Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

The Morning Plum

* Striking new numbers out of Nevada: Harry Reid has suddenly opened up a seven point lead over Sharron Angle in a new Las Vegas Review Journal poll, Reid leads 44-37, though the race is still volatile, with 10 percent undecided and five going for neither.

This suggests that Reid's scorched earth strategy of dropping a ton of negative advertising on Angle -- in order to rapidly define her as extreme, dangerous and temperamentally unfit for the Senate before her campaign gets underway -- may be working.

* The Dem message: Yes, this fall's election will be a choice. The DNC is out with a new talking points memo arguing that predictions of a "wave" for Republicans are a misreading of history and the current landscape.

Cliff notes version: Obama is more popular than Clinton was in 1994; the GOP has not capitalized on Dem travails to repair its brand; and Dems are persuading voters to see this fall's contests as a choice between two governing philosophies.

* Today in Senate megalomania: Ben Nelson says he will oppose letting his fellow Democrats debate energy reform if there's any form of carbon pricing in the bill, even on utilities only.

* Sleeper to keep an eye on: A new ABC News poll finds that support for the Afghanistan war is at a new low, 43 percent, and approval of his handling of it has declined sharply, to 45 percent.

* Fun read: Charles Krauthammer cautions Republicans against getting too smug, says Obama is hell-bent on undoing Reaganism and may well succeed. The man sounds genuinely frightened!

* But when you look at what Obama is actually doing, it doesn't seem that scary: Check out the Post's extremely useful visual guide to what Wall Street reform accomplishes.

* And another useful guide to what repeal of FinReg would mean.

* The left gears up for another epic fight on Social Security.

* Jason Linkins skewers VandeHarris's attack on the liberal blogosphere: "Three years in, and Politico still doesn't have the slightest idea what pundit-bloggers on the left actually do!" Apparently not!

* Alan Greenspan says lawmakers should let the Bush tax cuts lapse.

* But will this carry anywhere near the same weight with lawmakers as his original endorsement of them?

* Headline of the day, from Jon Chait, recapping Obama's day yesterday passing FinReg and temporarily halting the Gulf spill:

Another Day In The Life Of Failed President Carterbama

* In all seriousness, as Chait notes, Obama didn't directly halt the spill, but wasn't everybody saying a few weeks ago that the continued gushing threatened to drown his entire presidency?

* No end to the grievance: Anonymous Sarah Palin aide runs to the lamestream media to complain that the lamestream media is letting her enemies trash Palin anonymously.

* And this captures Palin's unique political situation perfectly: Gallup finds that her favorable ratings among Republicans are higher than any other 2012 GOP hopeful -- while her unfavorable ratings among all Americans are also significantly higher than those of her rivals.

What else is happening?

By Greg Sargent  |  July 16, 2010; 8:27 AM ET
Categories:  2010 elections , 2012 , Climate change , Financial reform , Foreign policy and national security , Morning Plum , Senate Dems , Senate Republicans  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Happy Hour Roundup
Next: Only Republicans like Sarah Palin

Comments

What else is happening?

Yesterday the House Committee on Natural Resources passed a bill reorganizing MMS. Before the final vote Rep. Cassidy (R-LA) sponsored an amendment to overturn the drilling moratorium. The amendment failed 26-22. However, 2 Democrats actually voted for the amendment: Natural Resources Committee Chair Nick Rahall of West Virginia and Jim Costa of California.

http://thehayride.com/2010/07/cassidy-amendment-to-kill-obamoratorium-defeated-in-committee/

Rahall is the Committee Chair. Costa is the Energy and Mineral Resources Subcommittee Chair.

http://resourcescommittee.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=96&Itemid=27

In other words, the Democratic Committee Chair and the Democratic Subcommittee Chair BOTH voted to strip the Democratic President of the power to declare the deepwater drilling moratorium.

Will there be any consequences for this effrontery?

I urge all of Rahall's and Costa's constituents to telephone their offices and voice your displeasure (if you are in fact displeased). Rahall (D-Big Coal) may be hopeless but why in the world is he the committee chair? Costa's district includes Fresno and Bakersfield, so let him know how you feel.

