Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Happy Hour Roundup

* Jon Ralston skewers the methodology of the recent public polls showing Sharron Angle with a slight lead.

* Headline of the day, from ABC News, on John Boehner's speech on the economy today:

Boehner's Closing Argument on Jobs: "Do You Have to Take it? Hell No You Don't!"

* Ben Smith calls B.S. on the phony claims we keep hearing that labor's spending is equivalent to that of corporate-funded groups.

* A Tea Party leader tells Brian Beutler that Eric Cantor had better bag all his responsible talk about not shutting down the government -- or else. Harbinger of things to come?

* History lesson of the day, from Ezra Klein:

Amid the wave of Republican nostalgia for Bill Clinton's moderate instincts, it's worth reminding people that Barack Obama's health-care plan was the moderate Republican plan that emerged as a counter-proposal to Clinton's big-government vision.

* Very good Rachel Maddow segment pillorying the skittish Beltway Dem approach to dealing with Republicans, and why Dems who go on offense are succeeding.

* This may be the most brutal ad of the cycle, a DCCC spot slamming a GOP candidate in Massachusetts for strip searching female teenage suspects.

* Robert Reich offers a dispiriting survey of the post-Citizens United landscape, and a roadmap to action.

* Nice overview from Dan Eggen of the "full scale war" that's erupted between the Chamber and Dems.

.* Good question from Jonathan Bernstein: If the GOP takes back power, will Rush, Beck and all the big right wing opinion makers look the other way if Republican leaders punt on all their deficit pieties? I think we know the answer to this one.

* More Tea Party nonsense: Wisconsin Senate candidate Ron Johnson's factories employ prison inmates whose health care costs are paid by the state, meaning his company doesn't have to cover them.

* Another brutal ad from Harry Reid, this one attacking Angle for voting against a "program to weed out sex offenders by helping youth and church groups do background checks on volunteers."

* And Jed Lewison dubs her "Sharia Sharron."

What else is happening?

By Greg Sargent  | October 8, 2010; 5:39 PM ET
Categories:  2010 elections, Happy Hour Roundup, Health reform, 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: How low is the public's regard for the GOP?
Next: Open Thread

Comments

Obama is complaining about a "threat to democracy"

Is that a laugh or what?

What about Obama's credit card machines - were they taking in FOREIGN MONEY ??? Seriously folks, this is a serious question. The American People DESERVE an investigation into the CREDIT CARD CONTRIBUTIONS to Obama's 2008 Campaign.


The American People DESERVE IT.


The banks have all the credit card information - the billing addresses of ALL the credit cards of Obama - and the contribution limits.


Obama spent $700 MILLION in 2008 -

and now he is complaining about a FRACTION of that amount?

Anyone who knows the slightest bit about the subject can not believe that Obama would go make these kinds of charges.

At this point, why doesn't Obama just put on a red suit with a giant H for Hypocrite?


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 8, 2010 5:48 PM | Report abuse

Great catch by Ezra. That's amazing. That's a nice reminder to the Teabag crowd who think we're shifted far to the left. As if.

Also, I could swear I saw Chris Cilizza jogging on the lakefront path today. The guy had glasses just like his and his face looked exactly like him.

Anyone know if he's following Rahm around today here?

Posted by: BGinCHI | October 8, 2010 5:49 PM | Report abuse

" If the GOP takes back power, will Rush, Beck and all the big right wing opinion makers look the other way if Republican leaders punt on all their deficit pieties?"

Rush and Beck probably won't, actually. Neither of them are likely to be demanding we replace said Republicans with Democrats, however. But if Republicans completely punt on deficit and big government, they are going to get critiqued.

"Wisconsin Senate candidate Ron Johnson's factories employ prison inmates whose health care costs are paid by the state, meaning his company doesn't have to cover them."

That's called having your cake and eating it, too. Nice gig, if you can get it.

Re: Ezra Klein. He brought that up multiple times during the debate. However, it didn't end up passing muster with a lot of the more conservative Republicans, and I'm pretty sure it didn't put an end to healthcare savings accounts.

But, as I recall, it also contained an unconstitutional mandate. Hmmm.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 8, 2010 5:59 PM | Report abuse

SaveTheRainforest:

Obama is the THREAT to democracy! Did you see our thread comments about him acting like a thug dictator targeting the U.S. Chamber of Commerce?

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 8, 2010 6:03 PM | Report abuse

* History lesson of the day, from Ezra Klein:

Amid the wave of Republican nostalgia for Bill Clinton's moderate instincts, it's worth reminding people that Barack Obama's health-care plan was the moderate Republican plan that emerged as a counter-proposal to Clinton's big-government vision.
===============================

No matter. Wingnut think tanks are paid to invent new realities, and the likes of JakeD2 enjoy living in thase alternate universes.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | October 8, 2010 6:08 PM | Report abuse

ifthethunderdontgetya:

Assuming he is legitimately President of the United States, Obama IS violating the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's free speech rights.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/10/us_chamber_sees_no_need_to_add.html

He should be impeached and removed from office immediately.

