Wednesday, September 29, 2010

The Not-So Babbling Brooks

David Brooks is one of those conservatives (though, yes, center-right may in fact be a more accurate way to describe him) that other conservatives seem to abhor.....I like David Brooks. And, no, it isn't because he's easy on the liberals, either. He isn't. In fact, folks, Brooks is one of the very few commentators out there who holds both sides' feet to the fire. And, while, no, there aren't a lot of self-evident political truths out there that one could reliably hang his or her hat on, there is in fact one. And, yes, Mr. Brooks has nailed it. As long, folks, as the Democrats refuse to reduce spending (yes, the Republicans are guilty on this one, too) and the Republicans refuse to raise taxes, we are never, EVER, going to make a dent in this deficit/debt problem.....Food for thought, as Brooks, etc., ostensibly the responsible ones, ponder a third way.

16 comments:

Rusty Shackleford said...

Come on Will.....Brooks a conservative? Stop smoking that weed....Will.

Stop your search for a wussy right winger....Lindsey Graham...Lincoln Chaffee....those wimps are yesterdays news....get with the program....f*^k reach across the asile...reach our way!

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Russ, I'm not saying that all of your favorite Republicans are bad folks, or that they need to vanish (like I said, I actually kind of admire Christie). I'm just saying that there's got to be a little room in the barn for my type of Republican, too. It's a great big tent, no?

Rusty Shackleford said...

Yes its a big tent,but you continually look for a Republican to reach across thr asile and compromise with the dems.You've never chastised a Pelosi,Reid or Boxer type for refusing to reach out.Whats with that?

Dervish Sanders said...

This is an excellent example of what I really hate about centrists. The middle of a recession is not the time to reduce spending. Unless you want to prolong the recession. It would cost more to cut spending because it would prolong the recession and thus cut revenue (taxes collected).

I'm in favor of drastically cutting the military budget and saving money by reducing waste, fraud and corruption (in the Military and elsewhere). Other than that I don't believe we need to cut spending. We need to increase it by expanding the social safety net.

The Republican plan is to SHRINK their tent. By using bigotry to drive away minority voters and by going HARD Right and driving away moderates and independents. I hope the strategy works out for them.

Rusty Shackleford said...

The media blasts Palin,O'Donnell and just about any Republican women on a daily basis.It seems every conservative female candidate is either stupid or a bit crazy to the MSM.Name one dem woman who the media has taken shots at?

Yet there is a senator from the state of Washington named Patty Murray who is so friggin dumb its hard to believe she could tie her shoes.

Rusty Shackleford said...

Its good to know WD has inside knowledge of the Republican partys master plan.

Joe "Truth 101" Kelly said...

Your plan to run ignorant females has been exposed Rusty. This was done so you thought we'd forget the crap you lob at Hillary or Pelosi by saying look how mean the media is to our women.


Of course the typical rank and file republican is fooled by your ploy because the typical rank and file republican is a blind sheep willing to take anything Rush or Beck say as gospel.

Rusty Shackleford said...

Curses.....foiled again!!!

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Russ, what do YOU think I think about Reid and Pelosi? I mean, come on, there's got to be something somewhere on this blog in which I take them to task. But just to wet your appetite a little, I am pretty sure that Pelosi was lying when she said that she wasn't briefed about those enhanced interrogation techniques. Just the fact that those "investigations" have seemingly nowhere leads me to believe that both parties may in fact have something to hide on this.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Truth, please don't hate me, but I do think that Rusty may in fact have a point here. Palin gets hammered continuously (oft-times justifiably so) for being stupid and inarticulate. Pelosi, who is also borderline inarticulate and a butcherer of the language - she, on the other hand, rarely does (by the mainstream media, I'm saying). And remember when Caroline Kennedy gave that interview when she was contemplating her Senate run, my God, she sounded like a total idiot. There wasn't a lot of major scrutiny on that event, either.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

wd, I was talking generally here. No, this may in fact not be the best time for drastic reductions. But just like the Truthster has said, it isn't always about the size of government but the effectiveness. This Democratic stimulus package was a totally blown opportunity. There wasn't a) enough infrastructure spending and b) a payroll tax holiday (money into the hands of working class people who, unlike the middle class, almost always spend it. And I didn't like those stupid-assed tax rebates, either. They didn't work for Bush OR Obama and all that they did was blow another big hole in the deficit.....Democrats and Republicans are both stupid, wd. It's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Dervish Sanders said...

It was not just Speaker Pelosi who says she wasn't briefed on the use of waterboarding. The CIA says, according to their documentation, committee defense appropriations staffer Paul Juola, Senator Jay Rockefeller, and former Senator Bob Graham were briefed on the use of "enhanced interrogation techniques". They say they were not.

The CIA's documentation also says Speaker Pelosi (and the others previously mentioned) were briefed on the use of EITs in September of 2002. The problem is the term "EIT" wasn't used (or hadn't been invented) at the time. TPM Muckraker reports that the term "was used by CIA from June 2004 onwards". The CIA's documentation is obviously flawed (or was fabricated at a later date). Nancy Pelosi did not lie.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

So, Leon Panetta is lying? And why hasn't the investigation progressed? The only logical explanation is that the Dems have something to hide, too......And so what that they may have called these techniques by a different term 7-8 years ago. Were they briefed or weren't they briefed?....Of course, they're not going to admit to it - not after having made such a major-league stink about Bush being a torturer and all.....Seriously, you don't think that Democrats lie just like the Republicans do?

Dervish Sanders said...

They were NOT briefed. Panetta isn't lying, only reporting what the CIA's documentation shows. He wasn't CIA director at the time, so how the hell would he know for certain? He only knows what the documentation says (and what agents who were there at the time say).

I suspect those involved dummied up the documentation to hide the deception that took place under the previous administration. Bush IS a torturer, a liar and a war criminal. The Republicans are trying to say that the Democrats did it to. When caught this is what they ALWAYS do!

This is why you see Republican Congressmen agreeing with the abysmal public sentiment regarding Congress. They know they did a terrible job during the last administration and the public won't buy it if they claim otherwise... so they say the Democrats were bad too.

You actually buy into their nonsense?

The Democrats aren't hiding their complicity in any war crimes, although they are sweeping it under the rug in the mistaken (IMO) belief that pursuing investigations would be bad for them politically.

No, I do not believe Democrats lie JUST LIKE Republicans do.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Panetta obviously believes in their veracity or he wouldn't vouch for them.....And how do you know for certain that they weren't briefed? Were you there?....."Sweeping something under the rug" because they think that it benefits them politically - does that sound like courageous leadership to you? It sure doesn't sound like it to me.....Democrats don't lie like Republicans, huh? 3 words; Gulf of Tonkin.

Dervish Sanders said...

I didn't say Democrats never lie and have never lied. I do, however, believe this lie belongs in it's entirely to the Republican Party. Read one of the pages I linked to.

They say Panetta did not "vouch" for the documents. He simply presented them and said it was up to Congress to determine whether or not they were accurate. He defended the institution in general, but not the documents specifically.