Disqus - Friends of nicrivera

Re: ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR MINDS???

AustinRoth — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 20:01:15 -0000

And I will raise back with 2 hyper-politically correct Berkley vegan lesbians, 3 Code Pink protesters, 2 black female professors making up false racial incidents, a rent control advocate and a PETA activist.

:-)

Re: Carrie Prejean “Still Standing” After Sex Tape

AustinRoth — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 13:34:30 -0000

Hey AustinRoth -- not every day you get accused of being part of the PC left-extremist crowd! Welcome to the club!

I am an equal opportunity offender!

:-)

Re: Pragmatist’s Quote of the Day

AustinRoth — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 12:35:46 -0000

Could have been worse. It could have been "White President Obama"!

Re: The Affordable Health Care for America Act

AustinRoth — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 11:56:34 -0000

Yes, so much easier to walk away when you are called out on your BS. Typical Liberal response - I am losing this argument, so I will pretend that the other side is being unreasonable.

Re: Down the Drain

AustinRoth — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 11:13:30 -0000

I have trouble thinking that something that costs 10% more every year is not a problem in an economy where wages are stagnant or shrinking.

Ah, I see you are referring to the college tuition problem!

Obviously we need a tax-payer funded, mandatory, 100% opt-in with a public option Higher Education Tuition Reform Act. It must be passed NOW! No time for reviews or cost reduction analysis or measures, as this is a CRISIS.

p.s. - the bill must contain a minimum of 2,200 pages.

Re: The Affordable Health Care for America Act

AustinRoth — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 10:02:15 -0000

Here is the link again, and here is a quote from it:

OK. my turn to call you out. The Huffington Post as a 'reliable and unbiased source'? Get real.

Re: The Affordable Health Care for America Act

AustinRoth — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 09:59:42 -0000

So I suppose I became a bit too defensive at the way AR framed his argument -- this is too expensive and here are the numbers to prove it

Wow. I had missed that reply.

What am I supposed to say? Sorry for using facts to support my contentions?

Facts that YOU forced me to cite, as you kept harping that I wasn't providing the source for the one-line figures I talked about?

If you are willing to accept the fact that I do not make up numbers out of thin air, I will stop throwing long, complex source documents at you, and we can debate the underlying assumptions.

But as long as you keep implying I am a liar and making numbers up, or using 'unreliable sources', hell yes I am going to keep showing your lack of knowledge.

Re: The Affordable Health Care for America Act

AustinRoth — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 09:52:37 -0000

Assuming you agree the health care delivery system is in crisis

No, I do not share that view.

Do you think Obama should stop all spending until the economy gets better

Of course not. That cannot be done. I do however think he, and to be fair, Congress, should stop creating so many new $T+ spending programs. I opposed TARP, the Porkulus bill, the car bailouts, etc. I WOULD have supported a stimulus bill that wasn't just the Democrats funding all their pet projects, i.e., a TRUE infrastructure and jobs creation bill (not one that 'saved' 935 jobs in a department that only has 508 total employees).

Unemployment has gotten significantly worse than either the 'no stimulus' or 'with stimulus' projections. Why? Simple. Actions have consequences. When business owners, especially small business owners, are fearful of what is going to happen with inflation, taxes, energy costs (and the government has flat out stated their goal is to make energy costs go up to 'force' people to conserve, and make alt energy more cost viable by comparison), and the government forcing a HUGE increase on their health care costs, they stop hiring, put off expansion, and even let people go.

The business community, large and small, are showing they feel no confidence the government is currently concerned abut their problems, and is instead focused on passing these wide-ranging, expensive programs that will hurt their businesses, and crush the economy for years to come.

So, yes, unless they want to focus on actually helping the economy instead of pushing the 'progressive agenda', I certainly do think we would be better off if they did nothing.

Re: House Democrats Say They Will Not Vote for Final Bill if Stupak Amendment Is In It

AustinRoth — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 09:36:59 -0000

leonidas -

Sorry, even I cannot see the Catholic Church closing all their hospitals over this. Never going to happen.

Re: ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR MINDS???

AustinRoth — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 09:31:44 -0000

What California needs is a permanent ban on nanny-state Liberals who try to micro-manage every aspect of the economy and people's life.

Re: The Affordable Health Care for America Act

AustinRoth — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 22:27:26 -0000

OK, I have given you all the facts and figures and cites to show you were mis-characterizing the difference between budget deficits and national debt, and that Obama is spending us into oblivion. Other than some lame 'but he HAS to because of Bush' excuse, care to comment on fact he is crippling us, our children and our future grandchildren under an unprecedented debt load that will take generations to overcome? I don't see WW III coming to pull his ass out the economic fire like WW II did for Roosevelt, either.

Re: The Affordable Health Care for America Act

AustinRoth — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 18:51:26 -0000

First, your constant need for 'cites' simply says you think everyone is a liar. That offends me.

Second, your inability to find the simplest of available data implies either laziness or inability. You tell me which it is.

Third, your constant reliance on incorrect analysis simply because it comes from an organization you trust, rather than going to source documents, speaks to the same likely causes as my second complaint.

So, as anyone who might have spent the LEAST amount of time actually learning about what they are trying to shoot their mouth out about knows, the United States has been free of a national debt for only two years, 1834 and 1835. (page 2)

Again, you are confusing and mixing the concepts of National Debt with Budget Deficits.

So, for the second time in a few days, from the 2010 White House Budget Historical Tables (page 128), put out by the Obama Administration, which I hope meets your exacting standards for 'credible sources':

Now, when Bush took office, the National Debt was $3.410T ($5.629T gross - $2.219T held in government accounts), and when he left office it was $5.802T ($9.986T gross - $4.183T held in government accounts), a difference of $2.392T. Divided by 8 years in office, that is an average of $299B per year. Nothing to be proud of, certainly.

