Chief Justice Roberts’ refusal to cooperate is not exactly shocking. But as you keep pointing out, he’s not reading the room very well right now either. Must be all of that rarefied SCOTUS air he’s inhaling. For a smart guy, he can’t seem to grasp the court’s shrinking credibility and standing. A little transparency and some new ethics rules could change that.
Most Americans don’t want to live in a society where they get pulled over and ticketed for running a red light while the folks sitting on the highest court in the land can thumb their nose at that same red light without consequence.
Who can look at trump’s refusal to any debates as anything other than weakness and cowardice?
Still, it is funny how the republicans that carry his filthy water are outraged that the dems won’t have debates when there’s a sitting president in a party… but ok with their fuhrer not accepting any.
Spending needs to be cut. That can be paired with tax increases if needed, Just be aware that tax increases on businesses will be reflected in the prices of goods and services.
A quick look shows 485 active and reserve Navy ships. Looks like 232 Admirals. So even giving room for the numbers to be wrong, there are not more admirals than ships, Mr. Tuberville.
He also complains about the general to enlisted ratio. He states, "When my dad served in World War II, we had one general for every 6,000 troops. Think about that: one for every 6,000. Now, we have one general for every 1,400 enlisted service members." Guess he doesn't understand that the World was at War! What was the ration during peacetime after WW2? How did the ratio change for Korea and Vietnam? Active drafting ended in 1973. An all volunteer, professional military naturally ends up more top-heavy than one where junior enlisted are conscripts.
Spending is a challenge but that is a matter related to budgeting.
The current problem facing the House is not about spending (in the future) but paying for what has already been spent or approved (in the past). The difference between the BUDGET (what will or won't be spent in the future) and the DEBT CEILING (money already spent or approved) is the messy political challenge now gumming up the works.
The national debt is so large that it cannot be "paid off" any time soon, and no matter what a new BUDGET says, the national DEBT will still remain.
That video I linked is not easy to grasp, but she has the most coherent explanation of the difference between the two as I have heard. Do take a look.
The holdup is that agreement to pay bills is being held hostage in an attempt to make promises about what that budget will (or will not) be approved. McCarthy is blackmailing the House of Representatives to make commitments without negotiating.
Chief Justice Roberts’ refusal to cooperate is not exactly shocking. But as you keep pointing out, he’s not reading the room very well right now either. Must be all of that rarefied SCOTUS air he’s inhaling. For a smart guy, he can’t seem to grasp the court’s shrinking credibility and standing. A little transparency and some new ethics rules could change that.
Most Americans don’t want to live in a society where they get pulled over and ticketed for running a red light while the folks sitting on the highest court in the land can thumb their nose at that same red light without consequence.
Wow. So pork is bad, according to magats. It’s corrupt, it’s not fair, it lines the pockets of politicians and their cronies.
Unless.
Unless it takes money from states that produce corn, for ethanol, and then? It’s worthy of changing a debt ceiling package, or it won’t pass.
Once again republicans show what lying, hypocritical filth they are.
Well done, McCarthy!
Who can look at trump’s refusal to any debates as anything other than weakness and cowardice?
Still, it is funny how the republicans that carry his filthy water are outraged that the dems won’t have debates when there’s a sitting president in a party… but ok with their fuhrer not accepting any.
Yesterday afternoon's Politics Chat was especially good.
Heather Cox Richardson's explanation of the difference between the DEBT CEILING and the BUDGET is timely & clear.
Go to the 31-minute mark in the timeline and pay attention for the next twenty minutes or so.
https://www.facebook.com/heathercoxrichardson/videos/213590808083459
Spending needs to be cut. That can be paired with tax increases if needed, Just be aware that tax increases on businesses will be reflected in the prices of goods and services.
A quick look shows 485 active and reserve Navy ships. Looks like 232 Admirals. So even giving room for the numbers to be wrong, there are not more admirals than ships, Mr. Tuberville.
He also complains about the general to enlisted ratio. He states, "When my dad served in World War II, we had one general for every 6,000 troops. Think about that: one for every 6,000. Now, we have one general for every 1,400 enlisted service members." Guess he doesn't understand that the World was at War! What was the ration during peacetime after WW2? How did the ratio change for Korea and Vietnam? Active drafting ended in 1973. An all volunteer, professional military naturally ends up more top-heavy than one where junior enlisted are conscripts.
Spending is a challenge but that is a matter related to budgeting.
The current problem facing the House is not about spending (in the future) but paying for what has already been spent or approved (in the past). The difference between the BUDGET (what will or won't be spent in the future) and the DEBT CEILING (money already spent or approved) is the messy political challenge now gumming up the works.
The national debt is so large that it cannot be "paid off" any time soon, and no matter what a new BUDGET says, the national DEBT will still remain.
That video I linked is not easy to grasp, but she has the most coherent explanation of the difference between the two as I have heard. Do take a look.
The holdup is that agreement to pay bills is being held hostage in an attempt to make promises about what that budget will (or will not) be approved. McCarthy is blackmailing the House of Representatives to make commitments without negotiating.