I’ll put you in the camp that spells Carl with a “K”.
I don't do that. But I do spell the name Jeff the stupid way with a G.
I’ll put you in the camp that spells Carl with a “K”.
I agree. The only way for the Dems to curb Musk is to do it themselves and own the problem. I also agree entitlements are out of control (including VA disability benefits).All true. And I agree. I've been touting the bipartisan nature of our F'd up situation for a long time.
But I'll also say this: the vast majority of people I've come across who seem at all interested in paring the costs of government strike me as Republican voters. Those Democrats who are engaged on the issue seem to think we can largely, if not entirely, tax our way out of our pickle....as if the problem has been a diminishment of tax revenues rather than a growth of government spending.
The problem has not been a diminishment of tax revenues. Tax revenues comprise virtually the same percentage of GDP today that they have since the end of the war. They bounce around a bit, but not with a terribly large sigma. It's the growth of spending that has put us on a path to ruin.
I'm open to any ideas how to get that back on a sustainable path. And I'm not even generally opposed to tax increases. But it's beyond time for Democrats to engage in this debate...instead of just throwing temper tantrums about Elon Musk.
Dealing with it right now.......day ****ing 3. I don't have the energy anymore.Run that by the wife.......
The Dims will continue to attack every day - just like always. Extreme lock boxes on steroids. Death by 1,500 cuts, a couple of impeachment filings per year, as many pejoratives as possible, a triple-down on identity politics. Division as wide as the Trump Canyon and Gulf of America out together.
And Trump will gleefully give them ammo with new-league record efforts to claw back pseudo-legislative power from Congress (which will result in reactions similar to a crack head losing his crack) and react to every single slur.
Someone needs to contact @mcmurtry66 ’s psychiatrist - he smells healing. I smell street battles leading to generalized riots,
Life is good when you do not need govt help.Well, you’re preaching to the choir on protectionism. Hopefully it doesn’t amount to much more than saber-rattling for Trump. Because there are no winners in a trade war.
And I’m with you (mostly) on his bluster about foreign policy, too. The one caveat I’d have is that he’s right that it’s not in our best interest to have a Chinese firm operating ports in the Panama Canal. In fact, I agree with him that it was a mistake for us to cede control over the Canal itself.
I didn’t vote for Trump and have no regrets in not voting for him. But I’ll support him when he’s doing something good. And, to me, any attempt to reduce federal expenditures is a good thing. The expense is a drag on our national vitality.
Sorry, the kid picking his nose threw me. Cute though.Elon Musk is a terrible public speaker. And his political instincts leave a bit to be desired (which is only fair, as he ain't a politician).
But his logic is here unassailable -- even if I think it's very unlikely he'll be able to get $1T in deficit reduction. Of course, I'm also somebody who said it was an utter impossibility that Donald Trump would win the popular vote. So don't put too much stock in my predictive prowess.
As I understand it, the Senate can introduce a recission bill under the ICA that is exempt from the filibuster. When DOGE gets nearer to cataloguing everything they recommend be cut, that's the way Trump should go. It seems like it might be easier for him to get a bill through the Senate than the House, especially a bill like this one.
What an absolutely fascinating clip. Trump sitting down, at his Oval Office desk, just making faces--I'm not even sure he's listening, but he's giving Musk the floor and interested more in the kid than Musk. And we have Musk, in that weird hat and get up (wouldn't surprise me if he has black pants and brown shoes on--autistic, indeed) speaking in that bizarre, yet completely genuine manner, seriously thinking he can convince people he's right, seemingly unaware that, in politics, no one cares.Elon Musk is a terrible public speaker. And his political instincts leave a bit to be desired (which is only fair, as he ain't a politician).
But his logic is here unassailable -- even if I think it's very unlikely he'll be able to get $1T in deficit reduction. Of course, I'm also somebody who said it was an utter impossibility that Donald Trump would win the popular vote. So don't put too much stock in my predictive prowess.
As I understand it, the Senate can introduce a recission bill under the ICA that is exempt from the filibuster. When DOGE gets nearer to cataloguing everything they recommend be cut, that's the way Trump should go. It seems like it might be easier for him to get a bill through the Senate than the House, especially a bill like this one.
