Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Happy Hour Roundup

* She may be "the one"! Sarah Palin tells Fox News she could run for president if the American people decide she's "the one."

* Maybe I'm just fried, but for some reason this brings to mind that McCain/Palin 2008 ad sneeringly referring to Obama as "the one."

* Tea Partyers for stimulus funds! Stimulus-hating Senate candidate Ron Johnson sought stimulus finds for a local opera house when he was president of the opera's board in 2009.

* The DCCC opens fire on that other Tea Partyer from Delaware, House candidate Glen Urquhart, for equating the separation of church and state with Nazism.

* Not our usual fare, but John Aravosis writes in from Sweden with an interesting tale about how a young woman's single blog post about her ailing mother is transforming the Swedish elections.

* Three independent fact-checks -- one, two, three -- all rate Sharron Angle's latest ad attacking Harry Reid on immigration as misleading or downright full of it.

* Rant of the day: Onetime top Obama aide Steve Hildebrand tears into Dem "cowards" in Congress who are fleeing Obama's agenda, claiming they should take a hike if they can't stand up for policies that are right.

* Paul Krugman says the GOP offer of a "deal" on a temporary extension of the Bush tax cuts for the rich is a "set up":

The whole point is to avoid a vote on the middle-class tax cuts while Democrats control the House; when and if Republicans regain control, they can refuse to let anything but a full extension reach the floor. So the goal is actually permanent extension; what they're offering isn't a compromise, it's a trap.

* Sam Stein reports that White House officials are irked with Blue Dog Dems for coming out against letting the tax cuts for the rich expire after they spent so much time weeping about the deficit.

* Markos is just fine with Elizabeth Warren taking the consumer financial protection agency gig temporarily, because that way she can run against Scott Brown in Massachusetts in 2012.

* Grovel alert: Karl Rove will appear alongside Christine O'Donnell on the same show this Sunday.

* Good for Chuck Todd for asking Evan Bayh how he squares his support for continued tax cuts for the rich with the fact that one in seven are below the poverty line.

* And a fun read to send you into the weekend: Michael Gerson gives the Tea Party a stern spanking and sends it to bed without its supper.

What else is happening?

By Greg Sargent  |  September 17, 2010; 5:20 PM ET
Categories:  2010 elections , Happy Hour Roundup , House Dems , House GOPers , Senate Dems , Senate Republicans , Tea Party  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Does Christine O'Donnell think homosexuality is an identity disorder?
Next: Open Thread

Comments

The one? Has she crossed dimensions and killed all the other Palin's, Jude Law style? If not, she is just the "deluded one."

Posted by: nisleib | September 17, 2010 5:27 PM | Report abuse

Re: Gerson-

The political neophyte argument that TeaPartiers and others espouse in a "kick-the-bums-out" atmosphere has merits *to a limit*. Nothing beats experience when it comes to knowing where the bodies are buried.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | September 17, 2010 5:37 PM | Report abuse

Krugman, as usual, is correct. A trap is being set, but , hopefully, too obvious to work. These gutless 38 Dems need to be escorted to the WH and sit down with Rahm and Obama and told in no uncertain terms, either get on board and vote against the tax cut extension for the 2%, or , should they survive Nov, there won't be any financial help for them what so ever from the DNC in 2012. Better yet, find a primary opponent to give the bucks to.

Posted by: filmnoia | September 17, 2010 5:39 PM | Report abuse

Will Karl ask The Virgin Princess any tough questions about her background? He seemed to have all his oppo research ready the other night on Fox...

Posted by: BGinCHI | September 17, 2010 5:40 PM | Report abuse

"Paul Krugman says the GOP offer of a "deal" on a temporary extension of the Bush tax cuts for the rich is a "set up":

The whole point is to avoid a vote on the middle-class tax cuts while Democrats control the House; when and if Republicans regain control, they can refuse to let anything but a full extension reach the floor. So the goal is actually permanent extension; what they're offering isn't a compromise, it's a trap."

This is so obvious I could scream. It's already getting out of hand. If Obama doesn't step up the Cong Dems are going to do to taxes what they did to health care. And then watch out in November. Last chance, Democrats, White House. Last chance.

Posted by: wbgonne | September 17, 2010 5:46 PM | Report abuse

That interview between Todd and Bayh is hysterical. Talk about a pretzel, he had himself so twisted he couldn't even repeat the GOP "survival of the fittest" talking points. What a twit.

Posted by: lmsinca | September 17, 2010 5:48 PM | Report abuse

And if any of you ever wander over to SP's facebook page and read the comments, you'll find her people have already decided she's "the one". We might as well get used to it, she's gonna run.

Posted by: lmsinca | September 17, 2010 5:51 PM | Report abuse

"These gutless 38 Dems need to be escorted to the WH and sit down with Rahm and Obama and told in no uncertain terms, either get on board and vote against the tax cut extension for the 2%, or , should they survive Nov, there won't be any financial help for them what so ever from the DNC in 2012. Better yet, find a primary opponent to give the bucks to."

There appears to be zero party discipline for the Democrats. Democrat Caucus members attack leadership, jump ship on procedural votes, and undermine the core philosophy of the party without consequences. Why the party and the White House feel compelled to support every incumbent is beyond me. Democratic Party loyalty is totally a one-way street. It is foolish.

Posted by: wbgonne | September 17, 2010 5:51 PM | Report abuse

Weigel's report on the Values Voter Summit speech and descent from heaven of the Virgin Princess.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/weigel/archive/2010/09/17/values-voter-summit-christine-o-donnellmania.aspx

Priceless.

Posted by: BGinCHI | September 17, 2010 5:58 PM | Report abuse

The TRUTH


Christine O'Donnell has 1.6 MILLION DOLLARS raised since Tuesday -


That is more than enough to show her smile on television and erase any smear campaigns directed toward her.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 5:58 PM | Report abuse

Palin might just be the one, just like Arnold was picked as the one.


Watch an explanation of why Arnold was The One for them.

From Ireland:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlLpCh-lE54

Posted by: Liam-still | September 17, 2010 6:01 PM | Report abuse


Ed Schultz is a lunatic -


Are there proceedings to lock him up - or are the democrats going to keep him out there ???


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 6:01 PM | Report abuse

Of course Sarah is going to run. Her fan club will insist that she step forward to save the country. If she refuses, how can she be a mama grizzly?

And do we really think she might conclude that "the people" don't think she is "the one"? Not a chance.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | September 17, 2010 6:04 PM | Report abuse

Ed Schultz is going NUTS on the sterotyping of the Tea Party.


How does he feel about sterotyping ethnic minorities???


Does Ed endorse sterotyping?

Or is it just the groups ED WANTS TO HATE ???

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 6:05 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for the Weigel link, BG.

"I never had the high-paying job or the company car," said O'Donnell. "

Has she ever had ANY job? Other than running for senate, that is? She seems to be the Alan Keyes of Deleware politics.

Posted by: schrodingerscat | September 17, 2010 6:06 PM | Report abuse

that is more than enough to show her smile on television and erase any smear campaigns directed toward her.


.Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 5:58 PM
................

Such a shame that she will have to spend so much money trying to erase all those times that she self smeared herself on Television throughout the past ten years.

What is she going to do? Start claiming that all those thing that she said on Television, were just her taking herself out of context?!

Posted by: Liam-still | September 17, 2010 6:08 PM | Report abuse

STRF,

$1.6 million, huh? I guess Chastity O'Donnell might keep current on the townhome rent into November, ya think? Maybe she can even afford a couple more cheeseburgers.

And as for using television to fight the that "smear campaign" you mention -- the "smear campaign" is based on the facts of what she has been saying on television for 15 years. Too late to erase that.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | September 17, 2010 6:10 PM | Report abuse

s'cat, she's been on conservative welfare her whole adult life.

I'm glad Jane Addams isn't alive to see this.

Posted by: BGinCHI | September 17, 2010 6:11 PM | Report abuse

Ed Schultz is a lunatic -


Are there proceedings to lock him up - or are the democrats going to keep him out there ???


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 6:01 PM

//////////////////////

You should no best. What proceedings were use to put you in a Straitjacket, and take away your belt and shoe laces?

Posted by: Liam-still | September 17, 2010 6:12 PM | Report abuse

At least Ed Schultz didn't call O'Donnell a "fat girl."

Posted by: BGinCHI | September 17, 2010 6:15 PM | Report abuse

Fox News and Reality TV meet at the Values Voter Summit.

Posted by: lmsinca | September 17, 2010 6:17 PM | Report abuse

Have a great weekend, all.

Greg, thanks for everything, you did a bang-up job this week.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | September 17, 2010 6:19 PM | Report abuse

"The Alan Keyes of Deleware politics"

Ha! Good one. But why am I getting this feeling of deja vu where all sensible people assume that everyone sees that the lunatics are lunatics, only to find soon after that the lunatics have run away with the country. As a tactical matter, I think the Dems would be well-advised to start linking all these lunatic GOP candidates and making the (quite accurate) case that the GOP has been taken over by the Radical Right and is now far out of the mainstream of American political thought. Play offense for a change.

Posted by: wbgonne | September 17, 2010 6:21 PM | Report abuse

Values Summit is an Oxymoron.

Huckabee stood up there and called for the restoration of Health Insurance Industry Death Panels.

Some Values those people hold. Let sick people die. That is one of their Paramount Values.


Posted by: Liam-still | September 17, 2010 6:21 PM | Report abuse

You all have heard me rant this week about the AP. It's getting almost like parody over there. I can't believe how far to the right they've gone.

Here's the current headline:

"AP-GfK Poll: Climate for GOP keeps getting better (AP)

AP - Tilted toward the GOP from the start of the year, the political environment has grown even more favorable for Republicans and rockier for President Barack Obama and his Democrats over the long primary season that just ended with a bang."

With a pic of the Virgin Princess! My head hurts.

Posted by: BGinCHI | September 17, 2010 6:25 PM | Report abuse

"I'm glad Jane Addams isn't alive to see this."

No joke.

Posted by: schrodingerscat | September 17, 2010 6:25 PM | Report abuse

"Good for Chuck Todd for asking Evan Bayh how he squares his support for continued tax cuts for the rich with the fact that one in seven are below the poverty line."

Not to mention the National Debt. These Republicrats are complete phonies. All they really want to do is ensure that the Democratic Party never again becomes the party of Liberalism.

Later, All.

Posted by: wbgonne | September 17, 2010 6:27 PM | Report abuse

Good quote from an excellent piece from Tomasky...

"Within the Tea Party movement, a group that has about as many Jews as an average al-Qaida meeting..."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/sep/16/tea-party-victories-republican-midterms

Posted by: bernielatham | September 17, 2010 6:30 PM | Report abuse

The democrats are DESPERATE to demonize the Tea Party.


Give it to Christine O'Donnell


And Sharon Angle - Harry Reid is saying she wants to get rid of Medicare, which is not true.


AND YET - Harry Reid voted to take $500 BILLION DOLLARS OUT OF MEDICARE

So, Harry Reid is a LIAR.

This is what the American People are getting from the democrats.


THE AMERICAN PEOPLE DOES NOT DESERVE TO BE TREATED THIS WAY BY THE DEMOCRATS.


The democrats can whine all they want - they didn't get enough time to jam their spending programs into the Federal budget.


.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 6:30 PM | Report abuse

schrodingerscat:

Alan Keyes is an author (of at least 5 books that I know of) and political commentator. He was in the U.S. Foreign Service from 1979 to 1983, when he was appointed Ambassador to the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations until 1985. Keyes was also Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs from 1985 to 1987.

