tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8746692.post8456315483822807501..comments2024-03-29T02:03:49.151-04:00Comments on History Unfolding: The New Civil ConflictDavid Kaiserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05020082243968071584noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8746692.post-1752108475472279462009-12-08T10:22:23.095-05:002009-12-08T10:22:23.095-05:00At the bottom of this post I did not see the promi...At the bottom of this post I did not see the promised "afterword on the hoax". I would be interested to read it... thanks.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8746692.post-78838636792191541982009-11-14T15:26:27.072-05:002009-11-14T15:26:27.072-05:00"The government paid more than $47 billion in..."The government paid more than $47 billion in questionable Medicare claims including medical treatment showing little relation to a patient's condition, wasting taxpayer dollars at a rate nearly three times the previous year."<br /><br />And that is when obamacare and the government are NOT the only healthcare game available. Imagine what will happen whan the government and obamacare take over.<br /><br />http://apnews.excite.com/article/20091114/D9BVE9L00.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8746692.post-40844620410851239082009-11-11T23:34:31.600-05:002009-11-11T23:34:31.600-05:00Mr. Kaiser: Part II
When will a moment arrive ...Mr. Kaiser: Part II<br /><br /><br />When will a moment arrive that current administration is actually responsible for its own <br />action and the way it governs?<br /><br />I believe that the moment arrived after the president, his cabinet and the rest of<br />the administration were sworn in January, 2009.<br /><br />Or as H. Truman said, to paraphrase, the buck stops withe the current administration. <br />Enough with excuses/spin/deflections. The current administration campaigned to get elected<br />and were elected. They own governing after being sworn in and not anyone else.<br /><br />Should the voters be concerned about the deficits at all? Or should the current <br />administration be give carte blanche to do as many stimuli as they think necessary? <br />Notwithstanding the fact that the stimulus I was unabashed fiasco.<br /><br />I am concerned with deficit. I don't think printing more money is the solution.<br /><br />I believe that the stimulus was misdirected and didn't work and achieved the<br />goals stated by the administration when they were lobbting for its passages.<br /><br />As for number of jobs saved, I can only offer you some published statistics<br />that are available to me:<br /><br />Massachusets reported 12,374 jobs saved or created. Bridgewater State<br />College reported creating 160 jobs for $77,181 in stimulus money.<br />It turn out the jobs created were zero.<br />(reference available -Boston Globe)<br /><br />For the state of New York, the administration has released the following figure<br />for the number of jobs the stimulus saved/created: 40,625 jobs -- including 25,526 in<br />New York City.<br /><br />"A spokesman for Mayor Bloomberg told The Post that the city had "created" 3,000 jobs and that <br />the rest represented already employed teachers and other city employees who faced possible layoffs <br />without the federal "shot in the arm." <br />(reference available at NY POST)<br /><br />Fudging the purported numbers of jobs saved, will not put those people to<br />work.<br /><br />And to conclude, based on those numbers, I believe that no one can lie their <br />way out of recession. Especially when one can look at current 10%+ unemployment<br />rate and growing.<br /><br />Furthermore, the billions used for the stimulus I ,have simply added to the<br />largest yearly deficit ever seen and will be burden for future budgets<br />and generation.<br /><br />As for your suggestion that people of certain income should be taxed hugher,<br />there could be some merit to it.<br /><br />But in my experience, no matter how much money a government brings in, it can always spend all of what it had brought in and much more.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8746692.post-31647636059504669042009-11-11T23:33:55.842-05:002009-11-11T23:33:55.842-05:00Mr. Kaiser, - Part I
let me from the offset apo...Mr. Kaiser, - Part I<br /><br /> let me from the offset apologize for misspelling your surname.<br /><br /> Let me also for the purpose of full disclosure, let you know that I have emigrated<br />to the USA from a communist country/state that doesn't presently exist in the <br />configuration that I left, but as many more smaller states at the moment.<br /><br /> I reside currently in the state of Massachusetts.<br /><br /> Let me also mention that the said country/state had single payer healthcare system.<br />It didn't work, but I won't be talking about that at this time.<br /><br />Let me get back to my original questions posed to you and provide some of my<br />own answers:<br /><br />I was wondering, if not people currently governing, who are the voters supposed <br />to hold responsible in the next election in Novermber, 2010?<br /><br />I believe that a voter should and must evaluate the current administration based on their<br />deeds, policies, actions, inactions.