I also ask Democratic leadership why such people are in positions of power?

Posted by: wbgonne | July 16, 2010 8:41 AM | Report abuse

wbgonne: Of course there won't be any consequences. These are Democrats we're talking about. Amazing.

Posted by: Greg Sargent | July 16, 2010 8:43 AM | Report abuse

Same for Ben Nelson. Where is the party discipline?

Posted by: wbgonne | July 16, 2010 8:45 AM | Report abuse

"Alan Greenspan says lawmakers should let the Bush tax cuts lapse.
But will this carry anywhere near the same weight with lawmakers as his original endorsement of them?"

I assume that is a rhetorical question, Greg, because the answer is so obviously no. But that really raises a much more significant point. Here we are trillions in debt and the entire country apparently obsessed about it but we are "debating" whether to let the richest Americans continue to evade their share of taxes. Not only should the Bush tax cuts expire; the marginal tax rates on the wealthiest should be raised dramatically to balance the budget. I would LOVe to see some figures demonstrating how high the rate would have to be on the highest earners to wrestle the debt into control. Now THAT is a discussion worth having. The SuperRich stole our money through Wall Street; now make them pay it back in taxes.

Posted by: wbgonne | July 16, 2010 8:51 AM | Report abuse

"support for the Afghanistan war is at a new low"

As a consequence, I suspect, of the duration of this war, the cost of it in this period of economic travail, but also the absence of an administration doing the "War is Wonderful!" rah rah propaganda.

Posted by: bernielatham | July 16, 2010 9:03 AM | Report abuse

And returning to Nelson's opposition to carbon pricing: that effectively destroys any real reform. The only way to reform energy consumption legislatively is to include ancillary costs such as pollution and climate change in carbon pricing. If Nelson's obstructionism stands -- and based on immediate history it undoubtedly will -- the only way around it is for the EPA to price carbon administratively. I'm not sure how, exactly, but it must be done. Otherwise we will remain fully committed to hydrocarbons. I suppose at this point it's probably more politically viable to use the EPA.

Here's what I propose:

1. EPA immediately promulgates regulations making hydrocarbons reflect ALL their real costs;

2. That same night Obama goes on national TV with a broad plan to reform energy consumption.

3. Instead of skulking he proudly cites EPA's action as an essential building block for reform.

4. Obama announces proposals to curtail the insane subsidies given to oil and gas companies. This will not only help hydrocarbons reflect their true costs, it will also help the deficit.

5. Obama uses the Gulf Oil Disaster to buttress his plan. He also takes time to explain why the moratorium is necessary (just like MMS Director Bromwich did at the National Commission hearing) and that the moratorium on new deepwater drilling will continue unless and until the oil industry proves it can drill safely and that it has the capacity to respond effectively to a blowout.

6. Obama thank wbgonne for the excellent advice.

Posted by: wbgonne | July 16, 2010 9:12 AM | Report abuse

Krauthammer's column is rather fun, isn't it? Of course, he's quite right to be worried - there are, after all, two competing notions of how governance ought to be done in the nation and Krauthammer's preference has a strong past and a very dubious future.

I noted this bit: "the Democrats will pay the price for ideological overreaching"

That's a talking point, of course, though likely Krauthammer's perception of things as well. But one might be confident in asserting that Reagan's similar poll ratings at this point would somehow not be seen by Charles as a consequence of "ideological overreach."

Posted by: bernielatham | July 16, 2010 9:13 AM | Report abuse

Bernie: As Greg noted yesterday, a bad economy is the undoing of nearly any president. The only thing that comes close is a bad war. Obama is now facing a double whammy.

Posted by: wbgonne | July 16, 2010 9:14 AM | Report abuse

Re: Angle
Bwahahahahaha! Thank goodness the people of NV seem to be realizing what a mindless whackjob that woman is.

