Smithers MINNEAPOLIS

it only took 9 days for someone to say somthing!! i was pointing that finger at 5:45 pm on 8/1.. however, to be the devils advocate you guys planned to vote against it anyway.. am i wrong?

However valid, these are still cheap political points. But then, I’d expect Republicans to drive this point home if it was a DFL governor.

If it wouldn’t save the bridge why in the hell are you bringing it up? The problem isn’t that we don’t have enough taxes, the problem is what the taxes are spent on. word.

if you want to point the fingers, from what I’ve seen, the reports regarding the degrading (or potentially degrading) condition of the superstructure go all the way back to the Perpich governorship - so you can blame every governor and every legislature from then until now for the condition of the bridge…. so that makes it a little less about partisan politics.

I blame the bridge on Kruse.

I disagree with the comment “The problem isn’t that we don’t have enough taxes…” Who told you that, Jason Lewis? I think that’s precisely the problem, we don’t have enough tax revenue, but that’s just how the neo-cons want it. It’s “starve the beast” and reduce government…… unless of course you’re an anti stem-cell evangelical group preaching for tax-cuts for the rich, then it’s, “Who should we make the check out to?”

Not to mention the billions of dollars wasted over in Iraq.

We’re actually over a trillion dollars in Iraq now.

Molnau has stated that to fund all of the transportation needs we would have to increase the gas tax by 34 cents? Is she doing this to advocate increasing the gas tax 34 cents? No. Does she say it as she is finding other funding sources or means of increasing revenues to pay for need? No. She says it as a justification for supporting the vetoes of 5-10 cents gas tax increases.

Apparently, you can justify ardent support of not increasing revenues by saying that the proposed increase is too small, at the same time fail to propose increasing revenues as much as you see them needing to be raised, and fail to provide any alternatives or solutions other than opposition to others proposing solutions. I don’t know what planet that logic makes sense on, but it seems pretty disfunctional to me.

Insert period instead of question mark in first sentence of second paragraph.

Snide, Agreed on the Iraq bit, but you couldn’t be more wrong about neo-cons. They’re for expanded gov’t like you, just in a different way.

The problem isn’t that we don’t have enough taxes, the problem is what the taxes are spent on.
That’s not what Pawlenty is saying now. Now he’s saying the problem isn’t that the funds aren’t needed, but where to get the funds. Which is not what he said when he vetoed it - he said the funds weren’t needed (according to story on MPR today).

I stand corrected. Not “Neo-Cons”, just “Cons”, thank you Trissel. However, it doesn’t change the fact that our government is underfunded.

The government is underfunded but we are wasting money in Iraq? Huh??? Educate me-I’m politically ignorant and don’t understand how you can take the stance that we need to pay more taxes at the same time you opine we too much of our tax money is going to Iraq.

Right on Lynne

It’s simple. Because none of this politico-bloggo-babble means a f’in thing. It’s simply a forum to display your particular flavor of stupidity and myopic view of the world.

The bridge fell down…see I’m right [insert 2nd grade level Republican or Democrat mantra here]. Give me a fucking break. We’re doomed for sure…

Oh, and of course you know, this whole site is just something to entertain Smithers. duh. geez.

It’s simply a forum to display your particular flavor of stupidity and myopic view of the world.

That’s exactly what I thought when Neo-Geo Dubya showed up post-haste after the collapse. So, Brent, do you think his motivation was to try to save Pawlenty’s political hide (since anyone with a 2nd grade level will connect his know-nothing “No taxes” crap of the last several years with decaying infrastructure whether it’s his fault or not and his future’s toast), or do you think it was to show this time that the administration gives a damn when decaying infrastructure results in the suffering of Americans. Or maybe both motivations caused karl to order him here so quickly? We’re not doomed, the nightmare will soon be over…

It is completely valid to bring this up giving the about face the Republicans are now doing in the wake of the bridge collapse.

The question no one is asking, however, is this: What future disaster will happen because Pawlenty vetoed this gas tax?

If you don’t like taxes, it makes no sense for you not to support this one. It is a pure user fee. The money you pay at the pump goes directly to what you are wearing out. Seems like a no-brainer to me…

umm…it’s because the federal gov’t is running a massive budget deficit that is unsustainable, which is why some int’l commodities have changed the peg currency from the dollar to the Euro because, for the first time to my knowledge, another currency is perceived as being more secure than the dollar. Every time the dollar falls against the Euro, the prices go up for that commodity to accomodate the exchange rate…considering the Euro is at record highs against the dollar it doesn’t bode well for prices, and the reason the exchange is so high is that investors have lost confidence in the fundamentals and fiscal management of our federal gov’t.

