I'm guessing the party responsible is part German or eastern-european.

 

[slidewinder]

Could you provide a link for this?

Going by the $3.1 trillion 2009 Budget, $644 billion of that is Social Security expenses. I'm not seeing where it appears off budget.

Here's the SSA's history of the program's so-called "budget treatment." Summary:

1- Social Security was off-budget from 1935-1968;
2- On-budget from 1969-1985;
3- Off-budget from 1986-1990, for all purposes except computing the deficit;
4- Off-budget for all purposes since 1990.

With the caveat that

... those involved in budget matters often produce two sets of numbers, one without Social Security included in the budget totals and one with Social Security included. Thus, Social Security is still frequently treated as though it were part of the unified federal budget even though, technically, it no longer is.

As shown in this table (representative of how things have been reported since the mid-80s, I believe),

Unified Budget | Without "off-budget" items
Receipts: 	
$1.8 trillion         $1.3 trillion
Expenditures: 	
$2.2 trillion         $1.9 trillion
Deficit: 	
$412 billion         $567 billion

where SS revenues and expenditures were lumped into a "unified" budget, even though both are legally distinct from other federal income and spending, and thereby gave the appearance of a smaller deficit than was actually incurred.

 

[ToxicAdam]

Well, I give McCain credit. He is really going for it. From his energy policy to this empty promise of a balanced budget ... it's much better than Dole ever did.

Plus, if he does make it into office he can blame the Democratic congress for blocking him from reaching his goals.

 

[Tamanon]

I don't know how you can advocate running a balanced budget without advocating eliminating the Iraq occupation OR tax increases. You can't find THAT much waste in the budget, especially when the recession is hitting, when you need to inject more money back into the economy.

 

[Hitokage]

It's Anti-Keynesian Economics! Run deficits in boom cycles, surpluses in busts!

 

[Mandark]

The balanced budget promise reminds me of how McCain expects victory in Iraq within four years. Didn't explain that one either.

Obama talks a good game about hope, but McCain's the only one with enough guts to make hope his primary strategy for success.

 

[syllogism]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rob-kall/libertarian-legacy-ron-pa_b_111079.html

 

[Clevinger]

Poor guy...

Though I think making a political point out of his death like they're doing is pretty lame.

 

[maximum360]

Andrea Mitchell is like a broken record. Every time she speaks she brings up the Clinton campaign debt. Shut up about it already. We know!

Also, I hope she never complains about Obama's pausing when he speaks, she's ten times worse. How did she ever become a reporter? She's terrible.

 

[StoOgE]

It's Anti-Keynesian Economics! Run deficits in boom cycles, surpluses in busts!

Yeah, they need to be running massive deficits. I'm pretty sure they both know this and plan on doing it. THey just need to spend more of that deficit here in the US. I agree with Obama wanting to redo the highway infastructure system.. helps prop up the really shitty construction industry.

My guess is McCain doesnt plan a balanced budget but is trying to pull in fiscal conservatives with some good old fashioned pandering.

 

[scorcho]

McCain: there's so much special interests pork that we could wage additional war with Iran and still run a balanced budget by 2010.*

* using the Bush Administration's 2002 pre-war mathamateks.

 

[npm0925]

“The McCain administration would reserve all savings from victory in the Iraq and Afghanistan operations in the fight against Islamic extremists for reducing the deficit. Since all their costs were financed with deficit spending, all their savings must go to deficit reduction.”

Are they really this stupid or do they believe we are?

 

[Tamanon]

That quote reminds me, why didn't we call abortion clinic bombers "Catholic extremists"?

 

[gkryhewy]

Are they really this stupid or do they believe we are?

Both, and they are correct on both counts.

 

[Hitokage]

That quote reminds me, why didn't we call abortion clinic bombers "Catholic extremists"?

Or prefix Pat Robertson with "Radical Cleric"?

 

[Tamanon]

I guess it's a step up from Islamofascist, because Mussolini was rolling over in his grave.

 

[Hitokage]

He'd be far more proud of our crop of Christofascists.

 

[Tom_Cody]

...all rolled into one. McCain promises to balance budget in 4 years

Anyone expecting a balanced budget at the end of 4 years better start stockpiling the bare necessities now. :lol

I wonder how Iraq and Afghanistan figure into this "plan"?



....

Hopefully this will be true. Paying off the debt is my single most important issue. Balancing the budget is obviously the first step. It's truly a sad state of affairs that the simple goal of balancing the budget seems unrealistic.

 

[scorcho]

Hopefully this will be true. Paying off the debt is my single most important issue. Balancing the budget is obviously the first step. It's truly a sad state of affairs that the simple goal of balancing the budget seems unrealistic.

if you read McCain's plan it's full of sunshine and roses, with little reality to get in the way.

 

[npm0925]

Hopefully this will be true. Paying off the debt is my single most important issue. Balancing the budget is obviously the first step. It's truly a sad state of affairs that the simple goal of balancing the budget seems unrealistic.

It's not true. It's utter bullshit. He's banking on victories in Afghanistan and Iraq -- both of which have been going on longer than fucking World War II -- to balance the budget.

 

[Tamanon]

I hope McCain is ready to call out the Iraqi government for wanting to surrender!

http://www.reuters.com/article/topN...?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&rpc=22&sp=true

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki raised the prospect on Monday of setting a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops as part of negotiations over a new security agreement with Washington.

It was the first time the U.S.-backed Shi'ite-led government has floated the idea of a timetable for the removal of American forces from Iraq. The Bush administration has always opposed such a move, saying it would give militant groups an advantage.

In a statement, Maliki's office said the prime minister made the comments about the security pact -- which will replace a U.N. mandate for the presence of U.S. troops that expires on December 31 -- to Arab ambassadors in the United Arab Emirates.

"In all cases, the basis for any agreement will be respect for the full sovereignty of Iraq," the statement quoted Maliki as saying.

"The current trend is to reach an agreement on a memorandum of understanding either for the departure of the forces or a memorandum of understanding to put a timetable on their withdrawal."

The bastard just doesn't understand the facts on the ground!