BS: More Reagan/Bush-sized Deficits

Subject: More Reagan/Bush-sized Deficits
From: GUEST,Taliesn
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 08:52 AM

Well someone had to kick the election results reaction thread into motion , so it might as well be me.

First , a round of applause for the better-late-than-never final expression of integrity by Bushite appointee to be the head cop-on-the-WallSt-beat; Harvey ,the great White Whale ,Pitt;
officially *ex*-chairman of our Securities & Exchange Commission as of this post-election morning.

Too bad the Bushites could've have chosen integrity from the get-go. It took the actions of a New York State Attorney General,
Rudi Guilianni's old post , to *shame* ol' Harvey the Pitt into finally pretending to do his job of enforcing the law after so many innocent pensioners, employees ,and 401-k holders had been outright lied too and then roobed blind with GDubya's pal-o-mine Kenny-boy Lay of Houston-based Enron.

Well, ofcourse ,my first reaction is the American investor can now kiss good-bye *any* further Congressional hearings on WallSt criminality , ;east of all from Bush campaign doners and general top 5% corporate friends-of-Bushites.

Now ,as if that wasn't enouygh of a reason for American wage-earner/investors , hoping to see retirement at some distant future before their jobs disappear to *watch their wallets* and "Be afraid, bre very afraid" , look out for evermore ballooning deficits to make ol' man Reagan nostalgic and ol' man Bush heave a sigh of relief that now he will no longer be the President recorded for harboring the largest U.S. deficits for all time. This makes Dubya really look like a chip off the ol' block now.

So just what does an All Republican Big Gubment mean?
Forget any further investigations into any corporate crime-in-the-suites because , historically ,Republicans have *always* been *soft* on corproate crime until some financial collaspe makes the perpetraitors appear as the rogue elephant in the living room of John & Jane Q Public.
This , ofcourse , will embrace the *inevitable* corproate hogs-at-the-Gov-trough ;the military contractors ,whom heaved a collection rebel-yell that the fat years are back and guess who pays for the largesse and outright gred-fed-fraud that *will* inevitably result ; especially now that Congressional hearings are on Republican holiday.

Oh, and get ready for some real war and the inevitable, un[predicted srew-up that will trigger something the Bushites didn't plan for that doesn't just result in "Oil prcie-spike" profits.

Bottomline: Now that the Republicans have control of the entire electqable Gov't whatever happens from here on is officially "On Their Watch". Just the corproate cop now looking the other way *alone* means that we will all pay that price sooner than later.
Them that believes that war can be profitable won't be able to restrain themselves for long ; especially now that Congress is completely in their pocket.

Praise the Lord and pass the amunition

Subject: RE: More Reagan/Bush-sized Deficits
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 08:57 AM

Wall Street loves Washington gridlock, and this morning, that is just what Wall Street got. The best goddam government gridlock money can buy.

Subject: RE: More Reagan/Bush-sized Deficits
From: GUEST,Taliesn
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 09:32 AM

Gridlock in the form of Senate floor philabisters, aptly practiced by that Texas horse's ass Phil-a-buster Gram , hardly anything beyond that .
BTW: Not being there for a Republican-ruled Congress I suppose Phil Gram will have to content himself with his cushy new corporate position that he has awaiting him AND his wife , Wendy gram , skating any further investigations into her actions while serving on Enron's board of directors leading up to its collapse due to *criminality*.

Yeah, WallSt .can celebrate crowing rights that they've got the kind of "gridlock'" that best suits them, but it's hardly any kind of serious oposition. I mean look at the full record of how effective the Democrat Senate was and then tell me that any serious gridlock will have any real meaning ;that is unless some corproation *pays* to have gridlock in order to gum up a competitor's "sweet deal" just sailing through this newly elelcted big corporate ass-kissing Congress.

I'm staining to find the humor in all this ,but it'll ultimately have to be the blackest of humor because we're in for some very serious
troubles now.

Subject: RE: BS: More Reagan/Bush-sized Deficits
From: Amos
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 10:24 AM

That sort of stain usually requires bleach, Tal!

A

Subject: RE: BS: More Reagan/Bush-sized Deficits
From: Bobert
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 10:37 AM

Haliburton? Harkin? Guess we won't be hearin' much about them anymore, hunh, Tal? Yep, the collective sigh you heard had two voices sighin' harmony....

And I gotta agree with you about the deficits. $157B this year, alone, which started out with a few bucks in the bank. Deja vu, all over again.

"When will they ever learn..."

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: More Reagan/Bush-sized Deficits
From: GUEST,Taliesn
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 03:08 PM

In "straining" to find humor in all this I would have to start with
material on whether we will ever see deficit numbers we can beleive again since the Office of Management & Budget ( OMB ) will only put the best face forward numbers for the Dubya Gubment and the Repub-controlled Congressional budget Office ( CBO ) will most certanly *never* produce budget numbers that would contradict the bouquet of rosey scenarios wafting out of the White House.

i mean what would Martha Stewart think..... oh, that's right, she's under investigation for lying about acting upon "inside trading info".
Yeah, sounds like a Repub culture is about to blossom.

Wanna see who's still laughing when the actual size of the deficit bills finally explode out of hiding after the Bushite's "fuzzy math" , that just got fresh gasoline thorwn on it , burns out enough to reveal what's actually left in the till.

