Republicans Are Not Serious About the Deficit

News outlets are noting that budget negotiators are "inches away" from a deal to avert a government shutdown, but that the one item holding a full deal back is the Republican's policy rider for fully de-funding Planned Parenthood, under the auspices that no tax dollars should go to fund abortions.

Unfortunately, there's just one small hitch. It is already federal law that no federal dollars go to funding abortion services; it's called the Hyde Amendment. And in fact abortion services makeup only 2% 3% of the services Planned Parenthood provides. So what does Planned Parenthood do, you ask? They largely provide basic health services for low-income women. Things such as mammograms and standard GBYN health exams and drum roll please...birth control! Perish the thought!

Most economists have called the funding of Planned Parenthood a deficit reducer. Why?

What do you think costs more? The $10-15 subsidy a month so a low income young woman can buy birth control? OR... The cost of the Child Income Tax Credit for 18 years? Let's also assume that this young woman is a single mother who has to stay home from high school and will probably never end up paying a tax dollar in her life. Hmmmmm... I wonder.

Methinks the birth control pills are cheaper for the government to help pay for.

Now, you might say maybe teens shouldn't be having sex at all! But your problem is not with Planned Parenthood, but with the man upstairs. It is His PERFECT design (right?) to make teens hornballs with larger and more active amygdalas and less active frontal lobes during this crucial timeframe. Too bad he designed humans so poorly to have intercourse when they were most fertile and physically healthy.

So Republicans, take the deal. We can argue (again) about abortion in 2012. And if you're serious about reducing the deficit, buy the damn birth control. Isn't having fewer poor people walking around the U.S. your favorite thing ever, anyway?

Venting about the response to Rep. Paul Ryan's 2012 Budget Roadmap

All over the blogosphere, the reviews of Rep. Paul Ryan's (R-WI) 2012 "Path to Prosperity" are in and they are summarized as follows. "Some things are good, some things are bad, but let's give Paul Ryan applause for being so brave about forwarding tough solutions to tough problems vis-a-vis entitlement reform." Fareed Zakaria's recent column is a perfect example.

Below is what I wrote to Andrew Sullivan's blog (now at The Daily Beast/Newsweek) venting about this blather:

"I'm sorry but liberals came up with various serious proposals for healthcare. Yes, many of those plans either were rejected or dumbed down by the political process, but I don't remember many conservative thinkers (other than yourself) giving the liberals much credit for "policy bravery."

Hmmmm...if I seem to remember correctly, Republicans uniformly tried to negate an adult conversation about a serious policy topic by alleging that Democrats just wanted to "pull the plug on Grandma." Even though finding more honest ways to talk about end of life planning is the most philosophically "conservative" and cost-cutting policy in the bill. Being adult enough to confront one's own death and weigh the costs of useless treatment in the last few months is probably the bravest we'll have to be in our lives.

But I forgot, the Dems just wanted to kill Grandma.

Ryan isn't going to get any applause from me for being a f***ing ADULT legislator willing to seriously talk about the problems we face. Welcome to the intellectual honesty club. I'm glad someone from that party has joined."

For Becs...

"That's all I'm asking for...one night with your Mother on Mother's Day"

The Obam-"duh" Doctrine, Ctd...

All the way back in December of 2009, President Obama received the Nobel Peace prize and I noted that conservatives were stunned that the President would advocate for the use of force in defense of this country and in limited times when the humanitarian call for action was too great. And I said way back then, that this was unveiling of the Obama doctrine. And I was right.

President Obama proved last night that he's a man of his word. He does not oppose the use of military force but he understands that military force alone cannot, and we as a country cannot, force political change. We can create conditions where mass violence is minimized, but we cannot through our military might form a brand new government for a country out of whole cloth. And for god sakes, we don't need to save the whole world by ourselves! It's OK to ask friends for some help. One of my favorite quotes during the 2004 Presidential campaign, John Kerry mused regarding Iraq, "Mr. President, it's not leadership if no one is following."

Some conservatives and liberals argue that by imposing the "no-fly zone" implicitly calls for regime change. I disagree. We are not taking part in a civil war. We are merely making it a fair fight. We have removed Gaddaffi's ability to attack from the air (which is imprecise and kills more civilians) and limited his ability to use mass artillery.  The Obama Doctrine is essentially limited strategic force with a cooperative massive effort on the diplomatic end to ensure foreign policy goals. Last night, the President essentially said "Gaddaffi must go, but we don't have to kill him for that to happen." After the sobering lesson of Iraq, we've learned that the U.S. Armed Forces are really good at blowing stuff up. They are not good at making a government for a foreign country.

Meanwhile, France and the U.K. are taking the reins, because this is in their backyard and the conflict is a more vital interest to them. We are also supplying our high tech know-how with radar jamming and other advanced rescue capability.

I think it's a pretty sensible policy. We will stop mass murder where and when we can. We are in the business of stopping things from happening not making things happening. The military is responsible for destructive capability and constructive capability will be the purview of our state department and diplomatic efforts in the region, which by definition, includes partners willing to help and help pay for those shared goals.

The era of the superpower died in 1990 and really died on September 11, 2001. With actual threats that are so defuse and varied, no one nation will be able to fight it all by itself. The new era requires cooperation with friends and allies, which happens to be the best for security and fiscally. And if working with our friends is called weakness by some conservatives, than so be it. I'd rather have a stronger America that looks weak than a weak America that pretends to be strong.

It's only a war if we stay...

Although I'm a bit apprehensive about the No-Fly Zone in Libya (which I think is ultimately the right decision), I think as long as we leave the job to our NATO allies Britain and France I'm fine with it.

That's the benefit of having a strong Europe. It means that the U.S. doesn't need to police the whole world anymore. They bitched and moaned about what arrogant bullies we were in Iraq - and they were right - but now they get to take care of a mess and be responsible for cleaning it up. This new world order will allow "The Great Satan" to save some Arab and African lives (a two-fer!) and then sit on the couch for the hard part.

Just think of the economic benefit of having the U.S. Armed Forces single-handedly underwriting your entire regional security. Sorry Europe, we have our own country to rebuild.

Go U Northwestern! Break right through that line...

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Ah, Dr. Michael Bailey's Human Sexuality class, which this li'l Ernie got an A in. Celebrating crossing the line as always.

By the way, this fight song has "you might see a sex demonstration after class" written ALL over it. Come on people, we're the WILDcats not the LAMEcats. Cue the music!

The Republican Jobs Congress

1st order of business, set up the rules. 2nd order of business, repeal healthcare bill. 3rd order of business, redefine rape?

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Rape Victim Abortion Funding
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog</a> The Daily Show on Facebook

Every time Republicans run for Congress, they promise to focus on jobs, jobs, jobs. But what they always really do is focus on culture war, culture war, culture war. Remember everyone, the REAL problem facing this country is not systemically high unemployment, it's that women who are date-raped shouldn't be able to use their pre-tax federal flexible spending account (FSA) for their abortion.