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 8, 2010 6:16 PM | Report abuse

"Is Bill Maher hinting that Christine O'Donnell has finally agreed to an interview?

The HBO host tweeted:

Christine O Donnell clip for tonight's show? I got something better!"

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/live/tpm-midterms-wire/

Posted by: suekzoo1 | October 8, 2010 6:18 PM | Report abuse

Assuming Joke is an alien, he should be vaporized.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 8, 2010 6:20 PM | Report abuse

suekzoo1:

Regardless, I will be here to defend Ms. O'Donnell.

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 8, 2010 6:22 PM | Report abuse

"Regardless, I will be here to defend Ms. O'Donnell."

Well, a little humor on The Plum Line never hurt anyone, I guess.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | October 8, 2010 6:29 PM | Report abuse

Anyone who can give to Alex Sink for Gov of FL, please do so ***TODAY***!!!!

http://www.alexsink2010.com/contribute

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 8, 2010 6:30 PM | Report abuse

Greg and all: nothing on the big foreclosure news??

Lots going on with BofA and a whole bunch of chatter.

Anyone have any interesting news? See the link I posted on the previous thread about DocX?

Posted by: BGinCHI | October 8, 2010 6:33 PM | Report abuse

ChuckinDenton:

You won't be laughing when she wins!

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 8, 2010 6:34 PM | Report abuse

In the news

A novel place to put the blame for the financial crisis:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-08/taleb-says-crisis-makes-nobel-panel-liable-for-legitimizing-economists.html

Posted by: sold2u | October 8, 2010 6:39 PM | Report abuse

BG, I was just about to mention foreclosures and post a link. Easily the biggest story of the day.

Steve Benen has an EXCELLENT run-down of links from today:

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_10/026047.php

And that is just to supplement Greg's list which, with the exception of the foreclosures story and the Dow breaking 11000 today, is also a great run-down of today's stories.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 8, 2010 6:41 PM | Report abuse

@Ethan....Here is our breaking story of the day in St. Petersburg. The "Big Dog" is coming to town to campaign for your guy Kendrick!!!!

http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/elections/bill-clinton-to-campaign-for-kendrick-meek-at-usf-st-pete/1126917

Former President Bill Clinton is set to campaign for Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Kendrick Meek on Oct. 19 in St. Petersburg.

Clinton and Meek will be at the University of South Florida St. Petersburg that morning and the next day they will campaign together at the University of Central Florida.

Obviously they are trying to fire up the "youth vote" by visiting Universities.
Let's hope they succeed. Like most states Florida has far more registered Dems than R's it's really all about GOTV.

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 8, 2010 6:42 PM | Report abuse

ruk and Ethan, from Kos:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/10/8/908771/-FL-Sen:-GOP-fears-Meeks-withdrawal

This is going to get spicy.

Maybe they could run together against Rubio. Ebony and Ivory 2010!

Posted by: BGinCHI | October 8, 2010 6:47 PM | Report abuse

@BG Thanks for the link. It's an interesting scenario but I can't really see Kendrick dropping out. Don't know about Crist either. In fact I don't know which would have the better chance if they got to go it alone. I think Rubio's % is solid but again it's nowhere near enough to win the race alone.

Whatever BG I don't believe you're going to get Ethan to sign off on Kendrick dropping out. The fact that the big dog is coming to campaign for him here in Crist's hometown speaks volumes about the Dem attitude. Perhaps they could buy off Charlie with an offer if he agreed to join the Dem party. Of course we've already seen how well that worked out for Specter.

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 8, 2010 6:53 PM | Report abuse

To paraphrase my favorite movie, ruk, "Forget about it, Kendrick, it's Florida."

Posted by: BGinCHI | October 8, 2010 6:55 PM | Report abuse

I bet anything it's Charlie Crist who's going to withdraw, or nobody will. That would be my hope. But I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility. Crist is falling rapidly in the polls and the Greer trial is about to start. Meek has stuck his neck WAY out by rejecting the Sierra Club co-endorsement of himself and Crist on the basis of it being ridiculous for them to endorse Crist after standing on stage with Palin with a crowd chating "Drill baby Drill". And now Clinton going down there to campaign. Plus, Dems are psyched to have Meek in there to help Sink get the African-American vote he helps bring to the polls.

Yah, no way Meek withdraws unless it's pretty close to last minute. I can see Crist withdrawing tho for the aforementioned reasons. It has to be planned out perfectly. It certainly can be done. Meek with Crist's endorsement, Clinton campaigning and Obama campaigning would put Meek over the top imho.