Re: Support for Afghan War
Not surprising, if not a little late. As long as there is a withdrawl date, and we are working towards it, I don't forsee Pres. Obama taking a political beating from this.

Re: Chait's Headline
LOL! It's so true. Everything is "this" close to destroying his Presidency. When he accomplishes something, nothing to see here. The parrallels between Pres. Obama and Jackie Robinson continue to mount - unbelieveable expectations mixed with vitriol and hate...but just keeps playing, and winning.

Posted by: TheBBQChickenMadness | July 16, 2010 9:18 AM | Report abuse

"Three years in, and Politico still doesn't have the slightest idea what pundit-bloggers on the left actually do!"

This is only surprising if one imagined that VandeHarris (wonderful wordplay, by the way) had a fundamental goal of increasing their understanding of the world about them rather than the fundamental goal of learning enough to gain money and insider status.

Posted by: bernielatham | July 16, 2010 9:20 AM | Report abuse

What else?

The Iranian chickens are coming home to roost.

"Twin Suicide Bombings Kill 22 in Southeast Iran"

http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/Explosions-Outside-Mosque-in-Southeastern-Iran-98530969.html

Posted by: wbgonne | July 16, 2010 9:26 AM | Report abuse

Further to my unwelcome presidential advice: It seems that the economy generally and unemployment particularly are the primary concerns right now. Therefore, everything Obama and the Dems do from now until November should be case in terms of increasing employment. A concerted effort in fostering Green Technology can fold nicely into the frame. For instance, as to to the moratorium, Obama should couple the explanation with announcements concerning investments in Louisiana in wind and water power. Of course, this will set off the usual ranting from the GOP about socialism but Obama must tune that out -- or better yet take it on directly -- and focus on the goal.

Posted by: wbgonne | July 16, 2010 9:34 AM | Report abuse

O&O.

Posted by: wbgonne | July 16, 2010 9:36 AM | Report abuse

From the Palin piece linked by Greg...

"A “Romney intimate” was quoted by Time’s Mark Halperin in a Thursday column as saying that Palin could not withstand the rigors of a presidential campaign.

“If she’s standing up there in a debate and the answers are more than 15 seconds long, she’s in trouble,” the Romney intimate said.

An additional Romney “adviser” was quoted as saying the former Massachusetts governor’s team is not intimidated by a possible Palin run. “She’s not a serious human being,” the adviser said."

One can just sense the depth of the Terror! in this Romney aide's voice.

Tomasky recently recommended that liberals refrain from wishing that Palin runs for the WH (unstated reason - you might just end up getting much more of this good thing than you want). I can empathize with Tomasky's sentiment here. But I guess I've just come to the fatalistic conclusion that if she were to run, then to actually gain the nomination, and then to actually win the race...well, then we'd all be well over the edge and into a sort of downside up world so weird and irretrievable that I wouldn't have to worry about politics any longer. It wouldn't be Lincoln and King and Jefferson any longer but something more like BladeRunner Meets Barbie.

Posted by: bernielatham | July 16, 2010 9:40 AM | Report abuse

wbgonne, I love all your ideas and wish we knew who reads these comments other than Greg. I know Greg's comments get read, but what about ours? And here's a rare piece by one of my favorite political junkies, Chris Hayes. He's comparing the deficit fetish to the lead up to the Iraq War. I predicted a long time ago that this deficit commission was Obama's biggest mistake, and I still think I'm right.

"Remember that the Iraq War might have been prevented had more Congressional Democrats stood up to oppose it. Instead, many of those who privately knew the entire enterprise was a colossal disaster in the making buckled to right-wing pressure and pundit hawks and voted for it. That mistake is being repeated. Despite White House economists' full realization of the need for stimulus in the face of astronomically high unemployment, the New York Times has reported that the political minds inside the White House, David Axelrod and Rahm Emanuel, have decided that the public has no appetite for increased spending. "It's my job to report what the public mood is," Axelrod explained. He then showed up on ABC's This Week to wave the white flag, saying that the president would continue to press to extend unemployment benefits; conspicuously omitted was any mention of aid to state governments, which had originally been included in the president's June letter to Congress asking for a new stimulus package.

