David Brooks makes some good points, but then makes sure to say that we should be cutting disability and unemployment benefits, and Mitt is just a genuinely nice guy who says stupid stuff sometimes.
Yep, he lost me, there.
Off-topic discussion. Wanna talk about corsets, duct tape, or physics? This is the place. Detailed discussion of any current-season TV must be whitefonted.
David Brooks makes some good points, but then makes sure to say that we should be cutting disability and unemployment benefits, and Mitt is just a genuinely nice guy who says stupid stuff sometimes.
Yep, he lost me, there.
Owen had a field trip today that I could not go to because I had to take the van in for repairs. I came home from the mechanic's and found Owen's lunch on the table. *FAIL*
I called the school and they had the cafeteria pack him a lunch before they left so he did eat.
Does the guilt ever go away?
Yay, Lee! Great news.
I love all of you and your spicy brains and your big hearts.
Every time I think about the dog thing, I think we are the dog in that situation, and I don't want a president who is going to tie me to the roof of the car while I shit myself in terror.
Exactly. I have been continuously horrified by the callousness and Olympic gold-level clueless privilege that man exhibits.
David Brooks makes some good points, but then makes sure to say that we should be cutting disability and unemployment benefits,
I don't see where he says that. I see he says that those programs can
cultivate patterns of dependency in some people
While framed from a negative perspective, he's not actually flat out calling for cuts. True, he isn't glowingly extolling their virtues, but any condemnation coming from him is pretty mild.
thing is, I am not sure there is a lot of empirical evidence about dependency. not more than say how many of us may be dependent on mortgage interest deductions and dependent on retirement planning including social security.
Chikat beat me to the bootstrap example. Literally pulling yourself up by them is impossible, which was the irony of the phrase when people knew what they were. Nowadays it just seems to imply that you're in the lazy-no good-suspiciously dark-skinned 47% and with just a little effort you too could be a job creator.
I still think that the cognative dissonance described does not include every conservative. It is there and real but there are a variety types of conservatives, and (in addition to the well informed) there are some who are not stupid, not well informed for whom this will make a difference. So I think this will cost Mitt some votes on the right. Who ever thought I'd be the moderate voice among the Buffisitas on a political issue?
I hear the "half of people in America don't pay taxes" thing ALL the time from people. I respond with, "Which taxes? Income? Payroll? Sales? Property? State? Local?"
I still think some of this tax stuff (in the media not here) is a distraction because I would like to roll up our sleeves and have a discussion of regressive and progressive taxes. I think people who have more income should pay more in taxes.
But I believe in funding social services, fire, police, etc.