Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Happy Hour Roundup

* Hittin' back: In another sign that the Illinois Senate race has become a brutal, hard-fought contest, Dem Alexi Giannoulias is up with a hard hitting spot responding to Republican Mark Kirk's attack ad from yesterday:

The Giannoulias spot hammers Kirk over his contortions about his military service and repeatedly blasts his "lies." Giannoulias spokesperson Kathleen Strand tells me there's a substantial buy behind the spot. "We're fighting back against Congressman Kirk's desperate, false attacks and continued lies about Alexi," Strand says.

By the way: I'm hoping to dig into this race more soon. Illinois readers, tips, please!

* Ryan Grim agrees that Obama signaled today he's set to pick Elizabeth Warren, leaving "little room for doubt that the matter is all but decided."

* Things I hope aren't true: Digby says Dems are balking over the tax cuts for the rich because they are afraid of any fight that necessitates mere mention of the word "taxes."

* This should be obvious, but if Republicans agree to temporarily extend the Bush tax cuts before demanding that they be made permanent, that doesn't count as a compromise.

* Joan McCarter suggests it might not be a political disaster for Dems to get into "a really good fight over how the GOP is holding Obama's tax cuts for the middle class hostage to help the rich."

* E.J. Dionne calls on Obama to debate John Boehner and Mitch McConnell, because it may be the only way to drive home the choice voters face. For precisely that reason, it won't happen.

* "It's just us": Perhaps the strongest statement from Obama in defense of American Muslims was this one:

I've got Muslims who are fighting in Afghanistan in the uniform of the United States armed services. They're out there putting their lives on the line for us. And we've got to make sure that we are crystal-clear for our sakes and their sakes they are Americans and we honor their service. And part of honoring their service is making sure that they understand that we don't differentiate between them and us. It's just us.

* Inside baseball alert: Nevada journalist Jon Ralston lays out the whole story of how Sharron Angle backed out of the debate. Cliff notes version: Angle, after a lot of confusion and even an apology, ain't gonna show up.

* Jonathan Cohn says Obamacare is bending the cost curve in the right direction.

* Ezra Klein says so, too.

* Mark Halperin says Obama's presser today wasn't enough to stop the Republican wave. One presser won't suffice to alter the outcome of elections eight weeks away? What a colossal failure!

* Pretty cool: Austan Goolsbee, incoming chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, engages on Atrios's blog.

* Think Progress clips the video of Michael Steele's comments about small business and credit lines, and notes another contradiction.

* And of the 50 House seats Chris Cillizza says are most likely to flip this year, only a handful are held by Republicans.

What else is happening?

By Greg Sargent  |  September 10, 2010; 4:27 PM ET
Categories:  2010 elections , Foreign policy and national security , Happy Hour Roundup , Political media , Senate Dems , Senate Republicans , economy  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Obama again speaks up for `Ground Zero mosque'
Next: Open Thread

Comments

The caselaw clearly states that Freedom of Religion is NOT absolute - if there is a "compelling interest" Freedom of Religion can be set aside in specific cases.


By saying the mosque has to move, that is NOT telling anyone that they have to CONVERT - individual Freedoms are preserved.


There are many "compelling interests"


The liberals are either LYING, or trying to use an absolute position as a COVER to side with the TERRORISTS.


CLEARLY THE MOSQUE AT GROUND ZERO WILL HELP THE TERRORISTS -


IT WILL BE A PROPAGANDA TOOL - AND IT WILL HELP THE TERRORISTS RECRUIT ON THE INTERNET.


The liberals are being silly - their positions are deceptive - OR they are siding with the TERRORISTS.


Obama KNOWS that the First Amendment is not absolute - and he is being deceptive.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 10, 2010 6:03 PM | Report abuse

Looks like the village idiot got first post.

You get an gold e-star!

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 10, 2010 6:06 PM | Report abuse

SaveTheRainforest:

It looks like the Koran burning is back ON!!!

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 10, 2010 6:10 PM | Report abuse

According to Joke2, Jews might actually be stupid sheep being led to slaughter by the million, by the possible anti-Christ Barack Obama.

Just thought everybody might like to know that he thinks this way since he is a regular contributor and one of the main Republican voices on this blog.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | September 10, 2010 6:11 PM | Report abuse

@BGinChi Fill us in please...not just the Senate race Greg has brought up...but also what's going on in Chitown politics.

Daley..out..who is in...some other Chicago poster said Rahm is toast in Chicago and that any thought he is going to stroll in and become Mayor of Chicago is actually far out.

Fill us in Windy City guy.

Posted by: rukidding7 | September 10, 2010 6:11 PM | Report abuse

Obama says:

they understand that we don't differentiate between them and us. It's just us.

