Sunday Morning Talk Show Thread 6 January 2013

Various driveby media television networks ^ | 6 January 2013 | Various Self-Serving Politicians and Big Media Screaming Faces

[Alas Babylon!]

The Talk Shows

January 6th, 2013

Guests to be interviewed today on major television talk shows:

FOX NEWS SUNDAY (Fox Network): Reps. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., and Jim Jordan, R-Ohio; Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas.

MEET THE PRESS (NBC): Sens. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.; Angus King, a Maine independent; Rep. Xavier Becerra, D-Calif.; Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson, leaders of President Barack Obama’s now-defunct deficit commission.

FACE THE NATION (CBS): Sens. McConnell; Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., and Chris Murphy, D-Conn.; Reps. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., Mike Kelly, R-Pa., Rick Nolan, D-Minn., and Matt Salmon, R-Ariz.

THIS WEEK (ABC): Sens. McConnell and Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.D.; Reps. Joaquin Castro, D-Texas, and Tom Cotton, R-Ark.

STATE OF THE UNION (CNN): Heitkamp; Sens. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.; Rep. Richard Hudson, R-N.C.

[Cheerio]

He threatened to withhold people's Social Security direct deposit checks the next week, despite Congress saying they would fund those.

AND he has the backing of the left and his RAT party to do exactly that. He will indeed use it again in 2013 and DEMAND from those obstinate Republicans to have the debt ceiling REMOVED.

Here is where he derives his state run media power over this subject that the spineless Republicans can never ever win on........the below argues both ways, and provides insight into the history of this ponzi scheme LIE perpetrated by the lefties.

Social Security’s Sham Guarantee
By Michael D. Tanner
May 29, 2005

Gov. Perry's Right About Social Security
Walter E. Williams
Sep 21, 2011

Washington’s Lies
BY WALTER E. WILLIAMS, OCTOBER 2010

Note: The article below has been scrubbed from all sources ( http://www.frumforum.com/social-security-checks-are-not-guaranteed/) even the wayback machine, but I post the original below.


Social Security Checks Are Not Guaranteed
July 12th, 2011 at 4:59 pm David Frum

Back when conservatives were fighting the good fight for private accounts in Social Security, we often pointed to the Supreme Court ruling that individuals had no legally enforceable right to Social Security benefits. I quote the Cato Institute’s Michael Tanner:

Many people believe that Social Security is an “earned right.” That is, they think that because they have paid Social Security taxes, they are entitled to receive Social Security benefits. The government encourages that belief by referring to Social Security taxes as “contributions,” as in the Federal Insurance Contribution Act. However, in the 1960 case of Fleming v. Nestor, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that workers have no legally binding contractual rights to their Social Security benefits, and that those benefits can be cut or even eliminated at any time.

Ephram Nestor was a Bulgarian immigrant who came to the United States in 1918 and paid Social Security taxes from 1936, the year the system began operating, until he retired in 1955. A year after he retired, Nestor was deported for having been a member of the Communist Party in the 1930s. In 1954 Congress had passed a law saying that any person deported from the United States should lose his Social Security benefits. Accordingly, Nestor’s $55.60 per month Social Security checks were stopped. Nestor sued, claiming that because he had paid Social Security taxes, he had a right to Social Security benefits.

The Supreme Court disagreed, saying “To engraft upon the Social Security system a concept of ‘accrued property rights’ would deprive it of the flexibility and boldness in adjustment to ever changing conditions which it demands.” The Court went on to say, “It is apparent that the non-contractual interest of an employee covered by the [Social Security] Act cannot be soundly analogized to that of the holder of an annuity, whose right to benefits is bottomed on his contractual premium payments.”

The Court’s decision was not surprising. In an earlier case, Helvering v. Davis (1937), the Court had ruled that Social Security was not a contributory insurance program, saying, “The proceeds of both the employee and employer taxes are to be paid into the Treasury like any other internal revenue generally, and are not earmarked in any way.”