Now, In Obama's first year the WH's own estimates (same chart) show a national debt of $8.531T, or a ONE YEAR INCREASE of $2.279T! By the end of his first (and hopefully only) term, the national debt is estimated to have grown to $11.468T, an increase of $5.666T (which is more than than double what it was when he took office). That is an average increase of $1.417T per year, and that is before Health Care Reform or Waxman-Markey, and the lower than projected tax revenues as the recession (depression) is exacerbated by this insane spending spree, all of which will add multiple trillions of dollars more.

Now, to your other point of confusion, budget deficits, i.e., the amount in any given budget year that government spending exceeds revenues. On that matter, indeed at the end of the Clinton years there were four years of budget surpluses. But look at the annual budget deficits under Bush, and the WH and CBO projections for Obama.

Here is the source document for this chart, again, prior to Health Care Reform or Waxman-Markey, and the lower than projected tax revenues.

Re: It Was Twenty Years Ago Today

AustinRoth — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 09:43:13 -0000

The Berlin Wall fell under George H.W.Bush
Brain fart. You are of course correct.

But to say neither the Reagan speech nor his political strategies against the USSR were the final driving force is ludicrous. Did other events over time help lead to a point where his efforts did have the effect they did? Of course. All history is interconnected. Very little, if anything, happens in pure isolation for previous events.

Re: House Passes Health Care Bill But Future Unclear

AustinRoth — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 08:51:45 -0000

Interesting that you pick third world countries to make your point

What?? Obviously you did not read the article, only my excerpt. It was talking about the previous major attempt at socialism (USSR), its failure, the fact that indeed those small countries are now trying it, and we seem to be headed down a somewhat similar path.

You really need to try and not beclown yourself so much via simple ignorance and laziness.

Re: The Affordable Health Care for America Act

AustinRoth — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 08:47:02 -0000

And what was the deficit on the day Obama took office?

The 2008 budget deficit was just under $500B.

The question you forgot:

And what is the deficit the first year since Obama took office?

The 2009 budget deficit is $1.4T

Re: The Affordable Health Care for America Act

AustinRoth — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 00:25:04 -0000

I get one indisputable fact out of all this:

Under Bush, the country went from a surplus to a $2 trillion dollar deficit.

Absolutely a verifiably false statement Kathy. You really should either do research before you try to quote facts, or stick to generalities.

No annual Bush budget deficit was in excess of about $450B (not that that high number is a good number, mind you). Obama in his first year has hit $2T, and that is BEFORE Health Care Reform, the "Clunker" initiative, or the upcoming attempts to pass the Waxman-Markey Bill in the Senate. That will just make the numbers even worse.

Re: The Affordable Health Care for America Act

AustinRoth — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 00:07:53 -0000

Facts are ugly things when they prove you wrong, and these are very ugly to you Kathy, I am sure:

US Deficit Chart

These are the White House's own numbers:

Table 7.1—FEDERAL DEBT AT THE END OF YEAR: 1940–2014—Continued
Gross Federal Debt (Million $)
1995 4,920,586
1996 5,181,465
1997 5,369,206
1998 5,478,189
1999 5,605,523
2000 5,628,700
2001 5,769,881
2002 6,198,401
2003 6,760,014
2004 7,354,657
2005 7,905,300
2006 8,451,350
2007 8,950,744
2008 9,985,757
2009 estimate 12,867,455
2010 estimate 14,456,303
2011 estimate 15,673,873
2012 estimate 16,565,716
2013 estimate 17,440,160
2014 estimate 18,350,010

Here is their 2010 budget tables (information above is on page 128)
THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010, HISTORICAL TABLES

You are confusing the concept of budget deficits with the national debt, which is the key issue. But if you want, we can show the quintupling of budget deficits in less than a year under Obama. You are letting your love of progressive agendas blind you to the true damage being done to the economy and your daughter's, and any future grandchildren's, financial futures

Re: House Passes Health Care Bill But Future Unclear

AustinRoth — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 21:20:07 -0000

In spite of its monumental failure to bring social peace and material abundance, socialism is enjoying something of a renaissance. From Venezuela to Bolivia to South Africa, government ministers espouse the supposed virtues of socialism. Even in the West, some policies are taking government intervention in the economy to levels unseen in decades. Given the renewed interest in alternatives to capitalism, it is perhaps appropriate to recall the last time that socialism was tried with real gusto.

ht: Instapundit (again)

Re: Republicans Disrupt Debate on House Floor

AustinRoth — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 11:28:49 -0000

No need to impugn ("misrepresentation")

Minor quibble. Impugn does not mean to misrepresent; it means to to challenge as false.

Re: Republicans Disrupt Debate on House Floor

AustinRoth — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 10:44:32 -0000

Not necessary, AR

Of course not. But fun!

Re: Same Sex Marriage Rights Defeated In Maine

AustinRoth — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 10:40:48 -0000

JD -

Do not take my characterization of being a literalist as any kind of a criticism. There are many ways different types of Christians interpret the Bible. Nothing negative was meant by me at all.

As to what I consider a fair statement on what God did, well, being an atheist, I have a different view on that than you, obviously.

Re: Republicans Disrupt Debate on House Floor

AustinRoth — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 01:18:56 -0000

2271. Having fun yet? :-)

Re: Republicans Disrupt Debate on House Floor

AustinRoth — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 01:18:30 -0000

2270

Re: Republicans Disrupt Debate on House Floor

AustinRoth — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 01:18:24 -0000

2269

Re: Republicans Disrupt Debate on House Floor

AustinRoth — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 01:18:18 -0000

2268