Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Open Thread

By Greg Sargent

A few quick items this morning.

* Rachel Maddow has now addressed Keith Olbermann's suspension, arguing his contributions are a no-no if MSNBC wants to be seen as different from Fox.

That seems like a legit case in one sense. Olbermann's posture is that of strongly opinionated partisan, but ultimately I don't think he wants to be seen as a political activist or operative sitting in an anchor's chair. Contributions risk blurring the line between the two.

Opinion journalism requires striking a delicate balance. At a moment when journalistic categories are in flux, and many are questioning the legitimacy of melding opinion with reporting, it seems unwise to do anything that risks casting further doubt on that enterprise.

But even so, the problem remains that the punishment far outweighed the transgression, particularly since the NBC policy Olbermann supposedly violated seems ambiguous, raising questions about the real motives behind his Olbermann's suspension. He should, and I suspect will, be allowed to return.

(Update: I should add that Maddow, too, said Olbermann should come back.)

* Keach Hagey notes that the whole mess shows MSNBC's reluctance to embrace its lefty identity, which has fueled its success.

* Obama, still feeling his way on the new landscape, seeks some sort of common ground with the GOP on extending the Bush tax cuts:

I recognize that both parties are going to have to work together and compromise to get something done here. But I want to make my priorities clear from the start. One: middle class families need permanent tax relief. And two: I believe we can't afford to borrow and spend another $700 billion on permanent tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires.

Obama wants a permanent extension on the middle class cuts and is projecting openness to a temporary extension of the high end ones. But Republicans have already signaled that they want all the cuts to be extended on the same timetable, so they don't have to push for an extension of the high end ones in isolation.

So if Obama is going to stand behind his demand for a permanent extension of the middle class cuts, it's hard to see what the basis for a compromise will be.

* And Lori Montgomery has a good overview of the emerging House GOP agenda and the clashes that lie ahead.

What else is happening?

By Greg Sargent  | November 6, 2010; 9:21 AM ET
Categories:  House GOPers, Political media  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Happy Hour Roundup
Next: Open Thread

Comments

I'll bring this up again.

Olbermann's donations were made to guests that appeared on his program. The donations were made the day each appeared on his program.

Do these facts change anything?

Posted by: DDAWD | November 6, 2010 9:32 AM | Report abuse

@DDAWD: "Olbermann's donations were made to guests that appeared on his program. The donations were made the day each appeared on his program. Do these facts change anything?"

I dunno. I don't think so. He was essentially promoting those guests (as most opinion pundits do when they've got someone they like on their program). Should he get in trouble for those in-kind donations (and should everybody else)?

What does the donation even mean? Hey, I like this guy. Good luck!

If it's some arbitrary standard they set, then perhaps a warning or two would have been more appropriate?

I just don't think this is about the donations, either. There's also that.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | November 6, 2010 9:34 AM | Report abuse

First of all, contributions were made only to Grivalda on the same day he appeared on Olbermann's show, not both parites. Personally, I agree with KW's opinion on the matter as well. I also feel that if it is the policy of MSNBC to require its employees to enlighten management regarding contributions to political candidates, then employees should expect some disciplinary reaction.

Posted by: DinOH | November 6, 2010 9:52 AM | Report abuse

The idea that Keith Ubermoron has even one minute particle of "journalistic" credibility or integrity is hilarious. Even more hilarious is the spectacle of MSNBC tripping over itself to fire said partisan lunatic to preserve the appearance of journalistic integrity.

Really, the absurdity of it all beggars description. Keith Ubermoron of Special Comment, nightly foaming at the mouth about Bush and Cheney treason and all?

Conservatives couldn't make up a story to make the leftwing media look so ridiculous. Oh, wait . . . that's it, Rove you magnificent bas****! You set this up, didn't you!

Posted by: quarterback1 | November 6, 2010 10:05 AM | Report abuse

I should add, there is no amount of money Keith could give to Dems that would compromise his credibility in the least, because his nightly appearances and insane commentary leave him none.

Posted by: quarterback1 | November 6, 2010 10:13 AM | Report abuse

Although Keith does tend to go "over the top" with his comments, I would venture a guess that you would be hard put to find anything in any of his appearances that would compromise his credibility. Lying is not part of his commentary, although a little entertainment certainly is.