As you've noted, he ran for office several times (his roommate back from Harvard, Bill Kristol, ran Keyes's first campaign).

In 1994, he began hosting a syndicated radio show called "The Alan Keyes Show: America's Wake-Up Call" from Arlington, Virginia. The show became simulcast on cable's National Empowerment Television in 1997. Keyes also launched various web-based organizations — notably "Renew America" and the "Declaration Foundation", both headquartered in Washington, D.C. In 2002, he hosted a live television commentary show "Alan Keyes Is Making Sense" on MSNBC.

Which of those are not "real" jobs?

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 17, 2010 6:33 PM | Report abuse

Palin will sure get my vote in the primary since I think she has no chance in hell at winning in the general. Her small group of worshipers can't make her dog catcher for anything but the republican party...

Posted by: soapm | September 17, 2010 6:33 PM | Report abuse

P.S.

Markos is just fine with Elizabeth Warren taking the consumer financial protection agency gig temporarily, because that way she can run against Scott Brown in Massachusetts in 2012.

Markos writes:

"And the gig will be finished in time for her to start her 2012 campaign for Senate in Massachusetts. (And yes, I'm already aboard that bandwagon, even if I have to build the wagon myself.)"

Count me in. An epic battle that can and should be won by Liberalism and the Democrats get Ted Kennedy's seat back to boot. I LOVE it!

Posted by: wbgonne | September 17, 2010 6:34 PM | Report abuse

From the Gerson column...

"But a serious commentator cannot think this way. He owes his readers or viewers his best judgment -- which means he cannot simply be a tool of someone else's ideological agenda."

BAHAHAHAHAHA, good one, Mr. Bush speechwriter!

What the hell are commentators if not ideological tools?

Posted by: DDAWD | September 17, 2010 6:37 PM | Report abuse

"Christine O'Donnell has 1.6 MILLION DOLLARS raised since Tuesday -


That is more than enough to show her smile on television and erase any smear campaigns directed toward her."

But it won't make her any more electable. The girl is a fruit cake and ya'll should be ashamed putting her on the ballot.

These are serious times and we have serious problems so we wish you would send serious people to Washington to help find a solution. Sending these far out fringe nut cases will only making things worse. Worse with more gridlock, worse with stupid solutions and worse for the middle class who is slowly being shifted to the poverty list...

Posted by: soapm | September 17, 2010 6:37 PM | Report abuse

wbgonne, I'm hanging in there for the mid-terms, the votes on tax cuts and to see what happens with the deficit commission and Social Security. I'm just about as frustrated as I can get and not give up, mostly because I've never given up in 40 years of working for progressive policy for the middle class. They don't make it easy though do they?

I'm just one of the worker bees, not a "professional left" personality, but it's pretty discouraging when I hear some of the comments from the Administration. Below is just another example of a really stupid way to inspire people to work with you.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`

Obama took the opportunity to mock supporters of the public option last night at a DNC event in Greenwich, Connecticut (per Mike Allen):

OBAMA: "Democrats, just congenitally, tend to get — to see the glass as half empty. (Laughter.) If we get an historic health care bill passed — oh, well, the public option wasn’t there. If you get the financial reform bill passed — then, well, I don’t know about this particularly derivatives rule, I’m not sure that I’m satisfied with that. And gosh, we haven’t yet brought about world peace and — (laughter.) I thought that was going to happen quicker. (Laughter.) You know who you are. (Laughter.) We have had the most productive, progressive legislative session in at least a generation."

Posted by: lmsinca | September 17, 2010 6:37 PM | Report abuse

PALIN-D'SOUZA 2012!

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 17, 2010 6:38 PM | Report abuse

Well, Chris Coons called himself the "Bearded Marxist" - just the guy that Obama and Harry Reid would want to have around after all their efforts to redistribute wealth.


Does that help Obama? Actually it is completely hilarious.

If Obama doesn't want to be called a "socialist" - perhaps it would be best if the democrats didn't nominate people who called themselves "Bearded Marxists"

You can't make this stuff up.

The problem with the democrats is that they attack and smear, attack and smear.


And then the democrats complain that somehow the portrayals of Obama growing up in Indonesia, being raised a muslim, knowing muslim songs - somehow all that is unfair.


The democrats complain that telling what Rev. Wright said in his church is unfair - that BLACK LIBERATION THEOLOGY is not a fair representation of what Obama taught his children week after week, year after year.


If Obama didn't believe what Rev. Wright was saying, then why did Obama bring his children to the church week after week, year after year ?


Somehow ALL the smears that the democrats want to make are fair, but when someone says something about Obama, that is wrong.

Well, no, it is right - and it makes the democrats hypocrites.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 6:39 PM | Report abuse

John Philip Souza 1912!

Posted by: BGinCHI | September 17, 2010 6:40 PM | Report abuse

@Imsinca = ""Democrats, just congenitally, tend to get — to see the glass as half empty. (Laughter.) If we get an historic health care bill passed — oh, well, the public option wasn’t there."

What Obama doesn't know is all we wanted is for him to support the PO. We never expected to get it but we'd of given him all the credit in the world for trying...

Posted by: soapm | September 17, 2010 6:41 PM | Report abuse

In addition to "Barracuda" (1977) by Heart, I want to hear these campaign songs by John Phillip D'Souza:

"The Washington Post" (1889) IRONY-Alert
"The Liberty Bell" (1893)
"Stars and Stripes Forever" (1896)
"Pride of the Wolverines" (1926)

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 17, 2010 6:44 PM | Report abuse

John Philip Souza 1912!

Posted by: BGinCHI | September 17, 2010 6:40 PM

...................


In case you didn't pick up on it, that raging birther lunatic, just called for Palin to pick a guy born and raised in India, to be her running mate, in 2012

Posted by: Liam-still | September 17, 2010 6:45 PM | Report abuse

"Which of those are not "real" jobs?"

Please. The guy hasn't had a real gig since 1991 when he was interim President of Alabama A&M. Everything since then has been either very short lived or wingnut welfare.

Posted by: schrodingerscat | September 17, 2010 6:46 PM | Report abuse

The bottom line is the establishments of BOTH parties have been out-of-line for way too long.


The anger the establishment is showing at the grassroots ? WHO do THEY think they are??


Linda Murkowski doesn't want to respect the results of her own primary ???

WHAT IS WRONG WITH LINDA, HER FATHER IS NOT AROUND TO JUST APPOINT HER TO THE US SENATE ????


WHAT A COMPLETE JOKE.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 6:47 PM | Report abuse

Segment 1 Guest: Christine O'Donnell,
Segment 2 Guest: Karl Rove

My guess Greg is that they won't be together, let's see if Chris has his orders not to put them together

Posted by: mscal | September 17, 2010 6:49 PM | Report abuse

@Save... "And then the democrats complain that somehow the portrayals of Obama growing up in Indonesia, being raised a muslim, knowing muslim songs - somehow all that is unfair."

Where in the constitution does it say any of this disqualifies him for president? You guys say you defend the constitution but you make issue out of things that are within the constitutions limits of being allowed.

Even if Obama were a Muslim, how does that in any way disqualify him for office? What then is your point for mentioning these things? Could your reason be bigoted in nature? Is this more "scare the white people" stuff?

Posted by: soapm | September 17, 2010 6:49 PM | Report abuse

Before any of you libs start complaining that he is not Constitutionally eligible to be (Vice) President of the United States, I have just received the following statement directly from Honolulu:

"I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, director of the Hawaii State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Dinesh D'Souza was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement."

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 17, 2010 6:52 PM | Report abuse

The Birther wants and Indian who emigrated here on a Green Card, to be Palin's running mate in 2012.

That reveals how dumb those Birther Cretins really are.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 17, 2010 6:54 PM | Report abuse

No one wants to see the reality -


Obama and the democrats are FARTHER from the center

Than the tea party is from the center.

The problem is Obama - the problem is the democrats who have gone back on their word from 2008.


The problem is the 33 far left-wing policy Czars that Obama has.

AND just today, Obama ANNOUNCES he wants to go around the CONSTITUTIONAL SENATE CONFIRMATION PROCESS - and do whatever he wants with Elizabeth Warren.

It's NOT an issue with Elizabeth Warren - NOW it is about Obama - and his willingness to IGNORE THE CONSTITUTION.


(yea, the one Obama is sticking to so closely with the mosque at Ground Zero)

This is ANOTHER IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE.

The democrats are starting to be HONEST - several democratic candidates are saying that Obama is off the reservation on health care.


It is about time the democrats START TO AGREE WITH THE COUNTRY - Obama has to go.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 6:55 PM | Report abuse

soapm:

If Obama is Muslim, then you would agree that he lied to the American public and should be impeached, right?

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 17, 2010 6:55 PM | Report abuse

As some of you will have noticed, Her Sublime Gaganess has become politically active on the issue of DADT. But it seems clear that she's got a fair comprehension of process (see her tweet on the misuse of filibuster) as well.

I see this as a very good thing indeed. Those of you who lived through the 60s will appreciate the influence of youth opinion-leaders in the arts, particularly music at that time.

And we need over the next two cycles, the continuation of youth as activists and as civic members.

Posted by: bernielatham | September 17, 2010 6:57 PM | Report abuse

Liam-still's post reveals how dumb he is for not reading the post right before his.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 17, 2010 6:58 PM | Report abuse

STRF,

Thanks for demonstrating that you don't know Sen. Murkowski's name.

Complete joke?

Yes, you are.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | September 17, 2010 6:58 PM | Report abuse

Obama says:

We have had the most productive, progressive legislative session in at least a generation."


___________________________________-

This is NOT what Obama promised in 2008 -

and it is NOT what the American People wanted

So, democrats complain somewhere else when hundreds of your candidates - downticket lose this November.


Complain somewhere else.


Thank you.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 7:00 PM | Report abuse

schrodingerscat:

Since you have now conceded that Alan Keyes has had "real" jobs, I will be right back with a list of Ms. O'Donnell's jobs ...

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 17, 2010 7:02 PM | Report abuse

soapm 6:49 PM


No I never said anything like that.


But you LOVE to throw out the False Charges of RACISM - don't you ???


Then democrats like you complain about the horrible lack of bipartisanship, right???

Take your charges of racism - and go elsewhere.


The facts are the facts - I suppose one could start making charges of sexism against anyone who brings up something on Christine O'Donnell - is that why you don't like her?


Anyway - find someone else to call a RACIST - will ya?

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 7:03 PM | Report abuse

@Save = "Obama and the democrats are FARTHER from the center

Than the tea party is from the center."

You can't put the center anywhere you want. There really is a center and Obama is about as close as we've had in the WH for a while of being there...

When you compare Bernie Sanders to Jim DeMint, HCR is about as centered as legislation can be. It sure isn't left and it sure isn't right since both sides complain.

The right wants America to believe center is somewhere close to their far right fringe but no one is taking the bait...

Posted by: soapm | September 17, 2010 7:06 PM | Report abuse

If SP "is the one" (whatever THAT means) then hell has surely frozen over.

Posted by: rm8471 | September 17, 2010 7:07 PM | Report abuse

Following college, O'Donnell went to work for "Enough is Enough", a Washington, D.C.-based anti-pornography group. Over the following few years, she worked in conservative issue advocacy and for the Republican National Committee, as well as serving as a spokesperson for "Concerned Women for America".