The Iraq war is funded as a “supplemental”, which is a little gimmick that the Bush administration has played because by being “supplemental” it is essentially off the books for federal accounting purposes. Normal budgetary items are subject to “pay-go” criteria, which means that all funding must have an accountable source. If you propose more spending you have to identify what you are going to cut or how you are increasing revenues.

Essentially, I guess if you consider it healthy to run up a massive credit card debt and include your capacity to have credit extended to you without having any plan for paying it back than you could sit there and say the government is flush with cash. I find this foolish, and pretty clearly the rest ofthe world does, too, considering the dollar’s performance against other currencies, and our fiscal irresponsibilities are beginning to cost us.

“Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, civil service pensions, military pensions, defense and interest on the national debt…What do you want to cut?”

Aw hell, Social Security won’t be around anyway. Oh, wait…

I came late to this one but I just found myself wondering if its possible to discuss any political topic among my Progressive friends without Iraq being the cause and increasing taxes being the solution.

Now that was entertaining.

Let me break it down for you…2nd grade style.
Two words. Iraq. Earmarks.

Iraq = Myopic Bush idiots displaying their stupidity and this is only the first chapter in a war against a perverted segment of the worlds largest religion. (Mankind & Religion…lovely. consult your history books for more on my god is better than your god and now we have to kill all of you with the wrong god)

Earmarks = Republicans AND Democrats spending like drunk sailors at a strip club to get as much sensless crap as they can for their district to ensure they remain in office. See Jack Murtha (D), Smith(R), Pelosi (D), Stevens (R)in Alaska with the bridge to nowhere.

What would I cut? Iraq and all earmark spending. Then we could see what we have left to run the country.

Politico-bloggo-babble = Myopic fools whom absolutely fail to hold “their” side accountable for anything and honestly believe it’s all the other sides fault. Known to say things like “Well as least the [insert D or R] don’t [insert talking point]. This is why we’re doomed. Two sides, each drank their respective kool-aid and are busy fighting like 2nd graders blaming the other side for whatever.

I must admit though, its a little entertaining to watch. Sort of like a drunkin Packers vs. Vikings argument in the parking lot of the dome. Or a Ford vs. Chevy argument in a bar somewhere….. Ah! Smithers, you should get a Calvin pissing on a Republican sticker for your car or bike or burley… Wait, tell me you’re not already one of those people who has their car plastered with political bumper stickers. god those people are hilarious….

oh…for JimR

Here here I agree…throw in baseline budgeting and its effect coupled with how many times the gov has run a deficit in the last 50yrs (just to illustrate this isn’t a new problem).

Maybe someday things will change and the masses will join together and reject the current system. I have my doubts…we’re not exactly turning out the best and the brightest these days….

I propose as a simple step in the right direction….
Limit all political service to 2 terms….return the gov. to the people….political office can not be a profession any longer. Its too lucrative.

Maybe bridges to nowhere wouldn’t then be built and structurally deficient bridges would be fixed. Maybe then decisions would start to be based on what is best for the people and not what is best for policital careers or to position their party against the other side.

that was easy.
but my brain hurts.
blogging is hard.

a sticker of a space alien pissing on the space shuttle pick

Dude. Another Million-Dollar idea! Go for it!

amen, b2b.

B2B: Why is debate such a bad thing? And what’s with the elitism? I’ve totally been rethinking my positions as a result of hearing from the progressives on this site. That’s how I go about achieving less myopic views–by hearing and debating those I disagree with.

Let’s be clear here about what’s at stake. Some people would grow the government in hopes of redistributing the wealth of the people. Others want to return us to (or keep us in) a free economy. A whole range in the middle of these two exists as well. There is a real difference of opinion here and it’s healthy to debate it.

I have all sorts of stickers on my truck, my favorite ones are the Lunatic Biker stickers and the Darwin fish-dude.

B2B = brilliant.

B2B:

I just watched and reviewed SiCKO. One of the points Moore makes in his movie is that in Europe (especially France) the Government is afraid of the people because they are activists. Conversely he posits that Americans are afraid of the Government (or at least apathetic I suppose).

His point is that is one reason why they have universal healthcare and we don’t. I also thought it relelvant to your post here.

Nice post by the way.