Thursday, July 28, 2011

The Most Boring Post Ever

I don't usually write about technical things, partly because I'm not that interested in them. I love computers, I love to program them, I love the idea that a computer can simulate any system -- the concept of the universal Turing machine is beautiful and amazing. But I do not find it exciting to pick up somebody else's program and spend weeks trying to figure out how they expected me to use it, and I do not enjoy it when the computer breaks down or runs slow. I am not a gadget guy or a fixit guy.

I am actually going to put this online because I have seen a hundred techie web sites where people asked how to fix this problem, and nobody gave them the right answer.

A couple of weeks ago I bought a little Acer Aspire One D255 netbook for $199, refurbished, at Micro Center. It looked like fun, it's a tiny wine-red thing with a 10.1-inch screen, I figured I could throw it in my backpack and take it places, surf the web from wifi hotspots, use it to draft notes to myself and blogs and work on papers. It's not a powerful computer but it could be a handy little workhorsepony.

But the stupid thing kept crashing. It'd work for a few minutes and then bog down and you couldn't shut it down or do anything, it's got Windows 7 Starter OS but you had to hold down the power button to turn it off. Several times I was working on text documents and they got irrecoverably corrupted, which is very frustrating, trust me. I went into Task Manager and discovered that a process called "NT Kernel & System" would run at zero to two percent CPU for a long time, and then all of a sudden it would jump to fifty percent or more and stay there, and that's when the thing went dead.

But what does "NT Kernel & System" do? That was the question. It is a generic-sounding process, nobody seems to be able to tell you what it does. I ran programs to find malware, I scanned the whole hard drive with a virus checker, I took everything out of my Startup menu. I went through the Task Scheduler and disabled nearly everything and the thing still crashed on me. Uninstalled all the stupid games that came with it, commercial junk they hope I'll buy, anything I didn't think I'd need I got rid of. Still no good.

I noticed that if I started in safe mode it was okay, though of course the computer was not very useful like that. In safe mode it would run forever without crashing. So I knew the problem was being caused by one of those things they take out to make safe mode safe. Windows 7 has something called "Safe Mode With Networking," and I discovered by accident that if I started it that way it would crash. Aha -- it's the network driver! I tried disabling the ethernet and wireless adapters and then re-enabled each one, and narrowed it down to the wifi adapter.

Once I knew that, I went to the Acer Driver page for this particular model. Device Manager said I had a Broadcom adapter, so I uninstalled it and downloaded the one from the Acer site. Since I had disabled the driver I didn't have wifi, duh, so I downloaded it to my MacBook and then copied it over to the Acer and ran the Setup routine and rebooted.

I know what you're thinking: he has a MacBook? So why is he wasting time on a Windows machine? Ah, grasshopper, the human mind is inherently irrational, that's all I can tell you.

Now I have been sitting here watching the Task Manager for a couple of hours. "NT Kernel & System" has jumped as high as three percent for one fraction of a second, now it normally sits at 0% CPU. System Idle Processes are ninety-seven to ninety-nine percent, just like I like them.

I think I fixed it. Now this seems like a kind of neat little machine, and did I mention cheap?

When I used to play music for a living there would be nights in a bar when everybody was drunk, you'd have a crowd but nobody paying attention, bartenders and waitresses are bored and cranky, nobody's listening to the music. Sometimes on nights like that I would say into the microphone, "I'll give you five dollars if you just come up and ask for it," and nobody would do it -- that's how you know they really aren't paying attention. Nobody ever came up and said, "Sure, give me five bucks," not once. This blog post will be like that. I could probably offer you five bucks right now (but I won't) and leave this up on the Internet for the rest of my life and nobody will ever read this far and ask for it. Most boring post ever.

That's okay, I have been trying to figure this out for about two weeks and I think I finally can claim a little victory, and I'm glad to have it. I am posting this so that guys like me who Google Acer "NT Kernel & System" might find it, after reading a hundred techie sites where some guy with a lot of experience says, "It sounds like malware to me." Check your network driver. Disable it in Device Manager and if that fixes your problem replace it with a newer version.

39 Comments:

Anonymous svelte_brunette said...

Hi Jim,

Actually I read all the way through, and I’m bummed you didn’t maintain the$5 offer. I spent a good chunk of yesterday on IM and the phone with my company’s IT guy getting VPN access back on my machine. It was an exciting day delving into the gory details of setting up routing profiles and rules on my router. Oh joy.

It was a convenient day for me to do that as I was stuck at home waiting for the plumber. I’ve got a water pump that keeps cycling on and off every 15 seconds. I originally thought the problem was with the pressure tank, which I don’t have any experience with. The plumber first tried replacing the pressure switch but it didn’t fix the problem. When he left yesterday, he thought it was the tank too, and was going to get one before overtime rates went up at 5pm, and come back with it this morning.

After thinking about the symptoms though, and how quickly I lose pressure once pump power is off, the problem would seem to indicate a leak in the pipe in the well head. The leak appears far too fast to be a pinhole underground, so I’m suspecting a bad joint in the pipe between the top of the water in the well, and the very top of the well. He should be here in a bit, so we’ll see if he thinks that’s a reasonable explanation.

A new pressure tank (and other parts to go with it) will cost me about $500, so your little netbook sounds like a bargain! I’ve been eyeballing the Acer Iconia Tab W500. I’m using it as a “carrot” to get me to do some MUCH needed maintenance around the house and yard. So far, it looks like it will be quite a while before I’ve finished enough work to reward myself with the Iconia.

How’s that for a boring post?

Have a nice day,

Cynthia

July 28, 2011 8:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm just grateful you didn't find some way to twist the whole thing around to have implication for the gay agenda

July 28, 2011 8:54 AM  
Anonymous juggernaut said...