___________________________________

Then why has the democratic party become an attack machine against "Islamaphobes"

Why does the democratic party engage head-long into False Charges of Racism ???

Then why hasn't Obama spoken out against the NAACP Resolution - and its false charges of racism - Why hasn't Obama spoken out against the NAACP saying they will investigate the Tea Party ???


Seriously folks, Obama has been the most DIVISIVE President... ever.

These kinds of statements are a joke, right? They are meant for Saturday Night Live, right ?

,

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 10, 2010 6:20 PM | Report abuse

* Obama says Republicans holding recovery hostage *

President Barack Obama accused Republicans on Friday of holding the middle class hostage and defended his efforts to stimulate the sluggish economy as he tries to reverse grim election prospects for his fellow Democrats in November.

[...]

...during his 77-minute news conference on Friday, he was clearly on the offensive, drawing battle lines for the November 2 congressional election that is widely expected to be a referendum on his economic policies.

"If it was just a referendum on whether we've made the kind of progress that we need to, then people around the country would say 'We're not there yet,'" Obama said.

"If the election is about the policies that are going to move us forward, versus the policies that will get us back into a mess, then I think Democrats will do very well."

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE67O4WF20100910

Posted by: Ethan2010 | September 10, 2010 6:20 PM | Report abuse

* Wall Street gains as economic outlook brightens *

The Dow and S&P 500 closed the week with their seventh gain in eight sessions in a turnaround period for stocks that has seen investors' worst fears about the economy start to dissipate.

But the gains were made on the lightest trading volume of the year so far.

The S&P 500 has rallied nearly 6 percent since the end of August, a month when shares skidded as investors worried that the economy was headed back into recession. The gradual improvement in economic data continued on Friday as U.S. wholesale inventories surged by the largest amount in two years in July.

"That's going to support the probability that the third-quarter GDP is at least going to be a positive number," said Bruce Bittles, chief investment strategist at Robert W. Baird & Co in Nashville. "All of a sudden the numbers started to turn just enough to say that we're not going to have a double dip, and that forced a lot of money back into the market."

[...]

Technicians are looking at the 1,130 level on the S&P 500 as a potential breakout threshold.

"Nothing is exciting until 1,130 on the S&P 500. That's the number we're trying to push through," said Linda Duessel, market strategist at Federated Investors in Pittsburgh.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6861DR20100910

Posted by: Ethan2010 | September 10, 2010 6:23 PM | Report abuse

I think Republicans are trying to inflame Muslims so Iraq and Afghanistan turn into chaos. They want a slaughter of American troops so they can teach the Democrats a lesson.

Wouldn't surprise me since they have little to no respect for our troops.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 10, 2010 6:25 PM | Report abuse

Donald Trump says he offered the owner of the proposed mosque site a 25% profit to simply sell him the property and end the controversy. He even offered to help him find another site. According to Trump, the guy didn't stand on principle but just wanted a lot more money. He's of the opinion that the whole hullabaloo about a mosque/community-center is just a way to ultimately make money on the property---with no real intention to build a mosque.

Posted by: Brigade | September 10, 2010 6:26 PM | Report abuse

* Stocks continue September rally; Dow gains again *

Stocks edged higher Friday, extending a rally that began nearly two weeks ago, as investors hold on to their newfound optimism about the economy.

The Dow Jones industrial average rose 47 points in very light trading. It was the seventh day of gains out of the past eight for the index. Treasury prices eased as traders became more willing to take on risk.

Stocks have escaped their August doldrums and moved steadily higher in September thanks to a series of encouraging signals on the economy. The latest came Friday morning with a report that wholesale inventories shot up in July, a sign of confidence that retail sales will pick up.

"It's becoming more evident that confidence by consumers and the labor market is improving," said Tim Speiss, chairman of EisnerAmper's Personal Wealth Advisors practice.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jmT59dgLTTziX4p9X9MRBRpWZGdQD9I5AI000

Posted by: Ethan2010 | September 10, 2010 6:27 PM | Report abuse

"According to Joke2, Jews might actually be stupid sheep being led to slaughter by the million, by the possible anti-Christ Barack Obama."

What I actually typed was "I have no opinion on that."

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 10, 2010 6:29 PM | Report abuse

Mike -- I'm psyched that people are racing to be first!

Posted by: Greg Sargent | September 10, 2010 6:32 PM | Report abuse

Ethan2010 posted,
"If it was just a referendum on whether we've made the kind of progress that we need to, then people around the country would say 'We're not there yet,'" Obama said."
-------

No kidding?

-------

"If the election is about the policies that are going to move us forward, versus the policies that will get us back into a mess, then I think Democrats will do very well."

