PDA

View Full Version : 30 Year Veteran GOP Congressional Staffer Mike Lofgren Defects and Spills GOP Tactics



KRNEKIM
09-09-2011, 11:06 PM
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/09/05/congressional-staffer-mike-lofgren-turns-on-his-fellow-republicans.html

http://www.truth-out.org/goodbye-all-reflections-gop-operative-who-left-cult/1314907779


• The debt-ceiling debate was an act of “political terrorism,” in which the GOP concocted a crisis and used it to ensure that the party's unprecedented demands were met. He writes: “Everyone knows that in a hostage situation, the reckless and amoral actor has the negotiating upper hand over the cautious and responsible actor because the latter is actually concerned about the life of the hostage, while the former does not care.”

• The August FAA reauthorization fight was another instance such of hostage-taking: “Republicans were willing to lay off 4,000 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) employees, 70,000 private construction workers, and let FAA safety inspectors work without pay, in fact, forcing them to pay for their own work-related travel—how prudent is that?—in order to strong arm some union-busting provisions into the FAA reauthorization.”

• The GOP plan to discredit government in the people’s eyes is very conscious: “A couple of years ago, a Republican committee staff director told me candidly (and proudly) what the method was to all this obstruction and disruption. Should Republicans succeed in obstructing the Senate from doing its job, it would further lower Congress's generic favorability rating among the American people. By sabotaging the reputation of an institution of government, the party that is programmatically against government would come out the relative winner.”

• As for belief as opposed to tactics, the party basically really cares only about the rich. Actually, Lofgren doesn’t say “basically.” He says “solely and exclusively.” And he explains how they’ve camouflaged this with talk of protecting small businesses and so on.





Cliffs:


- Long time GOP Congressional staffer defects from the party after disgust
- Disgusted by the GOP and spills the inside information
- GOP held the Americans hostage to get what they want from the Dems, because GOP knows Dems will not commit economic and political suicide together with the GOP.
- Create non-issues (like the debt ceiling) which normally is straight business and no controversy, into a hostage taking crisis by risking national economic well-being, to get what they want.
- GOP are mouthpieces for the rich and he means it.
- He is mad and he is gone.




http://www.truth-out.org/sites/default/files/090211-3.jpg

aceshin
09-09-2011, 11:33 PM
inb4 obscene amounts of character assassination

nutsy54
09-09-2011, 11:39 PM
The debt-ceiling debate was an act of “political terrorism,” in which the GOP concocted a crisis...BRB - Let's ignore that "crisis" was created by the actions of Obama, Pelosi, and Reid as they utterly failed in their fundamental responsibilities for the government's budget (not to mention their campaign lies to care about deficits and debt).

Beeewbs
09-09-2011, 11:59 PM
BRB - Let's ignore that "crisis" was created by the actions of Obama, Pelosi, and Reid as they utterly failed in their fundamental responsibilities for the government's budget (not to mention their campaign lies to care about deficits and debt).

How so?

IVIagic
09-10-2011, 12:02 AM
The sky is blue, the grass is green, tide comes in/out no explanation, people breathe air, water is wet...etc.

leafs43
09-10-2011, 12:02 AM
brb, hive-mind relays message about "tea party terrorism" and "GOP hostage taking".

nutsy54
09-10-2011, 12:08 AM
How so?- Promising "fiscal responsibility", then creating $1,300+ billion deficits for three years in a row (with another $1,100 billion requested for 2012)
- Not passing an actual budget each year, just playing the game of "continuing resolutions"
- Knowing that the debt ceiling would be hit in early 2011... but waiting until Republicans could be blamed for not rubber-stamping yet another massive increase the President would ask for

GrokTheCube
09-10-2011, 12:55 AM
- Promising "fiscal responsibility", then creating $1,300+ billion deficits for three years in a row (with another $1,100 billion requested for 2012)

In all seriousness, about $500 billion of that per year is due to the economic downturn. Cutting $500 billion of spending during a recession would be at best grossly negligent. Almost all the rest of it is spending form years past. Only 10% of the debt is the result of new policies enacted since Obama became president. He and his crew have been far from fiscally responsible, but it isn't at all realistic to blame them for all of it. Undoing all of the new policies and government expansion implemented under the Bush administration would have been economically disastrous, and cutting spending to match the declining economy would have been bad also. They probably could have avoided the 10% of new stuff, or the 22% of the debt that is renewed Bush policies, but undoing all the tax cuts and Medicare Part D wouldn't have gone over too well.