"In an amazing turn of events, North Carolina’s Woman’s Right to Know Act went from being one vote shy last month to having enough to override Governor Beverly Perdue’s veto on Tuesday, by a vote of 72-47.

Despite Perdue’s rhetoric blaming the “Republicans’ social agenda” and citing the bill as “needless government intrusion” into the patient/doctor relationship, three “Blue Dog” Democrats switched their votes at the last minute.

The House overrode another veto last month — that measure stripped Planned Parenthood of taxpayer funding.

The Democrat who cast the deciding vote Tuesday, Rep. Jim Crawford, said that while the governor was not happy with his vote, he was content with this decision.

“I’ve always voted pro-life.” he said. “When it comes down to informing people and that kind of issue, I just felt like it was important to let people know the consequences of abortion.”

North Carolina joins 34 other states that require clinics to properly inform women about the risks of abortions, and 25 states that require a waiting period before an abortion can be performed.

“What is so dangerous about information?” Rep. Ruth Samuelson, the bill’s sponsor, asked her colleagues before the override vote. “What are your alternatives? Are there social services available so the woman really has the whole picture of what her options are?

“The intent is to give women the information they need,” she added. “Large numbers of women want this bill.”

Barbara Holt, president of North Carolina Right to Life, said North Carolinians want mothers to have information.

“Oftentimes women regret their abortion, because they have not received the information that’s due to them,” she said. Now, “They understand that there are two lives.”"

July 28, 2011 9:39 AM  
Anonymous everyone do the wave! said...

"Most presidents affect the standing of their political parties. Ronald Reagan advanced his party's standing among young voters. So did Bill Clinton.

In his first term, George W. Bush helped Republicans equal Democrats in party identification in the 2004 exit poll -- the first time that happened since polling began.

Now Pew Research has come out has come out with figures for 2011. They're not good news for Barack Obama and the Democrats.

The Democratic party identification edge has been reduced to 47 to 43 percent. That's a 4-point drop for Democrats and a 4-point rise for Republicans since 2008.

If Republicans can maintain that standing in party identification, they should be in fine shape in November 2012, even with increased presidential year turnout.

It's interesting to see which groups have moved most in party identification.

As the Pew analysts note, there has been little change among blacks, who are overwhelmingly Democratic.

But there has been big movement among whites. In 2008 they were 51 to 40 percent Republican. In the first half of 2011 they were 56 to 35 percent Republican -- more Republican than Southern whites were three years ago.

The most noteworthy movement among whites has been among voters under 30, the so-called Millennial generation. Millennials voted 66 to 32 percent for Barack Obama in 2008 and identified as Democrats rather than Republicans by a 60 to 32 percent margin.

But white Millennials have been moving away from the Democrats. The Democratic edge in party identification among white Millennials dropped from 7 points in 2008 to 3 points in 2009 to a 1-point Republican edge in 2010 and an 11-point Republican lead in 2011.

There have been shifts of similar magnitude among whites who are low-income, who have no more than a high school education, and who live in the Midwest.

It's not hard to come up with plausible reasons for these changes. Obama campaigned as the champion of "hope and change" in 2008 and assured crowds of young people that "We are the change we are seeking."

But the change they have seen is anything but hopeful. Youth unemployment rates have been at historic highs. Young people have seen their college degrees produce little in the way of job offers.

They are choosing more often to keep living with their parents. From the Obama Democrats they have gotten only a promise that "children" up to age 26 can stay on Mommy and Daddy's health insurance plans.

In the wake of the 2008 election, I argued that there was a tension between the way Millennials lived their lives -- creating their own iPod playlists, designing their own Facebook pages -- and the one-size-fits-all, industrial-era welfare-state policies of the Obama Democrats.

Instead of allowing Millennials space in which they can choose their own futures, the Obama Democrats' policies have produced a low-growth economy in which their alternatives are limited and they are forced to make do with what they can scrounge.

There is little evidence that the Millennials believe their plight can be relieved and opportunities opened up by slapping higher taxes on Bill Gates and Steve Jobs or by restricting deductions for corporate jets, as Barack Obama urged in his Monday night speech calling for tax increases (although Senate Democrats gave up on them) in debt-ceiling legislation.

The intended purpose of legislation like the stimulus package and Obamacare was to improve the situations of those least able to take care of themselves -- the young, the less educated, the low-skilled. But it is just such groups that, the Pew Research Center numbers show, have been moving away from the president's party. An instructive achievement, no?"

July 28, 2011 10:11 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Boehner is having trouble herding his cats.

The vote has been called off for tonight.

July 28, 2011 10:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

oh well, looks like "cut, cap & balance" will have to suffice, being the only plan passed by either house

July 28, 2011 10:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

CC&B is dead.

The only C that will pass both the House and the Senate is Compromise.

Boehner can't get the House to pass something that will also pass the Senate as long as he keeps humoring the tea bag fringe. At this point, he can't even get the House to pass something that approaches compromise.

Boehner is a weak Speaker of the House who can not even line up votes for his own 6 month punt.

If this Bonehead bill passes, we will all be going through this again during the Christmas holidays.

Joy to the World!

July 28, 2011 11:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

actually, I think it will last until February

July 28, 2011 11:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"CC&B is dead."

not necessarily

even if Congress passes it, it goes to the states so Congressmen might feel safe voting for it

and, surprise, no Presidential involvement is required fot it to become law

July 28, 2011 11:33 PM  
Anonymous Robert said...

Shucks, I could have used the 5 bucks.

July 29, 2011 8:08 AM  
Anonymous Aunt Bea said...

