In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 761
Online now 763 Record: 11761 (2/27/2012)
The Web's No. 1 forum for coverage and discussion of Terps sports
Visitor discussion of University of Maryland and college sports
A place for lively discussion for all other sports unrelated to Maryland athletics
Feedback for IMS and 247Sports
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Why don't you guys just settle on Calvin Coolidge as "The Great Satan," and blame everything on him? He doesn't have that many defenders left, so you'll cause less laughter that way.
With oil now officially the fuel of the past, wut exactly's going to power Air Force 1 to all the vacation spots and golf courses the Obamas like so much?
I guess wind will easily lift that plane up into the sky, the unicorns will fly alongside and all will be well in the brainwashed idiot liberals' BUBBLEWORLD Valhalla. [rofl]
"What has brought California to such a perilous state? How did its government become so wildly dysfunctional? One obvious cause is the deep recession, which has caused tax revenues to plunge for all states. But California's woes have a set of deeper reasons: direct democracy run amok, timid governors, partisan gridlock and a flawed constitution have all contributed to budget chaos and people in pain. And at the root of California's misery lies Proposition 13, the antitax measure that ignited the Reagan Revolution and the conservative era. In Washington, the Reagan-Bush era is over. But in California, the conservative legacy lives on."
It will be interesting if conservatives will ever get to the point where they can un-emotionally analyze the legacy of Reagan, but I fear theories of cognitive dissonance prevent that.
Set in place by an antitax revolt, Prop 13 is at the center of California's fiscal crisis, one that may affect America's attempts at economic recovery
Aren't propositions in CA voted on by the people, not the governor? If that's so, shouldn't you be blaming the people of CA? And don't the people of CA vote in all of the politicians who spend all their money and pass generally stupid laws? And couldn't they either repeal or modify 13 by a new prop?
Prop 13 remains popular among lefties and righties alike, and overall California is aways in the top 10 of highest taxed states so it's hard to argue that it's starving the state of revenue. BUT, you can make an argument that Prop 13 has contributed to CA's main governing problem--too much power residing in Sacramento, which is in thrall to entrenched lobbyists. Sacramento raises and spends the money that the localities cannot because of their property tax limitations.
Sure. But the reality is tax cuts and entitlements are extremely popular. So long as there are politicians that are willing to lie to them by saying they can have both and still reduce the deficit (see: Romney's platform), then why would anyone vote for tax increases? Shoot, it would be great if we passed a law that said in order to cut entitlements you would need to send it to a referendum. But I understand the demographic and fiscal realities so I know that would be irresponsible. And that's what that was. Fiscally irresponsible public policy which has caused serious long term damage.
Sadly, regardless of whether state or federal, both the people and the politicians of all stripes and persuasions are proving themselves to be fiscal idiots. I doubt either party will solve CA's, 49 other states, and the fed's budget problems - at least until our faces are rubbed in the stinky poo poo of long term debt.
I don't disagree with you there.
A referendum on tax increases (or cuts) or entitlement cuts will always succeed when you can convince the majority of voters that the other guy is going to take the hit. But that's not even the issue, both in CA and in the entire country. The reality is that the money that's already been spent far outpaces any tax increase you could possibly inflict on the wealthy. Also, in CA and the US, you could utterly destroy the middle class if you were to raise their taxes to the point necessary for lowering the debt to a manageable level. It's a shell game, plain and simple. We just move theoretical money around and make ourselves feel better by raising taxes on "the wealthy" every once in a while.
CA will learn harsh lessons when more and more of the wealthy folks pick up and move out of the state, and when the government has destroyed more of CA's incredible farmland out of concern for (irony alert) "the environment".
"California,....is liberalism's chickens,.... come home to roost" - Rev Right
"The February 2012 US budget deficit was $237,000,000,000. The largest monthly deficit by any nation ever."
I'm pretty sure you could say that about at least one month's budget every year in recent years (and probably a new record set multiple months every year).
[Yes, it's still startling and absurd...but just saying...]
Don't know if this was already posted but it is Obama related....really just posting it to watch Soledad O'Brien get pawned and outed on her bias. She is the worst.
Soledad O'Brien is right and everybody needs to shut up about it, says Soledad O'Brien (UPDATE: Did Dorothy Brown forget what she wrote?)
Going to have to listen more to Amy Holmes (sp????); the voice of reason in this conversation.
With Veeps like this, Obama doesn't need enemas:
Vice President Joe Biden addressed 87 wealthy Democrats last night attending a fundraiser at the home of Sen. John Kerry in Georgetown. As they dined on grass-fed New York strip steaks and white truffle mashed potatos underneath a outdoor tent, Biden criticized Republicans for being out of touch.
“These guys don’t have a sense of the average folks out there,” Biden said according to the pool report, “They don’t know what it means to be middle class.”
