Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Entry 42290
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2025/05/24 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
5/24    

2006/3/17-20 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton] UID:42290 Activity:kinda low
3/17    Conservatives use "starve the beast" logic when they want to cut taxes,
        But if they  really want to starve the beast, than, why raise the
        debt limit?
        http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/03/17/news/budget.php
        \_ its pretty clear they just want to cut taxes, and keep spending up
          (just redirect it to Bechtel/Halliburton, and other 'contributors').
          This is perfectly in line with raising the debt limit.
        \_ That brings the per-capita federal debt to what, $30,000 per person.
           (note thats not per taxpayer)
        \_ They just used the fiscal conservative strategy to get elected,
           they don't actually believe it.
        \_ Duh, the strategy is to fuck it up so bad, that when the Dems assume
           power the economy will be all fucked up AND they'll have to raise
           taxes, which sets up the Republicans for the next election.
           \_ Sounds like what Clinton did to his successor.
              \_ You seem to be forgetting the gigantic surplus which seemed
                 to dissapear so quickly after 9/11.
                 \_ Yeah, you mean when the bubble popped.
                    \_ With the tech bubble, 9/11, and post-9/11 security
                       overhead as excuses, I can give tax cuts to my biggest
                       political donors and run horribly executed projects both
                       foreign and domestic, and I'm still completely covered
                       as far as my base is concerned!  Go dubya!
              \_ ^Clinton^Bush Sr.
                 \_ Maybe in your reality.  According to the National Bureau
                    of Economic Research, the Bush Sr. recession was from
                    7/1990 to 3/1991, so it ended way before the Clinton
                    presidency.  The Bush Jr. past recession was from 3/2001
                    to 11/2001, so it started right after the Clinton
                    presidency.  http://www.nber.org/cycles.html
                    presidency.  The Bush Jr. recession was from 3/2001 to
                    11/2001, so it started right after the Clinton presidency.
                    http://www.nber.org/cycles.html
        \_ Because they're not conservatives.  They're Republicans.
        \_ http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0385518277
           Impostor : How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the
           Reagan Legacy
2025/05/24 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
5/24    

You may also be interested in these entries...
2012/12/18-2013/1/24 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:54559 Activity:nil
12/18   Bush kills. Bushmaster kills.
        \_ Sandy Huricane kills. Sandy Hook kills.
           \_ bitch
	...
2012/10/29-12/4 [Science/Disaster, Computer/SW/Languages/Java, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:54516 Activity:nil
10/29   Go Away Sandy.
        \_ Sorry, Coursera is performing preventive maintenance for this
           class site ahead of Hurricane Sandy. Please check back in 15 minutes.
           class site ahead of Hurricane Sandy. Please check back in 15
           minutes.
        \_ Bitch.
	...
2011/5/1-7/30 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:54102 Activity:nil
5/1     Osama bin Ladin is dead.
        \_ So is the CSUA.
           \_ Nope, it's actually really active.
              \_ Are there finally girls in the csua?
              \_ Is there a projects page?
              \_ Funneling slaves -> stanford based corps != "active"
	...
2010/11/8-2011/1/13 [Politics/Domestic/Abortion] UID:53998 Activity:nil
11/8    Have you read how Bush says his pro-life stance was influenced
        by his mother keeping one of her miscarriages in a jar, and showing
        it to him?  These are headlines The Onion never dreamed of
	...
2010/11/2-2011/1/13 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:54001 Activity:nil
11/2    California Uber Alles is such a great song
        \_ Yes, and it was written about Jerry Brown. I was thinking this
           as I cast my vote for Meg Whitman. I am independent, but I
           typically vote Democrat (e.g., I voted for Boxer). However, I
           can't believe we elected this retread.
           \_ You voted for the billionaire that ran HP into the ground
	...
2010/5/26-6/30 [Politics/Foreign/Asia/China] UID:53845 Activity:nil
5/26    "China could join moves to sanction North Korea"
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100526/ap_on_re_as/as_clinton_south_korea
        How did Hillary manage to do that when we're also asking China to
        concede on the economic front at the same time?
         \_ China doesn't want NK to implode. NK is a buffer between SK and
            China, or in other words a large buffer between a strong US ally and
	...