"CC&B is dead."

not necessarily

even if Congress passes it, it goes to the states so Congressmen might feel safe voting for it

and, surprise, no Presidential involvement is required fot it to become law"


And I bet you *think* Paul Revere set out from Lexington or Concord, *New Hampshire* on his midnight ride to *warn the British* the British were coming!

< eye roll >

Fact check time

Before any bil becomes law, it must be passed in both the House of Representatives and in the Senate and be signed by the President.

This cut, cap and balance bill is dead because the Senate killed it:

"The Senate voted 51 to 46 on [last] Friday to kill the House-passed "cut, cap and balance" bill."

All of Boehner's tea bagger arm twisting and pizza bribing has resulted in the biggest failure of his tenure as Speaker of the House. If he wants to pass a "bipartisan" bill to raise the debt ceiling, why is Boehner only trying to find "compromise" with tea baggers? Tea baggers are also Republicans who view "compromise" as "capitulation." They would rather have the US default on it's existing obligations (like paying for TARP, unfunded Medicare prescription plan, two wars, and tax cuts for the wealthy) than compromise to save our AAA rating.

IMHO it's hysterical hypocrisy tea baggers want to amend the Constitution now, after all their talk about how the framers got everything just right.

July 29, 2011 8:34 AM  
Anonymous patriot city, baby said...

"Before any bil becomes law, it must be passed in both the House of Representatives and in the Senate and be signed by the President."

sorry, looney-b, I always assume that most readers have a complete thought process going on but I should allow for those like you, who are not always able to fully engaged mentally

I was talking about the balanced budget amendment

CCB requires the Senate to pass this before it takes effect and amendments are passed by both houses of Congress then by the states

the President has no say

my point is that the Senate could pass this without much worry because it would still have to go through 34 other legislatures to become law

by then, we'd have a Republican president anyway, I guess

"This cut, cap and balance bill is dead because the Senate killed it"

oh, they're free to reconsider, and might have to, if Boehner can't get the last few votes he needs

"All of Boehner's tea bagger arm twisting and pizza bribing has resulted in the biggest failure of his tenure as Speaker of the House."

ain't over yet, looney-b, but he still has been the only one to get anything passed (CCB)

"If he wants to pass a "bipartisan" bill to raise the debt ceiling, why is Boehner only trying to find "compromise" with tea baggers? Tea baggers are also Republicans who view "compromise" as "capitulation.""

Tea baggers prefer to cut the budget enough that no further borrowing would be necessary.

That's kind of tough love and would be a short-term hit but, in the long-run, would make the U.S. the envy of the world.

They're willing to compromise by allowing a debt ceiling increase if they can get some cuts in exchange but Reid's bill is a joke-house of mirrors and accounting tricks.

Past history indicates that when Republicans compromise, no cuts happen at all. It just happened in January.

"They would rather have the US default on it's existing obligations (like paying for TARP, unfunded Medicare prescription plan, two wars, and tax cuts for the wealthy) than compromise to save our AAA rating."

you're misusing the word "default" again

the rating agencies have said they will downgrade unless we cut 4 trillion and we haven't been able to because of socialist intransigence by the Dummycrat Party

raising the debt ceiling won't preserve our rating

"IMHO it's hysterical hypocrisy tea baggers want to amend the Constitution now, after all their talk about how the framers got everything just right."

for once, you do have half a point

personally, I agree that we shouldn't amend the Constitution in such a way

still, it's hard not to appreciate the frustration of ordinary Americans, as expressed by their champions, the Tea Party

and, actually, the founders devised a system for amending the Constitution so you might find a few that would support this amendment

July 29, 2011 9:23 AM  
Anonymous svelte_brunette said...

Anon exclaimed:

“I'm just grateful you didn't find some way to twist the whole thing around to have implication for the gay agenda”

Gosh darn it Anon, you caught me. I went back over the last couple of months of Jim’s posts, and sho’ ‘nuff, right here in the ones below:

O'Malley to Get More Involved Next Time (about the marriage bill here in MD)
Biblical Marriage (Jim’s satirical post with the chart showing heterosexual men with slaves, concubines, and war prisoners as wives)
Marriage Wins in New York (you remember, the gay marriage win there)

I somehow managed to twist the topic around to be about the “gay agenda.” Here I thought I was being subtle and clever, but you guys are just TOO smart for me! How am I supposed to work in topics about the gay agenda on a blog like this if you guys are just too quick to call me on it???

I’ll have to study the Anon’s post more carefully, and figure out how he managed to take a post on a persnickety wifi driver and turn it into another bellicose Obama / liberal bashing rant without anyone noticing.

Have a nice day,

Cynthia

July 29, 2011 10:15 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I wasn't talking about you, Cinco

I was talking about Jim

just a light-hearted comment about how Jim will take just about any topic and turn it around to a gay agenda comment

didn't think the comment would cause any offense

July 29, 2011 10:20 AM  
Anonymous Aunt Bea said...

"the rating agencies have said they will downgrade unless we cut 4 trillion and we haven't been able to because"....Boehner has put forth a bill that doesn't even cut $1 trillion and he can't get members of his own party to support him in his insufficient effort.

"I was talking about the balanced budget amendment"

I suppose that's why you started your comment without mentioning "the balanced budget amendment" at all and instead said:

""CC&B is dead."

not necessarily

even if Congress passes *it*, *it* goes to the states so Congressmen might feel safe voting for *it*

and, surprise, no Presidential involvement is required ***fot*** *it* to become law"


Your use of *it* in each of these sentences clearly refers to the cut, cap and balance bill.

And I noticed you misspelled "for" as "fot." What is it with you non-TTFers and your inability to spell?

Maybe I should give you an "eye role fot" that one!

You seem to be forgetting that before any constitutional amendment will be sent to the states for ratification, two thirds of both the House and Senate must approve it.