There is hope, however: the public is nowhere near as obsessed with the deficit as are those in Washington. According to a USA Today/Gallup poll, 60 percent of Americans support "additional government spending to create jobs and stimulate the economy," with 38 percent opposed. A Hart Research Associates poll published in June showed that two-thirds of Americans favor continuing unemployment benefits. There is also very little public appetite for "entitlement reform," a k a cutting Social Security.

The lesson of the Iraq War is that over the long haul, good politics and good policy can't be separated. If the White House is tempted to support bad policy in the short term because it seems less risky politically, it should give John Kerry a call and ask him how that worked out for him with Iraq."

http://www.thenation.com/article/37534/deficits-mass-destruction

Posted by: lmsinca | July 16, 2010 9:41 AM | Report abuse

This is local, but I am enjoying it anyway.

Apparently, a "Tea Party" has submitted enough signatures to get candidates on the ballot in Michigan this November. But the supposed "real" Tea Party is claiming this group to be a fraud. HA HA

Here's hoping much confusion ensues.

http://www.freep.com/article/20100714/NEWS15/100714059/Group-files-to-put-Tea-Party-on-Michigan-ballot

Posted by: suekzoo1 | July 16, 2010 9:42 AM | Report abuse

Time for Boehner to start measuring the drapes!

Pop the corks boys n girls! There's a new slightly orange like colored Speaker in town.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | July 16, 2010 9:49 AM | Report abuse

wb: I'd agree that most of that (not sure about #6 in 9:12) is good advice.

Also, I appreciate the change in tone when you mention Obama.

Posted by: converse | July 16, 2010 9:52 AM | Report abuse

WBgonne, another good catch. Thanks.

One of the challenges is that Senators and Congressmen try to get assigned to committees that impact their districts. So you have Blanche Lincoln working to keep Ag subsidies and Susan Collins working to make sure we get ships built at Bath Iron Works and Portsmouth Naval Shipyard. And Nick Rahall doesn't want to upset the coal cart.

Yes, they should be more informed about issues that affect their constituents, but there's an inherent conflict of interest and a fast track to pork.

Posted by: KathleenHusseininMaine | July 16, 2010 9:52 AM | Report abuse

Krugman had another good piece yesterday pointing out the obvious but putting it in words we can all understand. We simply cannot give the GOP the keys to Congress or the WH.

"Republicans are feeling good about the midterms — so good that they’ve started saying what they really think. This week the party’s Senate leadership stopped pretending that it cares about deficits, stating explicitly that while we can’t afford to aid the unemployed or prevent mass layoffs of schoolteachers, cost is literally no object when it comes to tax cuts for the affluent.

Of course, flirting with crisis is arguably part of the plan. There has always been a sense in which voodoo economics was a cover story for the real doctrine, which was “starve the beast”: slash revenue with tax cuts, then demand spending cuts to close the resulting budget gap. The point is that starve the beast basically amounts to deliberately creating a fiscal crisis, in the belief that the crisis can be used to push through unpopular policies, like dismantling Social Security.

Anyway, we really should thank Senators Kyl and McConnell for their sudden outbursts of candor. They’ve now made it clear, in case anyone had doubts, that their previous posturing on the deficit was entirely hypocritical. If they really do have the kind of electoral win they’re expecting, they won’t try to reduce the deficit — they’ll try to make it explode by demanding even more budget-busting tax cuts."

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/16/opinion/16krugman.html?_r=2&ref=opinion

Posted by: lmsinca | July 16, 2010 10:00 AM | Report abuse

Benen follows up on Ethan's catch on Feehery from yesterday:

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_07/024753.php

Summary: "Republicans aren't just treating the public like fools, they're counting on the public to be dupes. When an entire political party takes on the role of a con man, on purpose, because it sees the electorate as a bunch of suckers, it's really not healthy for the political system."

