Skip to main content
Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 06:50 AM PST
by Tom TomorrowFollow for Comics
Click to embiggen
Support independent cartooning: join Sparky's List!
Add keywords that describe this diary.
Separate multiple keywords with commas.
- Search For Tags
- Browse For Tags
More Tagging tips:
A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?
Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.
If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office.
CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.
Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.
Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary:
Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House.
If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state
Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries
that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.
You must be a member of a group to use this feature.
Tom Tomorrow's most recent book is TOO MUCH CRAZY from Soft Skull Press.
by Tom Tomorrow on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 06:50:07 AM PST
the money but doesn't want to pay the bills.
Tax and Spend I can understand. I can even understand Borrow and Spend. But Borrow and give Billionaires tax cuts? That I have a problem with.
by LiberalCanuck on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 07:02:13 AM PST
assassination program, operating with no oversight.
Machine gun bullets became the bloody baptizers/ And the falcon 'copters don't care if someone's the wiser/ But the boy in the swamp didn't know he was killed by advisers
by JesseCW on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 07:06:26 AM PST
[ Parent ]
includes assassinating American citizens who have never been charged with a crime . . . and then we have to listen to our walking pig turd of an Attorney General claim with a straight face that "the due process guaranteed in the Constitution does not mean judicial process . . .", when, of course, what the constitution guarantees in the 5th Amendment if:
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that his justice cannot sleep forever. ~Thomas Jefferson
by bobdevo on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 07:14:00 AM PST
Just like the "due process" that doesn't involve "judicial process," the folks who helped elect the President don't get to review the evidence. We get to debate the merits of a platinum coin, the minting of which was ruled out months ago.
Still, the process, whatever it may be, that is used to determine who dies in a drone strike (or, in the case of a "signature strike," the rough geographical location where generic "bad people" will die), is somewhat more progressive than it would have been in a Republican Administration.
While it's almost certainly a male-dominated group of people who decide on the deaths of others, the group in this Administration is probably not all white. Hence, progress.
by Spron on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 08:34:56 AM PST
or whatever it is.
And on a scale of importance 1 to 10;
Drone program - 4
Defaulting on the nation's debt - 10
by LiberalCanuck on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 09:21:15 AM PST
You think a large oversight free program of not only murder, but sloppy murder that kills so many innocent bystanders Capone would have rejected it as bad for business is better (by a huge margin) than not paying debts.
The complete destruction of the concept of due process matters more than the bullshit creation of a fake economic crisis.
by JesseCW on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 09:44:37 AM PST
You're no better than those morons in Congress. "I've got this issue, and its more important anything else!"
Economic collapse around the world would foment a rolling wave of conflict and destruction around the world, as governments fell and radical leaders rose from the ashes. Just look at WWII!
Folks like you fail to take a more systematic look at things, to look at the full balance of policy, instead of doing the standard college-age midnight bullshit session method of deciding what policy should be.
Simple question: In the years since Republicans successfully urged the disempowering of workers and unions in the Midwest, what has happened to those states economies?
by Stephen Daugherty on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 12:41:40 PM PST
on the premise that we cannot simply be murdered by our Government without ever knowing the charges against us, without ever being given the opportunity to refute them in open court?
Without that, it's over. I don't give a shit how much money you have you're living under a police state at that point.
You may be cheaply bought. You may gladly bow your head for bread.
But it is not the smart thing to do to, it's the easy thing.
We do not all grow more cowardly as we age, and those who do should not be proud of having done so.
by JesseCW on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 12:45:30 PM PST
I don't think people will be much concerned about tightening up and improving policy on drone strikes if the fucking economy is coming down in bright red flames around their ears. You take care of business, or shit happens. Ideology doesn't stand a chance when it conflicts with realities. Democrats realize this, Republicans don't.
It's time for you to get some perspective.
by Stephen Daugherty on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 12:59:28 PM PST
something they can retain if they cease all effort to protect them just because they (shock and horror) might otherwise find out what life has been like for the poor all along.