You are hallucinating if you *think* there are enough "yea" votes in either the House or the Senate to pass a constitutional amendment by such a margin, and then to get 3/4 of the states to also approve it.......by next Tuesday.

All this has been some smoke and mirrors pretense that the GOP is working on a solution.

The *only* budget item the GOTP is adamant about is making the deficit-increasing Bush tax cuts permanent.

They are willing to cut the GOP's favorite defense budget even, but they are completely unwilling to bring in enough income to cover our bills.

Under Bush, the GOP completely gutted the "rainy day fund" Bill Clinton put together for us and then dug a huge deep hole by continuing the Bush tax cuts long after the surplus was gone.

My family has a savings account for a rainy day. We don't pay it out to ourselves "because we earned it!", we keep it saved for when we need it. My family has used a mortgage and car loans, that is, we went into debt to purchase large expensive items and then paid off the debt over time like lots of families do. Why I bet even you didn't pay cash for your house but took out a loan to pay off that big debt over time.

Apparently the GOTP thinks there's something wrong with Americans managing our finances just like American middle class families do.

July 29, 2011 10:52 AM  
Anonymous wassup with that? said...

"You seem to be forgetting that before any constitutional amendment will be sent to the states for ratification, two thirds of both the House and Senate must approve it."

I didn't forget that at all. My point was that they could be persuaded to do so since the effect would only be symbolic. It still has to go to the states. Surely you're old enough to remember the ERA.

"You are hallucinating if you *think* there are enough "yea" votes in either the House or the Senate to pass a constitutional amendment by such a margin, and then to get 3/4 of the states to also approve it.......by next Tuesday."

CCB doesn't require that the states ratify at all, much less by next Tuesday.

btw, despite the alarmism of the media and the White House, next Tuesday is not the deadline. There's at least a week and probably much more before we reach the necessity of borrowing to fund Obama's stimulus spending.

And, also, as needs to be repeated often, we will, in any case, make our debt payments first so the U.S. will never default on its debts.

"All this has been some smoke and mirrors pretense that the GOP is working on a solution.

The *only* budget item the GOTP is adamant about is making the deficit-increasing Bush tax cuts permanent.

They are willing to cut the GOP's favorite defense budget even, but they are completely unwilling to bring in enough income to cover our bills."

Yeah, you're right. The tax burden of Americans is already quite high enough.

July 29, 2011 11:17 AM  
Anonymous wassup with that? said...

"Under Bush, the GOP completely gutted the "rainy day fund" Bill Clinton put together for us and then dug a huge deep hole by continuing the Bush tax cuts long after the surplus was gone."

The surplus was the result of Newt Gingrich's Contract with America. Admittedly, Al Gore helped by inventing the internet since that stock bubble increased revenues significantly.

btw, economic growth increases revenue not taxes

The tax burden of Americans is fixed and it's not going up again.

Ever.

"My family has a savings account for a rainy day. We don't pay it out to ourselves "because we earned it!", we keep it saved for when we need it. My family has used a mortgage and car loans, that is, we went into debt to purchase large expensive items and then paid off the debt over time like lots of families do. Why I bet even you didn't pay cash for your house but took out a loan to pay off that big debt over time.

Apparently the GOTP thinks there's something wrong with Americans managing our finances just like American middle class families do."

I don't know what the "GOTP" thinks but countries aren't the same as families, for a number of reasons.

Our debt right is so high that it threatens our security and if no brake is put on Obama, we would be in deep trouble. Remember, his submitted budget in February was UNANIMOUSLY rejected by the Democratically controlled Senate.

Right now, Obama's stimulus plan is still in effect and here's the results:

"The economy grew less than expected in the second quarter as consumer spending barely rose amid higher gasoline prices, and growth braked sharply in the prior quarter, a government report showed on Friday.

Growth in gross domestic product -- a measure of all goods and services produced within U.S. borders - rose at a 1.3 percent annual rate, the Commerce Department said. First-quarter output was sharply revised down to a 0.4 percent pace from 1.9 percent.

In addition, fourth-quarter growth was revised down to a 2.3 percent pace from 3.1 percent, indicating that the economy had already started slowing before the high gasoline prices and supply chain disruptions from Japan hit.

Economists had expected the economy would show signs of perking up by now with Japan supply constraints easing and gasoline prices off their high, but data has disappointed. This and the sharp downward revisions to the prior quarters suggest a more troubling and fundamental slowdown might be underway."

July 29, 2011 11:18 AM  
Anonymous Robert said...

I wonder if this is in fact the old conservative notion of "starving the beast:" cut revenues, then hold the economy hostage until more reasonable people have no choice but to gut the social contract our government has with our people.

The real problems with our economy are underregulation, and a huge and growing imbalance between the income and assets of the very wealthy and the rest of us.

The rush to cut funding in this economic climate is nothing but Hooverism. It didn't work in 1929, and it won't work now.

July 29, 2011 11:26 AM  
Anonymous Ben Franklin had a printing press said...

"The real problems with our economy are underregulation, and a huge and growing imbalance between the income and assets of the very wealthy and the rest of us."

thanks for confirming that you're a socialist, Robert

history shows that managed economies don't do well

even when the government runs out of money, sometime in late August, we can print money and pay our bills

you may remember from Econ 101 that this causes inflation but the amount to carry us through a few months is not that much relatively and can be controlled by selling bonds

not a good idea long-term but there options for the next couple of months as we work on getting the Dems used to the fact that spending will have to go down for the sake of the economy

July 29, 2011 11:50 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"On Capitol Hill Democrats all saying the same thing. And that is, this president has been invisible, he is not a leader. They said this all behind closed doors. Democratic leaders, Democratic rank-and-file. In fact, 40, 50 of the most powerful Democrats on the Hill. The complaints were all the same. The president has vanished. He has left us here alone again like he did with health care. Where is he? Now, they didn't call him a loser, but they sure as hell didn't call him a leader."