Only Russian humor is black enough to ameliorate my sense of foreboding.

Subject: RE: BS: More Reagan/Bush-sized Deficits
From: GUEST,Tim
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 03:19 PM

Rest assured, whatever happens to the economy during the next years of total Republican control of federal government, it will undoubtedly be Bill clinton's fault. Just ask Rush and his friends.

Subject: RE: BS: More Reagan/Bush-sized Deficits
From: Ebbie
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 03:51 PM

"Ask yourself: Am I better off than I was two years ago?" Just two short years! What a difference. Mind boggling.

I hope the short-term future won't be as bad as I'm afraid it will be- I'd be very happy to be proven wrong.

The problem is the long-term future; we are on the wrong track.

Subject: RE: BS: More Reagan/Bush-sized Deficits
From: NicoleC
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 05:19 PM

You know, folks, I think all the sky-is-falling near-hysteria isn't really appropriate. It's easy to be concerned -- if you are a white male, preferably well off, you have nothing to fear from the far-right. The rest of us have a LOT to lose.

But when it comes right down to it:

1) Although the Repubs now have a slim majority, most of the Dem line-crossers were voted out. The orientation of the Dems remaining has gone father left.
2) Both houses are still VERY close in terms of party balance
3) The US citizenry is still VERY close in terms of party balance
4) The current lame duck Congress has a Democratic Senate that hasn't done squat to block Bush's legislative goals anyway recently. They've BEEN rolling over. It'll just be more of the same.

I am concerned over the long term effects of the potential judiciary appointments. Folks who are concerned need to stay mobilized and aware on this issue. We can force Congress to reject candidates who aren't fair and moderate -- we've done it before.

But life isn't that much easier for Bush today. They're feeling really happy, and it's a boon for the White House, but it's not a Get Out of Jail Free card.

Subject: RE: BS: More Reagan/Bush-sized Deficits
From: GUEST,Taliesn
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 05:55 PM

(quote)
"I am concerned over the long term effects of the potential judiciary appointments."

Why in particular is this more important to you than the looming War economy that Wall St is salivating over knowing that no one will be doing any investigations anymore. Isn't several 4trillion$ of citizen savings wiped out enough of an alarm yet .
Amazing that you don't consider the Cold War *borrow & spend* bill run up by Reagan/Bush and their Repub-controlled Senate for 6 years worth your attention since you and I and all tax payers are *still* responsible for paying for that bill and will be for another 20 years atleast and that's *before* the added bills for financial bailouts like the half-$trillion$ Savings & Loan bailouts.
*Now* add the trillions that will be voted for ginning up the Bushites war economy .

It's amazing how people don't think that every dollar of *defecit*
is *borrowed* in the form of Fed reserve T-notes and bonds which means not only doi the cost of those t-notes have to paid back with our tax dollars, but alos the interest on it.
Please focus a little household "common sense" economics , on this *deficit spending binge* the Bush White House is now about to have the entire Congress joining in on.

Bankrupt the nation and them see what *emergency* powers will be imposed from on high until the crisis is brought under control with austerity measures.

Subject: RE: BS: More Reagan/Bush-sized Deficits
From: NicoleC
Date: 07 Nov 02 - 12:15 AM

That also concerns me some, but even though the Republicans are now controlling what legislation gets to the floor, both houses are still closely divided. It doesn't mean all that legislation is going to pass, and what does is not likely to be too incredibly right wing. There are still quite a few moderate Republicans that wouldn't necessarily toe the part yline.

The US is so deeply in debt, that worrying that we might get a little more in debt seems like wasted energy to me. We NEED to start paying it off. But two more (or 4 more or 6 more) years of deficit spending is probably not going to shatter our economy -- heck, most of our economy thrives on the money that the government owes big business. As I said in another thread, hold on to your wallets, and you'd better think about cheating on your taxes like the big boys do :)

Judiciary appointments, on the other hand, don't go away when the administration does. Some of these judges last for decades. If one moderate Supreme Court justice resigns, the interpretation of the Constitution could take a radically different direction for many, many years.

Subject: RE: BS: More Reagan/Bush-sized Deficits
From: GUEST,Taliesn
Date: 07 Nov 02 - 08:51 AM

(quote)
"Judiciary appointments, on the other hand, don't go away when the administration does."

Uhmmm , neither does deficit spending debt with Fed interest.
We're *still* deepening the debt with Bushites reducing revenues. The weakened economy has also put several State budgets dangerously into the Red with *zero* chance of Fed help becasue the lionshare of Fed spending is beoing channeled into military and this "homeland security" agenda.

I don't know which State you make your living in ,but if it's one suffering these revenue droughts you'll be getting just a small taste of what austerity budget cutbacks will be like .

(quote)
" If one moderate Supreme Court justice resigns, the interpretation of the Constitution could take a radically different direction for many, many years. "

Well there's not much one can do when a Senator's vote for accepting a nomination hinges upon getting desperately needed funds or Fed contracts ( jobs) for their state. Guess which the the voters will choose in a prolonged weakened economy and their kids near college or, worse ,that $80k college degree leads to maybe a $9 an hour job. How many personal bankruptcies for defaults on school loans do you believe this econmy can absorb?

Just out of curiosity what particular laws you're watching specifically that you perceive as being potentially threatened?