Thanks for the links RUK and BG. You guys rock. I'm out, have a great weekend all. And that goes double for my buddy Kevin, who I give a hard time, but I want to like even though he is a disingenuous knee-jerk Republican who often reacts without any knowledge of the facts. Pisses me off sooo much. But whatever. Oh and THANKS GREG, you're doing a great job under insane circumstances, CHEERS! :-)

Have a great weekend everyone.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 8, 2010 6:58 PM | Report abuse

Thank God he's gone finally!

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 8, 2010 7:02 PM | Report abuse

Ethan, you really know how to bring the love.

Kevin, you need a tissue?

Seriously, interesting developments down FL way. Next couple of weeks are going to be really busy and interesting.

Posted by: BGinCHI | October 8, 2010 7:03 PM | Report abuse

Speaking of Gov. Palin:

Each of the attendees who spoke with POLITICO said they were impressed by her performance, particularly when she took questions and spoke off the cuff.

“Palin was engaging, charming, and well-informed on the issues and the campaigns going on around the country,” said Ralph Reed, a longtime GOP strategist who is now running a social conservative group called the Faith & Freedom Coalition. “While circumspect about her future plans, she was clear she wants to see the party and the country go in a more conservative direction.”

Even though she didn’t openly discuss her intentions, the possibility of a Palin run was discussed by many in the room.

“I was surprised about how many people in room said ‘yes’ when I asked if they could see themselves supporting her,” said one attendee. “I was expecting to hear what you mostly hear – ‘I hope she doesn’t do it’ or, ‘She’s more effective doing what she’s doing.’”

The gathering, first reported by US News & World Report, was described as a “get-acquainted” session by an attendee and was held in conjunction with a video interview Palin did with Newsmax, set to air next week. The evening began with a reception and dinner and was followed by Palin speaking and taking questions.

High-profile guests included Reed, Michael Reagan, Grover Norquist, Dick Morris, Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum and such donors as former GOPAC Chair Gay Gaines, and businessman Lee Hanley ...

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/43345.html#ixzz11oONqNXd

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 8, 2010 7:08 PM | Report abuse

"Ralph Reed, Michael Reagan, Grover Norquist, and Dick Morris" were all impressed with Sarah Palin!

Oh, snap!

Seriously??

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Jake, you're a comedy idiot savant.

Posted by: BGinCHI | October 8, 2010 7:10 PM | Report abuse

Rep. Bobby Bright (D-AL) will NOT vote for Nancy Pelosi to serve as Speaker if he wins re-election, the freshman Congressman told a local TV station Thursday.

"I am not going to vote for Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House ... I will vote for someone, a centrist, who is much more like me," Bright told WSFA-12, based in Montgomery.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/43276.html#ixzz11oPKnOgY

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 8, 2010 7:11 PM | Report abuse

P.S. to BGinCHI: Dick Morris was once "impressed" by Bill Clinton ... seriously.

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 8, 2010 7:14 PM | Report abuse

Before he went batshit crazy.

Posted by: BGinCHI | October 8, 2010 7:17 PM | Report abuse

That's your opinion, of course. I call it "repentance".

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 8, 2010 7:20 PM | Report abuse

A lot of people like to act that the GOP recalcitrance is due to Democrats pursuing policies that are so extreme that the GOP would never vote for them. Obviously this is BS, but the comparison of the GOP health care bill and the one that was passed this year is incontrovertible proof that it's not about policy. Simply obstructionism.

Posted by: DDAWD | October 8, 2010 7:24 PM | Report abuse

I'd be embarrassed if Dick Morris endorsed me. The guy is a sniveling pathetic lard ball of a human being.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | October 8, 2010 7:24 PM | Report abuse

Mike, that's an insult to lard balls.

Posted by: BGinCHI | October 8, 2010 7:26 PM | Report abuse

Of course, when Morris was helping Bill Clinton get re-elected, then he was a "brilliant strategist". Regardless, thank God that mikefromArlington is not running for public office.

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 8, 2010 7:27 PM | Report abuse

Play nice, all.

Off to the pub to meet some friends.

Posted by: BGinCHI | October 8, 2010 7:28 PM | Report abuse

"Before he went batshit crazy."

Agreed about The Clenis's sanity.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | October 8, 2010 7:30 PM | Report abuse

Mondale: Obama's teleprompters are 'idiot boards,' keep him from connecting with audiences
By: Byron York
Chief Political Correspondent
10/04/10 5:39 PM EDT

----

Idiot boards are for __________.

Posted by: Brigade | October 8, 2010 7:40 PM | Report abuse

A rebuttal to the Liar-in-Chief:

http://townhall.com/columnists/DonaldLambro/2010/10/08/obama_would_rather_ignore_fiscal_truths/page/full/

Posted by: actuator | October 8, 2010 7:51 PM | Report abuse

You don't believe in the Southern Strategy, sbj? You don't think it is the strategy of the GOP to pit white christians against everyone else and their ads are not designed for that purpose?

Posted by: pragmaticstill | October 8, 2010 12:51 PM
-----

What did you liberals think of this ad run during the 2000 campaign?

