Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Let us savor the impending downfall of lawless scoundrels who richly deserve the trouble barreling their way.

fuckem (in honor of the late great efgoldman)

Prediction: the gop will rethink its strategy of boycotting future committees.

Accountability, motherfuckers.

Come on, man.

We will not go quietly into the night; we will not vanish without a fight.

Putting aside our relentless self-interest because the moral imperative is crystal clear.

SCOTUS: It’s not “bribery” unless it comes from the Bribery region of France. Otherwise, it’s merely “sparkling malfeasance”.

You’re just a puppy masquerading as an old coot.

The current Supreme Court is a dangerous, rogue court.

The real work of an opposition party is to hold the people in power accountable.

People identifying as christian while ignoring christ and his teachings is a strange thing indeed.

New McCarthy, same old McCarthyism.

Whoever he was, that guy was nuts.

Quote tweet friends, screenshot enemies.

He wakes up lying, and he lies all day.

The gop is a fucking disgrace.

“The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits.”

It’s pointless to bring up problems that can only be solved with a time machine.

The willow is too close to the house.

Red lights blinking on democracy’s dashboard

The cruelty is the point; the law be damned.

So many bastards, so little time.

Don’t expect peaches from an apple tree.

You are here: Home / Politics / Domestic Politics / Payback Time

Reader Interactions

18Comments

  2. 2.

    Ahasuerus

    Paul Krugman addresses this in his blog. Summary: he deems it “hysteria”, and cites James Kwak’s opinion that it’s “…about scaring the government into inaction on unemployment”.

  3. 3.

    Senyordave

    I’m starting to think the Democrats would be better if they all quit and turned thinks over to the GOP. Then they can spend 24/7 ensuring that a Republican is unable to govern.

    How far down the chain do we have to go before a Republican becomes president?

  4. 4.

    Napoleon

    Dean Baker unloads on this story also.

    Amazing how when the country is about to pass healthcare and is talking about a jobs bill how suddenly these stories appear.

  6. 6.

    atlliberal

    Funny how we didn’t see any of these stories during the last administration when they were busily adding 5 trillion dollars to the debt, and had the attitude that “Deficits don’t matter” (direct quote from Dick Cheney). So much for “the liberal media”.
    If I have it right now here’s how things are:

    While Republicans are in office, “Deficits don’t matter, we can build up unlimited debt . (see Reagan and Bush and Bush)

    Once a Democrat is elected, it is their job to reign in deficits and pay back all the debt that Republicans have built up. (See Clinton and Obama) This way Republicans can get back into power by complaining about the tax increases and spending cuts Dems eneacted while in power.

    I don’t understand how people don’t see the reality that Republicans can’t be trusted with your tax dollars. The worst part is that both parties want to spend, it’s just on different things. With Republicans you get billions (or trillions) spent on wars,defense contracts, oil companies, financial companies and huge multinational corporations.
    With Democrats you get spending on health care, infrastructure, clean energy, consumer protection etc.

    It’s pretty clear to me which party I’d rather see spending my money, and which is more interested in governing rather than just being in power. I don’t understand how our supposed “liberal media don’t see the same thing.

  8. 8.

    The Grand Panjandrum

    Where is the balance in the piece? You know the balance we generally get when it goes against the conservative narrative? Even if two sides do not exist we generally get “the other side” to provide “balance.” Well in this piece we don’t get any balance. None. And two sides do exist. Interesting. Why would the author not dig up an alternate opinion. I guess they aren’t worried that Beck and Rush will be crticizing them for unbalanced reporting.

  10. 10.

    Napoleon

    @The Grand Panjandrum:

    Just like Broder’s much panned column from yesterday where amazingly he managed to only talk to (unnamed) “experts” that he claims states that HCR is a budget buster even though a story appearing in, I think, the NY Times that day or the day or two before manages to quote experts by name, including some in the Bush admin, who basically say its a start down the path of reigning in cost, etc. etc.

  11. 11.

