Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell


138 comments posted · 94 followers · following 0

7 years ago @ Information Clearing H... - Acceptable Losses: Aid... · 0 replies · -6 points

The entire article contains no facts, but is based on the strange claim that if many bad people like Clinton, it proves Trump is better.

However, many good people like Clinton, and Putin loves Trump. So?

10 years ago @ Commentary Magazine - Obama Disassociates fr... · 2 replies · -5 points

Rather than the complex, convoluted Heritagecare -- excuse me, Ronmeycare -- excuse me again, Obamacare -- we should have fully paid, full coverage Medicare for every man, woman and child in America.

Not only would this instantly bring us out of the recession, but it instantly would improve the health and vitality of all Americans.

And lest you believe the government can't afford it, read:

10 years ago @ Commentary Magazine - Can the Obama Revival ... · 1 reply · +1 points

Not sure how to correct an erroneous statement without leading to your insults, but for educational purposes, I'll try:

The following statement is not true: " . . . the dollars taken away from non-federal spending would then become, by definition, federal spending."

The following statement is true: The dollars taken away from non-federal spending would be dollars taken away from GDP (assuming Federal Spending and Net Imports do not change.)

10 years ago @ Commentary Magazine - Can the Obama Revival ... · 0 replies · 0 points

The facts, not polls, prove the shutdown cost America many billions of dollars, cost many people their jobs and their incomes, and accomplished absolutely nothing.

No polls needed..

10 years ago @ Commentary Magazine - Can the Obama Revival ... · 3 replies · 0 points

GDP = Federal Spending + Non-federal Spending + Net Exports.

I didn't make this up. That is the formula for GDP.

If the federal government taxed 100% of all wealth and income, what would "Non-federal Spending" total? Answer: $0. So what would that do to GDP? Think.

Anyway, the federal government (unlike state and local governments) does not spend tax money, which you will learn when you understood Monetary Sovereignty. See:

So, there is not need for the federal government to tax 100% or even 1%, but of course, being ignorant of Monetary Sovereignty, you'll claim that's drivel, too.

10 years ago @ Commentary Magazine - Can the Obama Revival ... · 5 replies · +1 points

" . . .cutting spending is possible. . . "

GDP = Federal Spending + Non-federal Spending + Net Exports.

Yes, as anyone with even a minor knowledge of algebra knows, not only is cutting spending possible, but the resultant cutting GDP also is possible. Inevitable, actually.


10 years ago @ Commentary Magazine - The Obama Backfire · 0 replies · -1 points

You guys should try to get your stories straight. "We said repeal Obamacare, but we don't mean repeal, we mean defund -- or else."

Here's what one of your brethren says:

Oops, McCain really isn't a brother. Sort of a cousin.

And now Paul doesn't want to repeal or defund it.

Gosh, it must be so confusing not knowing whom to parrot, today.

Anyway, be sure to defund food stamps too, because you know THOSE people are shiftless, lazy "takers."

10 years ago @ Commentary Magazine - The Obama Backfire · 1 reply · -9 points

Rick, ACA is THE LAW.

How does Congress change a law it doesn't like?

By threatening to bring down the entire government?? By threatening to destroy the credit of the United States?? By threatening a recession or depression??

Apparently, that is the Republican method.

In previous years, when Congress didn't like a law, it VOTED for changes in that law, and if the President agreed, he would sign the changes. Or Congress would vote to override the President.

But silly me, I thought that is the way our government is supposed to run. Apparently you disagree.

What next? Outlaw abortion or we'll destroy America? Make machine guns legal or we'll impoverish the population?? Eliminate teaching of evolution or we'll destroy the economy??

The possibilities are endless, once stupidity is acceptable.

10 years ago @ Commentary Magazine - The Obama Backfire · 4 replies · -3 points

What is there to negotiate. The target keeps changing. ACA is a law passed by both houses of Congress, signed by the President and approved by the Supreme Court. Now you want to negotiate it??

But wait. It's not Obamacare; its something else. The debt? The deficit? Immigration? Abortion? Gay marriage? The religious right has thrown so many things on the table, no one knows what is to be negotiated.

But, by heaven, they want negotiation.

If they want to overthrow an existing law, do it the old-fashioned way: By votes in both houses and Presidential approval. Is negotiation now a replacement for the legislative process?

10 years ago @ Commentary Magazine - Too Bad ObamaCare Work... · 0 replies · +2 points