In 2003, O'Donnell moved to Delaware to work for the conservative Intercollegiate Studies Institute (ISI) in Hockessin. After that, she worked free-lance as a marketing consultant. She has also provided political commentary on numerous Fox News television programs, such as The O'Reilly Factor, The Live Desk, and Glenn Beck.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 17, 2010 7:08 PM | Report abuse


soapm:

If Obama is Muslim, then you would agree that he lied to the American public and should be impeached, right?

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 17, 2010 6:55 PM
....................

Ah yes. The power of the "If" word. It makes falsehoods turn into truths, for all Birther Loons.

If JakeD2's Aunt had testicles that would make her his Uncle,

And if JakeD2 had testicles that would make him her nephew! "Right?"

Posted by: Liam-still | September 17, 2010 7:09 PM | Report abuse

soapm:

If Obama is Muslim, then you would agree that he lied to the American public and should be impeached, right? "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" are not protected via the First Amendment.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 17, 2010 7:11 PM | Report abuse

@Jake = "If Obama is Muslim, then you would agree that he lied to the American public and should be impeached, right?"

If lying was impeachable then every president in history would have been impeached starting with the "read my lips etc..." and the WMD fraud from the Bush duo. A politician lying... Is this a new concept to you?

Do you really want to go there??? What about death panels and the stimulus created on jobs?

Lying is impeachable? Is that also in your version of the constitution??? I know, it depends on what my definition of "is" is... You can add Clinton that that list but he was impeached...

Posted by: soapm | September 17, 2010 7:11 PM | Report abuse

soapm

There is nothing wrong with being a muslim - Obama should just admit it.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 7:12 PM | Report abuse

"If Obama is Muslim, then you would agree that he lied to the American public and should be impeached, right?"

Of course, that was not soapm's point, but I'll go ahead and bite:

The answer to your question is "NO". Have you even read the Constitution that you so readily claim you are trying to defend?

How is lying to the American public a "high crime and misdemeanor"? If you'll remember, even Repubs weren't that stupid during the Clinton administration: they impeached him for lying under oath - not just "lying".

Would you want to hold W to that same standard? Let's try this one out:

"Iraq has trained Al Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases."
- Bush in October 2002.

How about this one:

"Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised."
- George Bush, March 17 2003

Or this one:

"I have been very candid about my past."
- George Bush, November 2, 2000

Or my all time personal favorite:

"We do not torture"
- George Bush, November 7 2005

Posted by: schrodingerscat | September 17, 2010 7:13 PM | Report abuse

Who is the spokesperson for The Unconcerned Women For America?

Or do they just leave that position permanently unfilled, just because they are all completely Unconcerned?

Posted by: Liam-still | September 17, 2010 7:14 PM | Report abuse

soapm at 7:06


Bernie Sanders is a SOCIALIST


For years, in the House - he had an "S" after his name, instead of "D" or "R"


Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 7:14 PM | Report abuse

@Save = "No I never said anything like that.

But you LOVE to throw out the False Charges of RACISM - don't you ???"

Then tell us your motive? What would it matter if Obama were Muslim? The only reason for these accusations has to be racist, bigoted or to scare the white people. There is no other reason to have this in the conversation...???

Posted by: soapm | September 17, 2010 7:14 PM | Report abuse

Liam-still:

Perhaps you should discuss that with "soapm" who brought up the "What if Obama were Muslim?" hypothetical in the first place.

soapm:

Are you admitting that Bill Clinton was impeached (for lying about something much less serious BTW ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 17, 2010 7:14 PM | Report abuse

lol.

Was just cruisin' FDL to see if they mentioned the Warren pick.

nothin, nada.

Just a bunch of Obama is a failure posts with everyone claiming they aren't voting and whatever.

Why is she so bitter all the time? She's a professional Debby Downer.

I'd like to see them focused on say Sestak, who's behind. He was the FDL darling right? What are they doing for him?

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 17, 2010 7:17 PM | Report abuse

@Posted by: JakeD2 | September 17, 2010 7:08 PM

Awesome. So she hit the wingnut welfare circuit. How very "real-Amurkin" of her.

Posted by: schrodingerscat | September 17, 2010 7:17 PM | Report abuse

Are you admitting that Bill Clinton was impeached
-------------------------------
Don't you ever get tired of playing gotcha? I sure get tired of hearing your repetitive tricks to try to get someone to say "oh he wasn't impeached" so you can immediately leap up and say "he was so".

Everyone, keep in mind this twit loves these word games. It's not about the truth of the matter, it's all about the words and playing gotcha.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | September 17, 2010 7:18 PM | Report abuse

Fine, you RACISTS!!!! If you won't let "and [SIC] Indian" run for Vice President, then Palin should pick Jindal (is that AMERICAN enough for you?)

"You can leave it all behind
and sail to Lahaina
just like the missionaries did, so many years ago
They even brought a neon sign: "Jesus is coming"
Brought the white man's burden down
Brought the white man's reign

Who will provide the grand design?
What is yours and what is mine?
'Cause there is no more new frontier
We have got to make it here

We satisfy our endless needs and
justify our bloody deeds,
in the name of destiny and the name
of God

And you can see them there,
On Sunday morning
They stand up and sing about
what it's like up there
They call it paradise
I don't know why
You call someplace paradise,
kiss it goodbye"

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 17, 2010 7:19 PM | Report abuse

"Was just cruisin' FDL to see if they mentioned the Warren pick.

nothin, nada.

Just a bunch of Obama is a failure posts with everyone claiming they aren't voting and whatever. Why is she so bitter all the time? She's a professional Debby Downer. I'd like to see them focused on say Sestak, who's behind. He was the FDL darling right? What are they doing for him?"

Hey Mike:

FDL is about the only blogging outfit that is really behind CA marijuana legalization, which may be just enough to save the CA Dems even though they're too spineless and stupid to be on the right side of the issue. Show me who is doing more for Liberalism, common sense, or the Democratic Party.

Posted by: wbgonne | September 17, 2010 7:23 PM | Report abuse

"Bernie Sanders is a SOCIALIST


For years, in the House - he had an "S" after his name, instead of "D" or "R""

First off, he is not a socialist, he considers himself a "Democratic Socialist". And he never had an "S" after his name - he was always listed with an I for Independent.

Posted by: schrodingerscat | September 17, 2010 7:26 PM | Report abuse

soapm at 7:14


I said in an earlier post, which you should read - there is nothing wrong with being a muslim.


YOU though, insist on turning this discussion into some attack on me, which I find improper.

The democrats love to attack.

The ENTIRE POINT here is the democrats' attacks against Christine O'Donnell -


When the democrats attack Christine O'Donnell, they are saying that EVERYTHING SAID ABOUT OBAMA IS FAIR GAME.


If you can talk about Christine O'Donnell that way, then it is OK to talk about Obama the way it has been.


It is that simple.


I know you don't like it, but that is the way it is.


Case closed.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 7:26 PM | Report abuse

Not only is he foreign born, but he is also a vicious hate monger. Look at what he to gay people, who attended school with him.


"D'Souza was born in Mumbai, Maharashtra, India, to parents from the state of Goa in Western India. He arrived in the United States in 1978, originally through a Rotary International program, attending Patagonia Union High School in Patagonia, Arizona, and then Dartmouth College, where he graduated Phi Beta Kappa in English in 1983.[4][5]

According to Boston Globe journalist Peter S. Canellos, in 1981, D'Souza published the names of officers of the Gay Student Alliance in an article for The Dartmouth Review, including the names of those who were still closeted."

Posted by: Liam-still | September 17, 2010 7:29 PM | Report abuse

"(is that AMERICAN enough for you?)"

Ummm....it isn't a matter of what's "American enough" for anyone. It's what's in the Constitution. (Once again, a document that you apparently have never read).

D'Souza is not a natural born citizen - he was born in India to Indian parents. Bobby Jindal was born HERE so that makes him eligible. It's really not all that complicated.

Posted by: schrodingerscat | September 17, 2010 7:30 PM | Report abuse

"Prior to his marriage in 1992, D'Souza had relationships with two well-known female conservatives, Laura Ingraham, a nationally syndicated radio commentator to whom he was engaged but never married, and best-selling conservative author and commentator Ann Coulter."

Posted by: Liam-still | September 17, 2010 7:33 PM | Report abuse

why they hate us (reality version)

http://www.balloon-juice.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/M2RxI_thumb.png

Posted by: bernielatham | September 17, 2010 7:35 PM | Report abuse

Ann Coulter? Is she another Virgin Princess?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | September 17, 2010 7:37 PM | Report abuse

D'Souza is not a natural born citizen - he was born in India to Indian parents. Bobby Jindal was born HERE so that makes him eligible. It's really not all that complicated.

Posted by: schrodingerscat | September 17, 2010 7:30 PM
........................

To JakeD2, a brick is either a complicated thing, or his first cousin.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 17, 2010 7:38 PM | Report abuse

When the democrats attack Christine O'Donnell, they are saying that EVERYTHING SAID ABOUT OBAMA IS FAIR GAME.


___________________________

I can see the False Charges of Racism are emerging again

But the truth is the democrats are hypocrites - their attitude is they can attack, but attacks against them are somehow unfair.

This country so much WORSE OFF because of the democrats - look what they do.

They should pass a law - take ALL the registered democrats and MAKE THEM PAY OFF OBAMA'S DEBTS - send them an "OBAMA BILL" every month until the debt is paid off.

The democrats love to spend the money - and send the bills elsewhere - it is about time ALL the bills are sent to the DEMOCRATS ONLY - MAKE THE DEMOCRATS PAY THEIR OWN BILLS.

Thank you.


Case Closed.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 7:40 PM | Report abuse

What could it possibly mean to have a "relationship" with the Coultergeist? Did D'Souza and Coulter have something in common -- such as that they were both in love with Ann Coulter?

Posted by: bearclaw1 | September 17, 2010 7:40 PM | Report abuse

Ann Coulter? Is she another Virgin Princess?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | September 17, 2010 7:37 PM

................
I still get a chuckle out of recalling when she was trying to persuade people that John Edwards is gay. She was doing that, right, around the same time that Edwards had just embarked on his Shagging Women Across America, tour.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 17, 2010 7:43 PM | Report abuse

wbgonne 5:51 PM


All those kinds of threats were given out by Obama over the health care bill.


The result?


EVERY democrat who voted AGAINST health care won their primaries.


It is the democrats who voted in FAVOR of health care who are in trouble with the voters.


So, you are saying that Congressmen should not vote what their districts want - but what OBAMA WANTS?


You don't care what the voters want ???


This is the democratic party today - unbelievable.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 7:45 PM | Report abuse

STRF,

Have you been sending extra payments to the U.S. Treasury to pay for Bush's unfunded wars? Didn't think so.

As you love to say, "case closed."

Posted by: bearclaw1 | September 17, 2010 7:46 PM | Report abuse

schrodingerscat 7:26 PM


That is not true - for YEARS, Bernie Sanders asked the House to identify him as a SOCIALIST -


There was an "S" next to his name on EVERY DIRECTORY ON THE WALLS IN EVERY HOUSE BUILDING.

Sorry, I think Bernie Sanders even was identified as a Socialist on the ballot.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 7:49 PM | Report abuse

"Sorry, I think Bernie Sanders even was identified as a Socialist on the ballot."