    GReynoldsCT00

    Light story? I think you owe us some pets to make up for that false advertising Mister Cole

  12. 12.

    arguingwithsignposts

    Wall Street firms advising the Treasury recently estimated that the Fed’s purchases of Treasury bonds and mortgage-backed securities pushed down long-term interest rates by about one-half of a percentage point. Removing that support could in itself add $40 billion to the government’s annual tab for debt service.

    (emphasis added)

    My question: Why the f**k are we letting Wall Street firms advise the Treasury about anything when they’re the f**kups who got us into the mess to begin with. (head/desk)

  13. 13.

    Brian J

    Take this for what it’s worth, but I think Brad DeLong’s comments that this is a medium-term and long-term problem rather than a short-term problem are on target. He says we need a bigger deficit now, based on a larger stimulus, and need to worry more about unemployment than inflation.

    If he’s right, and I think he is, why doesn’t the administration come out with a deficit reduction package to take place once unemployment has gone to 7 percent and stayed there for six months or so? They simply need to come up with some fairly reasonable series of budget cuts of around $100 billion or so with tax increases of $100 billion. Why not start with a financial transaction tax, as a way to sock it to Wall Street? And while I have no idea where the $100 billion in budget cuts would come from, if the administration can trim $17 billion like it did back in February, can it be that hard to find more unworthy spending in the budget? All of this can be sold, mind you, with the idea that this is only a step in the right direction, as opposed to the only step that needs to be taken. But shouldn’t something like this send a message that the administration is concerned about the deficit, just in the right way?

  14. 14.

    D-Chance.

    NBD.

    All during the ’90s, Limbaugh used the evil “short term debt” mantra against Clinton, the Treasury was using short term, low interest rates to finance the debt instead of the slightly higher interest rates of the then-normal 30-year financing; therefore, he was “cooking the books”, blah, blah, blah, ad nauseum.

    Strangely enough, we heard nothing on the subject in the ’00s. In fact, debt was good. Debt was low as a % of GDP. Who care about the debt, we’re the Gawl-durn U S of A, if we don’t wanna pay up, who’s gonna make us?

    So now, one year into a new Jackass regime, I don’t want to hear, nor do I care to hear, any new “National Debt, oh noes, our grandchildren’s futures!” cries from anyone.

    Yes, we’re fucked. We’ve been that way for years and no one cares as long as its “our guy” doing the fucking…

  15. 15.

    MysticalChick

    @atlliberal:

    I don’t understand how our supposed “liberal media don’t see the same thing.

    What’s that saying? Something about you won’t see anything your paycheck depends on you NOT seeing? (can’t think of it exactly but that’s the gist of it.

    Sometimes, like the rest of you guys, I wonder if we’ve all entered into an alternate reality. Why can’t others see what is so obvious? All I can do some days is shake my head.

  16. 16.

    Uloborus

    This is the most amazing piece of concern trolling I’ve ever seen. Where to begin? Claiming the government is trying to deceive the public by seeking the best rates it can get – and this is magically a new practice? Relying on long-term estimates that we know from experience are shots in the dark to make numbers look bigger? His quotes and information coming from Wall Street types who, basically, are wildly conservative?

    No. The most outrageous and infuriating part, bar none, is the little comment about borrowing going up ‘in the last year or two’. Because George Bush Jr didn’t happen.

    And he never mentions what he wants us to cut from the budget, but we all know, right? Jesus. What a subtle, nasty little hack job.

  17. 17.

    Jacquelyn

    Oh you kidder! You sucked me right into that one, John!

    I recall when I was in college and we were worried about the deficit ever crossing $1Trillion. As an entrenched middle class American, I know this is going to cost me. Fortunately, I have no children or grandchildren to will this disaster to. All I can do is continue to shout at my elected officials (Doctor, Doctor, it hurts when I do this)!

  18. 18.

    bcw

    As usual the editorializing in what the NY Times calls “news articles” follows Republican talking points without challenge. No mention of this debt until a Democrat is in office facing a potential depression.

    I especially liked “…the wrenching challenges facing the United States after decades of living beyond its means.” No mention that the majority of the debt accrued under Reagan and the two Bushes. It was some national failure – not a failure of the Republican leadership.

Comments are closed.