2010/4/15-5/10 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:53786 Activity:nil
4/15    Guess who is not on this list (States with worst projected deficits):
        http://www.cnbc.com/id/36510805?slide=1
        \_ Don't know how CA missed that list; we're looking at a $20B deficit
           on $82.9B spending (24.1%)  -tom
           \_ Even if that number is accurate, it makes California #7. That's
              enlightening given the attenion California has received.
	...
2013/2/10-3/19 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Uncategorized/Profanity] UID:54603 Activity:nil
2/10    I like Woz, and I like iWoz, but let me tell ya, no one worships
        him because he has the charisma of an highly functioning
        Autistic person. Meanwhile, everyone worships Jobs because
        he's better looking and does an amazing job promoting himself
        as God. I guess this is not the first time in history. Case in
        point, Caesar, Napolean, GWB, etc. Why is it that people
	...
2010/2/22-3/30 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:53722 Activity:nil
2/20    Ok serious question, NOT political.  This is straight up procedural.
        Has it been declared that we didn't find WMD in iraq? (think so).
        So why did we go into iraq (what was the gain), and if nobody really
        knows, why is nobody looking for the reason?
        \_ Political stability, military strategy (Iran), and to prevent
           Saddam from financing terrorism.
	...
2009/8/5-13 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:53241 Activity:kinda low
8/5     Regarding NKorea relesing the journalists, here's what I think the
        actual deal between Kim and Obama is:
        - Both agree that Kim needs to save, or gain, face to pave the way for
          his son's succession and for NK's stability.
        - Both agree that Obama doesn't like losing face by publicly
          apologizing.
	...
2009/4/27-5/4 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton] UID:52914 Activity:low
4/27    "Obama the first Asian-American president?"
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090427/pl_afp/uspoliticsobama100daysasia
        Just like the way Clinton was the first African-American president.
        \_ Two wars, a banking, housing, and general economic crisis, a truly
           massive deficit, and now, Swine Flu.  Has any president except for
           Lincoln and Roosevelt faced worse?
	...
2009/3/13-19 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton] UID:52710 Activity:nil
3/13    So Bill Clinton doesn't know what an embryo is?
        \_ obCigarJoke
	...
2009/2/27-3/6 [Politics/Domestic/California, Reference/Tax] UID:52655 Activity:low
2/27    CA unemployment increases from 9.3% to 10.1% for Jan
        \_ Good thing the legislature passed the biggest tax increase in
           history!  That should solve it.
           \_ because cutting taxes has done such a great job so far!
                \_ it has.. giving mortgages to poor folks did us in
                   \_ 100% horseshit.
	...
2009/2/4-9 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton] UID:52511 Activity:kinda low
2/3     Well said: "What gets people upset are executives being rewarded for
        failure. Especially when those rewards are subsidized by US taxpayers."
        \_ Turns out, he gets it.
           \_ Talk is cheap.
              \_ Freedom is strength.
        \_ Isn't this something like FDR might have said?
	...
2009/2/2-8 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:52497 Activity:nil
2/1     Pres. Obama keeps rendition
        http://www.latimes.com/news/la-na-rendition1-2009feb01,0,7548176,full.story
        \_ This does not mean what you (or the LA Times) think it means.
        \_ More on how this article does not mean what you (or the idiotic
           LA times) think it means:
           http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/02/02/renditions
	...
2009/1/27-2/1 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton] UID:52478 Activity:nil
1/27    http://www.realnews.org/index.php-option=com_content&task=view&id=59&Itemid=189.htm
        [Title: Hilary's Bush Connection. Summary: Ties to Alan Quasha.]
        \_ I knew hillary was evil!
        \- in case you are interested, the old white guy to the right of
           the clinton-bushco picture [chalmers johnson] is a former ucb
           prof who sort of went nuts.
	...