Posted by: BGinCHI | July 16, 2010 10:22 AM | Report abuse

President Obama addresses developments in the BP Gulf of Mexico oil spill. 5 minute video at the top of the site as Breaking News:

http://www.nola.com/

Fact is, Americans don't deserve a president this good.


Posted by: wbgonne | July 16, 2010 10:23 AM | Report abuse

"The parrallels between Pres. Obama and Jackie Robinson continue to mount - unbelieveable expectations mixed with vitriol and hate...but just keeps playing, and winning"

That's the first I've heard that one. It really is pretty apt.

"the only way around it is for the EPA to price carbon administratively. I'm not sure how, exactly, but it must be done. Otherwise we will remain fully committed to hydrocarbons"

WB, in the grand scheme of things (i.e. long term) you're right. But any transition off carbon will take place over decades. In the meantime, there are a million things that can be done to minimize our use of petroleum. I'm not going to list them because I'm sure by now most of us realize the types of energy conservation concepts that are out there. All of these are supported by the President and that does not get nearly enough attention.

One related issue that I haven't seen much discussion of here nor other blogs is the PACE program's feud with Fannie/Freddie.

PACE (Property Assessed Clean Energy) is a financing program where homeowners retrofit their homes with renewable energy devices without the big upfront cost. It's a brilliant concept (actually, it's pretty similar to the idea of a home mortgage) and the idea is taking off like wildfire. But, unfortunately, up steps Fannie/Freddie to quash that program by suggesting in a letter from the Federal Housing Finance Agency that the program adds risk and must be stopped.

Now, faced with literally dozens (hundreds?) of communities where the program is strongly supported, states and municipalities are protesting. The state of California just sued F/F for halting the program.

It's flying under the radar but it is a HUGE story in many parts of the country.

Here is some of the context in an article in the Sac Bee:

"""PACE can play a key role in solving several of the most pressing problems facing our nation: unemployment, high energy costs and greenhouse gas emissions. Last December, Scientific American called PACE one of the top 20 ways to change the world. Both Congress and the Obama administration have been major supporters of PACE, and the Department of Energy recently allocated more than $150 million in federal stimulus dollars to help establish PACE programs across the country.

Having been at the center of the recent mortgage crisis, it is understandable that Fannie and Freddie are sensitive to innovations involving the mortgage industry. But in putting the brakes on PACE, they are seeking to fix a problem that doesn't exist – and are overstepping their authority in the process."""

http://www.sacbee.com/2010/07/16/2893861/fannie-and-freddie-put-brakes.html

Well worth keeping an eye on that one, folks.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | July 16, 2010 10:25 AM | Report abuse

Will someone in Dem leadership somewhere please put their foot up Ben Nelson's ass?

Posted by: BGinCHI | July 16, 2010 10:25 AM | Report abuse

Great posts this morning, wbgonne.

I like your retirement style, and glad you're in a better mood today.

Posted by: BGinCHI | July 16, 2010 10:27 AM | Report abuse

Zbigniew Brzezinski was on Morning Joe this a.m., and he was really insightful about something Greg has been touching on--the role of government. But in this case he went bigger to talk about Obama's need to articulate an organizing principle for America. This is the vid, starts at about the 7:45 mark. If you're interested.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036789/#38275937

Posted by: KathleenHusseininMaine | July 16, 2010 10:30 AM | Report abuse

"This suggests that Reid's scorched earth strategy of dropping a ton of negative advertising on Angle -- in order to rapidly define her as extreme, dangerous and temperamentally unfit for the Senate before her campaign gets underway -- may be working."
---------------------------------------------

"Scorched earth?" Wow. You *really* don't like that guy, do you? Are you sure he's not "urinating" on her?

But sure, as the incumbent in the race and the better known figure, Reid has a window of opportunity to help define his opponent to some extent and he'd be an idiot not to take it. And as intent as Angle seems to be on beating herself, Reid would be still well-advised to treat this as a real race with a serious adversary. I'm sure I don't need to remind anyone that as recently as a month or two ago, people were falling all over themselves to be the first to write his political obit. I wouldn't swear he's completely out of the woods just yet any more than I was buying the obit's before.