Posted by: DinOH | November 6, 2010 10:22 AM | Report abuse

I was going to quickly respond to DDAWD's question too.

Not sure what's on your mind but it doesn't seem a critical element. If he or his producers had promised a donation for an appearance, that would be something but there's zero reason to assume that.

If anything, I think it would speak in favor of Olbermann in that the donations look rather arbitrary and frivolous (I kind of like that guy so here's a check) outside of them being Dems of course.

By way of contrast here, one can easily see how GE's donations or Comcast's donations are strategically doled out in order to gain corporate advantages up the road. And that I find far more egregious.

Posted by: bernielatham | November 6, 2010 10:39 AM | Report abuse

A very good piece in New York magazine...

"Comparatively speaking, Boehner and McConnell are peas in the proverbial pod. Both are Establishmentarians to their core, who see politics and their role in promoting Republicanism in similar terms. Though both are more conservative than Dole, neither has a Gingrichian bone in his body. (This despite the fact that Boehner was once a lieutenant to Newt.) They are not firebrands or visionaries, but they are bone-deep partisans. For the past two years, they have demonstrated enormous discipline and skill in working side by side in the exercise of obstructionism. And for the next two, they will both be afflicted with the same headache: managing the tensions not between their caucuses but within them, as each is simultaneously energized and roiled by the infusion of a new crop of members more populist and hard-line than the guys who ostensibly command them."
http://nymag.com/news/politics/powergrid/69377/

Posted by: bernielatham | November 6, 2010 10:41 AM | Report abuse

And a tip of the hat to Rabin, murdered fifteen years ago yesterday by an extremist Orthodox Israeli settler.

Posted by: bernielatham | November 6, 2010 10:45 AM | Report abuse

Yeah, I didn't think the timing meant anything. Just thought I'd toss it out there.

Posted by: DDAWD | November 6, 2010 10:52 AM | Report abuse

The liberal penchant for rewarding losers is in play again. Nancy Pelosi stands to get rewarded for her part in the epic losses suffered by Democrats a few days ago.

It's incredible but is very fortunate for Republicans. The Obama-Reid-Pelosi, axis of evil, will be helping to lard conservative coffers until 2012, it looks like.

A Republican's best friends, it seems, is liberal Democrats. Why is that so??

Posted by: battleground51 | November 6, 2010 10:55 AM | Report abuse

Three great Americans giving their opinions on why and when it is morally allowable to murder hundreds of thousands of men, women and children...

David Broder:
"Here is where Obama is likely to prevail. With strong Republican support in Congress for challenging Iran's ambition to become a nuclear power, he can spend much of 2011 and 2012 orchestrating a showdown with the mullahs. This will help him politically because the opposition party will be urging him on. And as tensions rise and we accelerate preparations for war, the economy will improve."

Daniel Pipes:
“a strike on Iranian facilities would dispatch Obama’s feckless first year down the memory hole and transform the domestic political scene.

Elliot Abrams:
“The Obama who had struck Iran and destroyed its nuclear program would be a far stronger candidate, and perhaps an unbeatable one.”

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2010/11/ta110410.html

Posted by: bernielatham | November 6, 2010 10:59 AM | Report abuse

DDAWD, "Olbermann's donations were made to guests that appeared on his program. The donations were made the day each appeared on his program. Do these facts change anything?"

What bothers me most about it is that Keith has loudly criticized Fox personalities for doing this, and also for their non-disclosure of contributions made to candidates who appear on their shows, and also for openly fund-raising for candidates. He can't do the same and criticize others for doing what he did. Granted, the level of his contributions for a guy like Olbermann were quite modest. But still....

From the bigger perspective, I think it's really weird of MSNBC to require "permission" be obtained by their hosts prior to making political contributions. Does that mean they retain the right to say no to a particular request? If so, that is out of bounds, IMO. I don't fault them for wanting to know in advance, but permission is a bridge too far for me.

Lastly, I consider the on-air fundraising that Olbermann has done for causes like the free clinics. That has been tremendous, and he gets big props for that.