"The late October of 2000 NAACP ad featured a semi-re-enactment of the brutal murder: Black and white video of a pick-up truck's door closing and the pick-up then dragging a long chain down a dirt road. In her own voice, Byrd's daughter recounted:

''I'm Renee Mullins, James Byrd's daughter. On June 7, 1998, in Texas, my father was killed. He was beaten, chained and then dragged three miles to his death -- all because he was black. So when Governor George W. Bush refused to support hate crimes legislation, it was like my father was killed all over again. Call George W. Bush and tell him to support hate crimes legislation. We won't be dragged away from our future.'"

Let's see now. Three men were involved in the murder. Two got the death penalty and one got life in prison. But that wasn't enough. Paltry sentences like that were akin to murdering the victim all over again.

What strategy was in play here? Are all you libs now in favor of the death penalty?
Cat got your typing fingers?

Posted by: Brigade | October 8, 2010 7:53 PM | Report abuse

quarterback1 wrote,
"SCOTUS held that blue laws are not an unconstitutional establishment of religion, because they serve a secular purpose. (And, actually, I'm not aware of any particular Christian "law" they enforce.)"
-------

I didn't see anyone respond to this, but it's a good point. Would those whining about a Christian theocracy please point to the Christian doctrine and supporting Scripture that prohibits drinking or says anything about blue laws or not selling booze on Sunday? It's always good to have something to back up wild and inane assertions.

Posted by: Brigade | October 8, 2010 7:59 PM | Report abuse

JoeT1 wrote,
"blue laws might have had a secular purpose that saved them from being thrown out, but they were religious in origin and intent. Thankfully we have the constitution to protect us from christians trying to make this a religious nation."
----

See above post, Joe. Can you be a little more specific? We don't want anyone to think you're full of crap.

Posted by: Brigade | October 8, 2010 8:02 PM | Report abuse

filmnoia wrote,
"The point being made is that powerful industrial forces in this country always have used race and ethnicity to pit people against one another."
-------

See post from 7:53pm. You mean powerful industrial forces like the NAACP?

Posted by: Brigade | October 8, 2010 8:06 PM | Report abuse

Hard to imagine JOKE that the guy you and STRF can do NOTHING but complain about...the guy who has you sooo obsessed you rant on endlessly...is doing 4% better than Saint Ronnie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 8, 2010 2:24 PM
---

I knew Ronald Reagan. Ronald Reagan was a friend of mine. Barry, you're no Ronald Reagan.

Posted by: Brigade | October 8, 2010 8:08 PM | Report abuse

Frankly, I'm worried about the effects of elscott wrote,
"what I see as a deliberate attempt by the
GOP to divide the country along ideological lines. It brings about the persecution of Muslim-Americans, it dehumanizes illegal immigrants as Adam pointed out yesterday in his article that Greg posted, and it even leads to firemen letting someone's house burn to the ground in Tennessee."
---

So we're back to the house burning again. A perfect example of the failure of government bureacracy and it's used against the GOP. Some people.

Posted by: Brigade | October 8, 2010 8:12 PM | Report abuse

The Right knows that they can't win over the working and middle class through any rational economic argument . . .

Posted by: filmnoia | October 8, 2010 2:07 PM
-----

You're about 25 days away from finding out. It's certain they're not going after the freeloading d-bagger vote. That's your province.

Posted by: Brigade | October 8, 2010 8:15 PM | Report abuse

rukidding7 wrote,
"None of these freaking polls mean a thing...let's wait until that first Tuesday in November to pay attention to a poll and even then it will be way way too premature to gauge Obama's popularity".
---

That's an odd statement. Why do you think politicians pay so much to have polls taken? No one is suggesting that a poll today necessarily gets the same result it might in a month, a year, or two years. Polls are meant to get a read on things at the time they're taken. What politician is going to wait until the day before the elction to figure out where he stands.

And it's silly to say the first Tuesday in November will be "way to premature to gauge Obama's popularity." It will be exactly the right time to gauge his popularity at that time---which is what polls are supposed to do. If you mean that a November 2010 poll won't tell you what his popularity will be in November 2012, I can only say . . . duh, no kidding?

Posted by: Brigade | October 8, 2010 8:28 PM | Report abuse

Well, a little humor on The Plum Line never hurt anyone, I guess.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | October 8, 2010 6:29 PM
----

STAND UP, CHUCK!

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

@Brigade..."Would those whining about a Christian theocracy please point to the Christian doctrine and supporting Scripture that prohibits drinking or says anything about blue laws or not selling booze on Sunday? It's always good to have something to back up wild and inane assertions."

Are you freaking serious? Perhaps I gave you too much credit for having a brain. I mean really..are you SERIOUS. I can tell you what the retarded religious nuts like to throw out...read this link for starters

http://bible.cc/proverbs/20-1.htm

I have worked forty years in the heart of Dixie and have gone through dozens of these blue law battles. EVERY ONE of these blue laws were defended by CHRISTIAN ministers. You think Sunday and Sunday morning were just coincidences?
Why not Saturday and the Jewish Sabbath.