- Not passing an actual budget each year, just playing the game of "continuing resolutions"No doubt.

- Knowing that the debt ceiling would be hit in early 2011... but waiting until Republicans could be blamed for not rubber-stamping yet another massive increase the President would ask forIf they didn't want to "rubber stamp" the increase, they probably shouldn't have passed a budget that REQUIRED it. Trying to make it sound like it's all on Obama is disingenuous. Congress bears far more of the blame in my view, since they approved the budget, and then threw a hissy fit over having to approve the borrowing required to execute the spending that they DEMANDED. They tried to make it sound like running up a massive bill and then not paying was somehow fiscally responsible, and it blows my mind that people fell for it.

The crisis was absolutely 100% manufactured as a political tool to make Obama look bad. It was irresponsible, and unnecessary. He does a great job of making himself look bad without having someone else intentionally causing economic turmoil and trying to peg it on him.

KRNEKIM
09-10-2011, 12:57 AM
- Promising "fiscal responsibility", then creating $1,300+ billion deficits for three years in a row (with another $1,100 billion requested for 2012)
- Not passing an actual budget each year, just playing the game of "continuing resolutions"
- Knowing that the debt ceiling would be hit in early 2011... but waiting until Republicans could be blamed for not rubber-stamping yet another massive increase the President would ask for

2000-2008, no debt incurred?

KRNEKIM
09-10-2011, 12:58 AM
brb, hive-mind relays message about "tea party terrorism" and "GOP hostage taking".

:::yawn:::

r0gue6
09-10-2011, 01:02 AM
Spill tactics?

You don't need to be a rocket surgeon to know the GOP was a one trick deficit pony.

nutsy54
09-10-2011, 01:03 AM
2000-2008, no debt incurred?What the hell are you talking about? I never said that :rolleyes:

But since 2008, deficits and new debt have been massively larger - from the folks who promised the exact opposite.

The 2007 deficit was $160 Billion. Since 2009, it's been around $1,300 Billion. Imagine how long it would have taken to reach a $14.3 Trillion debt ceiling, if deficits hadn't been enormous. (Remember, the national debt was $10.6 Trillion when Obama took office 2 1/2 years ago...)

nutsy54
09-10-2011, 01:07 AM
In all seriousness, about $500 billion of that per year is due to the economic downturn. Cutting $500 billion of spending during a recession would be at best grossly negligent. Almost all the rest of it is spending form years past."Spending from years past"? What does that mean?

2007 Federal spending: $2,728 Billion (last budget from a Republican Congress)
2011 Federal spending: $3,818 Billion - Revenue was $400 Billion less, but spending was $1,100 Billion more.

LennardiVooDoo
09-10-2011, 01:17 AM
BRB - Let's ignore that "crisis" was created by the actions of Obama, Pelosi, and Reid as they utterly failed in their fundamental responsibilities for the government's budget (not to mention their campaign lies to care about deficits and debt).

The government "crisis" is a joke. It was only a "crisis" when Obama became president and the republicans had nothing else to attack him on. Why was it never a crisis when Bush was president? And whether you like it or not, the increased spending was the only thing preventing a depression similar to that of the 1930s. In fact, it was about half what top economists recommended (10% of GDP), and which is why countries like China and Australia who spent the recommended stimulus avoided the recession completely.
The deficit is not a crisis, it is an absolute joke for anybody to think that a reasonable debt of 100% (when people take out a mortgage on house, their debt goes to about 500% their yearly salary), as held by most developed countries somehow denotes a "crisis", especially when the said country is in 10% unemployment.