Cache (3049 bytes)
www.iht.com/articles/2006/03/17/news/budget.php
The budget decision came hours after a separate 52-48 Senate vote to increase the federal debt limit by $781 billion, bringing the debt ceiling to nearly $9 trillion. The move left Democrats attacking President George Bush and congressional Republicans for piling up record debt in their years in power. Despite calls by Republican deficit hawks to hold the line, Senate Republicans joined with Democrats to approve more than $16 billion in added spending for social, military, job safety and home-heating programs, exceeding a ceiling established by the president. In separate action, the House advanced $92 billion in war spending and hurricane recovery money. Senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana was the sole Democrat to back the budget after winning agreement for a new $10 billion effort for levee rebuilding and coastal protection, to be paid for out of oil royalties and other sources. Her vote saved Vice President Dick Cheney from having to break a tie. The successful push for additional spending alarmed and frustrated conservative Republicans, who have been trying to steer the party back to a course of more fiscal restraint. "It is very disturbing, and it gives me a whole lot of heartburn," said Senator Jim DeMint, Republican of South Carolina, who attributed the additional spending to political anxiety. "They want to go and say they are helping people, but we are not helping people when we are selling out their future." In the House, lawmakers easily approved almost the $92 billion in emergency spending, with about $68 billion going for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, and $19 billion for hurricane recovery. The budget fight and the focus on the rising national debt proved uncomfortable for some Republicans, who instead of tightening the federal belt found themselves caught in a Senate rush to add spending after raising the federal debt ceiling for the fourth time in five years. "This budget could be the final nail in our coffin, if we don't watch it," said Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, who said the Republican spending pattern is demoralizing party voters. But Senator Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania, who led the push for $7 billion in extra money for health and education programs, said those areas had been starved for money in recent years and could not afford to be overlooked again. "Health and education are the two major capital assets of this country," Specter said. In another spending increase, the Senate unanimously approved $184 million for mine safety. The provisionwould be used to hire mine safety inspectors and put in place better mine rescue technologies over five years. It came after a string of mining accidents that left 24 miners dead this year. The changes also mean that reaching a final budget deal with the House will be difficult, given conservative resistance there to new spending. Congress was told that the latest increase in the statutory debt limit to nearly $9 trillion was needed to avoid a default and keep the government operating.
Cache (850 bytes)
www.nber.org/cycles.html
the wartime contractions, and the full cycles that include the wartime expansions. the US Department of Commerce, Survey of Current Business, October 1994, Table C-51. The determination that the last contraction ended in November 2001 is the most recent decision of the Business Cycle Dating Committee of the National Bureau of Economic Research. The NBER does not define a recession in terms of two consecutive quarters of decline in real GDP. Rather, a recession is a significant decline in economic activity spread across the economy, lasting more than a few months, normally visible in real GDP, real income, employment, industrial production, and wholesale-retail sales. For more information, see the latest announcement on how the NBER's Business Cycle Dating Committee chooses turning points in the Economy and its latest memo, dated 07/17/03.
Cache (7599 bytes)
www.amazon.com/gp/product/0385518277
DVD Editorial Reviews From Publishers Weekly Liberal commentators gripe so frequently about the current administration that it's become easy to tune them out, but when Bartlett, a former member of the Reagan White House, says George W Bush has betrayed the conservative movement, his conservative credentials command attention. Bartlett's attack boils down to one key premise: Bush is a shallow opportunist who has cast aside the principles of the "Reagan Revolution" for short-term political gains that may wind up hurting the American economy as badly as, if not worse than, Nixon's did. As part of a simple, point-by-point critique of Bush's "finger-in-the-wind" approach to economic leadership, Bartlett singles out the Medicare prescription drug bill of 2003-- "the worst piece of legislation ever enacted"--as a particularly egregious example of the increases in government spending that will, he says, make tax hikes inevitable. Bush has further weakened the Republican Party by failing to establish a successor who can run in the next election, Bartlett says. If the Reaganites want to restore the party's tradition of fiscal conservatism and small government, he worries, let alone keep the Democrats out of the White House, they will have their work cut out for them. Booklist Bartlett, an economist and former Reagan administration official, attacks the Bush administration hard but from the political Right. Challenging Bush's conservative principles of operation and credentials, Bartlett actually gives former president Clinton more credit for following conservative economic principles. In contrast, the Bush administration has been marked by shortsightedness, if not anti--intellectualism, too willing to reward friends without