It's not about "tightening up" or "improving".
It's about ending a horrific abuse of Executive power that is completely destroying the concept that the accused have the right to answer accusations against them before being killed.
Otherwise, it doesn't matter what the fuck "the economy" does. Larger and larger numbers of us aren't benefiting a bit when GDP goes up. We're cut out of that.
If we can't challenge that theft of our labor without fear of being simply eliminated (along with our neighbors and families) at the whim of some crazed tyrant?
We can expect to have a choice between subjugation and near-starvation and death.
It is this, the protection of the courts, that all of our other rights flow from. Without those rights being protected, we cannot protect our physical well being either.
by JesseCW on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 01:15:59 PM PST
We should give a fuck about both. Both are important. And regardless of whatever drone strikes the President does, the coin is still a bad idea.
by Stephen Daugherty on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:41:23 AM PST
the fake economic crisis.
With that, I hope this helps:
A secondary point is that the debate over the efficacy of
giving $ to the MIC vs civil has taken a back seat with within the current dialog -- where discussion of full employment has darn near vaporized.
The well-known fact that $civil yields more jobs than $MIC yields an argument for reigning in MIC-over-extension that is, perhaps, a bit less ideological and, therefore, an easier sell. It's not directly connected with due process but, at least, would help bring more into focus an examination of our priorities and sense-of-self-as-a-people.
United We Understand
by dorkenergy on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 01:28:20 PM PST
financial argument as well as the ethical, moral, civil, and legal arguments.
by JesseCW on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 01:37:56 PM PST
daylighting guns-vs-butter might help bridge the gap and do some bootstrapping between the arguments.
by dorkenergy on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 01:44:39 PM PST
The Dutch kids' chorus Kinderen voor Kinderen wishes all the world's children freedom from hunger, ignorance, and war.
by lotlizard on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 11:08:03 AM PST
Spending money is not necessarily something that is bad or that increases the debt long term. Smart spending has far more assets (benefits) than liabilities, and actually reduces the debt.
The "terrible precedent" is tax cuts for the very wealthy and forcing the rest of us to pay for it through increased taxes, "fees", and the slashing of services.
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - David Rees from "Get Your War On".
by Oaktown Girl on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 09:44:48 AM PST
if you show me yours.
by bobdevo on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 07:06:32 AM PST
Do you want Mitt Romney to win? Obama hasn't been inaugurated yet so it's till OK to use that line of attack right?
"The problem with posting quotes off the Internet is you never know if they're genuine."--Gen. George Washington at the Battle of Gettysburg, February 30, 1908
by Aspe4 on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 07:08:22 AM PST
with the psychopath GOP. He needs to keep his mouth shut in the days/weeks leading up to and during these hostage negotiations. Which seem to be monthly these days. OK Obama, you feel like you need to take the alleged high road and completely dismiss invoking the 14th amendment and/or minting a $1 trillion coin? Fine. Just keep your fucking mouth shut about it. Let them think you're willing to do it, or at the very least let them think you're considering it. Just, be, quiet!
by FraidKnot on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 07:13:29 AM PST
is a bad sign.
It signals that you don't know how to play poker.
If cats could blog, they wouldn't
by crystal eyes on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 07:20:46 AM PST
by Aspe4 on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 07:35:34 AM PST
Tom can go back to cartooning the psychopaths
and that's a mulch…and THAT's beneficial for your garden!
by dorkenergy on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 07:28:25 AM PST
at least bluff to gain leverage. But once you realize that Democrats play to lose (good cop vs. bad cop), the seemingly poor negotiation and bargaining makes sense.
by Aspe4 on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 07:34:49 AM PST
by ek hornbeck on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 08:02:29 AM PST
if there is no negotiation?
by Theston on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 08:05:08 AM PST
Why wouldn't the repugs try to gain concessions in exchange for raising the debt ceiling? Because Obama said he wouldn't negotiate? You take him at his word?
by Aspe4 on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 08:23:01 AM PST
there's no leverage for Republicans, they won't let the country default.
by Theston on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 08:36:27 AM PST
To the extent that Obama has bought the same economic BS we all have, and until WE educate ourselves and him, the Rs don't need much leverage to get spending cuts.