Posted by: suekzoo1 | November 6, 2010 11:16 AM | Report abuse

Alterman makes an argument which I would dearly like to be able to challenge. But I cannot.

"One can pick out the mistakes as one prefers. For instance, doing healthcare first, instead of financial reform, was clearly a miscalculation. But the biggest problem with this administration has been its refusal to recognize reality. Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell recently told National Journal, "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president." Nobody should be surprised. According to then-Republican Arlen Specter, before "the ink was dry on the oath of office," the Republican caucus was plotting how to defeat Obama in 2012. And Senator Jim DeMint famously promised healthcare reform could be used to "break" Obama from day one.

And yet Obama never admitted this. Faced with a media establishment that treats Fox News as, well, "news" and considers Newt Gingrich a genuine sage, Obama bought into the Beltway pretense that Republicans were acting in good faith and that it was those pesky liberals who needed to be kept in line. Liberals were "f*cking retarded," said Rahm Emanuel, who apologized to retarded people but not to liberals. "They will be satisfied when we have Canadian healthcare and we've eliminated the Pentagon. That's not reality," added Press Secretary Robert Gibbs. And Obama himself joshed, at a $30,000 per person fundraiser at (yes) Rich Richman's house in Greenwich, Connecticut, "Gosh, we haven't yet brought about world peace and—[laughter]. I thought that was going to happen quicker." As if on cue, a Washington Post pundit said he was "proud of the president for...shaking the left by its shoulders, begging it to recognize how good they have it." Sun Tzu warned in The Art of War, "If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat." MSM pundits claim to be perplexed by Obama's ability to "lose by winning." Sun Tzu wouldn't be."


http://www.thenation.com/article/155850/you-are-only-coming-through-waves

Posted by: bernielatham | November 6, 2010 11:21 AM | Report abuse

One other comment on the Olbermann flap, but from a different perspective.

In the run up to the Iraq war, and during it for the first couple years, NBC news, CNN, etc. used retired military and others who had financial interests in the war effort regularly to comment and offer opinion. None of that was ever disclosed to the viewing public, even after the NYT expose. If you want to review:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/us/20generals.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=military%20experts%20comment%20iraq%20war&st=cse

It's odd to me that NBC still feels no obligation to address their part in not disclosing that they were a part of this mess, yet they can suspend Olbermann for a couple of undisclosed campaign contributions. Pretty BIG POT, little kettle.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | November 6, 2010 11:25 AM | Report abuse

"And as tensions rise and we accelerate preparations for war, the economy will improve."

Oh sure, Broder is old but he already forgot 2008, what was happening when oil was $145?

A couple tankers sunk in the Persian, I mean Arab Gulf will help people sort out their cap and trade issues in a hurry. Better to bomb, bomb, bomb Yemen, home of the rectum assassin. Saudi's wouldn't mind, they could even increase production in exchange for us acting badly again.

Posted by: shrink2 | November 6, 2010 11:25 AM | Report abuse

I think I read somewhere that Olberrman gave the money to Lucy Ramirez, who then gave it to Bill Burkett who aparrantly faxed the donations from a Kinko's in Midland, Texas. A riddle, wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma. It's obviously a set-up.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | November 6, 2010 11:30 AM | Report abuse

"The liberal penchant for rewarding losers is in play again. Nancy Pelosi stands to get rewarded for her part in the epic losses suffered by Democrats a few days ago."

Just like Boehner was rewarded after the stomping he got in 2006 and 2008 which resulted in a larger majority than the current House Republicans hold.

Maybe you should think things through before you hit enter.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | November 6, 2010 11:34 AM | Report abuse

"The idea that Keith Ubermoron"

Says the guy making up names like a 5 year old.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | November 6, 2010 11:40 AM | Report abuse

mike, we haven't yet held the 2012 election to see how many House seats the Republicans will similarly gain over two cycles. As someone pointed out, we get to run against Obana-Reid-Pelosi all over again. You've also made up silly names against Republicans you don't like.

Maybe you should think things through before you hit enter.

Posted by: clawrence12 | November 6, 2010 11:51 AM | Report abuse

In other news, while the economy sputters and America, the foreclosure nation, can't seem to think of any way to stop the interdependent downward spiral of unemployment and real estate devaluation...lets look on the bright side. Wall Street bonuses are going up 5-15% this year and executive pay is going up even more.