I guess you did not hear the boos or the Eagles fans.
I think that’s a little harsh. What’s his MO then? Limelight? Adulation? Narcissism?What an absolutely fascinating clip. Trump sitting down, at his Oval Office desk, just making faces--I'm not even sure he's listening, but he's giving Musk the floor and interested more in the kid than Musk. And we have Musk, in that weird hat and get up (wouldn't surprise me if he has black pants and brown shoes on--autistic, indeed) speaking in that bizarre, yet completely genuine manner, seriously thinking he can convince people he's right, seemingly unaware that, in politics, no one cares.
What an amazing actor he is, by the way, to so convincingly play the bizarre engineer type and hide his real desires to be the evil scheming dictator looking to "accumulate power" by stealing all our health information and social security numbers and soon rule us all!
As for the argument, he lost me at "cut the budget deficit in half." I give that less of a chance than the Hoosiers signing Brad Stevens as our next basketball coach.
What an absolutely fascinating clip. Trump sitting down, at his Oval Office desk, just making faces--I'm not even sure he's listening, but he's giving Musk the floor and interested more in the kid than Musk. And we have Musk, in that weird hat and get up (wouldn't surprise me if he has black pants and brown shoes on--autistic, indeed) speaking in that bizarre, yet completely genuine manner, seriously thinking he can convince people he's right, seemingly unaware that, in politics, no one cares.
What an amazing actor he is, by the way, to so convincingly play the bizarre engineer type and hide his real desires to be the evil scheming dictator looking to "accumulate power" by stealing all our health information and social security numbers and soon rule us all!
As for the argument, he lost me at "cut the budget deficit in half." I give that less of a chance than the Hoosiers signing Brad Stevens as our next basketball coach.
My second paragraph was sarcasm. I think Musk naively thinks he can fix it all with competence and caring, and he wants to fix it all. He likes to solve problems and thinks all problems, in every realm, are capable of a "solution."I think that’s a little harsh. What’s his MO then? Limelight? Adulation? Narcissism?
Do you think he’s genuine in what he related?
Got it. I know by virtue of all of the gov Ks he’s procured he’s certainly not a neophyte in that arena but as @Marvin the Martian has aptly pointed out there’s a difference between the sectors. There’s not that same autonomy to affect changeMy second paragraph was sarcasm. I think Musk naively thinks he can fix it all with competence and caring, and he wants to fix it all. He likes to solve problems and thinks all problems, in every realm, are capable of a "solution."
Oh, yeah. I don’t think there’s even a remote chance of that - not while leaving mandatory spending alone. Off the top of my head, I’d guess that $1T would account for something like 2/3 of discretionary spending.
But I’m also a proponent of the concept of aiming for something improbably high. You may never get it, but you’ll usually get good results regardless.
At the growing speed of the EO's doing everything one sided (instead of the legislator doing ANYTHING) , to combat the Skullduggery of the octogenarian Democrat oligarchs and swamp (Nan, chucky et all), That very well may be a good move.Trump is going to pressure the courts to restrict the power of the executive.
That might end up his greatest achievement.
instead of notice. In six months we’re pulling this. On Jan 1 26 we’re pulling this. What my guys have adopted is an asinine approachThey are just basically just slashing and burning, cancelling contracts on a daily basis. There is clearly not any thought to it.
You’ll hate when the next Dem comes in.At the growing speed of the EO's doing everything one sided (instead of the legislator doing ANYTHING) , to combat the Skullduggery of the octogenarian Democrat oligarchs and swamp (Nan, chucky et all), That very well may be a good move.
Icarus would like a word.But I’m also a proponent of the concept of aiming for something improbably high
They are just basically just slashing and burning, cancelling contracts on a daily basis. There is clearly not any thought to it.
At the end of the day, those have largely become the same thing.Maybe reforming the federal budget is it. Maybe reforming healthcare payments is it.
They are just basically just slashing and burning, cancelling contracts on a daily basis. There is clearly not any thought to it.
Given our fiscal trajectory, Trump or no Trump, has this ever really been avoidable?You’ll hate when the next Dem comes in.
I say bring on the constitutional crisis.
Touché.At the end of the day, those have largely become the same thing.