-------

Earth to Barack Obama: we don't have to get "back into a mess" because we've never gotten out of the mess, which is why it's doubtful "Democrats will do very well."

Posted by: Brigade | September 10, 2010 6:32 PM | Report abuse

"These kinds of statements are a joke, right? They are meant for Saturday Night Live, right ?'

Couldna said it better myself.


Posted by: ChuckinDenton | September 10, 2010 6:34 PM | Report abuse

The full questions / answers:

"What do you think about the fact that a vast majority of Jews voted for Obama in 2008?

Nothing.

Do you think that we are stupid sheep being led to slaughter?

I have no opinion on that.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 10, 2010 5:46 PM "

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 10, 2010 6:36 PM | Report abuse

I think Republicans are trying to inflame Muslims so Iraq and Afghanistan turn into chaos. They want a slaughter of American troops so they can teach the Democrats a lesson.

Wouldn't surprise me since they have little to no respect for our troops.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 10, 2010 6:25 PM
-----

You need to get back on your meds. That's crazy talk.

Posted by: Brigade | September 10, 2010 6:37 PM | Report abuse

u goof. :P

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 10, 2010 6:39 PM | Report abuse

Ethan2010 posted,
"Stocks edged higher Friday, extending a rally that began nearly two weeks ago, as investors hold on to their newfound optimism about the economy.

"The Dow Jones industrial average rose 47 points in very light trading."
-------

Happy days are here again!

Posted by: Brigade | September 10, 2010 6:40 PM | Report abuse

ChuckinDenton (last time that I will ask):

If Obama orders the Army to take over and occupy Denton, then will you agree that "Second Amendment remedies" would be in order?

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 10, 2010 6:41 PM | Report abuse

Have a good weekend all. Even all you know-nothing wingers.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 10, 2010 6:43 PM | Report abuse

Greg:

"Joan McCarter suggests it might not be a political disaster for Dems to get into "a really good fight over how the GOP is holding Obama's tax cuts for the middle class hostage to help the rich."

What kind of disaster might it be, though, to get into a really good fight over how the Dems are holding tax cuts for the middle class hostage to hurt the "rich"?

Posted by: ScottC3 | September 10, 2010 6:45 PM | Report abuse

Jake-

Thank Allah it'll be the last time.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | September 10, 2010 6:50 PM | Report abuse

"Koran Burning Coverage: Turns Out Fox News Had It Right

"... In the last few days the cable newsers... have been rather obsessive in their coverage of the “Burn a Koran Day” spectacle planned by Florida Minister Terry Jones. But upon closer examination, not all cable news channels were treated equal, or more accurately, treated it equally. There was one got paid it little attention from the beginning: Fox News."

http://www.mediaite.com/online/the-koran-burning-coverage-turns-out-that-fox-news-had-it-right/

Posted by: sbj3 | September 10, 2010 6:54 PM | Report abuse

"Obama talked so long about so many things that, in terms of strategic public communications strategy, he talked about nothing."

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/09/obama-mosque-economy.html

Posted by: sbj3 | September 10, 2010 7:02 PM | Report abuse

ruk and all.

Too early to predict the mayoral race here. The machine is still getting cranked up. I'd watch for Gutierrez, and hope it won't be Dart. There are going to be some racial fractures in this election for sure; Daley has held those in check (mostly) and it's been a while since there has been any kind of power vacuum.

As for Senate, it's not as conspicuous here as you might think. Lots of Kirk signs on the North Shore (where I ride my bike), but that's his richie rich home base. If the ad buy is big, that's news to me as I haven't seen any ads yet. I'd say the race is generally not getting anyone very excited. Give it a few weeks.

In the end I'd say AG wins on the strength of his core positions (closer to the IL mainstream) and the fact that Kirk is a lying Dbag. AG needs to do well downstate though; that's the key.

OK, off for a few beers with the lads. Later all.

Posted by: BGinCHI | September 10, 2010 7:06 PM | Report abuse

Mike


There is no need to start name-calling.

ON Rahm and Chicago:


Rahm's old district is very different from Chicago as a whole - there are many ethnic neighborhoods which did not have a part in Rahm's district.


In addition, Rahm never really connected with the voters - anway.


AND the one ethnic group in Rahm's district - the Polish - never really took to Rahm either - his main opponent was a Polish woman.

So - obviously the field matters - how many people are in the field - and who takes what constituency where - who can put together the coalitions.

Does Rahm have it ? It is going to be tough. Rahm has never been an alderman - he doesn't have allies around the City he can go to.


Anyway, we will all see how it plays out.


But isn't Rahm better off in Washington - as a lobbyist or whatever position - rather than going back to Chicago ???