Weightaholic
09-10-2011, 01:29 AM
Plenty of blame to share around....

nutsy54
09-10-2011, 01:33 AM
Why was it never a crisis when Bush was president?(a) Yup, just keep up the myth that nobody cared or complained about deficit spending under Bush :rolleyes:
(b) Those deficits were consistently going down until 2008
(c) The numbers are clear - If you don't understand the difference between $160 Billion deficit in 2007, and $1,300 Billion in 2009, 2010, and 2011... then I guess you wouldn't understand why the reaction is different.

The deficit is not a crisis, it is an absolute joke for anybody to think that a reasonable debt of 100% (when people take out a mortgage on house, their debt goes to about 500% their yearly salary)This makes so little sense, I don't even know how to respond. The Federal debt isn't a loan that's tied to a fixed asset which has value to cover the debt - it's an open-ended, unsecured credit card. Not to mention, the Federal Government's "yearly salary" is optimistically estimated at $2,600 Billion next year... Making our current debt nearly six times larger.

So... If someone has credit card debt that's six times larger than their annual pay (racking up more and more every day) - Would you say they're in a good financial position?

r0gue6
09-10-2011, 01:44 AM
(a) Yup, just keep up the myth that nobody cared or complained about deficit spending under Bush :rolleyes:
(b) Those deficits were consistently going down until 2008
(c) The numbers are clear - If you don't understand the difference between $160 Billion deficit in 2007, and $1,300 Billion in 2009, 2010, and 2011... then I guess you wouldn't understand why the reaction is different.
This makes so little sense, I don't even know how to respond. The Federal debt isn't a loan that's tied to a fixed asset which has value to cover the debt - it's an open-ended, unsecured credit card. Not to mention, the Federal Government's "yearly salary" is optimistically estimated at $2,600 Billion next year... Making our current debt nearly six times larger.

So... If someone has credit card debt that's six times larger than their annual pay (racking up more and more every day) - Would you say they're in a good financial position?

I really hate when retards compare credit card debt, to sovereign debt.

You seriously look completely ignorant and stupid....why do you do it?

nutsy54
09-10-2011, 01:50 AM
I really hate when retards compare credit card debt, to sovereign debt.

You seriously look completely ignorant and stupid....why do you do it?Oh, but the guy comparing it to a home mortgage, with GDP as the total available income, made sense to you? I was responding to his absurd statements, using his absurd analogies - so you ignore everything else I've posted here (Posts # 7, 12, 13 16), and fixate on that one segment... :rolleyes:

$4 Trillion of new debt in 2 1/2 years - a 38% increase from the folks who promised "fiscal responsibility", with no end in sight under this administration's plans (well, except for the vaguely secret plans that magically popped into existence this week, which nobody has actually seen). Justify that using any perspective you wish.

LennardiVooDoo
09-10-2011, 01:53 AM
http://thepeoples411.com/wp-content/plugins/RSSPoster_PRO/cache/0f5f6_20110831_jobs_chart.jpg

Look at the above graph.
Are you still against the increased spending?

r0gue6
09-10-2011, 01:57 AM
Oh, but the guy comparing it to a home mortgage, with GDP as the total available income, made sense to you? I was responding to his absurd statements, using his absurd analogies - so you ignore everything else I've posted here (Posts # 7, 12, 13 16), and fixate on that one segment... :rolleyes:

$4 Trillion of new debt in 2 1/2 years - a 38% increase from the folks who promised "fiscal responsibility", with no end in sight under this administration's plans (well, except for the vaguely secret plans that magically popped into existence this week, which nobody has actually seen). Justify that using any perspective you wish.

lol, Nutsy is economically retarded.

wow.

nutsy54
09-10-2011, 01:59 AM
lol, Nutsy is economically retarded.

wow.I posted facts - most of which come directly from the White House & OMB. You can only post insults.

Edit: and your next post proves you're just a sad little troll, completely ignoring what I actually typed, what I was specifically responding to, and the multiple other posts I made in this thread.

You must be wildly pissed that there's no way to actually defend the insanity brought on by Democrats in control of spending... So all you can cling to is personal insults against anyone who points out the utter failure of Obama/Pelosi/Reid.