Obama, with his crop of neo-liberal advisors, has it backwards in thinking they need to balance the budget.
The budget is only one indicator of a healthy economy.
And in down times, the government needs to INCREASE THE DEFICIT.
by dorkenergy on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 08:47:54 AM PST
The issue is whether Obama and the Dems believe that the repugs will allow default. Or more precisely, will Obama and the Dems use the possibility that Repugs will allow default as an excuse to give concessions to them?
by Aspe4 on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 08:51:58 AM PST
and the only way to give Republicans a reason to try for default would be giving them a ridiculous cop-out like a trillion dollar coin that would crater the President's approval.
by Theston on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 08:54:07 AM PST
would crater the President's approval" at this point. (See my comments elsewhere in this thread about need to change dialog as a preface to changing that disapproval.)
But the other point remains: the Dems and Obama -- because they have bought hook-line-and-sinker the neoliberal BS about the way for them to look responsible is to BALANCE the budget, STILL think they have to make SOME cuts.
THAT's the problem.
And each of us who accepts that is the problem.
Morning Mantra: Increase the Deficit NOW!
by dorkenergy on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 08:59:51 AM PST
the issue is raising the debt ceiling. And having Republicans own up to it.
by Theston on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 09:05:52 AM PST
canard is all to the good.
But it's still a canard.
They're playing long ball and we -- Dems, most Progressives, and Obama -- have all bought the upside-down macro crap they've taught us.
by dorkenergy on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 09:13:23 AM PST
say it, (most) Progressives, play to lose is because they've swallowed the macroeconomic BS that we've all been taught these last several decades.
All to the benefit of the Banksters and the few selected billionaire overlords who push the narrative.
by dorkenergy on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 08:21:46 AM PST
"progressive" are doing so from within the Rush-Limbaugh framed definitions of those terms. Basically "not Republican" is equivalent to "liberal" or "progressive" in their minds.
And that is a direct result of the framing in the corporate owned media for the last three decades.
Note, for anybody about to whine about "no true scotsmen" fallacies, I'm not claiming any such thing. I'm identifying the context in which these people self-identify. That doesn't mean they aren't actually liberals or progressives; just that the definitions of those words has been (radically) altered.
by JustinBinFL on Tue Jan 15, 2013 at 06:20:14 AM PST
in the long run is if we help create the conditions -- i.e., change the dialogue -- so that Obama sees that route is incumbent upon him.
To this point, the subject has been broached -- see, e.g., The Bright Shiny Object of Change.
And whether or not one thinks that the coin or the 14th or whatever other mechanism is the best way to go, what we need to focus on getting the populace (and, eventually) CongressCritters to understand what the modern monetary reality is in a Monetarily Sovereign State. (For those of you who don't understand that, have a look at that link.)
As Joel David Palmer says in that article:
The earth moved under our feet a little bit over the past week.
by dorkenergy on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 07:46:34 AM PST
by dorkenergy on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 07:47:26 AM PST
he doesn't have to hold a vote on the debt ceiling and Obama takes the blame. And boy, will he take the blame.
If Republicans know there's an out for them, they don't have to care about the consequences of their actions.
But there's not, that's why they're waffling.
by Theston on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 08:04:17 AM PST
He's putting them right on the spot he needs them to be, fully responsible for whatever bullshit goes down.
The platinum coin thing would make a joke out of our financial credibility, and provoke a constitutional crisis that would do all the work of undermining our full faith and credit that the moron Republicans are trying to do right now.
The Fourteenth Amendment thing? Same thing, you'd have Congress arguing they didn't authorize further debt, while the White House Claimed otherwise.