Blago wanted to go from Governor to cabinet position - Rahm is already higher than a cabinet official. So how can this be a step up ???

Also - Rahm is not Daley - it is that simple. Rahm might want TO BE Daley - but Rahm will not be Daley - he will be Mayor of a large City which is difficult to run.


I have been wrong about these kinds of things before - but Rahm shouldn't go for it.

.


Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 10, 2010 7:13 PM | Report abuse

Greg (from the previous thread):

"Obama again speaks up for `Ground Zero mosque'"

Not this again. Greg, you're thinking on this topic is more contorted than the pretzel girl at Cirque Du Soleil.

Let's recap:

When Obama first spoke, you celebrated it as full-throated support for the mosque project, saying that Obama had declared that anything less than full support was "un-American".

Then, when Obama walked this back, you walked right back with him, claiming that of course his initial speech was not an actual endorsement of the project, and that by refusing to speak to whether the project was "wise", he wasn't saying anything different than he had said the day before.

Now Obama comes out with what you say is "very close" to his original statement, in which, we are reminded by you again, Obama "never flat out endorsed the Islamic center". So logically, then this new statement is nothing, um, new, and itself could not be a flat-out endorsement of the center, right?

Wrong, at least here in the strange world of Plum Line logic. Now you say that, with this new statement which is "very close" to the original non-endorsement statement, "if Obama opened the door to the possibility that he didn't think the idea was wise -- a big if -- today he closed that door." Hmmmmm.

(BTW, a "big if"? Are you serious? Obama said specifically "I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making the decision to put a mosque there." In what bizarro world does this plain statement not raise the possibility that he didn't think the project was wise?)

So, Obama walks-back his walk-back in a transparent attempt to have it both ways, and to you he has been entirely consistent all along.

Your displays of mental gymnastics are truly spectacular, Greg. Almost as entertaining as the pretzel girl.

Posted by: ScottC3 | September 10, 2010 7:25 PM | Report abuse

ScottC3:

John Kerry ("I was for the war, before I was against it") ain't got nothing on this flip-flopper ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 10, 2010 7:29 PM | Report abuse

"This should be obvious, but if Republicans agree to temporarily extend the Bush tax cuts before demanding that they be made permanent, that doesn't count as a compromise."

I hate to say it, Greg, but I'm pretty sure that's exactly where we're headed.

Posted by: wbgonne | September 10, 2010 7:56 PM | Report abuse

ScottC3,

It's funny that you wrote that as I was thinking about this earlier. Initially, after Barry's statement, Greg wrote that it was "One of the finest moments of the Obama Presidency" and I guess that after Barry pulled the rug out from under him (and all the other pundits who believed Barry's "present" vote)he had to contort to justify his initial posting. I guarantee that Greg, like the rest of us, thought Barry was endorsing the Ground Zero Victory Mega-Mosque and I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall when he watched Barry make a retraction.

This is more of Barry voting "present" and Greg somehow concocting an endorsement out of it. If, true to form, within 24 hours Barry should say something like "Yeah, they have a right to build it there but I don't think they should." Thank God Greg is here to tell us what Barry actually means, even though he somehow cannot determine if Senator Feingold is trying to avoid Barry or not.

And BTW, knowing Bilgey himself feels free warms my fascist, bad faithed heart.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | September 10, 2010 9:04 PM | Report abuse

I wonder whether Greg stops by the WH to pick up the dog poop too.

Btw Scott hit it really tax cuts: Why is Obama holding permanent middle class cuts hostage to his appetite to punish the rich, ie, employers.

Posted by: quarterback1 | September 10, 2010 9:26 PM | Report abuse

I wonder whether Greg stops by the WH to pick up the dog poop too.

Btw Scott hit it re tax cuts: Why is Obama holding permanent middle class cuts hostage to his appetite to punish the rich, ie, employers. No liberals want to answer. Are the R's smart enough to say it?

Posted by: quarterback1 | September 10, 2010 9:28 PM | Report abuse

"I wonder whether Greg stops by the WH to pick up the dog poop too."

Hah! Right after he weeds the garden.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | September 10, 2010 9:46 PM | Report abuse

I think Republicans are trying to inflame Muslims so Iraq and Afghanistan turn into chaos. They want a slaughter of American troops so they can teach the Democrats a lesson.

Wouldn't surprise me since they have little to no respect for our troops.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 10, 2010 6:25 PM | Report abuse
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There's been some truly intemperate posts on PL by both sides. Typically it occurs in a heated back and forth, often it's merely namecalling or hyperpartisan boilerplate everyone's heard a 1000X. That's baseball.

Mike's comment is to no one here in particular and beyond hyperbole, provoked by nothing remotely close to substantiality or the real world.