regard to competency and to punish as enemies those who deviate from the party line. Bush's shortcomings include his drug bill, trade policies, and expanded regulatory requirements. Interestingly, Bartlett concludes that Bush's relentless effort to cut taxes will leave an unenviable legacy for a conservative--the need for America's largest tax increase. Bartlett also takes the administration to task for corruption that violates the principles of difference the Republican Party declared during the campaign against Clinton. This is a worthy critique, one that the administration will not be able to dismiss as liberal propaganda. See all Editorial Reviews Product Details * Hardcover: 320 pages * Publisher: Doubleday (February 22, 2006) * Language: English * ISBN: 0385518277 * Product Dimensions: 95 x 64 x 11 inches * Shipping Weight: 13 pounds. Bruce Bartlett, a conservative economist with impeccable credentials dating back to President Reagan's White House, answers that question in this important book with disturbing results. Analyzing the administration of the current President Bush he concludes that lacking a coherent ideology, what comes to reign in its place is a crass political opportunism. While coming from a liberal writer such attacks might seem old hat, Bartlett moves from his home on the right, arguing not only that the current White House shows signs of frequent incompetence, but in fact has betrayed the principles that the conservative movement embraced for the last forty years. Taking the competence question first, Bartlett examines how little appetite the current administration has for serious analysis and research. Citing sources on issues ranging from national security, to economics, to healthcare, the author offers examples to prove a pattern of stifling debate, cajoling, sidelining, and even threatening those who would question the policy conclusions determined mostly by political handlers instead of policy experts. Surrounding himself with "political hacks" whose main ability rests in the ability to "say yes and ignore the obvious," the administration often begins with policy and then searches out justifications. Thrashing dissent and ignoring the traditional policy experts who work from positions of expertise, Bartlett sees the President's failure on important issues as Social Security, healthcare, and perhaps even Iraq arising from this dysfunctional process. Thus the author looks to the rough treatment of both the Treasury Secretaries and the Council of Economic advisors, used not to formulate thoughtful policy, but instead to sell an often incoherent program to the public. Troubled by the current White House's obsession with secrecy, the author further wonders how the notion of an imperial presidency overthrew a conservative commitment to openness and reliance on legislative authority. Sadly, the timing of this work's publication does not allow us to hear Mr Bartlett's musing on the current question of domestic surveillance without judicial approval and what that means for the libertarian ideas Conservatives for so long cherished. On the issue of breaking with conservative ideals, Bartlett proves even more adroit in his criticism. Time and again, Bartlett points out how President Bush ignores fundamental issues such as a fiscal discipline and the desire for smaller government in order to avoid tough decisions and opportunistically score political points. Thus the author wonders about the greatest expansion of the social welfare state since the new deal with the Medicare Drug Benefit under a supposedly Conservative President. Again, the competence issue comes into play, as the White House suppresses the analysis of dissenting experts with grave concerns that the cost estimates of the program were woefully inadequate. History speaks for itself, as the cost estimates of those experts that we never learned of proved to be correct. Bartlett further stares aghast at the exploding federal deficit and wonders how President Bush can add new spending to a budget already flooded with red ink. That this President now hold a record for going the longest without wielding his veto pen, especially in the face of pork laden budget busters like the recent highway bill, leaves Conservatives like Bartlett truly dumbstruck. Indeed, the author commits a deep herasy when praising the budget discipline of the Clinton White House in contrast to the policies of the current administration. If the author's work falls short in one area, it is his failure to examine why so much of the conservative movement follows in lock-step behind policies that clearly violate long cherished beliefs. Supposedly Conservative Congressmen passed the drug benefit. Conservative intellectuals and officeholders actively defend the President as he spies on some American citizens and holds others without due process, both affronts to the very idea of personal liberty do crucial to libertarian ideals. Fox News and Talk Radio overflows with once conservative voices now turned to mere shills defending whatever policy the White House happens to roll out. Conservatives should look to Mr Bartlett's fine book as a wake up call. No doubt, White House attack dogs will do all they can to savage this fine, thoughtful disciple of Reagan, but if the rank and file allow that to happen it will leave their party in grave jeopardy. Just as the Democrats find themselves adrift, having abandoned philosophy for the expediency of power and in the end finding them selves bereft of both, Republicans may end up walking the same plank. Suggestion Box Your comments can help make our site better for everyone. If you've found something incorrect, broken, or frustrating on this page, let us know so that we can improve it. Please note that we are unable to respond directly to suggestions made via this form.