I'm totally shocked that you would turn out to be a big, fat liar:

"Sanders is a self-described democratic socialist,and has praised European social democracy, but because he does not belong to a formal political party, he appears as an independent on the ballot."

Posted by: schrodingerscat | September 17, 2010 7:54 PM | Report abuse

Jake


Obama is running around the Senate Confirmation process with Elizabeth Warren

That is impeachable.


We have a Constitution for a reason - not so someone can run around it whenever they want.

There is a whole list of things that Obama has done that should be counts in his impeachment.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 7:54 PM | Report abuse

"We have a Constitution for a reason - not so someone can run around it whenever they want."

I don't know if I'd be directing that comment at Jake. Based on his earlier comments about impeachment and D'Souza running for President, it's pretty apparent he's never actually read the Constitution.

Posted by: schrodingerscat | September 17, 2010 7:58 PM | Report abuse

Then George W. Bush should have been impeached, because he did the same thing with many his appointments.

Suddenly TeaBaggers are all worried about "The Unitary Executive". Where were they when Bush/Cheney were declaring that The President did not have to consult Congress or seek it's approval.

TeaBaggers are Right Wing Republican Hypocrites.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 17, 2010 7:58 PM | Report abuse

@Save = "They should pass a law - take ALL the registered democrats and MAKE THEM PAY OFF OBAMA'S DEBTS - send them an "OBAMA BILL" every month until the debt is paid off."

We could do that but we'd have to stop the conservative hypocrites from benefiting from the legislation. How many Republican's legislators did you see handing out big stimulus checks? Jindal, Cantor etc... and HC, there's a lot of poor people in the south who will benefit from the HC program and is getting unemployment benefits.

I think they should have to pay also... Fair is fair...

Oh, and while we're at it, perhaps the Republicans should pay for the two wars they started...

Posted by: soapm | September 17, 2010 7:58 PM | Report abuse

@Save = "They should pass a law - take ALL the registered democrats and MAKE THEM PAY OFF OBAMA'S DEBTS - send them an "OBAMA BILL" every month until the debt is paid off."

We could do that but we'd have to stop the conservative hypocrites from benefiting from the legislation. How many Republican's legislators did you see handing out big stimulus checks? Jindal, Cantor etc... and HC, there's a lot of poor people in the south who will benefit from the HC program and is getting unemployment benefits.

I think they should have to pay also... Fair is fair...

Oh, and while we're at it, perhaps the Republicans should pay for the two wars they started...

Posted by: soapm | September 17, 2010 7:59 PM | Report abuse

TARP was George W. Bush's bailout bill for Wall St. Casino Bank Operators.

Republicans want to borrow another Four Trillion Dollars to pamper Billionaires.

I guess we should be sending out the collection notices, for thosr massive expenditures, to all Registered Republicans, and Republicans trying to pass as TeaBaggers.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 17, 2010 8:03 PM | Report abuse

@Save = "When the democrats attack Christine O'Donnell, they are saying that EVERYTHING SAID ABOUT OBAMA IS FAIR GAME."

Again I agree, everything TRUE said about Obama should be fair game. However, make sure it is TRUE and not some far right conspiracy theory.

Posted by: soapm | September 17, 2010 8:04 PM | Report abuse

Very bright piece from Chait...

"The premise of all these pleas for Castle was extremely sensible: this is politics. Sometimes you move the ball forward, sometimes the other team moves it forward. Sometimes you make compromises in order to get ahead.

But the Republican base has been taught not to think this way. This isn't just politics, remember? This is a twilight struggle for freedom. And Mike Castle didn't just cast a couple bad votes. He acquiesced in a sinister plan to undermine capitalism. How could they ever support a candidate like that?

Moreover, Republican voters have luxuriated in the belief that they represent the true majority of the American people. Obama may have won by fooling the voters, or possibly by stealing the election with Acorn, but the enduring majority of the public is staunchly conservative. Indeed, Republicans only lost because they strayed from the true faith.

Now, most elite Republicans understand that the red meat fed to the base isn't exactly right. It's useful to scare the daylights out of the activists, but writers for the Standard and the Journal editorial page understand that "freedom," as most people understand the term, is not really at risk. They understand as well that politics is a little more complicated than "if Republicans stay true to conservatism, they cannot lose."

But the conservative base is not in on the joke. And so Republican elites found themselves with just a few frantic days to undo the toxic and intoxicating effects of 20 months of relentless propaganda. Vote for the man who compromised with evil! The true conservative can't always win! They couldn't do it.

I won't say that the Republican base strategy has been a total failure. But it is nice to see it blow up in the face of the establishment from time to time."
http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-chait/77698/republicans-reap-the-whirlwind

Two points to particularly note. First, "twilight struggle for freedom" is how these people have been propagandized to conceive of the world. It is lunacy and a very dangerous sort of lunacy but it's the situation we are in. Second, Chait has it eactly right in suggesting that the conservative elites in DC and New York are well aware that the base is seething with a lunacy that they themselves don't share but are - or at least were - happy to foment and utilize for their own purposes.

Posted by: bernielatham | September 17, 2010 8:06 PM | Report abuse

@Save = "
Obama is running around the Senate Confirmation process with Elizabeth Warren

That is impeachable.

We have a Constitution for a reason - not so someone can run around it whenever they want."

What Obama is doing with Warren was written into the bipartisan legislation. He is doing nothing wrong. He is going by the legislation made into law by Congress. That isn't impeachable...

Posted by: soapm | September 17, 2010 8:06 PM | Report abuse

This is so obvious I could scream. It's already getting out of hand. If Obama doesn't step up the Cong Dems are going to do to taxes what they did to health care. And then watch out in November. Last chance, Democrats, White House. Last chance.

Posted by: wbgonne | September 17, 2010 5:46 PM
----

Pretty pathetic, isn't it, that some politicians don't know how to play a hand like this? A tax cut for the first 250,000 for EVERYONE, rich and poor alike, but I might lose my seat if I vote for it. Imagine being dealt four aces in game of five-card draw and being afraid to call the opening bet because someone else at the table might be holding a straight flush.

The moderates in the swing districts are always the first to go in a purge election anyway. They may as well do something constructive while they're in Washington---that's what they were elected for. Cowardly behavior won't save them.

Posted by: Brigade | September 17, 2010 8:09 PM | Report abuse

Everytime the democrats attack Christine O'Donnell - and the other Tea Party candidate - the democrats are LEGITIMIZING everything said about Obama.


It is that simple.


I know the democrats would like to attack - and not get attacked back - but it is all fair game.


Seriously - and the FALSE CHARGES OF RACISM ARE RIDICULOUS.


" Oh, my oh my - YOU MUST HAVE SOME OTHER MOTIVE FOR SAYING THAT " - give the nation a break - the whole country is sick of listening to this crap from the democrats.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 8:11 PM | Report abuse

Which of those are not "real" jobs?

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 17, 2010 6:33 PM
-----

I think what they mean is that he's a little short on community-organizing experience. Very important to liberals.

Posted by: Brigade | September 17, 2010 8:14 PM | Report abuse

schrodingerscat 7:54 PM


Bernie Sanders was listed by the House as a SOCIALIST - by his own request.


Anyway - don't call me a liar - when your information is bad.

Sorry to disappoint you.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 8:17 PM | Report abuse

I'm a Democratic Dharmaist with a 9 after my name.

Posted by: tao9 | September 17, 2010 8:19 PM | Report abuse

soapm wrote,
"Palin will sure get my vote in the primary since I think she has no chance in hell at winning in the general."
-------

Be careful. I've been hearing the same thing all summer about the likes of Paul, Rubio, Toomey, Angle, Whitman, et al. I was told to just wait and see what the polls looked like after Labor Day. They would all be toast by then. What is it now---wait until Halloween?

Posted by: Brigade | September 17, 2010 8:21 PM | Report abuse

The democrats have just been out of control for too long -


There should be some sanctions next time


Every registered democrat should get an additional "OBAMA BILL" IN THE MAIL to pay for Obama's debts, until they are paid off.

Maybe then the democrats will CARE that those dollars are spent wisely.


OR if it is a jobs creation bill, JOBS ARE CREATED.

Los Angelos got $111 Million in Stimulus money - but reported only 55 jobs created.

THAT is 2 MILLION DOLLARS PER JOB.

See? This is precisely how Obama and the democrats have been wasting the stimulus money.

The DEMOCRATS HAVE TO PAY FOR THIS.


If the democrats pay, then the rest of the country shouldn't be so upset about Obama, right ?


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 8:29 PM | Report abuse

@Liam = "Republicans want to borrow another Four Trillion Dollars to pamper Billionaires. "

Yep, those tax cuts are just another TARP type bailout for the wealthy... More money for them to count at the cost of raising our deficit and borrowing from the Chinese...

Note to all Republican, all social programs come with the means to pay for them. If you cut the tax that pays for the program without reforming or eliminating the program then you have now added the cost of that program to the deficit. Which is what you call being "fiscally responsible"???

If you want to cut the program then have the balls to run on the platform of cutting the program. Tax and all. Don't be lame chickens and cut the funding for the program hoping the people will turn on it and demand it's elimination. That is what should be impeachable, tricking the people...

Posted by: soapm | September 17, 2010 8:31 PM | Report abuse

STRF,

Have you been sending extra payments to the U.S. Treasury to pay for Bush's unfunded wars? Didn't think so.

As you love to say, "case closed."

Posted by: bearclaw1 | September 17, 2010 7:46 PM
----

Have you been sending extra payments to pay for our continued involvement? Oh wait, scratch "extra" since you're obviously a member of the infamous 47% club.

Posted by: Brigade | September 17, 2010 8:32 PM | Report abuse

"As some of you will have noticed, Her Sublime Gaganess has become politically active on the issue of DADT. But it seems clear that she's got a fair comprehension of process (see her tweet on the misuse of filibuster) as well.

I see this as a very good thing indeed. Those of you who lived through the 60s will appreciate the influence of youth opinion-leaders in the arts, particularly music at that time.

And we need over the next two cycles, the continuation of youth as activists and as civic members."

Agreed, Bernie. I wouldn't know Lady Gaga if I tripped over her but it is far past time when successful performers begin to engage on behalf of Liberalism. Nothing good happens without young people.

Posted by: wbgonne | September 17, 2010 8:35 PM | Report abuse

TeaBaggers are Right Wing Republican Hypocrites.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 17, 2010 7:58 PM
----

I know they are, but what are D-Baggers?

Posted by: Brigade | September 17, 2010 8:35 PM | Report abuse

@Brigade = "Be careful. I've been hearing the same thing all summer about the likes of Paul, Rubio, Toomey, Angle, Whitman, et al. I was told to just wait and see what the polls looked like after Labor Day. They would all be toast by then. What is it now---wait until Halloween?"

I think Palin's a safe bet she won't win but you do have a point. However, this time in 2008 Obama was losing in the polls so there is still time. I will say there are some wing nuts in conservative districts that will get in. Paul in KY may be one of them. Bauchman makes it and you can't get more nuttier than that one...

The objective is to not make them the majority. We are safe from their ideas of how America should be as long as they are in the minority...

Posted by: soapm | September 17, 2010 8:38 PM | Report abuse

What Obama is doing with Warren was written into the bipartisan legislation. He is doing nothing wrong. He is going by the legislation made into law by Congress. That isn't impeachable...

Posted by: soapm | September 17, 2010 8:06 PM |
-----

Well, maybe he could just resign.