The comment is the most contemptible, degenerate thing I've seen at PL.

It's a filthy, nauseating blood libel.

No man who had a shred of understanding, or respect of his fellow citizens who may have a point of view that deviates from his poisoned, vile perspective, could ever write that and then put his execrable name to it.


Posted by: tao9 | September 10, 2010 9:48 PM | Report abuse

Obama debate a member of the House of Representatives and a Senator before the midterm elections?

Why? Talk about flailing around for ways to stop from getting crushed. This doesn't just smell of desperation, it positively reeks of it. I can smell the stench of it from here. Such a thing has never happened, ever. McConnell and Boehner are not running against Obama for a particular office. A pointless exchange of talking points would be a complete waste of time. The "debate" would consist entirely of Obama trying to mention Bush's name in the same sentence as Boehner's and McConnell's as many times as he can. Moreover, Obama is not on the ballot this year. Unless you are willing to concede that every single Democrat up for election this year is going to be a rubber stamp for the Obama agenda, a debate involving Obama would be completely pointless.


Posted by: Bob65 | September 10, 2010 10:10 PM | Report abuse

What I find funny is how the usual suspects here criticize Greg for posting liberal/Democratic-centered posts on a blog that is the same. Like, where have you been? Its like saying every week, "look, the sky is blue." Yup, was last thread/week/year. Apparently the powers that be at WaPo hired him after TPM (another left-of-center blog) *for a reason*. You can disagree with the reason, yada yada, but it sure takes a twisted mind to come here and, like clockwork, repeat ad nauseum how lefty/socialist/whatever yuo think the place is.

I assume similar blogs that lean Right are met with similar derision?

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | September 10, 2010 10:26 PM | Report abuse

Latest on the purity (and the vigor!) of conservative womens' vaginas...

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/09/odonnell-blasts-castles-un-manly-tactics-audio.php?ref=fpb

Posted by: bernielatham | September 10, 2010 10:34 PM | Report abuse

tao:

"The comment is the most contemptible, degenerate thing I've seen at PL."

You know, now that you have noted it, I agree that it is pretty bad. But I have to confess that when I first read it, it made almost no impression on me, probably because it is not really all that much different to the types of accusations we see here pretty routinely. It isn't that much of a leap to go from claiming that Republicans want to steal money from poor people to claiming that we want to kill our troops. The assumed ill-will and maliciousness of conservatives/Republicans is pretty much a standard part of the progressive narrative, certainly at least here on this board. I guess I have become to some extent accustomed and hence immune to the shock that ought to accompany some of the more outrageous charges that get made here.

(Of course, the other part of the standard progressive narrative is that those conservatives who are not assumed to be immoral/evil are assumed to be just plain stupid.)

Posted by: ScottC3 | September 10, 2010 10:37 PM | Report abuse

tao...ouch...I feel your pain and agree it was indeed an intemperate comment to suggest that R's do not care for our troops.

Having said that I feel that Newt Gingrich is just as contemptible...of course there is the difference that on one hand it was a as you put it..."The comment is the most contemptible, degenerate thing I've seen at PL.

It's a filthy, nauseating blood libel."

And I'm not disagreeing with your characterization nor defending the comment...but again that was one comment in the heat of the moment...but again I'm in basic agreement with your post.

Still it's hard to swallow when unlike a comment on a blog a person in a position of power/leadership in the R party like Gingrich preaches to the choir of hate that indeed we are at war with Islam. He even used horrific graphic video of 9/11 and soundbites edited to absolutely prey on people's worst fears...and why is he doing this? For personal political gain?

Perhaps tao you believe we are at war with Islam...not at war with the terrorist and jihadists who like the cowards they are hide behind a facade of Islam.

Still tao I don't mean to go tit for tat with you because as I said there is no call for such slander of all R's.

I feel your intensity because last night I went round and round with an idiot who refused to acknowledge the 2008 election for President and who has even talked about 2nd Amendment solutions to the problem.

Politics and religion have always made horrible bedfellows...fear and hatred are easily exploited by demagogues and when you have morons running around talking about 2nd Amendment solutions...how far are you from violence?

I wish I had something clever and pithy for you tao...you've certainly amused me in times of stress...alas these are truly times of stress for our country...the worst economy since the Great Depression...two wars..religious intolerance of a type not even imagined for decades...and reactionary right wingers...trying to take over the R party.

And instead of discussing solutions...we spend time arguing over Mosques...burning Korans..Obama's citizenship...his religion...whether or not he is a socialist...and it's all reflected in the microcosm of this blog.

Perhaps tao we should all get those sticks you talked about and beat each other senseless...alas it seems the entire country has already lost any sense.