87 guests paid a minimum of $10,000-per-couple to attend the dinner.
Victor Davis Hanson scales, guts and fillets Obama's administration and traveling circus. Read the column at the link, there's more there:
(note to my lone downvoter - keep it up, you're only jerking yourself off)
...In response to all those questions, we are seeing a campaign apparently framed on four general themes: an omnipotent, omnipresent George W. Bush in insidious fashion still hampers the Obama administration; a Republican House (why it is now Republican is never quite explained) for 15 months has stopped all the good things that Obama and a Democratic House would have done; opponents have not appreciated the president’s unique postracial symbolism and are often quite racist; and anything Obama did was better than not doing it, and his not doing other things was better than what he might have done.
Could not Obama instead galvanize Democrats by running proudly on his record? For example:
An 8 percent–plus unemployment rate is the new normal, and thus not really so bad, given that nearly 50 million are helped by food stamps, and unemployment insurance under Obama is generously allotted for two years. Gas prices of $4 and more a gallon serve our nation’s goal of curbing demand, decreasing the carbon footprint, and making viable heavily subsidized green energy. Much-needed wind and solar industries require massive subsidies, while the occasional, or even frequent, bankruptcy of these new companies is the price to be paid for investing in a green future.
Illegal entry into the United States is now an infraction, not a crime, and the felony-free alien should remain largely exempt from compliance with the law. The United States was never really a melting pot, so emphasizing separateness in the realm of social justice is natural; unity is found by bringing together pragmatic coalitions of different ethnicities, not by trying to ignore or deny their innate differences.
Obamacare’s universal coverage is worth the individual mandate, higher taxes, and government intrusion into private medical treatment. Americans will like federalized health care the more they see it gradually put into practice.
GM is a success story, and the subsidized Volt emblemizes the sort of smart car that private-public partnerships can produce. The public may prefer the more profitable GM SUVs, but these were the sorts of cars that guzzled too much gas and produced too much carbon, and therefore their disappearance is better for all of us.
Serial $1 trillion–plus deficits and $5 trillion in aggregate new debt were necessary stimulants and can in time be paid back with higher taxes, which are de facto fairer than, and thus far preferable to, spending cuts. An annual income of $200,000 was previously underappreciated as a necessary criterion for separating those Americans who have not paid their fair share from those who always have. Wise government tax policy can compensate for the unfairness of the market that arbitrarily and inordinately rewards the few at the expense of the many.
American foreign policy is finally embedded within a multilateral framework and subject to the approval of a generally sober and judicious international community — especially the U.N. — rather than mere authorization from the U.S. Congress. Continual pressure on Israel, in both its domestic and foreign policies, is necessary in attempting to achieve peace in the Middle East, given the longstanding willingness of Israel’s rivals to negotiate their differences.
All that is the Obama record. So why not run on it? Who knows, these days he might thereby win?
Victor Davis Hanson writes on NRO: As the election year heats up, we seem not to have noticed the surreal nature of the campaign. One would expect Barack Obama to run on his record from 2009 to 2012, and especially during 2009–10, when he had a solidly Democratic Congress and passed his signature Obamacare. But he . . .
More on Taxifornia's fiscal issues:
Exodus: California Tax Revenue Plunges by 22%
Compared to last year, State tax collections for February shriveled by $1.2 billion or 22%. The deterioration is more than double the shocking $535 million reported decline for last month. The cumulative fiscal year decline is $6.1 billion or down 11% versus this period in 2011.
While California Governor Brown promises strong economic growth is just around the corner, Chaing proves that the best way for Sacramento politicians to hurt the economy and thereby generate lower tax revenue, is to have the highest tax rates in the nation.
California politicians seem delusional in their continued delusion that high taxes have not savaged the State’s economy. Each month’s disappointment is written off as due to some one-time event.
The State Controller’s office did acknowledge that higher than normal tax refunds for February might have reduced the collection of some personal income taxes. Given that 2012 has an extra day in February for leap year, there might have been one day more of tax refunds sent out. But the Controller’s report shows personal income tax collections fell by $325 million, or 16% versus last year. Furthermore, leap year would have added another day for retail sales and use tax collection, but those revenues also fell during February-by an even larger $813 million, 25% decline from 2011.
The more likely reason tax collections continue falling is that businesses and successful people are leaving California for the better tax rates available in more pro-business states.
Derisively referred to as “Taxifornia” by the independent Pacific Research Institute, California wins the booby prize for the highest personal income taxes in the nation and higher sales tax rates than all but four other states. Though Californians benefit from Proposition 13 restrictions on how much their property tax can increase in one year, the state still has the worst state tax burden in the U.S.