Posted by: Brigade | September 17, 2010 8:39 PM | Report abuse

Obama's TOTAL DEBTS - are already more than all the debts incurred by George Washington through Ronald Reagan COMBINED.


Obama's debts are out of control

Republicans ARE going to figure out a way to make the democrats PAY for this.


Seriously, the democrats WANTED Obama - NOW YOU GOT OBAMA.

But all the nation asks is DON'T leave us with the bill - YOU PAY THE BILL.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 8:40 PM | Report abuse

Bernie:

"Good quote from an excellent piece from Tomasky..."

What in the wide, wide world of sports makes you think Tomasky has the slightest idea how many Jews are a part of the TP movement?

(on Chait)

"Two points to particularly note. First, "twilight struggle for freedom" is how these people have been propagandized to conceive of the world. It is lunacy and a very dangerous sort of lunacy but it's the situation we are in."

This is highly amusing. Coming from a man who routinely asserts the existence of a secret cabal of conservatives on the brink of destroying all that is good and virtuous, the cognitive dissonance of the above is simply staggering.

Posted by: ScottC3 | September 17, 2010 8:40 PM | Report abuse

schrodingerscat 7:54 PM


When Bernie Sanders was running for the House in the 90s - he identified himself as a socialist -


It was reported widely in the State - and Bernie Sanders identified himself as such.


Later on, running for the Senate, "democratic Socialist" started to come up.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 8:43 PM | Report abuse

Brigade,

Uh, wrong about that 47%. My wife and I paid about $38,000 in federal income tax last year. I'm a partner in a law firm.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | September 17, 2010 9:04 PM | Report abuse

The important issue in the country is OBAMA has let us down on the economy.


Obama has not concentrated his efforts on the economy.


If Obama cared half as much about jobs as he has about his own ego-driven health care bill, things would be different.


Obama never took the stimulus seriously - they just took it as an excuse to start all these democratic programs - NOT TO STIMULATE JOBS.

This was an issue at the time - but Obama didn't care - they just filled the bill up with junk - and Obama signed it.

The nation was fed a LIE about how the bill would be for job creation - and there would be a website to track those jobs-


NOW Obama has stopped updating the website.

The country has not forgotten - that at its time of need, Obama had more important, "big things" to do - and the jobs creation was never addressed properly.

And Obama was in Connecticut yesterday - claiming what a GREAT LIBERAL AGENDA HE PUSHED THROUGH CONGRESS - ignoring the American People and their priorities the whole way through.

Obama was even laughing about it.


You know that laugh he has, when he is caught in a lie - Obama smiles and laughs.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 9:07 PM | Report abuse

@Ims - if you are still attending in the midst of so much silliness.

It remains uncertain whether Palin will run even if an increasing number of smart folks are concluding she will or is likely to run.

What I think we can say we know is that there will be a rousing chorus from the base (and from all those in the GOP political sphere who are truly ideologically aligned with that base) for Palin to be the party representative.

And I think we can say we know that this will be the position of FOX and of talk radio. This isn't so much an ideological solidarity as with the base (though surely a large component) but also or rather a mercenary decision...audiences will surely be increased with such an end-of-days good vs evil narrative and that's where the dollars are.

The intelligensia of the right is more complicated. Kristol, Rove, Armey, Gerson, Krauthammer and others have expressed their more 'pragmatic' view that winning is what counts and not some allegiance to an extremist ideological purity. And it is these folks who are the main voices of the Chamber of Commerce rainbow of monied interests. Wall Street (as an abbreviation) does not give a poop about abortion or Ten Commandments posted in the civic square. Their goal is continued or expanded grasp on the levers of government - which represents the only real limiting entity on them.

I think we can say we know that this community above, if they were to read the comments from many conservatives on these threads, would privately speak about them just as the energy traders in California spoke about their victims or as Abramoff and Reed spoke about the Indian tribes they were ripping off - useful idiots, suckers, baboons.

Another point of power and influence that will be determinitive (or which will do whatever they deem necessary to be determinative) is the neoconservative camp and the military-corporate machine that shares goals with neoconservatives - that is, more war and military expenditures, in this present case, against the Muslim world most particularly. For this crowd, Palin presents great promise and great danger (and here, there's an intersection with the GOP establishment).

The promise is a cardboard cutout or symbolic figurehead who is neither bright enough nor educated enough to have any self-developed philosophy of foreign affairs nor any curiosity or interest in these things. She can be (she will be) surrounded by others and they will determine what policies are advanced. Those others will be our neoconservative friends and their militarist allies (how many generals have not wished for a free hand in their activities? )

But the danger of backing Palin is acute for precisely the reasons Rove sought to eliminate O'Donnell back in December - a likely or certain electoral loss.

more in second post...

Posted by: bernielatham | September 17, 2010 9:14 PM | Report abuse

Here's a little brain teaser.

"A" is a reasonably successful member of the middle class who works for a company which values its employees and treats (and compensates) them accordingly.

"B" is a company (or corporation) who, over the years, has managed to break the unions and replace its employees with scabs, on more than one occasion, in a race to the bottom in wages. It's primary obligation, of course, is to it's owners/stockholders. And labor is an expense. "B" has even opened some satellite plants in certain rural communities where hard times have fallen.

"C" are the employees of "B". Most of them don't have a pot to pee in because they are not well compensated. No healthcare, no benefits to speak of; they rely on various government programs which subsidize their existence. Rumor has it that some of those working in the rural areas are actually illegal immigrants. Oddly enough, the price of "C"'s widgets (or hot dogs or whatever), adjusted for inflation, have not decreased along with "C"'s labor costs. But profits are high and "C"'s owners/stockholders are doing fine---and so is its upper management.

Now, "A" is in a bit of a quandary. He may or may not buy "C"'s widgets (or hot dogs). But he does pay federal income taxes. Democrats tell him that we must help the needy, as in "B". "B" can't pay any of the federal income which subsidizes their existence, because they don't make enough money. "A" has suggested someone look into this business of employing illegal immigrants, but Democrats then called him a bigot and a racist. And neither "C" nor the politicans in the small rural communtities want to rock that boat. It's too profitable.

"A" turns to the Republicans for help. Hey, he says, why am I having to subsidize these low-wage workers? I don't need any widgets, and I don't have any stock in company "C". But wait, say the Republicans, we can't tax "C" to pay the government programs which aid "B" because it would be bad for business and bad for the economy. Someone might get laid off. Besides, if we do that, "C" has threatened to pack up and move the whole shebang to Mexico or China or wherever. Then imagine what your taxes will be to take care of "B", who won't have any income at all.

Question. Are "A"'s federal income taxes actually being used to subsidize "B". Or are they actually being used to subsidize the profits of "C" who is then under little pressure to provide for its workers by upping labor costs? And how much money does "C" give to which politicians?

Posted by: Brigade | September 17, 2010 9:18 PM | Report abuse

Must close up the shop and head home for dinner...will post a bit later.

Posted by: bernielatham | September 17, 2010 9:24 PM | Report abuse

I think I got my "C"s and "B"s mixed up midstream. Too much teasing for my feeble brain.

Posted by: Brigade | September 17, 2010 9:25 PM | Report abuse

The important issue in the country is OBAMA has let us down on the economy.


Obama has not concentrated his efforts on the economy.


If Obama cared half as much about jobs as he has about his own ego-driven health care bill, things would be different.


Obama never took the stimulus seriously - they just took it as an excuse to start all these democratic programs - NOT TO STIMULATE JOBS.

This was an issue at the time - but Obama didn't care - they just filled the bill up with junk - and Obama signed it.

The nation was fed a LIE about how the bill would be for job creation - and there would be a website to track those jobs-


NOW Obama has stopped updating the website.

The country has not forgotten - that at its time of need, Obama had more important, "big things" to do - and the jobs creation was never addressed properly.

And Obama was in Connecticut yesterday - claiming what a GREAT LIBERAL AGENDA HE PUSHED THROUGH CONGRESS - ignoring the American People and their priorities the whole way through.

Obama was even laughing about it.


You know that laugh he has, when he is caught in a lie - Obama smiles and laughs.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 9:28 PM | Report abuse

The important issue in the country is OBAMA has let us down on the economy.


Obama has not concentrated his efforts on the economy.


If Obama cared half as much about jobs as he has about his own ego-driven health care bill, things would be different.


Obama never took the stimulus seriously - they just took it as an excuse to start all these democratic programs - NOT TO STIMULATE JOBS.

This was an issue at the time - but Obama didn't care - they just filled the bill up with junk - and Obama signed it.

The nation was fed a LIE about how the bill would be for job creation - and there would be a website to track those jobs-


NOW Obama has stopped updating the website.

The country has not forgotten - that at its time of need, Obama had more important, "big things" to do - and the jobs creation was never addressed properly.

And Obama was in Connecticut yesterday - claiming what a GREAT LIBERAL AGENDA HE PUSHED THROUGH CONGRESS - ignoring the American People and their priorities the whole way through.

Obama was even laughing about it.


You know that laugh he has, when he is caught in a lie - Obama smiles and laughs.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 9:30 PM | Report abuse

What today's Value Voter's Summit represented today for Christianity is literally no different than what Al Qaeda represents to Islam. Radical extremists who CLAIM to be part of one of the World's largest religions, but who in reality bear little resemblance to actual Christians.

This Summit should literally disgust any TRUE Christian. When Mike Huckabee..a former 300lb pre existing condition himself..and amazingly a former minister...he has to know the teachings of Christ..so is he lying for political gain or what? For him to deride coverage for pre existing conditions by comparing it to trying to insure a house that has already burnt down or a car that has already been crashed...yeah in a purely capitalistic sense...but what about morality here...does Mike Huckabee TRULY BELIEVE Jesus Christ would compare human life and dignity to a piece of property..or a car...does Huckabee TRULY BELIEVE Christ would be happy to have his followers... people who call themselves "Christians"
DEVALUE human life to the same level as a house..or a car? These Value Voter Republicans are the most disgusting, selfish, materialistic pigs the world has even seen!!! Huckabee is as much a "Christian" as OBL is a Muslim...IN NAME ONLY. For this loser to blaspheme the very teachings of Jesus Christ and then wrap himself up in his Christianity with the rest of these hypocritical losers for political gain is simply pathetic.

The republican party has not only lost it's collective mind...it's lost it's soul.

Posted by: rukidding7 | September 17, 2010 9:31 PM | Report abuse

If we figure out a way to send an "Obama Bill" to all the registered democrats - and make them pay off Obama's debts -

Then maybe the democrats will CARE how Obama spends the money.


And the democrats would think it matters if the money is spent WISELY.


And the democrats would care if JOB CREATION MEANT JOB CREATION.

At some point, something has to be DONE to get the democrats get serious about how the money is spent.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 9:33 PM | Report abuse

Lady Gaga might be a bit flamboyant...but here is a 62 year old man who still enjoys her act and the fact she stands up for the less powerful people. She is dedicated to her fans...known affectionately as "little monsters" and she has stood up for gay causes from the start of her career.

Besides her songs are excellent for your cardio or weight workouts. I have "Just Dance" and "Poker Face" on my MP3 player.
Wouldn't head to the gym without them. :-)

Posted by: rukidding7 | September 17, 2010 9:37 PM | Report abuse

And Obama was in Connecticut yesterday - claiming what a GREAT LIBERAL AGENDA HE PUSHED THROUGH CONGRESS - ignoring the American People and their priorities the whole way through.


Obama was even laughing about it.