Cr^p Brigade that is the most stupid thing you have ever posted. For heaven's sake..as John McCain might say use the googles.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_law

A blue law is a type of law, typically found in the United States and Canada, designed to enforce religious standards, particularly the observance of Sunday as a day of worship or rest, and a restriction on Sunday shopping. Most have been repealed, have been declared unconstitutional, or are simply unenforced, although prohibitions on the sale of alcoholic beverages, and occasionally almost all commerce, on Sundays are still enforced in many areas. Blue laws often prohibit an activity only during certain hours and there are usually exceptions to the prohibition of commerce, like grocery and drug stores. In some places blue laws may be enforced due to religious principles, but others are retained as a matter of tradition or out of convenience.[1]

Laws of this type are also found in non-Christian cultures such as Israel, where the day concerned is Saturday rather than Sunday, and most countries with Muslim majority, where the month of Ramadan is involved.[2]

In the United States in particular, almost everything is closed on Easter Sunday, Thanksgiving, and Christmas Day. Banks, post offices, schools, government offices, most businesses (other than retail and restaurants) remain closed on all public holidays.

Brigade you will notice that the only difference in other countries with "blue laws" and us is observing the predominant religion of that country.

Seriously Brigade it's really hard not to resort to deprecating names and other insults at this point. That post was truly brain dead. What country do you live in?

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 8, 2010 8:34 PM | Report abuse

Anyone who can give to Alex Sink for Gov of FL, please do so ***TODAY***!!!!

http://www.alexsink2010.com/contribute

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 8, 2010 6:30 PM
----

What is it they say about a fool and his money?

Posted by: Brigade | October 8, 2010 8:34 PM | Report abuse

rukidding7 wrote,
"Whatever BG I don't believe you're going to get Ethan to sign off on Kendrick dropping out."
----

Why would you want him to drop out? Don't you like people of color? Racism pure and simple. You should be ashamed.

Posted by: Brigade | October 8, 2010 8:40 PM | Report abuse

Brigade...since you wish to talk about fools

here are some more links for your foolish post.

http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/Controversies/1095380608.html

A blue law is one restricting activities or sales of goods on Sunday, to accommodate the Christian sabbath. The first blue law in the American colonies was enacted in Virginia in 1617. It required church attendance and authorized the militia to force colonists to attend church services.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Blue+Laws

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/70275/blue-law

blue law, in U.S. history, a law forbidding certain secular activities on Sunday. The name may derive from Samuel A. Peters’s General History of Connecticut (1781), which purported to list the stiff Sabbath regulations at New Haven, Connecticut; the work was printed on blue paper. A more probable derivation is based on an 18th-century usage of the word blue meaning “rigidly moral” in a disparaging sense. Strictest in Puritan, Bible-oriented communities, blue laws usually forbade regular work on Sunday, plus any buying, selling, traveling, public entertainment, or sports.

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-are-blue-laws.htm

There is an old saying that one cannot legislate morality, but the concept behind a blue law comes as close as possible. In the modern sense of the term, a blue law is any ordinance that attempts to control the sale of commerce or limit business hours on Sunday, also known as the Lord's Day or the Christian Sabbath. Many parts of New England and the South still observe a number of blue law restrictions, especially the prohibition of alcohol sales and the limited hours permitted for retail sales on Sundays


And so BRIGADE to use your own words.."It's always good to have something to back up wild and inane assertions." Especially for somebody who is as incredibly ignorant as you are on the subject you decided to spout off about.

Wild, inane and incredibly ignorant. Anybody who doesn't realize blue laws are the result of pompous, ram our religion down your throat Christians doesn't even rise to the level of inane or wild!!!!!

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 8, 2010 8:42 PM | Report abuse

"Ralph Reed, Michael Reagan, Grover Norquist, and Dick Morris" were all impressed with Sarah Palin!

Oh, snap!

Seriously??

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Jake, you're a comedy idiot savant.

Posted by: BGinCHI | October 8, 2010 7:10 PM
----

No matter. RU has assured us that what people think today is of absolutely no relevance whatsoever.

Posted by: Brigade | October 8, 2010 8:43 PM | Report abuse

Not really Brigade...I've simply established you don't know your arse from your head when you spout off about blue laws and the fact that Christians have impinged on the freedoms of non Christians since and it's YOU not JoeT who is full of crap. So full your eyes must be a deep brown!

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 8, 2010 8:55 PM | Report abuse

Fine Brigade...you wish to obsess on polls...well your "friend" St. Ronnie trails "Barry" by 4% points at the same time in his adminstration.

So if you wish to obsess on what people are thinking right now...just realize they like PRESIDENT Obama more than your boy ronnie.