What you don't seem to get about Obama's position is that it's all about twisting those dumb motherfucker's arms behind their back, forcing them to agree in front of God and everybody else to give us a clean debt ceiling increase, to take that dumb motherfucker of an economy threatening idea off the table once and for all. It's a position designed to make those sick fucks eat crow.
Obama gets them to do it, and its another blow to the political credibility of the Republicans, another victory for us, and it'll let the oxygen back in the room for everybody else. No more extortion, no more idiocy.
by Stephen Daugherty on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 12:47:19 PM PST
saying a word about his intentions of the 14th or the coin. That's all I'm saying. I honestly don't give a flying fuck whether he utilizes the 14th or the coin. My point is it's piss poor negotiating to talk about it. It's like being asked by a used car salesman "What's your budget?". You don't answer that question. Ever.
by FraidKnot on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 02:00:22 PM PST
than fiction. Tipped and rec'd.
Intolerance betrays want of faith in one's cause. - Gandhi
by SpamNunn on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 07:15:29 AM PST
Thanks if anyone could answer.
by a2nite on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 07:32:51 AM PST
See my comment and links above.
It's a key part of changing the dialog.
But don't feel bad -- even Krugman doesn't fully get it (even though he's making progress).
There are several steps in this learning process -- for everybody -- in understanding what money is and what the government's role is with respect to money.
It's the opposite of what Repubs, Dems, Obama -- with all his old-school (neo-liberal) Wall St. advisors -- AND (most) Progressives think.
It will take time.
by dorkenergy on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 08:03:09 AM PST
by a2nite on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 08:24:33 AM PST
Krugman and Obama's Dangerous Austerity Myth.
That's a piece by economist William K. Black, who's been absolutely killing these past few months. I've got an email alert set up for when he posts, now.
by Oaktown Girl on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 09:53:08 AM PST
by a2nite on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 06:03:50 PM PST
by ek hornbeck on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 08:00:24 AM PST
That coin was his trump card against the GOP. Who really thought that he would use it? It was all one big put on. Like a rigged prizefight.
by Quasimodal on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 08:02:04 AM PST
though they would never be, repugs wouldn't hesitate to mint the coin if Dems refused to raise the debt ceiling.
by Aspe4 on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 08:31:00 AM PST
for tat -- and all that, but in this instant example, that's wrong.
The R's do actually believe in austerity because they want to do as Grover has said.
The R's overlords (who the non-rich R's admire but don't understand want to enslave them, along with the rest of us) want to shrink government so that the Banksters, big bondholders, and corporations can rule without regulation.
Put these in your crosshairs:
• Pete Peterson -- goal: eliminate Social Security in favor of market investment
• the Kochs -- goal: dismantle regulation on any commerce)
• the Waltons -- "would you like some chains with your groceries"
Those are persistent.
So elected R's would never do anything to allow government to spend more.
by dorkenergy on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 08:39:37 AM PST
He's set the precedent that not-white-people can be President, for starters.
And yes, the drones are not good. Or the Patriot Act.
And the Republicans have set the precedent that no amount of damage to the nation is too great to inflict if it might, possibly, be politically inconvenient for a President of the opposite party.
Economics is a social *science*. Can we base future economic decisions on math?
by blue aardvark on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 08:29:43 AM PST
diary is spot on.
And it seems that Krugman is coming closer to the MMT position. That would allow a more effective attack on the wealth disparity, but more importantly, the influence disparity.
by dorkenergy on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 09:08:10 AM PST
Been saying similarly re economics. (I've taught financial derivatives to liberal arts students in a Marxism class.)
But MMT shows that we can base our future economic decisions on math. Check out MMT, if you're not familiar with it -- e.g., here and here.
by dorkenergy on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 09:17:11 AM PST
these debt/ debit cliffs of mass deception could use a little more absurdity their starting to get repetitive so mint the coin. As for the drone bomb kill list as Debbie says what kill list? Or as Holder said it's a due process, it's just a different process we do.
by shaharazade on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 09:32:55 AM PST
And these weapons are real.
by dorkenergy on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 09:36:39 AM PST
That ending is brilliant.