________________________

It is moments like this when Obama shows what his REAL intentions were all along.


Obama INTENTIONALLY LIED TO THE COUNTRY ALL DURING 2008.


The democrats are going to have to be responsible for that in November.

The voters are going to make sure.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 9:44 PM | Report abuse

Chait's an emotional guy and has a very, very high opinion of his capacities. He goes the extra mile in showcasing that self-estimate by cranking out diktats that supposedly the benighted flyovers haven't the candle-power to grasp. (But all you TNR mensas get it, winkywink.) I've often thought Chait did not merely hate W, he hated those that voted for W.

Chait, as is his wont, places great significance in the deliverers of "the twilight struggle" rhetoric. But it's rhetoric. There just aren't enough consumers of the usual desseminating suspect evil monolith...FoxRushBeckSean. That Chaitean headfake is money in the bank for him because youBlues eat it up like pecan pie.

68% of Americans want smaller govt and lower taxes...74% of independents amongst them, even the Dems are split almost even on the issue. {Raz poll...I know, I know, then find one then that says otherwise, ninjas.}

I doubt very many TP'ers think about a "twilight struggle" and would giggle at a the self-absorption of a drama quee..., oops I mean, dude like Chait. They just think, actually it's more like workingman's wisdom, it's an exceedingly dicey thing to put trillion dollar bets on some very weak Keynsian ponies that ain't never won a county derby. Then they'd buy him a beer, try to calm him down, and tell Jonathon not to fret because no matter what happens this is still the USA and we have a tendency to, you know, figure it out.

Anyway, it's not only the TP'ers you've got to consider, unless 68% of Americans are TeaParty members. And they're all skeered by those bad people's propaganda.

Bernie's actually an excellent "George Constanza" barometer for columnists. Everyone he cites or cribs don't seem to get out into the country much. OneTrickPonies mostly (OK maybe one & a 1/2: Frank Rich knows a little about theater; Tomasky could probably find Omaha if he brought a Brit admin.asst. with him to drive the car).

Posted by: tao9 | September 17, 2010 9:46 PM | Report abuse

Bill Clinton is on in a clip from 2006 completely flipping out over Osama bin Laden.


A topic which should be looked into and discussed.


Bill Clinton did not do enough in Middle Eastern terrorism policy in the 1990s - it is that clear.


Clinton should take blame.


Clinton turns out to have been one of our worst Presidents. The economic record is horrible. Allowing the internet bubble to develop was stupid.


And Clinton, terrorism, our intelligence resources which were pulled out of the Middle East -


I don't really want to blame Clinton for 9/11 - but the facts are certainly there that Clinton left the country open.


No one seems to want to go there - but inside it is clear that Clinton knows it's true.


.


Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 9:50 PM | Report abuse

Bernie

I'll look forward to the end of your thought later and yeah the silliness gets difficult to wade through, but I'll keep on keepin' on.

Mike

You're gone but in case you check in later, Marcy Wheeler has a great post up today at FDL re Warren and basically celebrating that she's in. Also, David D. had one yesterday. I don't bother reading the comments over there anymore, too many of those folks have given up AFAIC, but there's some really smart posts up everyday and wbgonne is right about their influence and activism for legalization.

They're also working hard to get progressive candidates in across the country in some of the under the radar races, I think that's a good thing, since that's what I'm working on as well.

Here's emptywheel today:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"I’m cautiously optimistic with the dual appointment of Elizabeth Warren to be Assistant to the President to work at Treasury to set up the Consumer Financial Protection Board.

Frankly, no one knows what this appointment will mean in practice except perhaps Obama, Warren, and Timmeh Geithner. And no one knows how well Warren will negotiate the inevitable bureaucratic battles ahead, particularly with whoever replaces Rahm.

But I’m optimistic for two reasons. First, I have a lot of trust in Warren herself. She’s proven her ability to surprise her opponents in bureaucratic battles thus far. I also suspect (though don’t know for a fact) that she negotiated the Assistant to the President position as protection against anything Timmeh and Larry Summers might try. She seems to have demanded certain things with this nomination. And gotten them. And–as DDay linked earlier–she has expressed confidence that this is a win."

http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2010/09/17/congratulations-and-good-luck-to-elizabeth-warren/

Posted by: lmsinca | September 17, 2010 9:54 PM | Report abuse

The Washington Post has an article about how the democrats are trying to reach out to the black vote for the midterm elections.


There is one major problem: the black voters are not really WHERE the democrats need them.


Also, in the House, the blacks have been gerrymandered into districts - that might look good on paper - but it doesn't help the democrats in elections - it is already pre-determined about how many black Congressmen there will be (corrupt or uncorrupt.)


And additional black votes in the House are likely to be in these gerrymandered districts - so.


So, the black vote only really can be tapped for the Senate races - and the truth is those places are limited this year -

So the democrats did this to THEMSELVES

They should get rid of the black gerrymandered districts - and open up the process - it would be good for everyone involved.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 9:56 PM | Report abuse

"The promise is a cardboard cutout or symbolic figurehead who is neither bright enough nor educated enough to have any self-developed philosophy of foreign affairs nor any curiosity or interest in these things."

SNORT!!!

Bernie, it's wonderful when you're unintentionally hilarious. An opthalmologist's dream, too.

Posted by: tao9 | September 17, 2010 10:08 PM | Report abuse

Brigade at 9:18


Your points would be better if you dropped the letters - and just described the no-health insurance company - and the pro-health insurance company.


And the employees of each.


The answer is yes, under Obama's plan - the employees who are paid better will experience a transfer of wealth to those who don't have health insurance.


IN fact, the way it will work is that the company that has NO health insurance now will be required to pay some of the bill, the employees will be required to pay some - and the government (meaning other taxpayers) will pay the rest.

SO - one has to wonder if there are going to be ways for companies to "game" the system, and lower their health insurance costs by getting their employees to get maximium subsidies from the government -


IRONICALLY, lowering the wages of the employees does the SAME thing as well.

For instance, lets say that a company FIRES 100 high wage earners - and replaces them with 100 people making 25,000 a year.


So, not only is the company "trading down" on its employees and refusing to pay its employees for their experience -


The company will also receive a SUBSIDY FROM OBAMA for doing this.


WHY? Obama is going to pay MORE for the health insurance for the 100 people making 25,000 than for the health insurance for the high wage earners.

It is horrible - but that is what starts to happen with these crazy redistribution plans - people begin to game the system and unusual results come up.


Yes, Obama will pay MORE for the 100 employees making 25,000 a year - than for 100 high wage jobs - therefore PRODUCING AN INCENTIVE FOR THE COMPANY TO DITCH THE 100 HIGH PAYING JOBS.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 10:14 PM | Report abuse

tao, I think Bernie's right with regards to Palin, whether she runs or not, she will be run behind the scenes. I'm not one of those lefties who wants her to run, I'd much rather have some serious debate re the direction of the country and the economy.

I've been watching your guy Daniels and I hope he runs, there's more speculation everyday that he will. I don't agree with his philosophy but he's a serious person for serious times.

I am about 95% sure Palin will enter the primary, what Republicans do with that is up to them. Do they want the circus or an opera?

Posted by: lmsinca | September 17, 2010 10:17 PM | Report abuse

I believe the Republicans will get together and nominate a viable, strong and credible candidate.


We have all been through the nightmare of the far-left wing Obama - and no one wants to go through that again.


So don't expect the Republicans to nominate someone who is too far from the center.


YOU can expect someone who will stick to their values, and be fiscally conservative.


I know that the democrats find those two things repugnant, but you will have to live with it.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 10:31 PM | Report abuse

STRF, AFAIC you're part of the circus, you'll just have to live with it.

Posted by: lmsinca | September 17, 2010 10:36 PM | Report abuse

Imsinca


I can see the circus - and I bring it to the other side.


This country must be saved.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 10:46 PM | Report abuse

post to ims continued...first from work, second at home after a small bowl (an experimental post, if you will)

But the danger of backing Palin is acute for precisely the reasons Rove sought to eliminate O'Donnell back in December - a likely or certain electoral loss where a critical lever of power (the Senate) is at stake. If the numbers show her unable or very unlikely to win a general, what will these guys do? Losing the WH again will be an enormously painful blow (when Clinton won his second, Ralph Reed quit politics in a state of apathy). So there will be a severe internal struggle for power and it will not help them look sane and responsible. Worse, they'll be losers which, in their version of the American creed, is the worst thing you can be. All this is to be avoided, particularly as demographics increasingly favor liberal government which, outside a civil war, will possiblly result in some arrangement like Canada or Europe where white people yet manage to get by and be actually happy.

But there's another danger in here too which I'm sure is appreciated. Palin will polarize. Someone like our Mormon with the Superman blue hair thing, not so much. And that polarization will necessarily set up a dichotomy of undeniable extremism on the right vs... a handsome basketball player who talks good and seems to care and who has a family life that Evangelicals pray for. An over-arching perception that might arise with this pairing and Palin failing miserably is a loss of respect for conservativism if this was the best they have to offer. Further, she'll polarize because I, for example, will sure as hell get seriously activist. Who among us wouldn't?

And how would she end up so badly? She won't do or won't get past debates and interviews. She'll have to do them, won't she? And she will be and be seen to be, a fool. For electoral purposes, she is in many ways exactly the wrong person.

Smarter would be if she managed some believable narrative why another would be better and then worked in tandem with him. I don't think her ego will allow another VP run. So it's TV etc keeping base at that pitch that scares dogs, for good reason.

I don't know for sure how this is going to come out. It's interesting but only in the same way as watching the Titanic come apart.

Posted by: bernielatham | September 17, 2010 10:50 PM | Report abuse

Why is Bloomberg now using taxpayer funds to have the New York City Police Dept protect the mosque at Ground Zero from the press ????


Apparently now, Bloomberg has some protection zone around the mosque - one in which the press is not allowed to report.


WOW - so to protect the Freedom of Religion - NOW we have to restrict the Freedom of the Press ????

AND why is Bloomberg giving the mosque PUBLIC SECURITY- the mosque is supposed to be a private entity - so Why is Bloomberg using public funds for security ????


Bloomberg is WAY too close to the mosque supporters - there is a curious motive here.

Obama as well - WAY too close to this project - for dubious public benefit -


HOWEVER, it appears Obama is behind the mosque at Ground Zero and nothing is going to stop him.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 17, 2010 10:52 PM | Report abuse

lms,

Here's why I don't think Palin, if she runs, will garner much success other than from rock-ribbed 'Cudaphiles:

cf.: the graf I quoted above with the appended "SNORT." We are currently in the throes of a presidency that is thoroughly, predictably out of it's depth.
The parallel/obverse spectacle to 2008 of a scripted, shadow-funded, callow, accomplishment-free yet disturbingly self-engrossed, guarded, "transformative," albeit charismatic candidate will be all too familiar to the voting public.

Fool me once, shame on me....

Daniels? Perhaps.

Rodham, like Charlie (gratuitous ApocalypseNow ref), just grows stronger in the bush.

Posted by: tao9 | September 17, 2010 11:08 PM | Report abuse

Bernie,

What was in that small bowl?

Posted by: tao9 | September 17, 2010 11:14 PM | Report abuse

Rodham, like Charlie (gratuitous ApocalypseNow ref), just grows stronger in the bush.

What they really got was crazy. But let allow you to imagine a loin-cloth story here.