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 8, 2010 9:00 PM | Report abuse

Brigade,

Looks like you can handle this kit with one set of synapses firing, thanks to Bill Gates and Steve Jobs WE the people can be in more than one place at a time. This bunch thinks they can pull it off again, can you believe it? trouble with their picture is the 10,000,000,000,000 mile wide trail they've left after the Greatest Heist in History (50% of OUR National Treasury), is littered with evidence and transparency that gives US, the one thing they forgot to cover up. WE now have a *hit-load of material to refute every Plum Crazy attack and confounded sortie they launch.

Posted by: RichNomore | October 8, 2010 9:06 PM | Report abuse

Maybe can't legislate morality, ru, can't accuse them of that, the Almighty Everlasting knows, but they sure have done their level *riggering best to legislate immortality, and WE think the Eternal is growing in disdain for this usurpation.

Posted by: RichNomore | October 8, 2010 9:13 PM | Report abuse

Seriously Brigade it's really hard not to resort to deprecating names and other insults at this point. That post was truly brain dead. What country do you live in?

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 8, 2010 8:34 PM
-----

Actually, it is your post that is brain dead, and it's exactly the kind of post I was expecting to draw out of you. You seem to understand that Muslim terrorists do not necessarily and accurately represent Islam---I see it all the time on this blog.

Now understand this. Just because certain Christian denominations or congregations have attempted to formulate their own particular brands of prejudicial rules and regulations has nothing whatsoever to do with Christianity in general. And don't bore me with references to Judaism.
Proverbs 20:1, "Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whoever is deceived thereby is not wise." That's your proof text for teetotalism and blue laws?

Rather than toy with you further, let me simply educate you. Christians are not prohibited from drinking; they are cautioned against drunkenness. You do remember when Jesus changed the water into wine? Please don't tell me you're one of those who believe it was really just grape juice. "Be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit."---Ephesians 5:18. Did you ever hear of anyone getting drunk on grape juice?

And there was never a transference of the Sabbath to the first day of the week. It is and always was the seventh day of the week. The New Testament says nothing whatsoever about what you should buy or drink on the Lord's Day.

The bottom line is that some idiot preachers telling people not to drink or dance or go to movies or play the piano or what you can sell to whom on Sunday or whatever else has NOTHING to do with Biblical Christianity. It is a perversion of the faith. So any such "theocracy" built on these perversions would be one of their own making and have no roots whatsoever in the New Testament. It might be a theocracy, but calling it a "Christian" theocracy would not make it one.

Posted by: Brigade | October 8, 2010 9:14 PM | Report abuse

"Very good Rachel Maddow segment pillorying the skittish Beltway Dem approach to dealing with Republicans, and why Dems who go on offense are succeeding."
---------------------------------------------

I know how addicted you are to the "skittish Beltway Dem" meme, Greg. But these two things actually have very little to do with each other. Dem's who are doing well by going on the attack aren't necessarily particularly liberal -- i.e., they're the very same people you customarily call "skittish" and/or "spineless" in many cases -- or basing their attacks on very liberal positions and the few who are actively throwing progressive red meat around aren't necessarily doing very well. Alan Grayson would be a case in point.

Posted by: CalD | October 8, 2010 9:22 PM | Report abuse

[@ 7:24 PM on October 8, 2010 mikefromArlington had another lapse from a liberal stupor saw a name that evoked a pavlovian itch and succumbed to the urge to scratch it, and posted...:
"I'd be...a sniveling pathetic lard ball..."]

Quite personally offensive, I know Dick, mike and you are more of a dick than he has ever been, even when he had to do what he had to do in the Hill-Billy Admin.

Context is context and abuse is abuse, but WE would rather have you burn yourselves out three weeks early, than peak like you did last time around. Will lightening strike twice, or will your powder fizzle.

Posted by: RichNomore | October 8, 2010 9:26 PM | Report abuse

rukidding7's evidence:
"A blue law is one restricting activities or sales of goods on Sunday, to accommodate the Christian sabbath."

ru, there is NO CHRISTIAN SABBATH!

"The first blue law in the American colonies was enacted in Virginia in 1617. It required church attendance and authorized the militia to force colonists to attend church services."

These requirements are not biblical and are therefore a perversion of the faith. Claiming something is Christian does not make it so.

-------

"blue law, in U.S. history, a law forbidding certain secular activities on Sunday. The name may derive from Samuel A. Peters’s General History of Connecticut (1781), which purported to list the stiff Sabbath regulations at New Haven, Connecticut; the work was printed on blue paper. A more probable derivation is based on an 18th-century usage of the word blue meaning “rigidly moral” in a disparaging sense. Strictest in Puritan, Bible-oriented communities, blue laws usually forbade regular work on Sunday, plus any buying, selling, traveling, public entertainment . . ."

Bible oriented communities? All you have provided is evidence that certain groups of misguided Bible thumpers have attempted to establish what THEY CALLED Christian communities. A true Christian theocracy would necessarily have to be based on a New Testament Christian doctrine. The relevant point is that you have totally failed to provide any Scriptural support for blue laws or any of the other nonsense you mention. Jonathan Edwards and Billy Sunday are not mentioned among the names of the apostles, and they have/had no authority whatsoever to impose legalistic requirements on ANYONE.

