The Senator-elect from Illinois has dubious math skills

[Riot]

More GOP hypocrisy regarding deficit reduction and spending:

Sen. Elect Mark Kirk: Extending Jobless Benefits Is ‘Misguided,’ But Bush Tax Cuts Must Be Extended ‘No Matter What’

Unless Congress acts by tomorrow, 2.5 million Americans will lose their extended unemployment benefits, even though unemployment is still above nine percent and there are currently five unemployed workers for every job opening. In the last forty years, the U.S. has never allowed jobless benefits to expire with unemployment so high.

At the same time, Congress is also faced with the December 31st expiration of the Bush tax cuts.

Today, in two separate interviews, Sen.-elect Mark Kirk (R-IL) tried to bolster his fiscal conservative credentials by saying that extending unemployment insurance without finding spending cuts to offset the extension would be “misguided” because of its effect on the deficit.

However, Kirk also called for extending all of the Bush tax cuts, “no matter what” the effect on the nation’s budget:

KIRK: We should extend the Bush tax cuts and make sure we don’t have a double-dip recession. And I have the honor to be the first of ninety-five new Republicans, fiscal conservatives, to help right our ship of state. [...]

Q: The first thing you’re talking about is deficit reduction and spending. Does that mean that right now, as of today, you’d be against extending the unemployment insurance?

KIRK: That’s right. You could extend it if you found a way to pay for it. And I voted for that in the past. But these proposals to extend unemployment insurance by just adding it to the deficit are misguided.

Kirk actually claimed that extending benefits — which costs $60 billion for one year, or $12.5 billion for a three-month extension — would lead to a Irish-style debt crisis, while glossing over the $4 trillion cost of extending the Bush tax cuts for a decade ($830 billion of which goes to only the richest two percent of Americans).

Even MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough saw through Kirk’s double-talk, asking, “if [the tax cuts] are not paid for though, do we not risk going the way, as you said, of Greece and Ireland?”

As the New York Times editorial board wrote, “opponents would have you believe that the nation cannot afford to keep paying unemployment benefits: a yearlong extension would cost about $60 billion. The truth is, we cannot afford not to… Without jobs, there is inadequate spending, and that means ever fewer jobs. A wide range of private and government studies show that unemployment benefits combat that vicious cycle by ensuring that families can buy the basics.”

Of course, as The Wonk Room explained, Kirk is no stranger to fraudulent fiscal conservative rhetoric.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Riot

More GOP hypocrisy regarding deficit reduction and spending:

Let me guess? Think Progress.com

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Let me guess? Think Progress.com

You guys are hysterical - yes, it was TP. But Kirk was talking on Morning Joe with Scarborough. Are you saying that Kirk didn't say those things?

Or you just want to express your dislike the news outlets that are covering it?

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Riot

You guys are hysterical - yes, it was TP. But Kirk was talking on Morning Joe with Scarborough. Are you saying that Kirk didn't say those things?

Or you just want to express your dislike the news outlets that are covering it?

Why didn't you simply quote Kirk w/o TP's biased commentary, which made up 75% of the post?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Why didn't you simply quote Kirk w/o TP's biased commentary, which made up 75% of the post?

Because the background information about what and when things expire are integral to the story?

You're kinda making a laughable complaint here, Dell, that you don't like the messenger. Okay, you don't like the messenger. That wasn't the point or the focus of the story.

[dellinger63]

and hypocrisy?

http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/sho...1&postcount=21

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

and hypocrisy?

http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/sho...1&postcount=21

What are you saying is hypocritical in this? "The other thing the Dems are doing is gearing up a better PR machine. They are notoriously lousy at publicizing their successes. Passed largest middle-class tax cut in history - Obama, Pelosi Reid Passed largest budget-cut in history - over 1 billion to reduce the deficit in one year - Obama, Pelosi, Reid"

[Riot]

Here Dell - here's the original video of Kirk's interviews, untainted by any TP background. We'll let his own words speak for themselves. First being a two-faced hypocrite on Fox News, then on Morning Joe (MSNBC)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hryuS...layer_embedded