Bye-Bye troll. Hope for Change - maybe someday one of Obama's speeches will provide the results he promises.

r0gue6
09-10-2011, 02:00 AM
I posted facts - most of which come directly from the White House & OMB. You can only post insults.

herp derp, credit card mortgage, herp derp same as the dollar.

nutsy54
09-10-2011, 02:05 AM
http://thepeoples411.com/wp-content/plugins/RSSPoster_PRO/cache/0f5f6_20110831_jobs_chart.jpg

Look at the above graph.
Are you still against the increased spending?What do you believe that graph "proves"?

- The spending spree started in 2008, so I guess "increased spending" causes employment to drop?
- The housing bubble killed the economy - nothing to do with "increased spending"
- Spending in 2009/2010/2011 was massively higher than 2007, yet Unemployment has remained high since 2009, and is now getting worse
- Are you seriously pretending (or believing) that signing the massive bloated spending bill (oops, "Recovery Act") into law instantly triggered a recovery to begin? Before the first dollars were even spent?

Insane Clown
09-10-2011, 02:16 AM
(a) Yup, just keep up the myth that nobody cared or complained about deficit spending under Bush :rolleyes: No, people did care and complain about the deficit spending under Bush... it just wasn't you who did so. I've done a quick search for your name + deficit posts on here, and until Obama took office, I can't find a single reference to deficit spending in regards to President Bush that you have made that's main purpose wasn't to deflect blame onto the Democrat controlled congress... prior to the Democrats taking over Congress, I can't find a reference to you discussing Bush's deficit spending at all.

You may have made one, but I couldn't find one in about 20 pages of searches... as opposed to Obama's deficit spending, which it's amazingly easy to find pages and pages of your kvetching about that. Are you one of those partisan hacks you keep talking about? The evidence suggests yes...


(b) Those deficits were consistently going down until 2008 From when until? From 2004 until 2007. 3 years. The deficits also were going UP for the 3 years prior to that. Bush did not have a clear track record of lowering our deficit. He raised them for the entire first half of his tenue, then when they started to go down for a short period, they jumped tremendously.


(c) The numbers are clear - If you don't understand the difference between $160 Billion deficit in 2007, and $1,300 Billion in 2009, 2010, and 2011... then I guess you wouldn't understand why the reaction is different. Why are you going from 2007? Bush drafted the initial budget proposal for '08 and '09. '07 wasn't the last year that Bush was actively involved in the budget process, so why do you go back two years when making your comparison?

Oh yeah... because the deficit was huge in '08 and would have been a record deficit even if Congress passed Bush's proposed budget for '09 without any changes whatsoever. I guess it's nice to ignore those little points if it gets in the way of your 'it's all Obama' rhetoric, right?



This makes so little sense, I don't even know how to respond. The Federal debt isn't a loan that's tied to a fixed asset which has value to cover the debt - it's an open-ended, unsecured credit card. Not to mention, the Federal Government's "yearly salary" is optimistically estimated at $2,600 Billion next year... Making our current debt nearly six times larger.

So... If someone has credit card debt that's six times larger than their annual pay (racking up more and more every day) - Would you say they're in a good financial position? As someone else has mentioned, sovereign debt isn't the same as a credit card. And if the U.S. isn't risking going into default (which, as long as Congress doesn't do something stupid like they almost did, they aren't going to anytime soon), then it stands to reason that they can increase the debt NOW to get people back to work, which will help improve our ability to pay down that debt in the long term.

chitown70
09-10-2011, 05:06 AM
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/09/05/congressional-staffer-mike-lofgren-turns-on-his-fellow-republicans.html

http://www.truth-out.org/goodbye-all-reflections-gop-operative-who-left-cult/1314907779






Cliffs:


- Long time GOP Congressional staffer defects from the party after disgust
- Disgusted by the GOP and spills the inside information
- GOP held the Americans hostage to get what they want from the Dems, because GOP knows Dems will not commit economic and political suicide together with the GOP.
- Create non-issues (like the debt ceiling) which normally is straight business and no controversy, into a hostage taking crisis by risking national economic well-being, to get what they want.
- GOP are mouthpieces for the rich and he means it.
- He is mad and he is gone.




