"It's like a Soviet military parade: displaying power makes people fear your power."

Thats nice. How about 'nothing succeeds like success?'.

I dont know whats worse, the Catholics electing a Catholic pope or the Republican senate passing Republican measures from a Republican president. 4% of your SS privatized, one step from the gulag.

Re: "It's like a Soviet military parade etc."

Says absolutely everything about your inability to construct an intellectual response to what amounts to nothing more than the usual hard-ball politics. Congressional Democrats are coming up against the first administration in more than thirty years that doesn't cower when attacked. Let's face it, John Bolton was MEAN to his staff on a few occassions in the past twenty years. What could possibly be worse?
Ah yes, using one victory to build momentum for others to come.....tsk tsk.

Sometimes its like Republicans have their own agenda or something...

The irony in attacking a Republican president by comparing him to the Soviet Union is utterly breathtaking. Or perhaps irony isn't actually the word I'm looking for.

Appointments are not money. The outcomes on Bolton and the judicial filibuster mean nothing concerning Social Security.

And this post by Mr. Greenberg is intended to do what?

What type of discourse can be engendered by this type of characterization? Where do we go? How to take it?

Do we just spit on each other (euphemistically speaking)? Is that what Mr. Greenberg wants to have us do?

Please, Mr. Greenberg, try elevating the level of discourse. No side - Left or Right - has a monopoly on conducting spitting contests. The spittle from the Right can be as voluminous as from the Left.

But all it does is make a mess. Which is what this blog is turning into.

SMG

And this post by Mr. Greenberg is intended to do what?

Vent bile and offend others, as near as I can tell. It does not further any discussion.

How can he not be aware of how offensive comparing a US Presidential administration to a Soviet military parade is? Not just on the obvious level, either- look at the state of the 'Soviet' military today.

Feh.

"I dont know whats worse, the Catholics electing a Catholic pope or the Republican senate passing Republican measures from a Republican president. 4% of your SS privatized, one step from the gulag."

Actually, it's not 4% of your Social Security, it's 2/3 of your Social Security. The suggested plan is to subtract 4% out of the 6% currently allocated to Social Security as a whole, not to merely take 4% of of what is currently allocated to Social Security as a percentage. While that may not be one step from the Gulag, it is a big financial difference.

This Greenberg guy is a prof.? Did I get that right. This entry was a joke of his wasn't. He's presenting a caricature of the caricature of shallow sycophantic liberal profs to amuse us. He's a riot, this Greenberg. I mean I can go to any bar in America sit down and nine times out of ten meet someone with more to say and who says it better. But it was all a joke, right? If not, you got some scam going Mr. Greenberg, I mean making money off your "intellect" and all. I wouldn't want to live or be in a place that takes you seriously. So I won't.

Bob

"Power was seen as finite..."

This is also analogous to how the left views wealth, which explains alot.

"The suggested plan is to subtract 4% out of the 6% currently allocated to Social Security as a whole..."

Actually is 4% out of the 12% that is allocated, which is 1/3 of SS. God forbid that people not be completely dependent on government.

If Bill Clinton had had a similar size majority we would all be on the Hillary Care dole.

"Actually is 4% out of the 12% that is allocated, which is 1/3 of SS. God forbid that people not be completely dependent on government."

I stand corrected. The 4% in question comes from 12% allocated for Social Security, not 6%. That's what I get for posting at the end of the day and without consulting my notes.

Also, I agree that people should not be completely dependent on government. It is terrible for anyone to find themselves in that state. However, if one does find oneself in that state (due to sickness, injury, bankruptcy or just plain bad luck), it is good to have a social insurance system in place as a back-up, so as to prevent complete impoverishment. That's why protecting Social Security is necessary. No one is arguing against savings or investments. It's just good to have that bit of additional back-up for people to count on. Call it part of the cover charge for living in a civilized country.

http://www.advice-dating-site.com/web-site-for-dating-singles-platinum-romance