Gosh I just don't care about what he did. It doesn't bother me. Is that strange, or do others feel the same?

He was so sharp on the floor sometimes, debating issues others would roll over on. I can't help but imagine - in some alternate universe - how Weiner might have handled this totally differently. For example, instead of the denials and flip-flopping, Weiner could have said from the very beginning: "This is none of your damned business.... I can't believe your asking this." (Which is pretty much what George Bush Sr. said in the '90s when confronted by press about a likely affair.)

Every one of the charges could be answered with that response. It really is none of our business. Even if he took a cell phone shot of his d-ck in the goddamn oval office. Who cares? Because it's public property? I say it again - WHO CARES? It's just sex. Why get hung up on any of it (unless you're his wife)? There's no indication it was affecting his job.

"None of your damned business." If he'd said that (and meant it!), sure, his career would probably still have tanked. But, in some circles at least, he'd be a bit of a folk hero.

I can only conclude Weiner must be dealing with some powerful sexual guilt issues to lose all his nerve when confronted with his own behavior. The irony, of course, is - it's our own culture's guilt and discomfort with sex that drove this to become such a public issue for him in the first place.

Can you imagine if he's rolled over the line first in that state? That would have made history surely. You have to feel a bit sorry for him.

So you'd rather him blow it on your belly than blow it on your back? >> ^bamdrew:

Start a death metal band with him. Get drunk and just fucking ROCK, you-know? Soon enough all would be forgive, due to the rocking.
wiaht whatre we talkin about? I think I just trolled blankfist. ... better just roll over and show my belly, metaphorically... avoid some blowback

Start a death metal band with him. Get drunk and just fucking ROCK, you-know? Soon enough all would be forgive, due to the rocking.

wiaht whatre we talkin about? I think I just trolled blankfist. ... better just roll over and show my belly, metaphorically... avoid some blowback

>> ^Psychologic:

>> ^blankfist:
>> ^chilaxe:
Some asshole dying is so sad! Where are the carebears when you need them??

For me, I don't mourn his passing; I mourn the disregard for his right to a fair trial. I don't think anyone ever intended to bring him in to give him a fair trial. Revenge makes for a great movie premise, and it feels awesomely satisfying when the bad guy dies at the end, but in the real world it's scary to think some people's rights can be skirted completely as long as the majority of people think it's okay.

In what alternate reality could he possibly get a fair trial? He'd be center stage for the political circus we have for a government.
Honestly, it was either kill him or stop hunting him, and personally I wish the troops had come home long ago.


I don't think you could get a fair trial for Osama. A lot of it would've been political theater. But does that mean we should just roll over and accept rights as being conditional?

At what point do we or did we start making the decision who does and who doesn't get a fair trial?

Aesop just rolled over in the grave.

>> ^flavioribeiro:

As for the top priority of the US Congress, I believe it should be balancing the budget. The national debt is the most pressing issue because especially over the last 4 years, US GDP growth has been fueled with borrowed money.

I say getting a solid economic recovery is job #1. A huge portion of the deficit right now is due to the recession itself -- it lowers our GDP (and therefore the tax revenues), and it means a lot more people going on government assistance because they're unemployed and can't find a job.

>> ^flavioribeiro:
Rolling over this debt will already cause a significant drop in the American standard of living, especially as inflation and interest rates start to rise.

"Rolling over" this debt? Why will it result in any drop in the standard in living? It seems to me that leaving the unemployment picture untouched is going to have a massively larger impact on our long-term prosperity than having a higher short- and medium-term national debt.

>> ^flavioribeiro:
To make things short, I refer you to Karl Denninger's blog (who I agree with). He posted short video about this today. To answer your question more precisely, the US Congress must 1) revise the tax code and 2) enact significant cuts to government programs. (1) is nearly impossible to pass because it effectively taxes everyone the same. We will at best see a weak version of (2), which will be insufficient and more painful in the long run.


I'll have to watch the video later, but the blog post probably gives me a clear enough picture. You know this guy is a founder of one of our dreaded Tea Party groups here, right?

In any case, I'll just respond to what I think he's got a valid point about.

First, he's right that medical care costs are essentially the entire problem with the long range debt picture. We've got to find a way to get health care cost inflation under control here. Other countries have done so with lots of government interventionism. We're still refusing to do that sort of thing, and the longer we put it off, the worse our deficits will get.

Second, while I think the "Fair" tax is a giant scam, I'm not opposed to the basic idea of replacing income taxes with consumption taxes.

Third, I like the idea of cutting back on the number of incentives baked into the tax code. But I don't oppose the very idea of them on principle, I just think we have a bunch that aren't doing any good for anyone, and a bunch that are actively doing harm (like oil & gas subsidies).

However, the vast majority of it is just lies and dogmatic ideology being presented as some sort of solution to a mundane budget issue. It's exactly what I was referring to when I said this:>> ^NetRunner:

The issue here [is] the millions of people who think the biggest problems in our country are that taxes are too high on businesses, government aid to the poor is too generous, and worker safety regulation is a tyrannical imposition on liberty.


It's also just one step shy from suggesting that we euthanize our elderly, process them into soylent green, and sell it to pay down our debt.

Out of sheer curiosity, what country are you from?

>> ^NetRunner:

If you mean it in a broader sense, and mean more people need to be aware of FPTP problems and the issues with supermajority rules, then yeah I'm in complete agreement. I mostly get push back about those from right-wing people though, who either say "the Founding Fathers made it that way for a reason, and we shouldn't mess with their perfection" or just generally cheer the idea that those things make it hard for the government to do anything at all, even though it really just makes it nearly impossible for people to have a voice in what it does. A desire to make the system work right, rather than a desire to sabotage it would be nice.

(...)

Okay, so let's unpack this. What do you think should be the top priority of the US Congress over the next year? If it's the national debt, why is that the most pressing issue right now? Why do you reference spending specifically? Aren't revenues at a 60-year low? What factors make our spending "unsustainable"? Does the fact that we're still mired in a recession affect the answer to any of these questions?

Yes, I mean it in the broader sense. FPTP degenerates too often into regimes where there is very little opposition, even if there are (formally) more than two parties.

As for the top priority of the US Congress, I believe it should be balancing the budget. The national debt is the most pressing issue because especially over the last 4 years, US GDP growth has been fueled with borrowed money. Rolling over this debt will already cause a significant drop in the American standard of living, especially as inflation and interest rates start to rise.

To make things short, I refer you to Karl Denninger's blog (who I agree with). He posted short video about this today. To answer your question more precisely, the US Congress must 1) revise the tax code and 2) enact significant cuts to government programs. (1) is nearly impossible to pass because it effectively taxes everyone the same. We will at best see a weak version of (2), which will be insufficient and more painful in the long run.

This video has been seconded as a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof seconded with isdupe by chicchorea.

*isdupe>> ^zomgunicorns:

dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Help-I-ve-Fallen-and-I-Can-t-Roll-Over

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by zomgunicorns. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Help-I-ve-Fallen-and-I-Can-t-Roll-Over

This video has been seconded as a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof seconded with isdupe by chicchorea.

*isdupe>> ^GDGD:

dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Help-I-ve-Fallen-and-I-Can-t-Roll-Over

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by GDGD. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.