“Excellent choice. Starring the always funny John Astin.”

Okay, I have heard of that movie, but I haven’t seen it.

Might pick it up on DVD.

Excellent choice. Starring the always funny John Astin.

Quaker in a Basement: “That’s my second favorite movie-that-almost-no-one-has-seen.”

I love that movie.

“First: Evil Roy Slade”

Never heard of it.

That just went on my netflix queue.

(Unfortunately, I probably won’t get to it until 2010. It’s a long queue.)

That’s my second favorite movie-that-almost-no-one-has-seen. First: Evil Roy Slade.

[sings] Stubby index finger…tapping out the code…

Well, at least we agree on something.

farging iceholes

You watched Johnny Dangerously the other night, didn’t you?

Money to rebuild infrasturcture in America? Wasteful government spending!

Tom, I want a full report on my desk before the end of the day. Cites and Links. Especially the “systematic” part. That is all.

I gotta ask. Do you get paid or somehow compensated for every “Putsch fellating” or “Republican’t” that you put in your comments? That’s gotta be the case, because you seem to put them in practically every single thing you write. Like it’s some kind of a nervous tic that you’re powerless to do anything about.

Does this happen to you in real life? “Give me two cheeseburgers, large fries – PUTSCH FELLATING REPUBLICAN’T – and a chocolate – REPUBLICAN’T – shake.”

The government confiscating $10,520 from every working American sounds like stimulus to me.

Now you’re getting upset with the outrageous expenditures of the Republican’ts when they were running the country into the ground from 2000 – 2008?

Thanks Barrack.

Oh – sorry. Thought I had found a Republican’t familiar with the concepts of integrity, honesty, and morality. My bad…

Plus: the irony involved with Putsch fellating Republican’ts whinging about dissent being suppressed now that there’s a Democratic president, when the Republican’ts have been engaging in systematic suppression of dissent by illegally using government resources, is amazing. How do you farging iceholes manage to do it without that empty melon on top of your shoulders exploding from the cognitive dissonance?

You are so correct.

Ms. Rivlin, allow me to introduce you to TARP I.

Doesn’t matter, Duros. Like midderpidge noted above, there’s a big difference between “loyal dissent” and “blatant political obstructionism”. If you’re blocking it to keep the other party from succeeding or just because you can, then yes, you’re a dick. But if you’re blocking it because you’re concerned about the alarming amount of money being spent (requiring huge future tax increases) with no clear idea how this is going to stimulate the economy, then you’re not. I think enough Republicans have pointed out these concerns to qualify for the second category.

Bipartisanship!!

No I’m not. But you failed to answer the question.

How exactly does this stimulate the economy?

I think it’s a great thing. But put it in the second, long-term bill and let people debate the merits of spending money on that vs. infrastructure, health care, education, etc.

What was Ben Bernake’s big hurry with the TARP funds?

Damned if I know. I was against TARP I too. At least the way it was done (i.e. no oversight and not given out for original purpose). And I think Bush and his idiots (Bernanke and Paulson) bungled that one too. I just don’t expect a higher level of competence now that Dems are running the show. Nor would I had McCain won either.

I mean, c’mon, how many millions were in there for contraceptives?

That money is for a lot more than contraceptives. It is also for treating and preventing the spread of AIDS, STD like gonorrhea, syphilis and chlamydia, and stopping the spread of Tuberculosis.

Are you against that?

Because if they did it that way, Obama and the Democrats can’t ram through all that big spending “wish list” that they’ve been longing for, for so very long.

What was Ben Bernake’s big hurry with the TARP funds?

Yeah, we heard a lot about “strict oversight” last Fall too. I didn’t believe it then either.

And before you start with the “Bush and the Repugs were lying, but WE’LL actually do it” canard, keep in mind that the Democrats don’t exactly have a sterling record in this area over the last few years. You may recall when the subject of oversight came up regarding Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac, the Democrats were the ones saying “Oversight? We don’t need any oversight. Everything is JUST fine”.

I know, and I give them a lot of credit for speaking out against what their party is pushing for so strongly. I just wish it was more than a few. Noticeably absent from the list of skeptics are the names “REID, PELOSI and OBAMA. They are the ones trying to push this thing through as quickly as possible. And without them changing their mind, it’s going to happen regardless of anyone’s doubts.

And of course, if it fails to turn the economy around in the next 2 years, the public won’t be happy and the Democrats will be the proud parents of this nearly $1 trillion spending spree. And the public’s “unhappiness” will be nothing compared to the day when the inevitable tax increases kick in to pay for all this. I doubt people will think of it as the “Change” they were “Hoping” for.

You’re just also a dick.

Yeah, I heard this from Duros yesterday. Because I’m all for blocking the current stimulus bill. Wounds me. Breaks my heart, it does. Crying my eyes out here. Yawn.

Contrast this to the plight of liberals who, considering the complexities of national mideast policy dared to suggest that the glorious Bush plan of bombing everyone to freedom might be ill-advised, were regularly called out as TRAITORS, SADDAM-LOVERS, TERRORIST SUPPORTERS and FIFTH COLUMNISTS — not just by comments on a blog, but some of the loudest, most widespread voices in television, talk radio, and print punditry (not to mention a great many eliminationist wingnut bloggers) for months or years on end.

Damn. You could almost hear the violins playing in the background of that paragraph. That’s a sad, sad story you got there. “The victimhood is strong in you, my young apprentice”. Have you considered turning it into a screenplay? I hear there are a lot of studios looking for tear-jerker anti-conservative projects like this to make so they can bomb at the box office.

Other than people on blogs, who were these “voices in television, talk radio, and print punditry” who were calling people against Bush or Iraq “TRAITORS, SADDAM-LOVERS, TERRORIST SUPPORTERS and FIFTH COLUMNISTS”? If it was so widespread, surely you can provide voluminous examples?

And I loved the “dared to suggest” and “might be ill-advised”. Like all the comments against Bush and Iraq were just calm and rational attempts to say “Whoa, hey, wait a minute… let’s just stop and take another look at what we’re doing here”. Apparently you’ve been living in a cave and missed the widespread screaming about Bush (and the Right) being WAR-MONGERS and RACISTS (for killing “Brown” people), and BUSHITLER’s ILLEGAL WAR, and HALLIBURTON and BLOOD FOR OIL and EEEEVIL REPUBLICANS, ad nauseum. I think there may even have been a parade or a thousand that expressed these sentiments.

Boo hoo, Rheinhard.

What’s next? You gonna dust off the chickenhawk meme (or does ed have that trademarked)?

Actually, Dave, that idea is getting support from people on our side of the aisle:

In testimony before the House Budget Committee yesterday, Alice M. Rivlin, who was President Bill Clinton’s budget director, suggested splitting the plan, implementing its immediate stimulus components now and taking more time to plan the longer-term transformative spending to make sure it is done right.

“Such a long-term investment program should not be put together hastily and lumped in with the anti-recession package. The elements of the investment program must be carefully planned and will not create many jobs right away,” said Rivlin, a fellow at the Brookings Institution. The risk, she said, is that “money will be wasted because the investment elements were not carefully crafted.”

If you’re not sure you want to be on the same side as the BI, you can have a do-over.