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Riot

Here Dell - here's the original video of Kirk's interviews, untainted by any TP background. We'll let his own words speak for themselves. First being a two-faced hypocrite on Fox News, then on Morning Joe (MSNBC)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hryuS...layer_embedded

Some people believe it or not feel it unfair to tax one American at one percentage of income (some none at all) and another at a rate double or triple that percentage. How about instead of reforming our health care system (ranked tops by the King of Saudi Arabia among others) lets reform our tax system making it fair for all. National sales tax at a even percentage.

ie. the rich man will pay more in taxes for say a new Bugatti while the poor man will pay far less though an inflated price for his clunker (if he can find one courtesy of Pres. Obama's 3 billion cash for clunkers program.) Thus a much, much lower tax and in reality the Bugatti buyer at 5% would pay in tax 15K while the clunker buyer would pay $250 bucks on a $5K car. In the end the rich would pay far more than the poor and everyone would be EQUAL under the law which should be the ultimate target anyway. No?

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Riot

What are you saying is hypocritical in this? "The other thing the Dems are doing is gearing up a better PR machine. They are notoriously lousy at publicizing their successes. Passed largest middle-class tax cut in history - Obama, Pelosi Reid Passed largest budget-cut in history - over 1 billion to reduce the deficit in one year - Obama, Pelosi, Reid"

They raised the budget by 500 billion in 09 (submitted by Bush $3.1 Trillion) v. $3.6 Trillion Obama '10. And not to be outdone raised it another 200 billion for 2011 ($3.8 Trillion)

SO AFTER RAISING THE BUDGET BY 700 BILLION YOU WANT TO GIVE THEM CREDIT FOR PASSING THE LARGEST BUDGET CUT ( 1 BILLION )? THOSE WHO BUY THIS ARE NOT DONKEYS BUT ASSES!

THAT'S NOT ONLY HYPOCRITICAL IT'S AN INSULT AND A CON-JOB

US Budget Info http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...federal_budget

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...federal_budget

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

They raised the budget by 500 billion in 09 (submitted by Bush $3.1 Trillion) v. $3.6 Trillion Obama '10. And not to be outdone raised it another 200 billion for 2011 ($3.8 Trillion)

SO AFTER RAISING THE BUDGET BY 700 BILLION YOU WANT TO GIVE THEM CREDIT FOR PASSING THE LARGEST BUDGET CUT ( 1 BILLION )? THOSE WHO BUY THIS ARE NOT DONKEYS BUT ASSES!

THAT'S NOT ONLY HYPOCRITICAL IT'S AN INSULT AND A CON-JOB

US Budget Info http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...federal_budget

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...federal_budget

It's a nice thread hijack, but what do you think about Mark Kirk? What do you think about saying you only will renew unemployment if it's paid for, but you'll raise the deficit 700 billion to give tax cuts to the rich, unpaid for, "No matter what" ?

Doesn't that make Kirk sound very beholden to the special interests of the wealthiest 2% of Americans, while he's willing to literally let other of his fellow Americans - millions - starve at Christmas because they can't find work during the biggest recession since the great Depression?

America has NEVER done that to it's citizens before - turned it's back on our citizens while unemployment is so high. You're okay with that? Yes or no?

Now, to get to your thread hijack: Obama, Pelosi and Reid are trying to cut 700 billion from the budget deficit. You won't give credit for 1 billion, certainly you must appreciate and endorse cutting 700 billion. The GOP is blocking that. Are you for that, or against that? You want to cut 700 billion, or not?

If your only criteria and desire for a budget at the brink of serious world-wide depression and then a major recession is the black and white simplicity of lower numbers, please go take Governmental Finance 101 to see the disaster that would have lead to.

There are parts of the budget (Bush especially) that were not negotiable in the face of a major depression. And let's look again at what the budget contributed to the deficit, how it got there after the Clinton years, and where it's going, okay?