Posted by: shrink2 | November 6, 2010 11:56 AM | Report abuse

"* Rachel Maddow has now addressed Keith Olbermann's suspension, arguing his contributions are a no-no if MSNBC wants to be seen as different from Fox."

It is different from Fox. It has about one third the viewers.

Posted by: 54465446 | November 6, 2010 11:59 AM | Report abuse

"* Keach Hagey notes that the whole mess shows MSNBC's reluctance to embrace its lefty identity, which has fueled its success."

Beating Anderson Cooper and CNN being a relative form of success.

Posted by: 54465446 | November 6, 2010 12:00 PM | Report abuse

Shrink and anyone else interested, there's an interesting piece in this month's "The Nation" re the trade deficit. It seems like Obama & company certainly understand the problem, what's debatable is if they can convince everyone else. I was actually sort of encouraged by reading this.

While everyone complains about some exaggerated and made up "cost" of the trip, he's working. It seems to me the housing market and the trade deficit are the two things holding us back from the kind of growth that translates into employment increases. While HAMP was an abject failure, maybe they can make progress on the trade deficit.

"There's no easy road to peace. The target is not only China but some of Washington's old friends, who run bloated surpluses at US expense. The Obama administration pushed concrete measures at the meeting of finance ministers in South Korea in October. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner proposed a new global rule that would require nations running trade surpluses to shrink them to no more than 4 percent of GDP, presumably by buying more imports from debtor countries, while debtor nations like the United States would have to reduce deficits by the same amount, to less than 4 percent.

Geithner's strict numerical limits were not accepted, but his proposal represents an important first step—a US administration coming to terms with American weakness and stepping away from the free-trade dogma that led to the crisis. The president recognizes the global nature of the problem. But I expect he will be compelled to take a tougher step—acting unilaterally. He will have to act for the United States in ways that get other nations, especially China, to take him seriously. Washington could, for example, declare a financial emergency, enacting legislation to put a ceiling on US trade deficits and begin a gradual process of reducing them. That would be a signal to exporting nations and multinational corporations that the good old days are over.But shrinking the trade deficits, important as it will be, is not sufficient. Washington must also change the rules for how American business and finance operate. Only in America do multinationals get to behave like free riders, with no strings attached. They harvest public money as subsidies and investment capital, they are protected by US armed forces and diplomacy, and they are rescued when they get into trouble. It is a one-way relationship, and the American public knows it."

http://www.thenation.com/article/155848/end-free-trade-globalization

Posted by: lmsinca | November 6, 2010 12:01 PM | Report abuse

Here's another important part of the trade deficit equation from the same piece.

"If Washington doesn't make these broad structural changes, another popular idea will prove illusory—that US manufacturing can be rebuilt around green technologies. China is already doing this, and is far ahead. It has 35 percent of the global market in solar panels and is poised to dominate other green technologies. The United States, in fact, has swelling trade deficits in this sector. American companies work both sides of the competition, collecting subsidies on both ends.

Doubters may say that Obama doesn't have the nerve to tackle this problem. They may be right. But the president is clearly thinking along these lines. He is the first president in thirty years to call for restoration of US manufacturing. This past summer he pushed modest tax measures that give a small advantage to home-based producers. The impact was so meager that Republicans didn't bother to object. But the GOP may also have grasped that measures favoring US factories over foreign ones will be wildly popular with voters. Obama repeated the message before a Labor Day audience in Milwaukee, saying, "I don't want to see solar panels and wind turbines and electric cars made in China. I want them made right here in the United States of America."

Posted by: lmsinca | November 6, 2010 12:04 PM | Report abuse

Oh well, except for a few loons to the far left of mainstream American thought no one really watches MSNBC anyway. And this is just another example of why that's so.

Posted by: danamo | November 6, 2010 12:05 PM | Report abuse

Oh well, except for a few loons to the far left of mainstream American thought no one really watches MSNBC anyway. And this is just another example of why that's so.

Posted by: danamo | November 6, 2010 12:05 PM | Report abuse

I'm out for the day doing fall cleaning, yuck, have a good one all.