Posted by: Brigade | October 8, 2010 9:27 PM | Report abuse

Go Rach, it is fun to watch every Dem. running as fast as he can away from himself, but if he were doing it as a load-mouth obnoxious "I am not a Democrat" Democrat, it will make it even easier for those with a short memory to remember just what and by whom this has been done to a perfectly good, recoverable economy.

Anybody...

Posted by: RichNomore | October 8, 2010 9:36 PM | Report abuse

Further education:
------------------
Not really Brigade...I've simply established you don't know your arse from your head when you spout off about blue laws and the fact that Christians have impinged on the freedoms of non Christians since and it's YOU not JoeT who is full of crap. So full your eyes must be a deep brown!

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 8, 2010 8:55 PM
-----

Now here's the post which started it all:

quarterback1 wrote,
"SCOTUS held that blue laws are not an unconstitutional establishment of religion, because they serve a secular purpose. (And, actually, I'm not aware of any particular Christian "law" they enforce.)"

I didn't see anyone respond to this, but it's a good point. Would those whining about a Christian theocracy please point to the Christian doctrine and supporting Scripture that prohibits drinking or says anything about blue laws or not selling booze on Sunday? It's always good to have something to back up wild and inane assertions.

Posted by: Brigade | October 8, 2010 7:59 PM
-----

now read again: "please point to the Christian doctrine and supporting Scripture that prohibits drinking or says anything about blue laws or not selling booze on Sunday."

You have posted endless blather about misguided colonists who attempted to impose SOME SORT of theocracy. If it was in fact CHRISTIAN, then please provide the Scriptural documentation I asked for. I never denied the existence of blue laws, I just said they don't derive from Scripture. They are among that much maligned body of doctrine known as "the traditions of men."

Now that you've been routed once again, don't you feel even a wee bit silly?

Posted by: Brigade | October 8, 2010 9:42 PM | Report abuse

When is a Judeo-Christian Heritage not a Judeo-Christian Heritage?

Ignorance is indeed bliss...for awhile...

<|: ) the roving noam

Posted by: RichNomore | October 8, 2010 9:45 PM | Report abuse

Jake

You are right Obama is the threat to democracy


I was going to say that - but the image of the guy in the red spiderman suit who ran onto the field in Philadelphia entered my mind - I was thinking it was Obama who just lost it.


Obama HAS lost it. Seriously - little of what he or his people say can be believed. The trial balloons over the past six months have had little to do with any reality - or any realistic approach as to what the people will accept.


For some reason Obama's campaign has resulted in extremely unrealistic expectations on Obama's part -


So not only is Obama inexperience and unqualified - having no little what he is doing - he is floating these trial balloons which are so unrealistic - like somehow he thinks they are going to work somehow. The False Charges of Racism have not only eroded Obama's support, but they have hurt race relations dramatically across the nation.


And yet - is Obama smart enough to see that?

NO - we see the NAACP going for it over the summer - without a word from Obama which may lead one to believe that Obama OK'ed those tactics.

Obama has become a national disgrace.


ONE of these days democrats will realize that he is doing far more damage to their party than good - and they will wisely start calling for his resignation.

Maybe there has to be some major incident for that to happen - but Obama doesn't have any "net" right now - one thing and he will lose all support.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 8, 2010 9:54 PM | Report abuse

"Dem's who are doing well by going on the attack aren't necessarily particularly liberal -- i.e., they're the very same people you customarily call "skittish" and/or "spineless" in many cases -- or basing their attacks on very liberal positions and the few who are actively throwing progressive red meat around aren't necessarily doing very well. Alan Grayson would be a case in point."

I think Liberals and Liberalism are in fact doing remarkably well and that this development represents the real citizen uprising in the United States, not the GOP-sponsored Tea Party. Especially considering that Liberal Elected Officials are incessantly demonized by the Radical Right and routinely stabbed in the back by the Democratic Party they are doing alright as well. Just imagine how ascendant Liberal politicians and Liberalism might be if they had the slightest bit of support from the Democratic Party Establishment which instead chooses to destroy itself by appeasing agents provocateurs.

Posted by: wbgonne | October 8, 2010 10:41 PM | Report abuse

I'm surprised Greg, usually you do a bet job sourcing your attacks. You use a Seattle Newspaper for a Wisconsin candidate? They do have newspapers in Wisconsin you know.

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/104605089.html

Here's the important part:
"Melissa Roberts, a top Corrections Dept., official said Friday that the work-release program remains popular in Wisconsin. In Winnebago County alone, according to the records, at least 20 companies, including Johnson's two companies, use inmates for work."

And I know you are from the east coast, so if you need help finding Wisconsin on a map, its in flyover country. Just look halfway between California and New York, next to some big blue things on your map. I'm sure you'll find it.