July 29, 2011 12:36 PM  
Anonymous we're a nightmare for Democrats said...

"House Republican leaders will tie a balanced-budget amendment to the Constitution to their two-step debt-ceiling bill — a move that is all but certain to clinch the necessary votes to pass Speaker John Boehner’s proposal a day after it stalled.

“I think this passes,” Rep. Steve LaTourette (R-Ohio)

Several GOP conservatives had held back their support for Boehner’s bill because they wanted the balanced budget amendment provision included. It was the main point of contention in Thursday night’s talks between GOP leaders and the holdouts.

The House plans to vote on the bill, pushed by Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and his leadership team, Friday afternoon.

The new provision would require a vote before the debt-ceiling could be raised for a second time in February.

“What’s clear now is that any solution to avoid default must be bipartisan,” Obama said at the White House Friday, saying the two parties “aren’t miles apart” and in “rough agreement” on plan with some modifications.

The speaker told his conference he woke up happy Friday morning.

And his premonition was right. Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) said the balanced budget provision has flipped his vote, and he predicted it will help bring many other members onto the bill – Rep. Scott Garrett (R-N.J.) said he was a now ‘yes.’

Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas said “liked what I’m hearing.”

“Let’s go vote 100 percent for this bill,” Georgia Rep. Phil Gingrey, one of the last holdouts, urged his colleagues, according to a source inside a closed-door House GOP conference meeting.

Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-Fla.) said in an interview that the balanced budget amendment made “the difference.”"

July 29, 2011 12:45 PM  
Anonymous Robert said...

"History shows that managed economies don't do well."

Where did you study history? History in fact shows that unregulated markets generate bubble, monopolies, great imbalances in wealth and income, and huge swings in economic well-being. Remember all those depressions you read about in U.S. history before the 100 days?

The American economy reached it's most unregulated extent since the depression during the first decade of this century. This led to the greatest economic downturn since the depression.

I am a strong believer in regulated free markets, as the best design for creating a reasonable level of prosperity for the citizenry of a country. This is not socialism, darling, despite what Rush, Shawn and Chris say.

July 29, 2011 1:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

yeah, you're a socialist, sweetie-pie

I'd agree there's a need for tweaking to sustain free markets

we have plenty of that already

we don't need the government trying to regulate business with goal of creating income equality

that is a negation of market forces

the equality we seek should be that of opportunity

as far as history goes, didn't a buddy of yours once say:

"I hung around St Petersburg
when I saw it was time for a change.Killed the czar and his ministers. Anastasia screamed in vain."
K

July 29, 2011 1:39 PM  
Anonymous Robert said...

If that's socialism, I'm proud of it.

Did I say anything about income equality? Again, just because Rush says it doesn't make it so.

I heard on the radio today that the the bond ratings of local and state governments in this area would be downgraded along with the Federal Government's, because of their close ties, including Maryland and Virginia, as well as Fairfax and MoCo.

July 29, 2011 2:30 PM  
Anonymous Obama: he's anti-American said...

they are considering downgrading because of our large deficits, not because Congress might stop the borrowing

the sad thing is that Obama could prevent it by simply making a definitive statement that he will pay our debts regardless of anything else

instead, he threatens our economy by playing politics:

"Obama’s Washington-knows-best attitude was on display Monday night when he said most Americans outside of Washington had probably never heard the term “debt ceiling” before.

The only way Americans could possibly be unfamiliar with the term is if they had tuned out the president for the last few weeks. The president and his Treasury secretary, Tim Geithner, have taken every opportunity to fan the default flames, even though such an outcome is highly unlikely.

Default is defined as the failure to make timely payment of principal and interest. Standard and Poor’s uses that definition, specifically as it pertains to market debt, when it issues its sovereign debt ratings.

The Treasury is not going to default in August, nor in subsequent months for that matter. An estimated $172.4 billion of tax revenue next month is more than enough to cover the $29 billion of August interest payments. For fiscal 2011, which ends Sept. 30, the Treasury is expected to take in revenue of $2.2 trillion, while only $214 billion is needed to service the debt.

And even if it lacks the authority for new borrowing, the Treasury can continue to roll over existing debt.

Instead of dangling the default threat every chance they get, Obama and Geithner should be telling the world that the U.S. has every intention, and the resources, to meet its debt obligations. They should shout it from the rooftops, put a banner on the Treasury Direct website, and use the Sunday talk shows to reassure investors, not frighten them.

The administration’s stated desire to remove the uncertainty hanging over the economy flies in the face of their saber-rattling. Why, one might even conclude that they are -- perish the thought -- playing politics with the debt ceiling! (Oh, wait, it’s the Republicans who are doing that.)"

July 29, 2011 3:08 PM  
Anonymous he's a freakin' hypocritical liar said...

"The real problem with our economy is a huge and growing imbalance between the income and assets of the very wealthy and the rest of us."

"Did I say anything about income equality? Again, just because Rush says it doesn't make it so."

July 29, 2011 3:11 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

WASHINGTON -- The House of Representatives passed a bill on Friday to raise the debt ceiling. Just four days before the government may begin to default on its loans, the House voted on the bill after two earlier versions failed to win over anti-spending stalwarts in Boehner's party.

By altering the content of his bill, Boehner was able to win the support of 218 members of the 240-member Republican conference.

The bill slashes 2012 fiscal year spending by $22 billion and cuts $915 billion out of the national budget for the next decade. It would also establish a "super Congress," composed of 12 members from both parties and chambers, that would have the power to make major changes to Social Security, Medicare and other programs.

To gain support from the Republican conference's most conservative members, it also includes a requirement for the passage of a balanced budget amendment to trigger the second phase of the bill, which would raise the debt ceiling again later this year.

That provision was added on Friday morning to win over members who said the balanced budget amendment measure in the original plan, which required a vote but not passage, was too weak.

Senators have no choice but to pass it since Republican can filibuster any alternative, preventing a vote.

July 29, 2011 7:21 PM  
Anonymous Aunt Bea said...

John Boehner added a provision about a balanced budget amendment to please the Tea Baggers in order to get his budget plan through the House. However, doing so ensures the Senate will kill this bill just like they killed the CC&B bill and for the very same reason.

Today the WSJ has reported Stocks Post Biggest Weekly Fall in a Year

"U.S. stocks fell and posted the biggest weekly decline in a year, as a blur of debt-ceiling developments left the market uncertain over the course of Washington's deadlocked negotiations...."

Anon repeated a GOTP talking point, which is a blatant lie:

"There's at least a week and probably much more before we reach the necessity of borrowing to fund Obama's stimulus spending."

The debt that we are paying off includes $5.07 trillion in debt incurred by Bush and $1.44 trillion in debt incurred by Obama.

Bush:

$1.469 trillion for Iraq, Afghanistan wars and defense

$1.812 trillion for the Bush tax cuts

$608 billion for non-defense discretionary spending

$224 billion for TARP and other bailouts

$180 billion for the Medicare drung benefit

$779 billion for the 2008 stimulus and other changes

Obama:

$711 billion for stimulus spending

$278 billion for non-defense discretionary spending

$425 billion for stimulus tax cuts

$152 billion for health reform and entitlement changes

-$126 billion in Defense cuts

" The tax burden of Americans is already quite high enough."

Surprise, surprise! Anon repeats another GOP talking point, which is also a blatant lie. Taxes are the lowest they've been since the Depression.

The Chronical with Bloomberg Business Report reports:

"For the well-off, this could be the best tax day since the early 1930s: Top tax rates on ordinary income, dividends, estates and gifts will remain at or near historically low levels for at least the next two years. That's thanks in part to legislation passed in December 2010 by the 111th Congress and signed by President Obama.

"This is clearly far and away the most generous tax situation that's existed," says Gregory Singer, a national managing director of the wealth management group at AllianceBernstein. "It's a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity."

For the 400 U.S. taxpayers with the highest adjusted gross income, the effective federal income tax rate - what they actually pay - fell from almost 30 percent in 1995 to just under 17 percent in 2007, according to the IRS.

And for the approximately 1.4 million people who make up the top 1 percent of taxpayers, the effective federal income tax rate dropped from 29 percent to 23 percent in 2008. It may seem too fantastic to be true, but the top 400 end up paying a lower rate than the next 1,399,600 or so...."

July 29, 2011 7:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Moody's and the other bond rating agencies have featured prominently in the build-up to the financial crisis. These agencies gave investment grade ratings to complex financial instruments filled with subprime mortgages and other bad assets. These ratings allowed Goldman Sachs and other investment banks to sell this trash around the country and the world, ensuring that the effects of the collapse of the housing bubble would reverberate throughout the financial system.

It was not just incompetence that caused Moody's to misunderstand the quality of the issues it was rating; it was corruption. Moody's and the other bond rating agencies were getting paid by the banks whose assets that they were rating. The bond-rating agencies knew that these companies wanted investment grade ratings for their issues. As one examiner for Standard&Poor's said in an e-mail, they would give investment grade ratings to products "structured by cows."

This record must be kept in mind when considering the possibility of a Moody's downgrade of U.S. government debt. It is no secret that many on Wall Street would love to see Social Security and Medicare cut back or even privatized. Investment banker Peter Peterson has even committed $1 billion toward promoting this agenda. When Moody's threatens to downgrade U.S. government debt, or if it actually does so, it may reflect its actual assessment of the creditworthiness of the U.S. government or it could be a reflection of the Wall Street agenda to cut back these key public programs.

There is one way in which the public can better recognize Moody's motivations. All banks, including giants like Citigroup and Goldman Sachs, hold huge amounts of U.S. government debt. There are also reliant on the U.S. government for all sorts of reasons, including potential bailouts. If the U.S. government were to default on its debts, then it would almost certainly wipe out every major bank in the country. There is no plausible scenario in which the U.S. government defaults on its debts and the banks will still be able to make good on their debt payments.

This means that if Moody's were to downgrade the government's debt, to be consistent it must also downgrade the debt of Citigroup, Goldman Sachs and the other big banks. If Moody's downgrades the government's debt, without downgrading the debt of the big banks -- or even threatens to downgrade the government's debt without also threatening to downgrade the debt of the big banks -- then it is more likely acting in pursuit of Wall Street's political agenda than presenting its best assessment of the creditworthiness of the U.S. government.

It is unfortunate that we have to suspect a major credit rating agency of such dishonesty, but given its track record, serious people have no choice. To paraphrase an old Winston Churchill joke, we already know about the character of the bond-rating agencies, we are only asking if they are prostituting themselves now."

July 29, 2011 8:39 PM  
Anonymous Robert said...

Sweetheart, can you not read? I said great income inbalance, not income inequality. This is a not a subtle difference. Nations with vast differences between the assets and income of the very wealthy and the middle class do not have stable governments. This is one of the characteristics of third-world nations, not developed market economies. Do you know no economics, or just what you learn by listening to WMAL?

Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations is not revealed scripture; it was a good start.

July 29, 2011 8:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"John Boehner added a provision about a balanced budget amendment to please the Tea Baggers in order to get his budget plan through the House. However, doing so ensures the Senate will kill this bill just like they killed the CC&B bill and for the very same reason."

well, if they send anything back to the House that doesn't include the balanced budget, it will fail in the House

so, where does that leave us?

the truth is that Boehner's bill only requires BB approval before the second stage of debt extension so it can be argued again in February

there's really no reason to not approve Boehner's bill other than Obama's re-election

and, at this point, even the Dems are starting to think of an alternative for nomination

"Anon repeated a GOTP talking point, which is a blatant lie:

"There's at least a week and probably much more before we reach the necessity of borrowing to fund Obama's stimulus spending.""

not a lie, Bea, it's a fact

Obama is recklessly threatening default for crass political purposes- without regad to the welfare of his country

"" The tax burden of Americans is already quite high enough."

Surprise, surprise! Anon repeats another GOP talking point, which is also a blatant lie."

can't be a lie

it's an opinion

and the debate is already over

taxes aren't going up

so, move on

"Nations with vast differences between the assets and income of the very wealthy and the middle class do not have stable governments."

any nation with a sizable middle class is stable

coveting is a violation of the Ten Commandments

thus, so is socialism

July 29, 2011 10:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tonight McConnell refused to negotiate with Majority Leader Reid and said he will only negotiate with the President. More importantly, Minority Leader McConnell indicated he and his Republican cohorts in the Senate would filibuster the Reid bill. However, that is the only bill that actually can pass the Congress in time to prevent a default and the automatic reduction in our credit rating from AAA to AA which will cause, according to Bank of America and Credit Suisse, a 5 % contraction in our GDP.

July 29, 2011 10:16 PM  
Anonymous mxyzptlk said...

"However, that is the only bill that actually can pass the Congress in time to prevent a default and the automatic reduction in our credit rating from AAA to AA"

actually, as is now clear, it has no chance to pass Congress because the House won't vote for the phony cuts

could be the debt ceiling won't be raised and Obama will have to make cuts in his stimulus spending

that's too bad but we will pay our debts first

those rating agencies were saying about a week ago that they would lower our rating if we didn't cut 4trillion

they have had tremendous credibility problems themselves

the American people know whose leadership has failed:

"PRINCETON, NJ -- President Obama's job approval rating is at a new low, averaging 40% in July 26-28 Gallup Daily tracking."

July 29, 2011 10:35 PM  
Anonymous right as rain said...

boy o boy

that Robert and Bea sure seem like a couple of stupid dolts

July 29, 2011 11:10 PM  
Anonymous Obama blew it said...

WASHINGTON — Somewhere, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who confronted a Depression and world war, is looking upon this city and asking, "Why the fear?"

The Gipper, Ronald Reagan, is wondering what happened to his "shining city on the Hill." John F. Kennedy is saddened about the torch that is being passed to a young generation of debtor Americans.

No matter the outcome of this showdown over deficits and debt, one element has become increasingly pervasive and corrosive: the politics of fear.

Political leadership can step in, with hope, context, reassurance and reason — as the above presidents did in times both challenging and promising. But we've seen little of that. President Obama's hope and change seems a lot more than three years distant in the rear view mirror.

As the debt-limit crisis moved into its climactic week, a nationally televised address by Obama seemed aimed more at fixing blame than offering reassurance that Washington could get its work done.

From the same place where FDR uttered his famous "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself" in the darkest days of the Great Depression, we got warnings that another Depression was just around the corner.

Depression, default, Armageddon, collapse — these have become the political keywords of this long, hot summer. Even if this gets resolved in a way that provides certainty and revs up the economy, they are lasting impressions.

Polls still show that the most optimistic group of Americans are those with the most to lose before they even get started. They are the millennials just entering adulthood, and at 95 million strong, they outnumber even the Baby Boomer generation running the country. Many of these twentysomethings are struggling to find and keep jobs, wondering whether their college degrees will mean anything, or whether their country will be bankrupt when they inherit it in full.

Leaders from this emerging generation, 120 university student body presidents, recently sent letters to Obama, Boehner and members of Congress that asked them to compromise on a meaningful deficit-reduction deal that would raise the debt limit.

The letter had the feel of children scolding their parents.

"Raising the debt ceiling to allow more borrowing, without a sincere effort to put our fiscal house in order, would be a raw deal for my generation," said Brandon Mitchell, student body president of the University of Miami.

They've already gotten a raw deal. Unemployment among Americans under 30 is significantly higher than other age groups. Harris Walker, a recent graduate of High Point University in North Carolina, is applying for entry level public relations jobs in which he often competes with people who have been in the business for years, lost their jobs and are looking for work anywhere. There are more and more stories of young people with fresh degrees and hopeful attitudes cobbling together unpaid internships and minimum wage jobs.

Obama's hope-and-change mantra overwhelmingly won over this age group in the 2008 election. Will they ever be as enthusiastic about any politician again?

"'The torch is passed' — symbolic of Kennedy. Reagan — 'shining city on a hill,' very idealistic," said Paul Conway, president of Generation Opportunity, a new organization aimed at those under 30. "When you take a look at what is going on now, and among people who know they've already made history (by helping to elect Obama) … they may ask the question: What is the legacy that is passed to us?

July 30, 2011 5:22 AM  
Anonymous we have the worst President ever said...

Obama’s advisers are now trying to present him as a reasonable man, offering a “balanced” approach to the debt problem, who has been stymied by unappeasable right-wing ideologues.

But it really doesn’t matter. Because the damage being done to Obama is more corrosive than whether he is assigned full or partial blame for this reckless scramble toward the edge of economic calamity.

What the debt ceiling imbroglio confirms for many Americans is that they are living in a world turned chaotic, a perilous place where things they thought they knew turn out to wrong and security they thought was their right is revealed as a mirage.

Not all the serious problems swirling about us are Obama’s fault, though some are. Others he has merely shown himself ill-equipped or incompetent to slay. But whether he is guilty or guilty by association, the Obama era is a time of instability and danger. And that’s bad politics for a president.

The debt ceiling scare is but the latest episode in this nightmare.

Americans now live in a world where unemployment is chronic; the economic recovery has stalled; the deficit is out of control; entitlement programs they counted on must be cut; home values are declining; banking giants have failed; the health system is about to be transformed; the country’s AAA rating is in jeopardy, and the threat of terrorism is ever-present.

The view internationally is not a bit more comforting.

Violent, drug-fueled anarchy rages across the border in Mexico; European allies stumble toward bankruptcy; Iran develops nuclear weapons largely unhindered; Kim Jong-Il attacks South Korea with impunity; the Arab world is in a state of upheaval; the Israeli-Palestinian conflict prevails intractably, while Israel’s enemies arm themselves with missiles and seek nuclear weapons; the North Atlantic Treaty Organization can’t even eradicate a nuisance like Muammar Qadhafi; China threatens to surpass us economically and challenge us militarily, and it’s not even clear after Obama’s “Afghan surge” if we’re winning against the Taliban.

The roster of crucial, even existential domestic and international concerns is unthinkably long and varied.

And the effect on the nation’s morale is clear. Ronald Reagan was reelected on the pitch that it was “morning in America.” Obama begins his reelection campaign as the country stares into a moonless night.

July 30, 2011 8:19 AM  
Anonymous Aunt Bea said...

The debt ceiling scare is but the latest episode in this nightmare.

And that scare was brought about completely by those who refuse to do what is needed -- raise the debt limit. Who is refusing to raise the debt limit -- the fringe wing of the GOP, the tea baggers, that's who.

"Ronald Reagan was reelected on the pitch that it was “morning in America." "

And why could he do that? Let's see, for most of Reagan's term in office, the top tax bracket was 50%. And during the recession Reagan faced, he had a Congress that voted 17 times to raise the debt limit so he could have the funds needed to create "morning in America."

The reason America is facing a moonless night now is because the GOTP refuses to raise the debt limit without draconian cuts on funding for students, the poor, the infirm and the elderly. The GOTP is forcing us to choose to either default on our debts or defund programs that serve those in need. What's next on their agenda, the repeal of child labor laws?

boy o boy

that Robert and Bea sure seem like a couple of stupid dolts


How obsessed are you? Did you add Robert and me to your prayers too last night or did you only insult us here before you crawled off to sleep?

July 30, 2011 9:47 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"And that scare was brought about completely by those who refuse to do what is needed -- raise the debt limit. Who is refusing to raise the debt limit -- the fringe wing of the GOP, the tea baggers, that's who."

actually, the scare is from one Barack Obama, a fellow who applied for a job he wasn't qualified for, who has repeatedly said he would stop paying our debts if he isn't allowed to borrow more money to fund his excessive spending

he has sufficient funds to make payments on our debts even if he is not granted more credit

"And why could he do that? Let's see, for most of Reagan's term in office, the top tax bracket was 50%. And during the recession Reagan faced, he had a Congress that voted 17 times to raise the debt limit so he could have the funds needed to create "morning in America.""

that was 17 times because the extensions were short-term in each case

Obama has threaten a veto if he is not given a long-term extension

another dubious scare tactic by our irresponsible "leader"

"The reason America is facing a moonless night now is because the GOTP refuses to raise the debt limit without draconian cuts on funding for students, the poor, the infirm and the elderly. The GOTP is forcing us to choose to either default on our debts or defund programs that serve those in need."

look another redefinition: any cuts are the equivalent of "defunding"

overall governmental spending is up 24% since Obama became President

to scale back our spending to pre-Obama levels is neither draconian or properly called defunding

Boehner's "draconian" actually includes for increases in student aid and doesn't cut Social Security or Medicare

"How obsessed are you? Did you add Robert and me to your prayers too last night or did you only insult us here before you crawled off to sleep?"

I just love to make hyperbolic types mad

it's entertaining

July 30, 2011 10:31 AM  
Anonymous Aunt Bea said...

So you didn't add Robert or me to your prayers. Instead you hoped you angered us.

Well, I can't speak for Robert, but nope, your insults don't anger me and your lies only motivate me to correct them.

"Obama....who has repeatedly said he would stop paying our debts if he isn't allowed to borrow more money to fund his excessive spending"

Show us a quote from a reputable news source with Obama quoted as saying he "would stop paying our debts if [AMERICA] isn't allowed to borrow more money" to prove this isn't a lie you just made up. You won't find it because he didn't say it. You made it up.

Anon repeats the tired old Karl Rove half lie "overall governmental spending is up 24% since Obama became President"

Here's how Rove put it:

The Obama administration "raised discretionary spending by 24 percent from President George W. Bush's last full-year budget and will run up more debt by October than Bush did in eight years."
Karl Rove on Sunday, January 10th, 2010 in the Washington Post


Politifact.com reported last year:

"...debt rose by $2.5 trillion during the Bush years from 2001 through 2008; and it is expected to rise $3 trillion in the two years under Obama. But Rove's equation assumes Obama is responsible for all of the debt accumulated in 2009 and 2010. And that's where things get messy.

...Our biggest problem with Rove's statement is that he credits all of the debt accumulated in 2009 and 2010 to Obama, and even conservative budget analysts agree that it's fair to assign at least some of the 2009 increase to Bush. And so we rate Rove's comment Half True."


Which of course means it's Half False.

July 30, 2011 11:35 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home