Posted by: bernielatham | September 17, 2010 11:19 PM | Report abuse

It's all very interesting Bernie in a side show sort of way. You may have read in the past that I was raised by a bunch of gamblers and enjoy a card game myself. If I were betting the odds on this, I'd say she's going to enter the primary, what happens after that is anyone's guess. I don't think her ego will be satisfied until she tries, whatever the powers that be think about it.

The Roves, Armeys, Kristols, Koch's etc. don't seem to be able to control the situation as well as they thought and it's clear the "young guns" aren't exactly setting the house on fire. I'm confident we'll see a tea party type of candidate in the primary and she fits the bill in their eyes. And remember they've managed to purge the party of more of the moderate Republicans this year.

As I mentioned to tao above, I hope someone with a little more intellectual heft and policy seriousness comes out the winner of the primary process, but it remains to be seen. Maybe after the Nov. elections, depending on how the tea party crowd fares, we'll have a better idea which direction the GOP will go.

Posted by: lmsinca | September 17, 2010 11:22 PM | Report abuse

But you point to a serious omission in what I wrote above...the fight for candidacy. Debates. Death. And death by another 'conservative' which is possibly unforgivable. Party ripping-apart possibilities look broad and rich.

She can't run.

Randy Scheunemann, her number one advisor for a long time now, is an interesting character. From the universe of lobbying and big money making as parasite around the DC system. Buchannan has very un-nice things to say about him, mostly centered around his money-grubbing self interest and regarding (he tries to be polite) Randy's connections to Israel and to Likud. "Dual loyalty" was the charge.

In trying to figure out her path ahead, I try to consider what his influences might determine.

Posted by: bernielatham | September 17, 2010 11:26 PM | Report abuse

Bernie,

You don't get the "Charlie" reference do you?

Hint: see Willard/Sheen is in his hotel room in Saigon waiting...

Oh, golly, never mind...it's lost on ya.

Civil war's comin'...ZOMG!!! & loin cloths.

{{{he,heh,&,uh,he}}}

Everything OK?

Posted by: tao9 | September 17, 2010 11:38 PM | Report abuse

Buchannan may have little use for Scheunemann, who's being very shadowy BTW, but he's got plenty of love for Palin regardless of the Israel issue. Too many variables still to call it I think, but the primary debates will be "must see TV".

Right now everyone's racing to the base but in a national debate it will be a different story if they want to pick up indy's and moderates, which they'll have to do at some point. Will cooler heads prevail?

Posted by: lmsinca | September 17, 2010 11:43 PM | Report abuse

lms,

"The Roves, Armeys, Kristols, Koch's etc. don't seem to be able to control the situation as well as they thought..."

They've never controlled the situation. Never.

How could they? Is the left controlled by some kind of Bill Keller, NPR, Soros brain-ray.

That is a conceit, and a condescending one on both sides in the bargain.

We are not marionettes.

Posted by: tao9 | September 17, 2010 11:48 PM | Report abuse

I didn't say they do tao, just that they think they do, and aren't doing a very good job obviously. I'm waiting for the real Republican party to surface and I hope it does soon after the mid-term elections. You seem to think that Obama won on a fluke of personality and was propelled into office by something other than the will of an engaged electorate. Yet at the same time you don't like the idea that it could happen on your side. Hold on to your seats ladies and gentlemen.

Posted by: lmsinca | September 17, 2010 11:55 PM | Report abuse

BTW, I'm waiting up for a call from Paris. My daughter touches down in about 50 minutes then they're off to Mont Saint Michele for a week of geologic study of tidal outcroppings. Can't wait to see the pics.

Posted by: lmsinca | September 18, 2010 12:07 AM | Report abuse

lms,

Definitely an engaged public. I was most intrigued by the man myself, but then I looked a little deeper at the record than most.

I'd say intoxicated would be a more accurate word (in both it's positive & negative meanings) though, than engaged.

Posted by: tao9 | September 18, 2010 12:09 AM | Report abuse

Wow, lms, that is exciting.

Maybe we should go grad school!

Posted by: tao9 | September 18, 2010 12:18 AM | Report abuse

tao, who you callin' intoxicated?

Too many shots to the head, perhaps, or rush of blood to the head.

What do you make of this O'Donnell woman, seriously? Would you let her drive your wagon over a bridge?

I like lms's definition of "serious pols for serious times." I would think you would too.

Posted by: BGinCHI | September 18, 2010 12:19 AM | Report abuse

tao, I'd love to have you and lms in one of my grad classes. Or maybe you just come to town and take a seminar I'm doing at the Newberry. Remember: Reading Is Fundamental.

Posted by: BGinCHI | September 18, 2010 12:25 AM | Report abuse

BG, that would be a kick wouldn't it? I bet tao and I could give you a little run for your money, mostly tao. I spend too much time lallygagging to be as informed or well read as you guys.

Unfortunately, looks like all my spare time will be spent in CO or TX (yuk, sorry McWing, but I've lived there myself) for the next two years. I'll let you know how the Coors tour is though.

Posted by: lmsinca | September 18, 2010 12:34 AM | Report abuse

Ladies:


The CLEAR INTENT of Congress is to have someone in charge of this agency who is subject to the "advice and consent" of the Senate.

If Obama doesn't LIKE that - perhaps he should have Congress change the LAW.


However - Obama has UNILATERALLY DECIDED to go around the law - and do whatever he wants - and run this agency in a manner in which Congress did not approve.

THAT is IMPEACHABLE.

Add this to the long list of offenses which Obama is guilty of.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 18, 2010 12:40 AM | Report abuse

Tao writes - or attributes:


the graf I quoted above with the appended "SNORT." We are currently in the throes of a presidency that is thoroughly, predictably out of it's depth.
The parallel/obverse spectacle to 2008 of a scripted, shadow-funded, callow, accomplishment-free yet disturbingly self-engrossed, guarded, "transformative," albeit charismatic candidate will be all too familiar to the voting public.

Fool me once, shame on me....


_______________________________________

Exactly, this is correct.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 18, 2010 12:44 AM | Report abuse

BG,

Mont St Michel's tough to beat. Are there any castles on islands on Lk Mich where you could have the seminar.

After lending it to my brother in VT, and getting it back on LaborDay, just re-read By the Lake.

Picked up this Ecco 4/Vol set of Conrad's Complete Short Stories and Tales. Gonna hit that great stuff again.

I get the feeling we're getting way more "Gawker" type info on O'Donnell so far. She can't be all that and still win vs. Castle w/out some kind of savvy.

I've been in the same room with Kiki Gillibrand twice and back-engineered from the experience that elevation to national office did not require great, uh, sagacity or wit.

Posted by: tao9 | September 18, 2010 12:54 AM | Report abuse

Imsinca writes to tao and says:


You seem to think that Obama won on a fluke of personality and was propelled into office by something other than the will of an engaged electorate.


_________________________________

Yea, well it was a fluke - I don't think "personality" had much to do with it -


Unless you think that "personality" requirement is a liar.

CLEARLY - it was a fluke - Everything thought Hillary would be nominated - but she stalled with just less than 40% in a wide field.

In situations like that, electorates look to the next candidate to fall to.


Obama - had a steady block of voters in the democratic party as a result of his skin color.

Edwards - was imploding on his own.

Biden and Dodd - with decades in the Senate each never really caught on - if one of them was around 20% prior to Hillary's stall, one of them may be President today.

Richards never really got above 8%.


So where could the democrats go? Edwards pulled out of the race - perhaps on the idea that a scandal was coming - or he was threatened to leave based on the scandal. But Edwards sure seemed to leave the race prematurely.


That left Hillary and Obama - with ALL the charges that the BLACKS WOULD NEVER ALLOW HILLARY TO "STEAL" THE NOMINATION - AND THERE WOULD BE "riots" in the streets if the Superdelegates took the nomination from Obama.


IT WAS INTIMIDATION BASED ON RACE - THE WHOLE TIME, OBAMA WAS USING HIS RACE TO GET AHEAD.

Then in the fall, the economic crisis and 8 years of one party - caused the nation to want to switch parties.


You can call that a FLUKE or whatever you want to -


But this guy Obama should NOT be the President right now -


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 18, 2010 12:54 AM | Report abuse

lms, sorry about the drain on your time, but glad to see your daughter thriving.

Family is rewarding and hard. That's life, I guess.

Hope the reading makes life more interesting.

Posted by: BGinCHI | September 18, 2010 12:55 AM | Report abuse

Good lord, don't you ever get tired of hearing yourself babble?

You lost. A majority thought Obama should be president, so now he is. Get over it. He won by the biggest margin in 20 years. So as for "should NOT", the constitution, and a significant majority of your fellow citizens, disagree.

You know, shouting lies over and over and over and over and over and over and over again, whether on a blog or while standing on a streetcorner screaming at passing traffic, does not make them true.

Posted by: JennOfArk | September 18, 2010 1:01 AM | Report abuse

Exactly, this is correct.


Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 18, 2010 12:44 AM | Report abuse
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

uh oh ;>)

niters. 1luv.

Posted by: tao9 | September 18, 2010 1:02 AM | Report abuse

Always BG, love to read and am just deciding which book to read next. She landed so I'm out. Peace out all........

Posted by: lmsinca | September 18, 2010 1:04 AM | Report abuse

To clarify the posting at 12:54


It was highly improper to have as an element of a Presidential election - the THREAT that if one candidate did not get the nomination, an entire ethnic group would "riot in the streets" and eventually leave the party.


Let me be clear: What went on with the Superdelegates in the Spring of 2008 was disgraceful IMPROPER and should never be a part of a Presidential election.

A little historical context - what started after the 84 and 88 elections - with the representatives of Jesse Jackson negotiating with party leaders to bring a more PROPORTIONAL DELEGATE SYSTEM to the democratic party nominating process -


There emerged a proportional system with Superdelegates added on.


But in 2008 - the proportional system started to yield a candidate a solid block of delegates based on the color of his skin -


But then - the Superdelegates were subjected to a CAMPAIGN OF INTIMIDATION - and threats that the blacks would leave the democratic party in mass - if Obama did not get the nomination.


Clearly, an attempt to EXTEND the support of the proportional system beyond the intented proportions.


There were MANY RACE-BASED arguments put to the Superdelegates.


All of a sudden, the nomination of a major party is being decided NOT BY WHO IS THE BEST CANDIDATE

WHO IS THE MOST QUALIFIED CANDIDATE


OR WHO HAS THE MOST EXPERIENCE.


Instead - the nomination is being decided by RACIAL INTIMIDATION AND THREATS OF DESTROYING A POLITICAL PARTY IF ONE ETHNIC GROUP DID NOT GET ITS WAY.


You want to call that a "FLUKE"

I would call it something else - but the result is NOW the democratic party is in really bad shape.


AND I would like to point out - that following the Superdelegates episode - TWO YEARS LATER WE HAD FALSE CHARGES OF RACISM LEVELED AGAINST MILLIONS OF PEOPLE WHO DID NOT SUPPORT OBAMA'S VERSION OF HEALTH CARE.

AND A DISGRACEFUL ATTACK FROM ELECTED OFFICIALS TO CITIZENS EXERCISING THEIR FREEDOM OF SPEECH - AN ATTACK BASED ON FALSE CHARGES OF RACISM AGAIN.


The democratic party let Obama get away with it in the Spring of 2008, and it is STILL going on.


And we have the NAACP resolutions too.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 18, 2010 1:06 AM | Report abuse

tao, floating poker game seminar in lake MI would be dreamy. I wish.