But with all that said, Sharron Angle really doesn't need Harry Reid to paint her as an extremist. She seems to have been doing a pretty fine job of that all on her own for years. All Reid has to do is tell the truth on her.

Posted by: CalD | July 16, 2010 10:32 AM | Report abuse

BG, thanks for the Benen link. As I said yesterday, it's not news that they want to fool Americans. It's news imho that they ADMIT that they will be, as Benen perfectly characterizes, exploiting public confusion. Stunning admission, imho, and I bet Feehery is wishing he didn't state it in such undeniable terms.

We'll see if this story or something like it gathers momentum. It might or might not because, again as Benen suggests, "it's really not healthy for the political system," but then again the GOP does a LOT of things that are not healthy for the political system.

But it is another tool in the Dem toolkit that they have admitted, in no uncertain terms, that they are attempting to take advantage of the "opportunity" of public confusion. To me there is literally NOTHING more irresponsible, or CORRUPT really, than using a position of authority to deceive the American public. Shame on the GOP! And I certainly hope the Dems grab on to this story and don't let go.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | July 16, 2010 10:34 AM | Report abuse

Aaron Shook was also on Morning Joe, whining that changing the rules makes business reluctant to invest. Too risky. So everything should stay status quo. Please.

I can't believe how chickens..t some people are, and here the Republicans are playing to the fear, saying Obama is ruining the country. He's trying to bail us out and they want us to keep taking on water.

Meantime, Lloyd Blankfein (can't stand him, but credit where due) sees the handwriting on the wall and bite the bullet. Settling with the SEC is redounding to Goldman's advantage. Goldman Sachs are risk warriors, granted, but take note, sheeple.

Posted by: KathleenHusseininMaine | July 16, 2010 10:41 AM | Report abuse

"Jason Linkins skewers VandeHarris's attack on the liberal blogosphere: "Three years in, and Politico still doesn't have the slightest idea what pundit-bloggers on the left actually do!" Apparently not!"
---------------------------------------------

Methinks thou doth protest too much. ;-)

Anyway, if you're *still* linking to a Politico article on day two it's exactly what they were hoping you'd do and it's no one's fault but your own.

Posted by: CalD | July 16, 2010 10:45 AM | Report abuse

well it is the same old, same old from the liberals here. Tax, borrow, spend, regulate. Somehow that is supposed to make America better.

Funny how it just never seems to work out.

and congrats to Obama on the oil well plug. All that golf clearly paid off. And of course an honorable mention to Salazar who proved that lying is just what liberals do.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | July 16, 2010 10:46 AM | Report abuse

"And another useful guide to what repeal of FinReg would mean."

Wall Street Reform
Wall Street Reform
Wall Street Reform
Wall Street Reform
Wall Street Reform
Wall Street Reform
Wall Street Reform
Wall Street Reform
Wall Street Reform

Posted by: CalD | July 16, 2010 10:49 AM | Report abuse

Right skip, same old facts and reasoned arguments here.

Back to Palin's Facebook page, where you won't get a headache.

Posted by: BGinCHI | July 16, 2010 10:49 AM | Report abuse

"Tax, borrow, spend, regulate. Somehow that is supposed to make America better."

It's worked since the passage of our Constitution in the 18th Century. It's called governing. You may disagree with the AMOUNT of taxation, etc... But what you are implying in your comment, Skippy, is that you disagree with the Founders and you want a totally different system of government participation in the economy than what we have had since then. That type of extremist view is so far outside the mainstream of American thought that it's pretty amazing that you continue to post such comments without being embarrassed at how insane they sound.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | July 16, 2010 10:59 AM | Report abuse

"Manchin To Appoint Former General Counsel Carte Goodwin To Byrd Senate Seat"

Share 0
tweets
retweet0
diggs
digg

West Virginia Governor Joe Manchin with the late Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV)
Read More
2010 elections, Carte Goodwin, Joe Manchin, Robert Byrd, Senate '10, WV-SEN
Share
Send to a friend!To email: Your Name: Your email:

The Associated Press reports that West Virginia Gov. Joe Manchin (D) will appoint his former general counsel Carte Goodwin as an interim Senator, for the seat formerly held by the late Democratic Sen. Robert Byrd.