http://www.truth-out.org/sites/default/files/090211-3.jpg

That was a great read! The guy sums it up perfectly!

frasersteen
09-10-2011, 06:12 AM
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/09/05/congressional-staffer-mike-lofgren-turns-on-his-fellow-republicans.html

http://www.truth-out.org/goodbye-all-reflections-gop-operative-who-left-cult/1314907779


Cliffs:

- Long time GOP Congressional staffer defects from the party after disgust
- Disgusted by the GOP and spills the inside information
- GOP held the Americans hostage to get what they want from the Dems, because GOP knows Dems will not commit economic and political suicide together with the GOP.
- Create non-issues (like the debt ceiling) which normally is straight business and no controversy, into a hostage taking crisis by risking national economic well-being, to get what they want.
- GOP are mouthpieces for the rich and he means it.
- He is mad and he is gone.



Not particularly surprising, from an outsiders perspective this seems obvious. Its a good reason that internationally the Dems have far more support, GOP come off like a bunch of crazies.

nutsy54
09-10-2011, 10:54 AM
No, people did care and complain about the deficit spending under Bush... it just wasn't you who did so.(a) So what? How do my comments from nearly a decade ago change the Facts of insane spending, deficits, and debt today? How is this even a point (other than distraction from the actual issue?)
(b) I have a solid history of criticizing deficit & debt spending, long before Obama took office. But, why bother with actual facts when crafting an irrelevant sideshow of personal fixation, right?
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?p=281584471#post281584471


You may have made one, but I couldn't find one in about 20 pages of searches... as opposed to Obama's deficit spending, which it's amazingly easy to find pages and pages of your kvetching about that. Are you one of those partisan hacks you keep talking about? The evidence suggests yes...As has been repeatedly pointed out - Spending, deficits, and debt are outrageously larger in the last few years. So why shouldn't the response & criticism be equally larger? Why are you pretending that our fiscal situation today is equal to what we had nearly a decade ago?

Why are you going from 2007? Bush drafted the initial budget proposal for '08 and '09. '07 wasn't the last year that Bush was actively involved in the budget process, so why do you go back two years when making your comparison?FY07 was the last year that a Republican-controlled Congress wrote and passed the budget. Why do you keep fixating on only one part of the budget process at a time, whichever is more convenient for your agenda?

Oh yeah... because the deficit was huge in '08 and would have been a record deficit even if Congress passed Bush's proposed budget for '09 without any changes whatsoever. I guess it's nice to ignore those little points if it gets in the way of your 'it's all Obama' rhetoric, right?If you properly define $458 Billion as "huge".... Where's your condemnation of the following 3 years? $1,412 Billion. $1,293 Billion. Projected $1,300 Billion this year. And another $1,100 requested by President Obama for next year. I'm still amazed that you attack me as a partisan, while you completely ignore the dramatic explosion in spending, deficits, and debt...

As someone else has mentioned, sovereign debt isn't the same as a credit card.Ignore the troll, and read the actual post I was responding to. The one which claimed that sovereign debt was the same as comparing entire GDP as "salary", and the debt as a "home mortgage". My post very clearly kept that same type of analogy, ut made it more accurate, with reference to annual revenue and unsecured credit card debt.

Saedeas
09-10-2011, 11:09 AM
Holy ****, this article is really good.

Sodao
09-10-2011, 11:33 AM
to anyone that's been paying attention at all this isn't exactly news, i'm pretty sure these points have been brought up before.

but of course this doesn't excuse the behavior of democrats either.