Spectrum Locations Consultants recorded 254 California companies moved some or all of their work and jobs out of state in 2011, 26% more than in 2010 and five times as many as in 2009. According SLC President, Joe Vranich: the “top ten reasons companies are leaving California: 1) Poor rankings in surveys 2) More adversarial toward business 3) Uncontrollable public spending 4) Unfriendly business climate 5) Provable savings elsewhere 6) Most expensive business locations 7) Unfriendly legal environment for business 8) Worst regulatory burden 9) Severe tax treatment 10) Unprecedented energy costs.
Vranich considers California the worst state in the nation to locate a business and Los Angeles is considered the worst city to start a business. Leaving Los Angeles for another surrounding county can save businesses 20% of costs. Leaving the state for Texas can save up to 40% of costs. This probably explains why California lost 120,000 jobs last year and Texas gained 130,000 jobs.
California Governor Jerry Brown’s answer to the State’s failing economy and crumbling tax revenue is to place a $6 billion tax increase initiative on the ballot to support K-12 public schools. He promises to only “temporarily” raise personal income rates by 25% on any of the rich folk who haven’t already left.
Recent statewide poll show that support for the measure has fallen from 72% to 52% of likely voters since January. Democrats favor the tax increase by 71%, while Republicans are opposed it by 65%. But independent voter support is now down to only 49% favoring versus 41% opposed as these swing voters begin to learn the initiative also raises their sales taxes, and the initiative will also be available to fund public safety realignment and freeing up dollars for "other spending commitments."
The more likely reason tax collections continue falling is that businesses and successful people are leaving California for the better tax rates available in more pro-business states.
I know it's unfair (and racist!) for conservatives to point out when Democrats and the Obama administration make minor errors with their programs, but even I got a little concerned when it was announced today, that the $940 billion ObamaCare law will cost us - well, our kids, really - $1.76 trillion over 10 years.
That's in addition to the miscellaneous rapes of our liberties, of course.
Just pointing it out for the record. I don't expect any of the board libs here to see anything wrong with that.
You so waisis!!!
So this is what the Prez means by going GREEN. Spend, spend, spend.
SATerp - a serial upvoter here
This President seriously is an idiot:
Obama’s History Lesson
By Mark Steyn
March 17, 2012
Our lesson for today comes from George and Ira Gershwin:
They all laughed at Christopher Columbus
When he said the world was round
They all laughed when Edison recorded sound
They all laughed at Wilbur and his brother
When they said that man could fly
They told Marconi wireless was a phony . . .
Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers sang it in the film Shall We Dance? (1937). Seventy-five years on, the president revived it to tap dance around his rising gas prices and falling approval numbers. Delivering his big speech on energy at Prince George’s Community College, he insisted the American economy will be going gangbusters again just as soon as we start running it on algae and windmills. He noted that, as with Wilbur and his brother, there were those inclined to titter:
Let me tell you something. If some of these folks were around when Columbus set sail — [Laughter] — they must have been founding members of the Flat Earth Society. [Laughter.] They would not have believed that the world was round. [Applause.] We’ve heard these folks in the past. They probably would have agreed with one of the pioneers of the radio who said, “Television won’t last. It’s a flash in the pan.” [Laughter.] One of Henry Ford’s advisers was quoted as saying, “The horse is here to stay but the automobile is only a fad.” [Laughter.]
The crowd loved it. But President Algy Solyndra wasn’t done:
There always have been folks who are the naysayers and don’t believe in the future, and don’t believe in trying to do things differently. One of my predecessors, Rutherford B. Hayes, reportedly said about the telephone, “It’s a great invention, but who would ever want to use one?” [Laughter.] That’s why he’s not on Mount Rushmore — [laughter and applause] — because he’s looking backwards. He’s not looking forwards. [Applause.] He’s explaining why we can’t do something, instead of why we can do something.
It fell to Nan Card of the Rutherford B. Hayes Presidential Center in Ohio to inform the website Talking Points Memo that the quotation was apocryphal. Hayes had the first telephone in the White House, and the first typewriter, and Edison visited him to demonstrate the phonograph.
But obviously Rutherford B. Hayes isn’t as “forward-looking” as a 21st-century president who believes in Jimmy Carter malaise, 1970s Eurostatist industrial policy, 1940s British health-care reforms, 1930s New Deal–sized entitlements premised on mid-20th-century birth rates and life expectancy, and all paid for by a budget with more zeroes than anybody’s seen since the Weimar Republic. If that’s not a shoo-in for Mount Rushmore, I don’t know what is.
I was interested in the rest of Obama’s yukfest of history’s biggest idiots. Considering that he is (in the words of historian Michael Beschloss) “the smartest guy ever to become president,” the entire passage sounded as if it was plucked straight from one of those “Top Twenty Useful Quotes for Forward-Looking Inspirational Speakers” websites. And whaddayaknow? Rutherford B. Hayes, the TV flash in the pan, the horse is here to stay — they’re all at the Wikiquote page on “Incorrect Predictions.” Fancy that! You can also find his selected examples at the web page “Some Really Really Bad Predictions About the Future” and a bazillion others.