In other words, Social Security is not an insurance program at all. It is simply a payroll tax on one side and a welfare program on the other. Your Social Security benefits are always subject to the whim of 535 politicians in Washington. Congress has cut Social Security benefits in the past and is likely to do so in the future.

Conservatives are blasting President Obama for “scare tactics” when he suggests in interviews that Social Security payments will not in fact be secure in the event of a hard crash with the debt ceiling.

Actually Obama is here channeling 100% classic conservative theory. Conservatives have argued for 20 years that Social Security is a pure gratuity, vulnerable to change at the whim of Congress. That’s why we wanted to change it! But the consequence of Social Security being a pure gratuity is that Social Security recipients must stand at the back of the line if it becomes necessary to slash spending by 44% . Bondholders collect first. People with other contracts and other legally enforceable claims collect next. Those without legally enforceable claims collect last. That last category includes not only Social Security recipients and the unemployed, but also, for example, soldiers in the field.

It can’t be right that the Secretary of the Treasury has the discretionary power to pay anybody he likes. Some people have legally stronger claims against the federal government than others. Unfortunately for the GOP’s strategy in this bizarre game of threat and counter-threat, the claims that are most politically powerful also happen to be legally weaker.

[Sooth2222]

I'll also disagree. The lower income Obama voters who believed that "millionaires" were going to get soaked are going to be surprised when they look at their paychecks and discover that they are the millionaires!

True, the seriously wealthy might see a change if they just stand there like a deer in headlights. But they won't. Most of them wouldn't have become seriously wealthy if they weren't really, really smart in the first place. So I doubt the gov't will collect near the $60 billion it projects from the income tax increases. I think Obama actually believes he won, and Boehner believes he lost. Okay -- let Obama spiking the football if it makes him feel good, but this deal wasn't a bad deal for the rest of us.

I'm more worried about them monetizing so much of the deficit, rather than cutting spending. This did not work out very well when it was tried by Weimar Germany.

[Jmathes]

[Son House]

No, Boehner and McConnell and many other Republicans should be written off as reliable Democrat votes, they are closer to Pelosi and Reid’s views then being anything Conservative.

Economically speaking, some House Republicans have been wrong since the last debt ceiling deal when the credit rating was first down graded because they wouldn’t stop the spending which is still the problem.

[Son House]

Boehner won’t get another deal, as from now on meetings will be with Biden and Geithner instead.

In the first place, Boehner should have never been negotiating outside of the House Democrats, let them go make any deals and say no if the deal isn’t right. It’s a matter of ‘know your role’.

[ROCKLOBSTER]

House Republicans...wouldn’t stop the spending which is still the problem.

All of this spending, which happened with no budget, must have been approved by the House in order to be appropriated. Do we have a list of these "continuing resolutions" or "supplemental budget" bills and the corresponding roll calls?

Or did they pass them by doing the cowardly "unanimous consent" hammer-vote?

[Alas Babylon!]

They didn’t have a referendum to ask us if we wanted to lend the money to them.

Oh yes they did! You (not you Twotone, the writer) were just too stupid to notice and didn't pay attention.

Every time you voted for a democrat or a RINO, you gave them carte blanche to do what they did. Collectively, you could have stopped it by flushing Obama, but you gave him another 4. So don't cry to me when that knife in your back gets twisted even further.

But not to worry about it! You won't NEED Social Security when the Death Panel does its job.

[SkyPilot]

I disagree with your disagreement.

• The GOP got swindled during the 2011 "debt deal" that placed great hope that the "Super Committee" in the sky would do what everyone knows has to be done, but does not have the political courage to do: reform entitlements. Instead, the GOP caved on agreeing to allow the military to take the body blow of 50% of the cuts, despite being 18% of the budget, and being the one agency that is called for in the US Constitution

• This "deal" did nothing but delay those cuts, that are now looming again in about seven weeks. Moreover, it is even worse when the details are examined. The DoD will now have only 7 months to implement the first set of cuts (which last 10 years!) for the remainder of the fiscal year. Worse still, they cannot cut troop strength (although that is coming very soon), so the DoD will be forced to slash the Operations and Maintenance budget line, which is the basically the life blood of the military. The cut will be deep, about 25-30% and will be immediate, resulting in the most rapid and deepest hollowing out of the Defense Dept in American history

• Taxes went up on everyone - the payroll tax was deducted from almost every hard working American's paycheck the day after Congress passed this legislation (and even before Obama's underlings "autopenned" his name

• The tax increases in "the rich" will fund the government for a whopping 6 days

• Real entitlement reform in the coming "debt ceiling" is now no where because of this political defeat the GOP signed onto. That means we are screwed as a nation.