Where is the Republican Party of George Romney?
by wolverinethad on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 09:39:06 AM PST
How much discretion does the Federal government have on the allocation and prioritization of spending by/in/for Congress? Can this funding be the first pulled, if the debt-limit is not raised? So Congress gets no salary, no staff budget, no travel budget, no franking privileges, [no insurance, no electricity or water or internet, depending on how long PepCo, DC Water, and ComCast or whomever will run on credit?], etc., until they ante up for the spending they have authorized?
What about cutting other spending starting with the Reddest districts in the Reddest states? How much discretion does the Federal government have, e.g. in eliminating Army bases (as Bush Jr did in 2005, cutting 27,000 jobs in Blue states but only 14,700 in Red states). All those red states who take in more federal funds than they pay out in taxes, bring them back down well below the 1.0 / 1.0 ratio, essentially overnight.
The GOP is playing politics with America's entire economic recovery. Cutting off Red districts is speaking for all Americans -- because the GOP is trying to hold the economy hostage to its ideological right-wing.
Join us at RASA: Repeal or Amend the Second Amendment. (Repeal will not ban guns, just help regulate them.)
by Sharon Wraight on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 10:08:52 AM PST
on the Congressional health care plan to, say, $6000. That's what I call saving money.
"The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"
by Lily O Lady on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 12:32:31 PM PST
to address the problem expeditiously, for the sake of the nation, take responsibility for doing so and press forward on real problems. He could simply say, "yes, it's true, this is not the way it should be done. Unfortunately, the Republican Party demonstrated total willingness to let this go on, threatening the U.S. and global economy. Undesirable as it was, this solution allow us to avoid those greater problems and pursue more important issues".
Obama does not want to lead or take responsibility. He's willing to let the economy, the class war and the climate war slide while dithering over this kabuki.
The Class, Terror and Climate Wars are indivisible and the short-term outcome will affect the planet for centuries. -WiA "When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill..." - PhilJD
by Words In Action on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 11:52:20 AM PST
Of course this administration is always all about "doing the right thing", except when it's not.
by Words In Action on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 11:54:45 AM PST
Rather than have a stupid idea as a way to deal with another stupid idea, we should just say, "cut the shit, no more stupid ideas, run our fiscal system with some sanity you assholes."
by Stephen Daugherty on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 12:35:56 PM PST
More drones now destroy their itselves than notsomuchers.
What's broken may not be working, at least according to plan.
“Please — a little less love, and a little more common decency.” K.V.
by Fulgour on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 11:03:40 PM PST
The eternal dissident was missing for a while, but he seems to be getting stronger as "our" president gets more Wall Street and more seeking of "bipartisanship."
Mr. Woodchuck, though, is probably working on his next super secret biography, which is impossible without access.
People complain about dirt, but I'd like to see them make some.
by The Geogre on Tue Jan 15, 2013 at 03:48:53 AM PST
by The Geogre on Tue Jan 15, 2013 at 03:49:53 AM PST
a hacker for downloading academic papers, while ignoring the fact that the previous administration started a war that did not need to happen, or ignoring the fact that financial institutions sold fraudulently packaged securities and crashed the global economy.
Too Big has Failed!
by tiggers thotful spot on Tue Jan 15, 2013 at 08:10:55 PM PST
One hopes that they're short-term oversights that get corrected and don't become intractably institutionalized.
It's much easier to treat a cancer in the early stages.
by Kushieda on Wed Jan 16, 2013 at 12:34:02 PM PST
by you on soon
Or you may make changes below and Preview again, or Cancel this comment.
Donate to support Daily Kos.
© Kos Media, LLC Site content may be used for any purpose without explicit permission unless otherwise specified
“Kos” and “Daily Kos” are registered trademarks of Kos Media, LLC