Given that the ol’ Hayes telephone sidesplitter turned out to be a bust, I wondered about the others. The line about television being a “flash in the pan” is generally attributed to “Mary Somerville, pioneer of radio educational broadcasts, 1948.” She was a New Zealand–born lass who while at Oxford wrote to the newly founded BBC with some ideas on using radio in schools. By the Seventies, the educational programming she had invented and developed was used in 90 percent of U.K. schools, and across the British Commonwealth from the Caribbean to Africa to the Pacific. She apparently used the flash-in-the-pan line in a private conversation recounted some years after her death by her fellow BBC executive, Grace Wyndham Goldie, a lady I knew very slightly. It was in the context of why she was pessimistic about early attempts at educational television. Mary Somerville would not have been surprised by American Idol or Desperate Housewives, but she thought TV’s possibilities for scholarly study were limited. If you remember Leonard Bernstein giving live illustrated music lectures on Beethoven on CBS in the Fifties, and you’ve lived long enough to see “quality public television” on PBS dwindle down to dreary boomer nostalgia, lousy Brit sitcoms, Laurence Welk reruns, and therapeutic infomercials, you might be inclined to agree that as an educational tool TV certainly proved “a flash in the pan.” And that’s before your grandkid gets home from school and complains he’s had to sit through Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth again.
What was Obama’s other thigh slapper? Oh, yes. “The horse is here to stay but the automobile is only a fad.” The line is generally attributed to “the president of the Michigan Savings Bank” in 1903. That would be George Peck, born in 1834 on a hardscrabble farm in Connecticut. Due to a boyhood accident, he was unable to use one arm and so was no good for agricultural labor. So at the age of 16 he started as the lowest paid clerk in a Utica dry-goods store. From this unpromising start, Peck built one of the largest dry-goods businesses in Michigan. Was he, as the president said, one of those men “who don’t believe in the future”? Not at all. He was president of the Edison Illuminating Company, named for the guy who invented that light bulb the United States government has banned. Henry Ford was Peck’s chief engineer. Peck set his son and Ford up in a shop on Park Place in Detroit to work on their prototype horseless carriages. After Ford departed, the first porcelain spark plug was baked in Peck’s shop.
Christopher Columbus? Once upon a time, your average well-informed high-schooler, never mind the smartest president in history, understood that Columbus was laughed at not because everyone believed the world was round: Educated Europeans of his day accepted that the earth was spherical and had done since Aristotle’s time. They laughed because they thought he was taking the long way round to the East Indies. Which he was.
So let’s see. The president sneers at the ignorance of 15th-century Spaniards, when in fact he is the one entirely ignorant of them. A man who has enjoyed a million dollars of elite education yet has never created a dime of wealth in his life sneers at a crippled farm boy with an eighth-grade schooling who establishes a successful business and introduces electrical distribution across Michigan all the way up to Sault Ste. Marie. A man who sneers at one of the pioneering women in broadcasting, a lady who brought the voices of T. S. Eliot, G. K. Chesterton, and others into the farthest-flung classrooms and would surely have rejected Obama’s own dismal speech as being too obviously reliant on “Half-a-Dozen Surefire Cheap Cracks for Lazy Public Speakers.” A man whose own budget officials predict the collapse of the entire U.S. economy by 2027 sneers at a solvent predecessor for being insufficiently “forward-looking.”
A great nation needs successful self-made businessmen like George Peck, and purveyors of scholarly excellence like Mary Somerville. It’s not clear why it needs a smug over-credentialed President Solyndra to recycle Crowd-Pleasing for Dummies as a keynote address.
They all laughed at Christopher Columbus, they all laughed at Edison . . . How does that song continue? “They laughed at me . . . ”
At Prince George’s Community College they didn’t. But history will, and they will laugh at us for ever taking him seriously.
Obama is an idiot because...his speechwriters tried to give him some humorous old quotes that only the super-nerdy historians or bkmalik would know could be picked apart.
That's all we've got folks?
So cute...so so cute...
It's more because he's willing to lie in order to belittle his opponents, instead of putting forth an argument based in facts.
Oh, and it would be nice if the ratio of governing: campaigning :: 90%:10%, instead of 10%:90%.
Says the party of climate denial, evolution denial, death panels, "the stimulus didn't create any jobs", Obama's a Muslim, and much, much more.
I like how you throw out the term "denial" so easily, as if everything you claim to be true is rock solid fact, and those who question it are lunatics. Leftists always seem to underestimate their opponents, and conservatives always seem to overestimate opponents - just a weird tic on both groups.
And I don't see any Republican candidates attacking private citizens, religions or companies the way that Obama does, nor using the dozens of strawman arguments that he seems addicted to. "War on Women," really?
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports