U.S. politics isolation tank

[rosco rathbone]

T

Oh, and speaking of Republicans and TARP: http://www.salon.com/news/tea_parti...htww/2010/10/26/wall_street_and_the_tea_party

That's why so much effort has been expended to pin the Crash of 08 on the Community Reinvestment Act, "predatory borrowers", ACORN, Fannie/Freddie, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, etc. It's an ideological forced move.

That's not to say that the Democrats in their Clinton/Rubin mode don't deserve a whole lot of blame.

 

[rosco rathbone]

When this debate turns into "government works for the people" (liberals) versus "get big government out of my business" (conservatives), it has gotten too simple and runs into the same repetitive rut.

The more honest and insightful conservatives, when they say "Big Government", actually mean the horrible amalgam of corporate and government interests epitomized by the regulatory capture that allowed the BP disaster to happen; or the spectacle of a former Goldman chief bailing out his buddies.

Conservatives are reluctant to criticise business. It's a tribal thing. It's related to the same psychological quirk that makes the Patriot Act under Bush a sinister violation of civil liberties, while under Obama it's something that only excites Alex Jones heads.

"It's OK, he's one of our guys".

But I actually see eye to eye with teabaggers when they insist that the game of capitalism needs to be played according to the rules.

I just don't think electing Republicans is going to get us there.

We're about to find out, anyhow.

 

[intothewoods]

When this debate turns into "government works for the people" (liberals) versus "get big government out of my business" (conservatives), it has gotten too simple and runs into the same repetitive rut.

Totally agree. Show me a functional path for getting rid of big government -- e.g., not appointing people to the EPA who believe there's no point in environmental policy since Jesus will be back any day now -- and I'm willing to listen. But I don't think I should hold my breath waiting to hear that plan.

Conservatives are reluctant to criticise business. It's a tribal thing. It's related to the same psychological quirk that makes the Patriot Act under Bush a sinister violation of civil liberties, while under Obama it's something that only excites Alex Jones heads.

"It's OK, he's one of our guys".

Yeah, or Clinton. No Patriot Act, but he wasn't so great on civil liberties.

 

[WriterDom]

This incessant Oprah-bashing must stop!


Anyone have any thoughts about NPR firing Juan Williams? ]

Yeah, he was fired the day after George Soros gave NPR 1.5 million dollars. Then the president of NPR later hinted that Juan had mental problems. She later backed off that remark.

I guess we need NPR because only three people were listening to Air America. Are they still on the air?

 

[Netzach]

But I actually see eye to eye with teabaggers when they insist that the game of capitalism needs to be played according to the rules.

I missed this, what?

 

[Netzach]

That's the Bell Curve dude.

He's a scummer.

He's absolutely just that. He was paid 2x the poverty level in 60 minutes to come to my school and explain how poor people are scum and less evolved. Now he's cashing in on them like this?

These people have - not a compass different from mine, but no compass. They are zombies.

 

[rosco rathbone]

I missed this, what?

Eh? To what are you "what"-ing?

 

[midwestyankee]

"The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president."

-- Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), in an interview with the National Journal, describing his goal in retaking the Senate.​

So glad to hear that the Republican Party actually stands for something.

 

[WriterDom]

"The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president."

-- Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), in an interview with the National Journal, describing his goal in retaking the Senate.​

So glad to hear that the Republican Party actually stands for something.

MCCONNELL: We need to be honest with the public. This election is about them, not us. And we need to treat this election as the first step in retaking the government. We need to say to everyone on Election Day, “Those of you who helped make this a good day, you need to go out and help us finish the job.”

NATIONAL JOURNAL: What’s the job?

MCCONNELL: The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.

Hell, McConnell is liberal. I want Obama impeached! Too bad we wasted one on a blow job.

 

[sb2009]

Impeached for what, exactly? PWB?

 

[WriterDom]

Impeached for what, exactly? PWB?

I was kidding. I bet 1 million blogs ran that quote and not one included the first part which was actually what he was talking about. Yes, it will be a good day if republicans win but the real prize is in 2012.

You can outlaw dodgeball in school for being to "manly" and promote soccer since more ties make everyone feel good but politics is still about winning. I'm sorry but that's just the way it is.

 

[midwestyankee]

I was kidding. I bet 1 million blogs ran that quote and not one included the first part which was actually what he was talking about. Yes, it will be a good day if republicans win but the real prize is in 2012.