Posted by: rukidding7 | September 10, 2010 10:38 PM | Report abuse

chuck:

"What I find funny is how the usual suspects here criticize Greg for posting liberal/Democratic-centered posts on a blog that is the same."

What I find funny is that criticism of Greg's complete lack of coherence from one post to the next on a given topic is read by you to be criticism of him for posting "liberal/Democrat-centered" posts. That would be a sensible interpretation only if one presumed that a lack of coherence was the equivalent of being "liberal/Democrat-centered".

Posted by: ScottC3 | September 10, 2010 10:50 PM | Report abuse

@Chuck in Denton...

"You can disagree with the reason, yada yada, but it sure takes a twisted mind to come here and, like clockwork, repeat ad nauseum how lefty/socialist/whatever yuo think the place is."

Amen Chuck. Ad Nauseum is precisely correct. You sometimes have to question the motivation of some of these posters. Is it an arrogance beyond belief that they suppose their name calling and constant derision is going to change our minds. Kevin W is the ONLY rightie to actually offer substance, and alternative views, as well as actually agreeing with us on occasion. He is the only one from the right who approaches this blog with an open mind...consequently I approach all of Kevin's posts with an open mind.

Perhaps it's a masochism...they enjoy hanging out where the vast majority have no respect for them. Maybe in some obvious cases it's a pathetic ignorance.

Personally I don't waste my time at Red state or Drudge because quite frankly I don't respect the idiots who post there.

And so Chuck perhaps we should take it as a sign of deep respect that the righties...especially the extremists...come here because they respect our intellects so much they can't find intelligent conversation on another blog.

Then again maybe they have nothing to offer in life and so they spend their time trying to find "gotcha" moments or complaining that a progressive blog is full of progressives! LMAO DUH!!!!!!

Posted by: rukidding7 | September 10, 2010 10:51 PM | Report abuse

ScottC You have zero credibility on this blog because despite your pompous arrogant supercilious posts...nobody respects you personally other than the righty extremists.

You have never admitted you were wrong...you have never actually offered a positive thought. You spend your entire effort on gotcha moments..like your epic fail to poke fun at my dictionary comment last night...you are so consistently negative that you have obliterated any reason to pay attention to you. Scott you think you are the great debater.. you're a actually just a borng johnny one noter.

But if reading your own manure and believing it's clever pleases you...then rock on dude...only the other right wing extremists find you amusing...the vast majority on this blog think you are simply a pompous arrogant jerk.....

Just my humble opinion of course...trying to help you out of your malaise...because Scott you do present yourself as such a miserable human being that yes...I do literally feel sorry for you!

Posted by: rukidding7 | September 10, 2010 10:58 PM | Report abuse

I was looking at all the polls that Greg listed in the Dem's should raise taxes on the rich thread and they all were of Random Adults. Some had Registered Voter subsets but the relevant questions regarding should the tax cuts expire were from the Random Adults. If you're trying to figure out what politicians are going to support or not support, I would think a "Likely Voter" model would yield better predictive value than Random Adults. After all, the politician wants to be on the majority side, generally, of the people most likely to vote. I'm wondering if Greg's dismay seems a little disengenous. The only one on the lefty side who seemed to get it was Liam-still talking about the 48 Dem reps running in McCain'08 districts.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | September 10, 2010 10:58 PM | Report abuse

"Perhaps it's a masochism...they enjoy hanging out where the vast majority have no respect for them. Maybe in some obvious cases it's a pathetic ignorance."

What? I'm not worshipped like a God?

I do to have an edjumacation! Proud public school gradit! Scoreboard!

And, I'll have you know, my ignance is not pathetic so much as systemic, so there's that.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | September 10, 2010 11:04 PM | Report abuse

ruk:

You are a fickle one, ruk.

Posted by: ScottC3 | September 10, 2010 11:09 PM | Report abuse

Scott...Indeed I am. :-)

Posted by: rukidding7 | September 10, 2010 11:12 PM | Report abuse

Troll...Don't worry about the polls or even if Obama somehow manages to extend all the tax cuts except those for the top 2%.

At the end of the day your side has folks like Jake standing by with their 2nd Amendment solutions.

Posted by: rukidding7 | September 10, 2010 11:14 PM | Report abuse

ruk, you're up late. Must be the fitness.

Or the Grey Goose.

Posted by: BGinCHI | September 11, 2010 12:47 AM | Report abuse

Re Mark Halperin...whatever Obama does is never going to impress Mr. Halperin so why don't we just take that as a given and move on.

Posted by: Dema | September 11, 2010 12:54 AM | Report abuse

Tao,

That comment by Mike was indeed all you say except that it was in no way unique in kind or degree. It was rather routine for the resident PL lefties and hence like Scott I took no special note of it. I am surprised you did not recognize it as such. Perhaps you have not read as much or for as long in these comments as I thought.