Dreary old Hamlet at the Newberry.

Conrad is great. Hard to beat the seagoing stuff. Still and all I like writers that take us to a place we didn't think we wanted to go till we got there on their language.

Posted by: BGinCHI | September 18, 2010 1:08 AM | Report abuse

Jenn

I am not sure that result would have been if Obama did not LIE - and then pull out of the PUBLIC FINANCE SYSTEM.


For decades, Presidential candidates were on a level playing field - agreeing to the terms of the Presidential Finance System.


Obama LIED and took an UNFAIR ADVANTAGE - by NOT remaining in the public finance system.

For ALL of Obama's talk of reform and how he is against the abuses in the campaign finance system - it was Obama who went outside the system that worked for decades.

AND without the economic crisis coming when it did - seven weeks before the election - who knows


If the economic crisis hit a few months later, Obama may not have won at all.

So, for all the HUFF AND PUFF from the democrats on Obama - a reasonable person has to concluded: NOT that impressive.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 18, 2010 1:15 AM | Report abuse

Sorry, dorkface, but the Democratic Party is a PRIVATE entity and you, who obviously do NOT belong, don't get to dictate its rules or how it chooses to interpret or enforce them.

Clearly from all the references you made to race that's the issue that has you all stirred up. Sorry, great hero Bush was such a monumental disaster that a sizable majority of your fellow citizens were able to overcome their latent racism and vote for a black guy who had been duly nominated by a political party that again, is a PRIVATE ENTITY operating under its own rules.

I'm not calling you a racist, but it's only because there's no need to.

Posted by: JennOfArk | September 18, 2010 1:17 AM | Report abuse

Jenn

I don't lie -


And usually when people disagree, they are more specific about the items - then simply talking about some imagined street corner.


So you know I type the TRUTH.

And my position - clearly stated above - is Obama should never have been nominated.


It really is too bad what the democrats have done to this country.

For a group of people so DESPERATE to gain power that they would rather LOSE a war - than stand and fight - I guess this should be expected.

Let's just hope that Obama doesn't do too much damage to the country.


At this point, most of the permanent damage can be undone -


It is too bad about ALL the people who are out of work - who are still out of work - AND who may be WORKING NOW if Obama and the democrats were serious about a JOBS CREATING STIMULUS


Instead, Obama and the democrats diverted the money to all sorts of projects.


I feel sorry for those people who SHOULD BE working - EXCEPT FOR OBAMA AND THE DEMOCRATS.


Some party which is supposed to care about working families.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 18, 2010 1:21 AM | Report abuse

By the way, you know who else pulled out of the presidential finance system?

Your pal, George W. Bush.

Posted by: JennOfArk | September 18, 2010 1:22 AM | Report abuse

By the way, you know who else pulled out of the presidential finance system?

Your pal, George W. Bush.

Posted by: JennOfArk | September 18, 2010 1:26 AM | Report abuse

Yes, you do lie.

You're a lying liar who tells lies. While it may be true that you're not smart enough or sane enough to recognize them as lies, they are lies nonetheless, which, as previously noted, are being told by a lying liar.

Sleep beckons, so you'll have to entertain yourself for the rest of the evening screaming at traffic.

Posted by: JennOfArk | September 18, 2010 1:29 AM | Report abuse

You guys should stop complaining because, one the health care we have now isnt as good as it was supposed to be. also the law has just been signed so give it some time. so if u want to say u have the right to choose tell that to ur congress men or state official. If you do not have insurance and need one You can find full medical coverage at the lowest price by calling 877-882-4740 or check http://bit.ly/9fDY7U If you have health insurance and do not care about cost just be happy about it and trust me you are not going to loose anything!

Posted by: quincyhow18 | September 18, 2010 6:17 AM | Report abuse

tao:

"What was in that small bowl?"

I'd also like to know exactly how "small".

BTW, tao, good stuff last night on Chait (read: Bernie).

Posted by: ScottC3 | September 18, 2010 6:33 AM | Report abuse

@tao - I know the scene. "Tougher" is defined by what is to follow, by the paradigmatic soldier Kurtz, by the heads on pikes and the massacre of innocents as loss of humanity and the insanity of the principles. Or, Conrad and Coppola were doing rah rah for the worst that we come to, perhaps?

As regards your "they never controlled" argument - you've taken the lazy/naughty way out and implied that Ims and I have suggested an absolute. We haven't. Note Ims "as well as".

I trust you would agree that you have not been as influential in the shape and trajectory of conservativism as Weyrich or Rove or Reed or Norquist or Kristol? How much less influential?

"We're not marionettes". Cognitive science research doesn't support your claim at least in any strong sense. See Weston. See the success of marketing strategies (or of Luntz' understanding of how we respond to language). Or consider the matter of "charisma". Or consider the efficacy of certain propaganda techniques. Much of the machinery of how we respond to stimuli is below consciousness and is not available to us for easy reflection.

Posted by: bernielatham | September 18, 2010 7:44 AM | Report abuse

""We're not marionettes". Cognitive science research doesn't support your claim at least in any strong sense. See Weston. See the success of marketing strategies (or of Luntz' understanding of how we respond to language)."

Which would raise a paradox as to the behavior of the puppetmasters. How wonderfully postmodern.

Posted by: quarterback1 | September 18, 2010 8:02 AM | Report abuse

Bernie:

"Cognitive science research doesn't support your claim at least in any strong sense."

Who's pulling your strings, then? How is it that Bernie has managed to resist the manipulations of the dread Rove-Beck-Limbaugh axis of evil?

Posted by: ScottC3 | September 18, 2010 8:02 AM | Report abuse

“The Republican establishment must get out of the way,” said Steve Scheffler, a longtime social conservative leader in Iowa who is a member of the Republican National Committee. “They need to have faith in the activists that we will pick the right winner who can win.” http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/18/us/politics/18repubs.html?_r=1&hp

Yes, please.

Posted by: bernielatham | September 18, 2010 8:02 AM | Report abuse

If either of you gents at some point wish to talk seriously, let me know. In the meantime, here's Noonan:

"A movement like this can help a nation by acting as a corrective, or it can descend into a corrosive populism that celebrates unknowingness as authenticity, that confuses showiness with seriousness and vulgarity with true conviction. Parts could become swept by a desire just to tear down, to destroy. But establishments exist for a reason. It is true that the party establishment is compromised, and by many things, but one of them is experience. They’ve lived through a lot, seen a lot, know the national terrain. They know how things work. They know the history. I wonder if tea party members know how fragile are the institutions that help keep the country together." http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/17/hot-tea-cool-g-o-p/?hp

Noonan recognizes the threat, not least because it is a threat to that of which she is a well-paid cog. But her argument here goes beyond self-concern and she's wise to perceive the threat to institutions which are (off with their heads!) fragile.

Posted by: bernielatham | September 18, 2010 8:24 AM | Report abuse

All, here's an Open Thread for you:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/09/open_thread_5.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | September 18, 2010 8:26 AM | Report abuse

Bernie:

"If either of you gents at some point wish to talk seriously, let me know."

Spare me, Bernie. You have no interest whatsoever in discussing anything seriously with people who a) challenge your premises or b) apply your premises to their logical (and, for you, uncomfortable) conclusion.

But feel free to prove me wrong and answer my question: If we are, in fact, marionettes, who is pulling your strings?

Posted by: ScottC3 | September 18, 2010 8:36 AM | Report abuse

Scott - Spare you I won't. Go read the frigging research and then come back and talk to me. My arguments may be assailable (surely are assailable) but you don't have the knowledge presently to get past your games of juvenile sophistry and assail them in any way I find interesting.

Posted by: bernielatham | September 18, 2010 9:00 AM | Report abuse

Brigade I am the one who told you to wait til Labor Day and I was right. Since Labor Day 1. Gallup has gone from +10 generic GOP to 43 /43 tie
2. Reid has gone from -15 to up 2
3. Whittman has spent $119 and is up 2 w/i margin of error; 4.GOP went from up 15 in Delaware to down 11 and now Alaska is in play
5. Murray up 5; Conway never a serious challenge and only Pa maybe Wisconsin a problem so yes things starting to change now that Labor Day has passed like every election cycle

Posted by: leichtman1 | September 18, 2010 9:11 AM | Report abuse

Well, Bernie, your claim of of mass psycho-political control does raise a conundrum, doesn't it? Unless we assume that cognitive science recognizes two varieties of "we" -- the marionettes and those with free will -- then a closed system of human actors become rather inexplicable. If cognitive science suggests, as you claim, that "we" are indeed marionettes, then cognitive science is not very useful or reliable.

Perhaps we must look to science fiction for the answers. But I think this is just another case where the mania for dehumanizing one's political foes and concocting extravagant theories of their venality and dangerousness leads one to propose and adopt aburdities clothed in intellectualism.

Posted by: quarterback1 | September 18, 2010 9:16 AM | Report abuse

"Perhaps we must look to science fiction for the answers"

What you need to do, first of all, is try to figure out why it is you are so comfortable in speaking to that which you don't know anything or much about. If you can get past that hurdle, you'll make yourself available for actual learning. That would be a move in the right direction.

Or, if you want to continue to be lazy as $hit but still challenge yourself, write up a careful essay on what Luntz is doing, how he is doing it, and why he is doing it.

Or, another on how and why propaganda is used as a tool by totalitarian governments and examples of its efficacy.

Let me know when any of this is done.

Posted by: bernielatham | September 18, 2010 9:54 AM | Report abuse

Who'd have dreamed it would happen?

"O'DONNELL SNUBS SCHIEFFER
GOP Senate nominee Christine O'Donnell (DE) cancels her scheduled appearance tomorrow on CBS's Face the Nation. She is apparently still planning on doing Fox News Sunday."
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2010/09/odonnell_snubs_schieffer.php?ref=fpblg

Posted by: bernielatham | September 18, 2010 10:18 AM | Report abuse

Lol, Bernie, you really are too much. Too much arrogance, self-delusion, and deflection.

When you start actually doing unbiased cognitive science rather than partisan propoganda of your own, let us know, and we'll all talk science.

Posted by: quarterback1 | September 18, 2010 11:08 AM | Report abuse

Bernie:

"Go read the frigging research and then come back and talk to me."

No need to, for I am perfectly willing to accept as true your presentation of the research (although your past history shows that such a trust is definitely not justified.) Tao said we are not "marionettes", and you said the research does not support him. Fine. Let's, for the sake of argument, accept that. The question I have, then, is, who is manipulating you? Quite an obvious question, really.

I realize you want to change the topic, for this is a rather uncomfortable question for you. But change it I won't.

"My arguments..."

You don't make arguments. You make assertions, and when they get challenged, you hide behind a facade of intellectual snobbery, pretending that those who are challenging you are too "lazy" or not "serious" enough or are simply intellectually unworthy of your edification.

Posted by: ScottC3 | September 18, 2010 12:08 PM | Report abuse

"You don't make arguments. You make assertions, and when they get challenged, you hide behind a facade of intellectual snobbery, pretending that those who are challenging you are too "lazy" or not "serious" enough or are simply intellectually unworthy of your edification."

Scott, you hit it on the head.

Posted by: quarterback1 | September 18, 2010 7:27 PM | Report abuse

Which of those are not "real" jobs?

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 17, 2010 6:33 PM | Report abuse

----

Running for office is a lot of work, but it is not a job. That's also true of being a bowling league secretary.

Have a good night Jake.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | September 18, 2010 7:58 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