Manchin's official announcement of the appointment will be made at 2 p.m. ET today.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/07/report-manchin-to-name-former-general-counsel-carte-goodwin-to-byrd-senate-seat.php?ref=fpa

Posted by: suekzoo1 | July 16, 2010 11:06 AM | Report abuse

It appears that Halperin is afraid Palin won't run, and keeps posting about her to give her a reason to run. Yesterday it was the ignore the polls piece, now it is letting Romney aides trash her (albeit with the truth). I still maintain she won't announce, but will instead sit on the soundlines and wait to be asked, after almost all the primary debates are over.

Posted by: oldabandonedbeachhouse | July 16, 2010 11:07 AM | Report abuse

All, I fleshed out the argument about Sarah Palin:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/07/only_republicans_like_sarah_pa.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | July 16, 2010 11:14 AM | Report abuse

@ss28:Tax, borrow, spend, regulate. Somehow that is supposed to make America better.

Funny how it just never seems to work out.

BTW. It did work out pretty well from the end of WWII to the Reagan administration which raised taxes on the middle class (through social security "reform"), while slashing taxes on the top 5%. Not perfect, and in need of some tweaks, but I would take that run over the Raygun and Bush the younger any day.

Compared to what? At least taxes have the potential of actually paying for what you spend. What is the alternative? Well we saw it from 200-2008. Cut taxes on the wealthy and corporations, deregulate industry so that they operate with almost no oversight, explode the deficit, start foreign wars or choice through deceitful reasoning and thoroughly screw up the effort, pander to the christianist taliban to control women's bodies.

I choose the former.

And labeling Salazar a liberal competes for the most foolish thing you have said this morning. Talk about DINOS. One of Obama's best moves was to get this rube out of the senate. I just wish he as appointed as ambassador to Paraguay and not the head of interior.

Posted by: srw3 | July 16, 2010 11:17 AM | Report abuse

There is waaaaay too much Sarah Palin in this blog as of late. Dont caare

Posted by: adammc123 | July 16, 2010 12:35 PM | Report abuse

Interesting update on the PACE program I mentioned earlier in this thread:

* House Democrats introduce bill to defend PACE clean-energy program *

Thirty House Democrats signed on to a new bill on Thursday that would save Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) programs, which have been under attack from mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. PACE is a finance tool that helps homeowners afford energy-efficiency retrofits and renewable-energy installations.

The PACE Assessment Protection Act of 2010 would force the government-sponsored corporations to adopt standards that support PACE, based on Department of Energy guidelines.

Yet the bill's author, Rep. Mike Thompson of northern California, hopes the legislation persuades Fannie and Freddie to accept a compromise before it's signed into law.

http://www.grist.org/article/2010-07-15-democrats-introduce-pace-bill-to-defend-clean-energy-program/

Posted by: Ethan2010 | July 16, 2010 3:01 PM | Report abuse

Salazar is a liar, something you didn't quibble with. You just tried to change the subject. Thanks for proving me right yet again.

Changing the wording of the report was hamfisted lying. It exposed Salazar and Obama as ruthless, amoral and power hungry.

yeah, that'll resonate with the American people really well. The liberals are not looking good here. First the hockey stick hoax now Salazar's blatant attempt to mislead us. Wow, what a flag around which to rally.

and you are wrong, just basically and dreadfully wrong. Taxes don't pay for what I spend. I'm NOT spending it. The fools in congress are. By trying to shift blame away from the government you show that you really cannot defend the recklessness we're seeing now.

the government made promises that the taxpayers are now, rightfully, loath to make good. It is time for the government to sacrifice, not the wage earners of America.

And swipes at Mr Reagan simply demonstrate childishness.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | July 16, 2010 3:52 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company