Insane Clown
09-10-2011, 01:29 PM
(a) So what? How do my comments from nearly a decade ago change the Facts of insane spending, deficits, and debt today? How is this even a point (other than distraction from the actual issue?)
(b) I have a solid history of criticizing deficit & debt spending, long before Obama took office. But, why bother with actual facts when crafting an irrelevant sideshow of personal fixation, right?
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?p=281584471#post281584471 Nobody said you weren't against deficit spending nutsy... we're questioning the legitimacy of your 'we called out Bush on it' rhetoric since, well... you didn't. And your proof? Linking to posts where you did exactly as expected... tried to divert as much conversation from President Bush as possible onto congress, a tactic you never use with President Obama since he's not a member of your favorite party.

Also, if it makes you feel better nutsy, I'm not really fixated on you. To be honest, I find most of your posts to be so amazingly hypocritical and devoid of substnace as to be unworthy of comment. I just didn't want to go to sleep last night and had some time to kill and decided to research your assertions about the 'we all hated Bush doing it, too' rhetoric since you use it so often. The research turned up nothing short of what I expected... lots of hypocrisy.


As has been repeatedly pointed out - Spending, deficits, and debt are outrageously larger in the last few years. So why shouldn't the response & criticism be equally larger? Why are you pretending that our fiscal situation today is equal to what we had nearly a decade ago?
FY07 was the last year that a Republican-controlled Congress wrote and passed the budget. Why do you keep fixating on only one part of the budget process at a time, whichever is more convenient for your agenda? Actually, I'm simply addressing the topic, which was why it wasn't a problem when Bush was president, which was the statement you responded to... by ignoring the last two years of Bush proposed budgets.

Nice attempt to confuse the issue by pretending we were discussing who controlled Congress, but anyone with the patience to look up the page for merely a second would see that's not the question you were answering.

Further, even if we were discussing control of Congress as well as the President... which we weren't... I already noted that deficit spending would have reached record levels if Congress did nothing but pass George W. Bush's proposed budget... something you conveniently ignore every time it's brought up because it doesn't make you happy.


If you properly define $458 Billion as "huge".... Where's your condemnation of the following 3 years? $1,412 Billion. $1,293 Billion. Projected $1,300 Billion this year. And another $1,100 requested by President Obama for next year. I'm still amazed that you attack me as a partisan, while you completely ignore the dramatic explosion in spending, deficits, and debt... How, exactly, have I ignored it? And calling $458 billion 'huge' is not a condemnation, but an observation, which is why there is no logical reason to conclude that I should condemn the following 3 years deficits if I hadn't done the same for '08 (and since the '09 deficit was Bush/Congress, not Obama/Congress, as you like to paint it, there is no reason to think I wouldn't be equally happy to condemn it if I had 'condemned' the '08 budget).

You see, I'm looking at the overall picture, not just trying to find a party to blame. For example, I overlook the deficit of '02 because we went to war. I blame Bush for the rest because he decided to fund two wars without raising revenue once, which was ignorant. If there was ever anytime when a president should have taken the message of shared sacrifice to the American people, it was after September 11 when we knew we were going to have go to war. Bush didn't do that, rather he ignored economic realities and pushed through measure to ensure that the American people wouldn't have to feel the pinch even though we were a country at war (two wars, actually).

I also expect deficit spending to be much higher in '08 through today because of the economic crisis, which is why I haven't 'condemend' the '08 deficit. Actually, it probably should have been even higher in '09 and not so much of it given out as more tax breaks. That said, I also blame Obama for caving on the tax issue and allowing the Republicans to hold unemployment benefits hostage to keep the Bush tax cuts alive. I also blame Obama for using up his political capital on a weak health care bill (health care reform was, and still is, neccessary, but Obama's focus needed to be on jobs while he still had a willing Democrat congress to get that stuff done).


Ignore the troll, and read the actual post I was responding to. The one which claimed that sovereign debt was the same as comparing entire GDP as "salary", and the debt as a "home mortgage". My post very clearly kept that same type of analogy, ut made it more accurate, with reference to annual revenue and unsecured credit card debt. Except you didn't make it more accurate. The unsecured credit card is actually a less useful comparison than home mortgage, even though neither are right. You simply responded to an inadequate analogy with a more inadequate one.

KRNEKIM
09-11-2011, 02:32 PM
ITT: Sociopaths try to justify apparent and obvious GOP tactics.