You can outlaw dodgeball in school for being to "manly" and promote soccer since more ties make everyone feel good but politics is still about winning. I'm sorry but that's just the way it is.

I'm glad we got that settled. Now you can stop whining about Health Care Reform because, after all, there was a political victory and that's what politics is all about.

 

[intothewoods]

Yeah, he was fired the day after George Soros gave NPR 1.5 million dollars. Then the president of NPR later hinted that Juan had mental problems. She later backed off that remark.

I guess we need NPR because only three people were listening to Air America. Are they still on the air?

I'm 2/3 of the way through the podcast of the Diane Rehm show on NPR, where he was recently interviewed: http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2010-10-26/juan-williams

It's pretty good.

There is some type of bias everywhere, but there is no comparing NPR to Fox news in terms of political slant.

 

[intothewoods]

You'll appreciate this, WD. Well, most of it.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-october-25-2010/npr-staffing-decision-2010?xrs=share_copy

 

[DeepGreenEyes]

How will the GOP actually govern?

"[Iowa GOP Rep. Steve] King, for example, is going to push his leadership not only to work to repeal health care but also to write into each spending bill that not one dollar can be used to fund any part of the Democratic-led health bill.

“My view is that this is going to come to a head on midnight Sept. 30, 2011, when the fiscal year ends,” King said of when spending bills have to be finished, signaling that he’d push the White House to the end of its wits. “We have to be willing to go down this path.”

Governance as a political game of chicken (apologies to sb2009)...

 

[Netzach]

Eh? To what are you "what"-ing?

A teabagger ever insisting that capitalism have rules.

 

[radepor]

Stability, are you talking to me? - Stability!

What's up with the political bickering?

Can someone explain it? A simple generation or two or three ago, we had democrats that got behind a republican president or congress on important issues when it counted. We also had republicans that got behind majority democrats when the reverse was true.

We can't seem to acheive that same kind of sense of purpose. Why is that?

More importantly than why, how do we reestablish that same sense of common purpose.

(I know; we could kill those who make it their purpose/business in life to drive a wedge between us, but even they serve a purpose.)

Okay...some people don't care, have actual lives or live in places where football doesn't involve pads and helmets.

So I offer this thread as an option for channeling the collective national bickering into a BDSM Cafe spot more stable than our national politics.

 

[DeepGreenEyes]

What's up with the political bickering?

Can someone explain it? A simple generation or two or three ago, we had democrats that got behind a republican president or congress on important issues when it counted. We also had republicans that got behind majority democrats when the reverse was true.

We can't seem to acheive that same kind of sense of purpose. Why is that?

More importantly than why, how do we reestablish that same sense of common purpose.

(I know; we could kill those who make it their purpose/business in life to drive a wedge between us, but even they serve a purpose.)

That's a great question, and I don't know the answer. I do know that in the past 30 years, most of the moderates have been purged from the GOP. The positions that were acceptable compromises to Republicans in the 70s are heretical now. That leaves a chasm to cross to attain anything like common purpose.

 

[WriterDom]

That's a great question, and I don't know the answer. I do know that in the past 30 years, most of the moderates have been purged from the GOP. The positions that were acceptable compromises to Republicans in the 70s are heretical now. That leaves a chasm to cross to attain anything like common purpose.

In this election cycle that is certainly true. But only a partisan hack believes conservative democrats are welcome in ObamaLand. Welcome only in the sense that they can help take over the House. As far as listening to any ideas that went out the window with all the C-Span hearings on ObamaCare that were promised. Instead it was passed in the dead of night with the vote of a dead senator no less.

I'm not whining. I'm just looking forward to the purging of those responsible.

 

[WriterDom]

What's up with the political bickering?

.)

It's called the Internet. The same people on the GB have been bickering back and forth for three administrations. Nothing is going to change their mind. If the republicans take over congress, the right will blame anything good that happens on Congress and the left will give Obama credit. If things go worse the reverse will happen. Then in 2012, after whomever wins, it will start up again the next day.

The overall divide does seem to be deepening. Makes me wish for younger days and a brave new world to sail to. Just give me ten acres and a mule and a slightly obese wife so she'll survive the winter. A doc who will make housecalls and take a couple of chickens for payment. If I die twenty years younger than so what. We're all going to die. At least I won't be like my uncle who started shitting in the front yard when no one was looking.