Posted by: Bailers | October 8, 2010 11:31 PM | Report abuse

Bailers, thanks SO much for pointing out that other people have done what Johnson is doing.

This will surely convince all the 12-year-olds out there who have been using the "everyone else is doing it" excuse.

Pathetic.

Oh, and if they do have newspapers in WI (we don't down here in Chi, since they've both turned into dogshit rags) they aren't doing their jobs. But go ahead and blame Greg, because obviously you're here because you're smarter than he is.

Posted by: BGinCHI | October 9, 2010 12:49 AM | Report abuse

Obama's biggest enemy


Obama's biggest enemy is .......


Obama's biggest enemy is .......


Obama's biggest enemy is .......


Obama's biggest enemy is .......

........... The TRUTH.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 9, 2010 3:59 AM | Report abuse

The Obamanation has allied itself with numerous, foreign governments to wage political war on the all-American state of Arizona. The subject is enforcing American law to hold back the massive influx of outlaw "immigrants" from south of the U.S. border. In short, America has become the dumping ground for Mexico and all points south of it's unwanted humanity. Here's the latest development:

The move comes in response to a 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling issued Monday, allowing nearly a dozen Latin American countries — Mexico, Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Peru and Chile — to submit friend-of-the-court briefs in Justice’s (Obama's) challenge to SB 1070, which Jan Brewer signed into law in April and is considered one of the nation’s toughest immigration-enforcement measures.

This proves, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that B.O. is America's first, anti-American president.

And the Democrats are astounded that Obama's numbers are steadily heading for the basement.

Duhhhhh!

Posted by: battleground51 | October 9, 2010 6:27 AM | Report abuse

Are you looking for a mortgage refinance? Best way is to contact at least three to five lenders for input on mortgage programs and rates. Also search online for "123 Mortgage Refinance" since they can do 3% refinance

Posted by: maxjulien09 | October 9, 2010 6:47 AM | Report abuse

"This proves, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that B.O. is America's first, anti-American president.

That's a strong statement, but unfortunately it is virtually impossible to deny its accuracy based on the Arizona fiasco. The O admin has indeed allied itself not only with illegal aliens but with foreign governments seeking to undermine and erode our national sovereignty. Its actions against Arizona truly are anti-American. They are, literally, against America.

Posted by: quarterback1 | October 9, 2010 8:22 AM | Report abuse

"This proves, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that B.O. is America's first, anti-American president.

That's a strong statement, but unfortunately it is virtually impossible to deny its accuracy based on the Arizona fiasco. The O admin has indeed allied itself not only with illegal aliens but with foreign governments seeking to undermine and erode our national sovereignty. Its actions against Arizona truly are anti-American. They are, literally, against America.

Posted by: quarterback1 | October 9, 2010 8:23 AM | Report abuse

BG,
It was a cheap shot at Greg, so Greg I'm sorry. I could have made my point without the snark.

But I'm not saying that everyone does it so it is okay. But the AP article leaves out the fact that there are many businesses that use this state program. It also hides the fact that Johnson pays for health insurance for his other employees, and makes it seem that the only reason he has these work release people is to save on health care costs. It's dishonest, and seems to be a common theme in articles covering the Feingold Johnson race.

And I agree with you about papers in Chi, there isn't much left there. I was hoping with Bill Curtis coming back to Channel 2 it would get better, but I haven't seen it yet.

Posted by: Bailers | October 9, 2010 8:41 AM | Report abuse

All, a fresh Open Thread for you:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/10/open_thread_7.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | October 9, 2010 8:52 AM | Report abuse

"This proves, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that B.O. is America's first, anti-American president"

"That's a strong statement, but unfortunately it is virtually impossible to deny its accuracy"

The Koch-Heads strike again! And look! Tweedle-Dee agrees with Tweedle-Dum. What a shock. What we clearly need is more Great American Patriots who think that money is freedom and Greed & Gluttony is the American Dream.

Posted by: wbgonne | October 9, 2010 9:24 AM | Report abuse

wb = STRF without substance

Posted by: quarterback1 | October 9, 2010 2:30 PM | Report abuse

It would be useful to flesh out what "shutting down the government" means practically. For seniors, would it mean suspended Social Security checks and Medicare claims?

Posted by: rhallnj | October 11, 2010 7:04 AM | Report abuse

rhallnj:

Great question! In 1995, the government shut-down did not include emergency personnel or Social Security checks. 400,000 newly eligible Medicare participants were delayed in enrolling, but we are probably not going to agree whether that was a good thing or not.

Other "non-essential" services:

Social Security - claims from 112,000 applicants were not processed. 212,000 new or replacement Social Security cards were not issued. 360,000 office visits were denied. 800,000 toll-free calls for information were not answered. Of course, most (if not all) of those were subsequently processed after the shut-down.

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 11, 2010 10:45 AM | 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