Posted by: lmsinca | November 6, 2010 12:07 PM | Report abuse

"A US administration [is] coming to terms with American weakness and stepping away from the free-trade dogma that led to the crisis...But shrinking the trade deficits, important as it will be, is not sufficient. Washington must also change the rules for how American business and finance operate."

Well can I get a Hell Yeah! But in the post Citizen's United era, there is going to have to be some aggressive "social marketing" done or nothing will change. And this administration is just terrible at social marketing.

From Clinton on, the "free" traders managed to convince the voters that "free" trade was good for the little guy, since of course the wicked labor unions were against it. I am no friend of corrupt PACs like AFSCME and the SEIU, public employee unions are a big part of our problem actually, another topic.

But "free" trade never was free. We are going to pay a lot more for all that cheap stuff we thought we bought, as we were borrowing to buy it. A bipartisan, Grown and Value Added Here, Made in America effort is the only way to a sustained economic recovery.

All this talk about more or less stimulus versus tax cuts is nothing but distraction.
Health care for all will be a vicious, broken promise if the people who are supposed to pay for it all can't work.

I consider this so entirely obvious, I can't figure out why people are only talking about it on the margins. I mean, this shouldn't be in The Nation, it should be on Fox News all day every day. Krugman should deliver his effete homilies on this topic. Made in America doesn't seem like a hard sell.

Posted by: shrink2 | November 6, 2010 12:24 PM | Report abuse

I can't imagine any of the serious sort of people who read and write in this space, would watch MSNBC over CNBC. Why listen to an amen chorus of your own views when you can expand on the things you don't know?

Day in and day out CNBC is the best network for serious people on TV. They have exactly the same news sources as MSNBC, the NBC pool, and many of the same guests, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Bob Corker, Jud Gregg, Christina Romer, etc. However they have them often for an hour at a time, instead of 5 minutes or so. Additionally when Ben Bernanke speaks you get 30 minutes to an hour of him, if you want, as opposed to two minutes of his testimony.

The list of guests is brilliant and international, just this week they had the head of Brailian oil giant Petrobras on in a very rare tv appearance. The have Buffet and Pickens, and Paulson and just an amazing number of the world's movers and shakers who NEVER appear on MSNBC except in sound bites.

I didn't find out that the savings on HCR were wildly overestimated on MSNBC, or even Fox for that matter. I found it out when CNBC pointed out that Medicare cuts listed in the bill had been waived the last six times and were extremely unlikely ever to occur. They weren't doing it as part of a partisan screed however, they were trying to weigh the impact of the bill on the actual economy.

Change channels for a while and see. It won't make you into a conservative, but it might make you into a better informed liberal!

Posted by: 54465446 | November 6, 2010 12:27 PM | Report abuse

I prefer C-SPAN myself.

Posted by: clawrence12 | November 6, 2010 12:37 PM | Report abuse

Greg:

“Rachel Maddow has now addressed Keith Olbermann's suspension, arguing his contributions are a no-no if MSNBC wants to be seen as different from Fox.”

Is this what distinguishes FOX, the fact that its on-air personalities are allowed to make political contributions? Really?

“Olbermann's posture is that of strongly opinionated partisan, but ultimately I don't think he wants to be seen as a political activist or operative sitting in an anchor's chair.”

What exactly is the difference between a “strongly opinionated partisan” and a “political activist”? One makes political donations and the other doesn’t?

(quoting Obama)

“And two: I believe we can't afford to borrow and spend another $700 billion on permanent tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires.”

And thus, again, Obama betrays either his economic illiteracy or his ideological radicalism. Cutting taxes is not “spending” and hence do not need to be financed by “borrowing”.

Speaking of which…hey Bernie, if Obama is smart enough to know that cutting taxes is not spending, but he makes the above statement, doesn’t that make him a propagandist? Or does the fact that he is doing it for a cause with which you agree absolve him of the label? I’m still trying to get my hands around your eccentric understanding of “propaganda”.