 

[DeepGreenEyes]

In this election cycle that is certainly true. But only a partisan hack believes conservative democrats are welcome in ObamaLand. Welcome only in the sense that they can help take over the House. As far as listening to any ideas that went out the window with all the C-Span hearings on ObamaCare that were promised. Instead it was passed in the dead of night with the vote of a dead senator no less.

I'm not whining. I'm just looking forward to the purging of those responsible.

There is vastly more philosophical variety within the Democratic Party, and there has been for a long time. That has both helped and hurt the Dems. While I don't necessarily agree with its policy advice for Democrats, a new book argues that there's so much variety that it's kept the party from accomplishing as much as it could have. It's simply not true that conservative party legislators did not have an influence on the Affordable Care Act (or on other legislation). If they had not, the law would have turned out far differently:

"Nancy Pelosi had to cut a deal with [conservative Michigan Rep.] Bart Stupak and his friends in order to pass health-care reform, and with Collin Peterson and his friends to pass cap-and-trade."

And this.

"Beyond health care, the Blue Dogs have helped delay a climate-change bill and block legislation that would make it easier for unions to organize.

That frustrates liberals, who say the Democratic Party's victory last November, including a 256-178 majority in the House, gives it a once-in-a-generation chance to enact a liberal agenda.

"Since they can vote with the Republicans in order to get their way around here, that doesn't sit well with progressives -- who don't want to vote with Republicans ever," said Rep. Lynn Woolsey, a California Democrat and co-chair of the House Progressive Caucus."

 

[WriterDom]

There is vastly more philosophical variety within the Democratic Party, and there has been for a long time. That has both helped and hurt the Dems. While I don't necessarily agree with its policy advice for Democrats, a new book argues that there's so much variety that it's kept the party from accomplishing as much as it could have. It's simply not true that conservative party legislators did not have an influence on the Affordable Care Act (or on other legislation). If they had not, the law would have turned out far differently:

"Nancy Pelosi had to cut a deal with [conservative Michigan Rep.] Bart Stupak and his friends in order to pass health-care reform, and with Collin Peterson and his friends to pass cap-and-trade."

And this.

"Beyond health care, the Blue Dogs have helped delay a climate-change bill and block legislation that would make it easier for unions to organize.

That frustrates liberals, who say the Democratic Party's victory last November, including a 256-178 majority in the House, gives it a once-in-a-generation chance to enact a liberal agenda.

"Since they can vote with the Republicans in order to get their way around here, that doesn't sit well with progressives -- who don't want to vote with Republicans ever," said Rep. Lynn Woolsey, a California Democrat and co-chair of the House Progressive Caucus."

Well, yeah, the country is just not that far left for true progressives to get what they want. That's how they took back the house to begin with. With Jesus loving, abortion hating, anti gay marriage gun carrying blue dogs. It's looking more and more like 60 to 80 democrat seats evaporating so I don't know if they'll be enough blue dogs left to even be a factor. And I'm not sure how the survivors will be welcomed. Voting with republicans when they are in the minority is just quaint and charming. Voting with a majority of republicans isn't going to sit well with the democratic faithful.

Now I could be wrong but when Barney is taking out loans things aren't looking too well for democrats.

 

[midwestyankee]

<snip>

Now I could be wrong but when Barney is taking out loans things aren't looking too well for democrats.

WD, this is at least the second time in the last couple of days that you have mentioned a congressman from Massachusetts in a particularly snarky way. Do you have something against Barney Frank besides his politics? You see, there are over 250 other Democratic congressmen in the House presently, and yet you rarely ever mention any others. What's the deal?

 

[WriterDom]

WD, this is at least the second time in the last couple of days that you have mentioned a congressman from Massachusetts in a particularly snarky way. Do you have something against Barney Frank besides his politics? You see, there are over 250 other Democratic congressmen in the House presently, and yet you rarely ever mention any others. What's the deal?

Barney makes headlines. I'm sure he isn't the only democrat worried in a blue state. Ask the press why? I'm not picking on him because he's gay if that's what you think.

 

[midwestyankee]

Barney makes headlines. I'm sure he isn't the only democrat worried in a blue state. Ask the press why? I'm not picking on him because he's gay if that's what you think.

I was just curious and no, I didn't think that you were singling him out for being gay, though some of your posts in the past have focused on that aspect. I ask mostly because he has had very little influence in recent months and yet you keep on hammering him as being one of the key sources of what you see as the destruction of all that is good in America.