Dems, what are your feelings on 'Six for '06'?

[Weirddave]

@BrainGlutton

Kind of milk-and-water . . . What about universal health care? What about a definite timetable for withdrawal from Iraq? What about some real alternatives, not only to gasoline, but to automotive transportation as such? What about abolishing Bush’s tax cuts and restoring social-programs funding to their pre-2001 levels? Etc. But it least it has substance, and what there is of it is better than anything the Pubs have got to offer. It can only help.

Even though nobody here seems to believe it, I am fairly moderate in my politics, I lean to the liberal side on most social issues and towards the conservative on foreign policy and fiscal responsibility. Any candidate who came out with these points as their platform (with the exception of alternative fuels and mass transit) would scare the crap out of me. I’d vote for Strom Thurmond instead.

[BrainGlutton]

@Weirddave

Any candidate who came out with these points as their platform (with the exception of alternative fuels and mass transit) would scare the crap out of me.

1. Why? I mean, except for UCH (and mass transit, etc.), I’m not talking about anything new and scary, just about going back to things the way they were under Clinton; and he gave us a budget surplus.

2. Do you think most Dem voters feel the same way as you do about these things? Most American voters in general?

[Weirddave]

@BrainGlutton

1. Why? I mean, except for UCH (and mass transit, etc.), I’m not talking about anything new and scary, just about going back to things the way they were under Clinton; and he gave us a budget surplus.

2. Do you think most Dem voters feel the same way as you do about these things? Most American voters in general?

1. Well, that leaves…a timetable in Iraq and raising taxes to fund social programs. A strict timetable is a terrible idea militarily, there is no way it doesn’t play into the insurgent’s hands. I wouldn’t be against a flexible timetable-“When these conditions are met, than we will draw down this much, then when these conditions are met, we will draw down this much more” and so on, but declaring that we will unilaterally remove our troops from Iraq by X date would be a disaster. As for raising taxes to fund social programs…you’re insane. Frankly, I like Bush’s tax cuts. The problem was that he didn’t cut government size or spending at the same time.

2. Most Dems? Certainly not the rabid ones like we have here at the SDMB, and probably not even most Dems overall, but you have those votes locked up already. For the independent and moderate Republican voters, yea, I think most of them feel the same way.

[BrainGlutton]

@Weirddave

1. Well, that leaves…a timetable in Iraq and raising taxes to fund social programs.

I’m only talking about a return to pre-2001 levels of both; that’s nothing radical. Clinton was/is no radical, after all, nor even a liberal, just a fucking DLC DINO; but his policies still compared favorably with W’s.

@Weirddave

A strict timetable is a terrible idea militarily, there is no way it doesn’t play into the insurgent’s hands. I wouldn’t be against a flexible timetable-“When these conditions are met, than we will draw down this much, then when these conditions are met, we will draw down this much more” and so on, but declaring that we will unilaterally remove our troops from Iraq by X date would be a disaster.

I’m afraid we’ve long since passed the point where we have any remaining options that don’t play into the insurgents’ hands. Probably the best thing we can do now – for ourselves and for the Iraqis – is to cut our losses, pull out, and let the Iraqis have their damned civil war among themselves.

How did we get into this mess? See here and here.

[ITR_champion]

@BrainGlutton

Cite? (And please choose it carefully.)

Will the trustees of Medicare and Social Securtiy be authoritative enough for you?

Two pillars of our economy are scheduled to go belly-up shortly, and almost nobody cares.

[BrainGlutton]

@ITR champion

Will the trustees of Medicare and Social Securtiy be authoritative enough for you?

Two pillars of our economy are scheduled to go belly-up shortly, and almost nobody cares.

Interesting. Disturbing. Alarming. Looks like sometime between now and 2018, they’re going to have to . . .

. . . wait for it . . .
RAISE TAXES!

(If only the Dems had the guts to say that, and clearly explain why . . .)

[BrainGlutton]

This paragraph from the link is also interesting:

The annual report, issued yesterday by the trustees who monitor the fiscal health of the Medicare and Social Security programs, said the trust fund for the health insurance system for the elderly will run out of money in 2018 – two years sooner than predicted a year ago and 12 years sooner than had been anticipated when President Bush first took office.

And this one:

In releasing the report, the trustees – including three of Bush’s Cabinet secretaries – slightly altered the message accompanying the forecast the past few years, when the administration sought to use the predictions as leverage to persuade a reluctant Congress to embrace the president’s goal of letting Americans divert some of their payroll taxes into personal retirement accounts. That emphasis prompted Democrats and other critics to chastise the administration for dwelling on Social Security while Medicare’s problems were more acute.

[BrainGlutton]

@Weirddave

I’d vote for Strom Thurmond instead.

Here’s your chance! I hear he’s running for alderman for the Ninth Ward of Hell! But you have to establish residence this week if you’re going to register in time for the primary!