[rodguy911]

It’s tough when you only control one house and barely control that. When we lost the election it really sealed our fate in so many ways. We can get some traction but how much is hard to say.
We have an administration hell bent on destroying capitalism and installing communism,they got reelected. Sad day for the country.

[Friendofgeorge]

Watched 5 minutes of MTP and the same of FNS. I just happened to tune in for Newt and Carly

While they both said a few good things, I did not appreciate them one bit suggesting that the debt ceiling was off limits

Why do they think they were invited on the show in the first place? Shirley((airplane) they know???? If not then they are not that bright!

Gregory only had Newt on because he had his writings on the debt ceiling, and same for Carly.

Yes I know they had perhaps a couple other things to say, but still they are only helping set up the MSM talking points for why we just have to raise the debt ceiling...They are only allowing themselves to be used, was kind of sickening really!

[Gritty]

The City Where the Sirens Never Sleep (Detroit is dying. But, it is not dead yet)

[SkyPilot]

True enough.

But the Republicans have to get the military sequester out of the equation. Right now, Obama and the Democrats have a gun to the temple of the hostage in the room, and that hostage is Defense.

The Republicans were asked by the Democrats (in a stunning reversal) if the Republicans wanted to delay Sequester for 2 years, and the Republicans said "No!"

True enough, it would have added $109 Billion to the debt for one year which would have been addressed in the next year's budget, but when we are talking about $17 Trillion in debt and $100 Trillion in unfunded liabilities driven almost exclusively by entitlements, the Republicans would have been very smart to have taken the deal. That $109 Billion is less than 10 cents on the dollars of every deficit Obama has run every year for the last 4 years!

The GOP refused, and painted themselves right into a corner with the coming debt ceiling negotiations.

Sometimes I wonder if the GOP is really that stupid, or they are stealth Democrats.

[Gritty]

Oops! That was posted by mistake.

It's a good article anyhow and shows where America is headed if we stay on the current glide path. Tinkering around the edges isn't going to hack it. Certainly massive corruption and socialism aren't either.

Anyhow, bray is right. God was thrown out of our schools and our schools turned to crap. God was thrown out of our culture and our culture turned to crap. God was thrown out of our politics and our politics turned to crap. When God is kept out of our lives, they eventually turn to crap.

Do I see a trend here?

Another thing I believe bray has right. If one believes in the utterly humanistic and discredited theory of evolution, one can't really believe God is whom He says He is in His deeds and His Word. "Evolution" of species is not His style. That is the style of somebody else. I used to believe it myself. But that's all it ever was or can be - a belief, and a wrong one at that.

Believing lies usually ends up in one living them as well.

[kabar]

The DoD will now have only 7 months to implement the first set of cuts (which last 10 years!) for the remainder of the fiscal year. Worse still, they cannot cut troop strength (although that is coming very soon), so the DoD will be forced to slash the Operations and Maintenance budget line, which is the basically the life blood of the military. The cut will be deep, about 25-30% and will be immediate, resulting in the most rapid and deepest hollowing out of the Defense Dept in American history

It won't happen. Congress will work out some sort of deal to avoid it. There are too many Dems who will not want to see such cuts that affect their consitutents. VA is a major recipient of DOD funds. Our two Dem senators and the Dem congressional reps don't support such cuts. You can bet that there will be some sleight of hand fiscal tricks to postpone these cuts as well as the other ones involved with sequestration. The bottomline will be no real cuts for anyone.