Ru and Ethan and many others have trafficked in calumnies just as outrageous since the moment I arrived here on both a personal and impersonal basis. Heck, I can recall roxsteady wishing all R's would die and ru personally wishing I would contract a disease. And those were not that unusual either. If you have watched carefully you know that many of these folks like ru and mike also have as little regard for the truth as just abiut anyone could. I have proven their outrageous claims false many times, and ive never once seen one of them recant. To the contrary, they normally just compound and inflate the absurdity if their lies. Thus we had ru just recently again claiming that Cheney and Rumsdeld concocted the Iraq War as a way to make hundreds of millions of dollars. You think that is any less depraved than what Mike just said?

And it is not a two-way street no matter how much smear merchants like ru claim it is. I couldn't show you from the day of my first comment here how the hyeanas came out of the woodwork to hurl names and invectives. Of course, at some point you have to ask yourself what sort of example Greg sets for all this. And I think the answer is a pretty bad one. He keeps his own rhetoric more restrained of course but if you notice there is very little in the way of smears of R's he is only too happy to promote and hype. And he is usually very friendly and encouraging to routine posters of some of the most vile calumnies and insults. There certainly is no level of degrading and insulting rhetoric about R's he loves to hate -- like Palin -- that he is not happy to encourage. It simply isn't true that Scott or I or 90% of conservatives I've seen here traffic in the same filth.

Posted by: quarterback1 | September 11, 2010 3:23 AM | Report abuse

Ru, as to your comments above, you are one of the most throughly unreflective hypocrite I've seen. And I mean that with not an ounce of malice but all the seriousness I can. I've personally had innumerable substantive discussions and posted innumerable substantive comments. And believe me when I say your respect is not important to any conservative.

I bothered several weeks ago to spend time answering your questions about why I comment here. Now you again ignore that and impute your own half-@ssed and insulting web psychologist motives, which is really funny given the nature of your most recent Jekyll and Hyde attack on me.

And your attempt to find equivalancy between mike's calumny and Gingrich is ludicrous and juvenile.

Posted by: quarterback1 | September 11, 2010 3:44 AM | Report abuse

And, ru, don't think for a minute that anyone will forget how the other day Scott and I suddenly went from reasonable and constructive conservatives with whom it was a pleasure to talk to whatever it is you are now calling us again.

Your silly indictment above is risible, and your credibility forever gone.

Fickle indeed.

Posted by: quarterback1 | September 11, 2010 3:54 AM | Report abuse

On the front page of the Ha'aretz site this morning we find this heading for the first piece...

"Obama on 9-11 anniversary: We're not at war with Islam, but with terrorists that distorted it"

And here's the second piece...

"9-11 bereaved families group: We support efforts to build NYC Islamic center"

How has it come to be that Israel's oldest newspaper is less dominated by or intimidated into) neoconservative messaging than either the NY Times or the WP?

Posted by: bernielatham | September 11, 2010 8:30 AM | Report abuse

Oh, please. Where was all the pearl clutching from the righties on this blog when someone accused ruk of TREASON yesterday? What about when Jake implied assasination was within the realm of possibility? I don't even want to get into some of the disgusting, vile diatribes thrown by Bilgey at a few of the female commenters.

There's more than enough vitriol on both sides of the aisle around here. Trying to claim otherwise just makes you look more ignorant and clueless than usual.

Posted by: schrodingerscat | September 11, 2010 8:47 AM | Report abuse

All, here's a hot, fresh open thread for you:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/09/open_thread_4.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | September 11, 2010 8:49 AM | Report abuse

May God bless the victims of 9/11, the troops in harm's way, and all conscientious Americans.

And may the insidious despicable Republicans who seek to capitalize on 9/11 or the ginned-up fear of Muslims for profit or personal political gain go straight to hell along side of those who attacked us or seek to do us harm.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | September 11, 2010 8:50 AM | Report abuse

May God bless the victims of 9/11, the troops in harm's way, and all conscientious Americans.

And may the insidious despicable Republicans who seek to capitalize on 9/11 or the ginned-up fear of Muslims for profit or personal political gain go straight to hell along side of those who attacked us or seek to do us harm.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | September 11, 2010 8:50 AM | Report abuse

My ridiculous comment got the reaction I was hoping for.

Now, every time I see right wingers come on here talking about how the left hates this country, our military and are purposely helping the terrorist or cheer something on our CENTCOM commander clearly outlined would directly put our troops unnecessarily in harms way I expect tao, scott and qb to be the first to defend the left from the vileness I see.

Right? Good. I'm glad I've got your support.