<br /><br />The previous administration hasn't been in power for almost past 11 months and constantly<br />blaming someone/something else for the current administrations failings/faults (and I<br />can come up with a few more such descriptiors) doesn't hold the water. Notice that all<br />perceived successes, if any, belong only to the current administration.<br /><br />I have never been a fan of the previous administration, but everything being their fault<br />simply doesn't hold factual water.<br /><br />Repeal of Glass-Steagall Act on November 12, 1999, was not done by the previous <br />administration, but by the adminisration of President Clinton. As a historian, I am<br />quite certain that you can put the consequences of the repeal of Glass=Steagall<br />Act in much better historical perspective.<br /><br />Bernie Madoff started his hedge fund in 1996 - not during the previous administration.<br /><br />And there are many other such examples.<br /><br />.....Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8746692.post-55145556135421436272009-11-11T11:11:29.756-05:002009-11-11T11:11:29.756-05:00I don't know what to say!I don't know what to say!Acaihttp://www.acaiberryfrance.frnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8746692.post-16350020706137110002009-11-11T10:10:14.810-05:002009-11-11T10:10:14.810-05:00How about some answers to the basic questions:
1....How about some answers to the basic questions:<br /><br />1. Why did Wall Street facilitate the deindustrialization of America from 1975-2009? Their commissions couldn't have been that big.<br />2. Why wasn't Clinton-Greenspan & Fannie/Freddie's push for "home ownership" seen as the quasi-socialist wealth transfer it was? And where was the NY Times, WSJournal etc on this?<br />3. Why can't Obama admin re-regulate Wall Street and why allow them to hide behind reorganization as "banks"? Can we get Glass-Steagall back?<br />4. Do you think the "dumbing-down" of US education will enable our kids to continue the standard of living on which they were raised, and can their purchase of Ipods, Rap and other consumer crap sustain economic growth and create jobs?<br />I look forward to reading your book on JFK Assassination! <br />Bob in NCBob in NChttp://www.affordablencwaterfront.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8746692.post-41211461352520647512009-11-10T06:48:48.336-05:002009-11-10T06:48:48.336-05:00Being too close to the subject, particularly ill r...Being too close to the subject, particularly ill read on my homey political history, I'm afraid my answers can only be impressions from memory on one oyour issues, however, to address here:<br />1) I would like to take a look at your source(s) for this idea of longer term circularity, if you can recommend any reading, and;<br />2) Southern liberals have always been in the minority, notwithstanding the Revolutionary War - that is an interesting issue - and after the Civil Rights Act passed, as LBJ predicted the South reveresed longstanding Democratic voting trends - a trend already in motion in the 1964 election - and under Nixon the state Republican majorities began the process of gerrymandering districts which seems to have been almost complete by the time Reagan took office. During the Civil War there is the famous exchange of Yankess soldiers questioning why a captured Southerner was fighting when he had no slaves and the Southerner answered, "Because y'all are down here." That about sums it up even for Southern liberals, curiously. I don't know of any other section of the country as ready to fight. For that, one need only read Mark Twain. His comments about Southerners are as true now as when written. Politically, Southern liberals waned with LBJ, but their actual lifespan as a political force only began with FDR and, with his demise, it took only a generation or two for liberals to fade from public predominance. The Republicans put the coup de grace to that for another 50 years.RUNNINGDOGLACKEYhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14443783129580809991noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8746692.post-42489459859437038552009-11-10T01:12:55.377-05:002009-11-10T01:12:55.377-05:00I do not think you are a moron. I see you have a ...I do not think you are a moron. I see you have a different set of priorities than I do. I certainly hope your reply to one of the previous comments about the stimulus package saving government jobs was at least marginally "tongue-in-cheek". I do not find your arguments in this article convincing. You have also deftly parried the insightful questions of the first comment. I would have to label you more as a spin doctor, than historian, assuming the two can be separated. That last would be my own tongue, firmly embedded in a cheek.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06686628118331819647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8746692.post-86120992870062165602009-11-08T10:20:39.731-05:002009-11-08T10:20:39.731-05:00From Runningdoglackey:
Your article very interest...From Runningdoglackey:<br /><br />Your article very interesting indeed. Being a Southerner i find myself cringing too often at the publicized actions of the southern Republican bloc. (There are those of us who are still fire-eating liberals who have not forgot what the 60's taught us, much to our parents' consternation!)<br />But i also find the idea of recurring generational types interesting for the reason that it resembles circular views of time instead of the typical Judaeo-Christian straight line time contiuum whose fundamental perception of the nature of time as linear has thus been an essential factor in the development of the discipline of History itself. It seems to be a competing theme, rather than an adjunct. Am i incorrect about this?<br /><br />9:37 AM<br /><br /> I think you are correct about that, yes--although one can also observe a VERY long-term trend over centuries, which seems to be favorable. After all, even Germany and Japan, who went horribly off the track between the 1860s and 1945, have gotten back on it since then. I am delighted to hear from a southerner like yourself who apparently does not resent the comments I have made about your section. I am deeply depressed that there were far more visible southern liberals (including white ones) when I first got interested in politics half a century ago than there seem to be now. Do you think the success of the civil rights movement is the reason?David Kaiserhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05020082243968071584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8746692.post-45715514060537085882009-11-08T10:18:03.982-05:002009-11-08T10:18:03.982-05:00Mr. Keiser: [actually, Kaiser]
I was wondering, i...Mr. Keiser: [actually, Kaiser]<br /><br />I was wondering, if not people currently governing, who are the voters supposed to hold responsible in the next election<br />in Novermber, 2010?<br /><br /> Their elected officials, of course.<br /><br />Is everything still the previous administration/s doing and fault?<br /><br /> The economic crisis is the fault of a lot of bad decisions over the last 30 years or more, of which he Bush Administration made some of the worst, especially it's tax cuts. Without them the deficit today would be much more manageable even if the crisis had still occurred. The current Administration should be judged on whether it has done enough to get us back on track. I think it should do more.<br /><br />When will a moment arrive that current administration is actually responsible for its own action and the way it governs?<br /><br /> That moment arrived nine months ago.<br /><br />Should the voters be concerned about the deficits at all? Or should the current administration be give carte blanche to do as many stimuli as they think necessary? Notwithstanding the fact that the stimulus I was unabashed fiasco.<br /><br /> The stimulus was not an unabashed fiasco. Among other things, it saved thousands of jobs in local government. I hope the Congress will vote more stimulus money. In the long run we need to be concerned about the deficits and in my opinion will need much higher taxes on upper incomes to help pay them down. In the short run, as in the Depression or the Second World War, we have to worry more about other things.<br /><br />What do you think?<br /><br /> See aboveDavid Kaiserhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05020082243968071584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8746692.post-64038939117234253102009-11-08T09:37:18.722-05:002009-11-08T09:37:18.722-05:00Your article very interesting indeed. Being a Sout...Your article very interesting indeed. Being a Southerner i find myself cringing too often at the publicized actions of the southern Republican bloc. (There are those of us who are still fire-eating liberals who have not forgot what the 60's taught us, much to our parents' consternation!) <br /> But i also find the idea of recurring generational types interesting for the reason that it resembles circular views of time instead of the typical Judaeo-Christian straight line time contiuum whose fundamental perception of the nature of time as linear has thus been an essential factor in the development of the discipline of History itself. It seems to be a competing theme, rather than an adjunct. Am i incorrect about this?RUNNINGDOGLACKEYhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14443783129580809991noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8746692.post-53078532152303141602009-11-08T01:09:38.915-05:002009-11-08T01:09:38.915-05:00Mr. Keiser:
I was wondering, if not people curr...Mr. Keiser:<br /><br /> I was wondering, if not people currently governing, who are the voters supposed to hold responsible in the next election<br />in Novermber, 2010?<br /><br /> Is everything still the previous administration/s doing and fault?<br /><br /> When will a moment arrive that current administration is actually responsible for its own action and the way it governs?<br /><br /> Should the voters be concerned about the deficits at all? Or should the current administration be give carte blanche to do as many stimuli as they think necessary? Notwithstanding the fact that the stimulus I was unabashed fiasco.<br /><br /> What do you think?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com