Taxes went up on everyone - the payroll tax was deducted from almost every hard working American's paycheck the day after Congress passed this legislation (and even before Obama's underlings "autopenned" his name

I for one am happy that the two year payroll tax holiday was ended. It was a scam. Congress guaranteed that the SSTF would be held harmless by issuing non-market T-bills in the amount of the lost revenue and depositing them into the SSTF. So the costs of the shortfall were made up by the General Fund, which borrows 42 cents on the dollar. This was just more stimulus spending and unlike the Bush tax rebates, it would include everyone who pays SS including those receiving EITCs. Do you think we should continue the payroll tax holiday at the same time that SS is already running a deficit since 2010?

[kabar]

Yep you are correct. I watched all the talk shows. The main talking point on the coming debt ceiling fight is that it would be catastrophic for the nation and the Reps and the most common analogy used was hostage taking and shooting the hostage.

I agree that Newt was put on MTP because he is against the debt ceiling fight. He wants to postpone it until the looming fights on the continuing resolution and sequestration. This is the old RINO ploy of postponing any fight with the Dems until some later event. And then when that event is on the horizon, there will be another excuse as to why it is not the right time. Neither party is serious about making real spending cuts.

[kabar]

True enough, it would have added $109 Billion to the debt for one year which would have been addressed in the next year's budget, but when we are talking about $17 Trillion in debt and $100 Trillion in unfunded liabilities driven almost exclusively by entitlements, the Republicans would have been very smart to have taken the deal. That $109 Billion is less than 10 cents on the dollars of every deficit Obama has run every year for the last 4 years!

More rationalization for why we cannot have any cut in spending, even $110 billion out of a $3.7 trillion dollar budget, which is less than 3%. The sequestration formula of 50% from defense and 50% from everything else can be changed. In fact, that was the idea. It was the club to get both parties to make cuts. Now that the time has arrived without any deal, both parties will need to identify cuts to avoid the sequestration forumla. The Reps have already done so and it was passed by the House.

Postponing the sequestration cuts for another year is just plain nuts. We have the Obama tax increases. Obama claims the spending cuts from sequestration, yet now you want to postpone them until next year. If the Reps were to agree to such a deal, what kind of message does that send to its base who are already unhappy with them for raising taxes?

[rodguy911]

I don't know exactly what to tell you on that one. But, I just got some new sources and will find out. First thing that comes to mind is that it's so difficult to get anything at all in the way of cuts from the regime that they may have wanted to salvage something but that's just a guess.

You gotta remember zero won't even talk about budget cuts. They want to do everything through taxation and growth.no surprise they buy most of their votes with our money and have been for years. Zero is basically saying let cloward piven weave its evil way. Which is what they really want. This whole thing is convoluted and complex,in some areas all we can do is make educated guesses.

[SkyPilot]

Now that the time has arrived without any deal, both parties will need to identify cuts to avoid the sequestration forumla. The Reps have already done so and it was passed by the House. Postponing the sequestration cuts for another year is just plain nuts.

There can be sensible cuts, but when the GOP agreed to allow the Democrats to take 50% from the military when it is approximately 18% of the budget was irresponsible. Moreover, the military is the only Federal agency that has already endured real, actual cuts in spending. The ONLY agency to already do so.

But even if we implemented all of the sequestration cuts right now, it would not stop the bleeding.

We are hemorrhaging as a nation because of entitlements.

They MUST be reformed.

[shalom aleichem]

In an attemt to get us over the century mark...comment on RG3 being kept in game way past his ability to play on badly injurted knee. Sad abuse of a great player. Shanahan said (in prior game) Don’t look at me, Doctors cleared him. Doctor says, Not true, I did not even see the kid or his injury.

I hope ESPN is happy that theior “cornball brother” went down.

What a nest of vipers (ESPN that is).

[shalom aleichem]

and for the 100th....Good luck to you Crimson Tide tomorrow night.

I don’t think Rudy or the Four Horsemen are on the roster, so the Tide should Rollll!