Have a good day.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 11, 2010 8:54 AM | Report abuse

Neoconservative Message of the Day

Brought to us by the New York Times:

"Tax Cuts May Prove Better for Politicians Than for Economy

The Congressional Budget Office found that extending the Bush tax cuts would be the least effective way to reduce unemployment."

Who'd have guessed that the neoconservatives were opposed to taxcutsfortherich? Thanks for cluing us in on the devilishly secretive neoconservative control of the NYT, Bernie.

Posted by: ScottC3 | September 11, 2010 9:00 AM | Report abuse

Mike,

Imbecilic, insulting, and a lie in the bargain is closer.

As a toss off stunt it shows your lack of seriousness.

As an accusation it shows you have a disturbing lack of understanding of your neighbor and your country, combined with a deep disdain for those that don't share your politics (as if that were truly important on this journey).

As in indicator of character, and good faith, it shows you're probably not to be trusted.

And yet, in a pinch, it would probably my ass or someone like me to defend you.

I expect no reciprocity from you. You are the mirror of those you hate.

Posted by: tao9 | September 11, 2010 9:06 AM | Report abuse

Right, mike, that would be less pathetically unconvincing if your comment had been out of character for you.

Unfortunately, it was not. It didn't change my opinion of you in the least.

And, no, I won't be policing right-wing excess, just like I didn't bother to respond to your jack@ass comment. I responded to tao and ru.

Posted by: quarterback1 | September 11, 2010 10:35 AM | Report abuse

Can't anyone play this game ? In the post, there are many links on extending Bush tax cuts.

To me it is a complete no-brainer that the Democrats should propose permanent extension of cuts on income under $250,000/yr, no extention of cuts on income over $250,000 and a rebate (right now) equally to all families of the revenue predicted to be collected from the higher taxes on income over $250,000 next year.

This is good policy. The argument for a temporary extension of tax cuts on income over $250,000 is that it is bad to raise taxes in a recession -- that only makes sense as a Keynesian argument and Keynes said it's better to cut taxes for the non-rich than the rich. My proposal is better policy than either proposal currently under discussion.

Also mailing people checks is good politics. the debate currently is tax cuts for the rich or not the Democrats are supported by a solid majority (roughly 60% against extending). If the debate were tax cuts for the rich or the same money spread equally, the Democrats would totally utterly crush the Republicans.

This all seems totally utterly obvious to me. So what's the problem ? Frankly, I think the problem is right here in this building -- the Washington Post Editorial board would denounce my proposal as demogoguery and Democrats obey Fred Hiatt.

Posted by: rjw88 | September 12, 2010 5:48 AM | Report abuse

Today Rick Perry started running commercials cliaming Texas has $8 billion in its Rainy Day Fund. Problems with that:
1. Our Budget Deficit has now grown from $18 to $21 Billion;
2. The $8 billion came from stimulus funds that Perry bragged that he would never accept and obviously never spent for its dedicated purpose of creating jobs.

Curious if others have identified this GOP scam of attacking stimulus spending, accepting it anyways and then hiding its intended purpose and likely violating its requirement to be used to create or save jobs. We know of the hypocrisy meter of GOPers who bragged that they opposed stimulus funds and then showed up at ribbon cutting ceremonies standing next to 5 foot cardboard checks, but hiding the funds in Rainy Day accounts and then not using it at all for job creation I suggest is much more sinister.

If other Governors have created this scam they likely have shortchanged our economu several million jobs and effectively stollen money from the US treasury. Would like to know if others have heard of this GOP scamming of stimulus money?

This should be the headline thread here that the GOP PLANS TO SHUT DOWN GOVERNMENT. That's right Rep. Westmoreland is saying that just like in 1995 the GOP plans to stop all Social Security and Unemployment checks going out in January, 2011.
If you think the economy is in trouble wait till these GOP idiots get control.


"A prominent Republican congressman raised the specter Friday of a government shutdown if the GOP wins control of the House ( Rep Lynn Westmoreland). This warning should go out to all voters across the country, the GOP plans to bring The Government and our economy to a screeching halt next year. We were told that Boehner would be releasing his new Contract ON America, apparently it includes shutting down our economy.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0910/41980.html

Politico Friday 9-10-10

Posted by: leichtman1 | September 12, 2010 10:19 AM | Report abuse

Interesting that 37th wants to rewrite the US Constitution and then claims to be a strict constructionist. Perhaps he is unaware that there are over 100 mosque in New York and in George W. Bush's own words
"we are not at war with Islam", although it is obvious that you are.

Pastor Jones also had some rather dispicable things to say about Judaism on this holy of weeks for Jews. Apparently there is no line that they will not cross.

Posted by: leichtman1 | September 13, 2010 12:03 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company