Posted by: ScottC3 | November 6, 2010 12:38 PM | Report abuse

54465446 (3) Uh oh, once again I agree with you 100%. I could have written what you just wrote. Squawk Box and Before the Bell is like must see TV for me, because they challenge my views on a daily basis, though not in that insult riven Fox tone. As you say, their guests are very, very good at what they do. They are the most powerful people in the world.

Posted by: shrink2 | November 6, 2010 12:39 PM | Report abuse

544:

"Day in and day out CNBC is the best network for serious people on TV."

I agree with you. I have CNBC on in the background at work all day every day. It is good.

Posted by: ScottC3 | November 6, 2010 12:42 PM | Report abuse


What planet does MSNBC live on? Impartiality? Where? I don’t see any; anywhere. Yall live in la la land.

oh..and you thought this was America? Like that's supposed to mean something? Next the corporations are going to be able to fire you for voting for a Democrat, opps they are ready are....

Please, we live in the Divides States of Glenbeckistan Inc.

What! Is no one aloud to have an opinion? I've seen this guy on the news and he doesn't hide his leaning in any way. Right off the bat I knew this Olberman was a liberal type. Firing Keith for donating to the DNC or whatever is crazy!! It's like firing someone for donating to a church or any cause they believe in. Hell, when any of us buy products we fund corporations that run huge public policy related PR campaigns.

MSNBC is shifting to the right because plain and simple it's more profitable. The elderly are the ones watching the tube and they lean hard to the Republicans side so ditching Keith is simply a way to bring more right-wing viewers.

Oh...and as far as I’m concerned, the media is only as “liberal” as the giant corporations that own it.

Profit makes perfect.

Posted by: getcentered | November 6, 2010 12:44 PM | Report abuse

Obama arrived in Asia and started to talk about sleeping in the Taj Hotel


"If you are wondering if it is meant to send a message, it is"


SO, Obama sends messages, and yet he refuses to receive them. Is that it???

.

Posted by: PolarBearMadness | November 6, 2010 12:46 PM | Report abuse

Right before Obama leaves for Asia, he starts up on a new narrative - It's not that the voters don't like our policy, it has been the administration's failure of communications.


Then Obama proceeds to get on a plane to a $200 Million a day trip to Asia. Which symbolizes

- first, Obama is not willing to start compromising right away, have meetings right away

- Obama is being tone-deaf on how expensive the government is. Even if the $200 million is wrong, it is clear that this trip could have been far less expensive with more than adequate security.


The EXISTENCE of the trip is a "failure of communications"

Obama should have cancelled the trip again - I don't know what to say.


Obama is fast approaching a situation in which he is becoming irrelevant.

There are so many democratic Senators up for re-election in difficult States that the Senate can not afford to have any difficult votes over the next two years.

Obama's range of what is possible has been dramatically limited, and he just doesn't seem to get it.

No one wants to hear Obama's lectures anymore - and he is pointing his fingers at reporters and acting defiant.

Obama is refusing to lead on the reorganizations on the Hill.


So IS OBAMA HEADED FOR A MELT-DOWN ???

Sure seems like it.

.

Posted by: PolarBearMadness | November 6, 2010 12:54 PM | Report abuse

Change channels for a while and see. It won't make you into a conservative, but it might make you into a better informed liberal!
-------------------------------------------------
Good advice for everyone. Instead of defending one's favorite channel, or commentator, one should listen to, watch, and read many sources of information.

A personal story: I was told that I had no credibility in criticizing Rush Limbaugh if I didn't ever listen to him. That seemed to have the ring of truth. So I listened to him, at least several times a week, if not daily, for about five years. I can say with credibility that I understand where the man is coming from. He did not change my basic views, but I learned about his brand of conservatism and can now compare and contrast his brand with other conservatives.

I also listen to NPR and BBC, read NYT, WaPo, WSJ, LA Times, the Economist and Aljazeera.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | November 6, 2010 1:02 PM | Report abuse

12Bar

What about FOX ???

Hannity???

Have you ever listened to the tapes available of Rev. Wright and his Black Liberation Theology?


.

Posted by: PolarBearMadness | November 6, 2010 1:13 PM | Report abuse

I haven't seen leichtman1 around here for a few days---since the election. What happened to Bill White? I thought this was supposed to be a squeaker that White might win. He didn't just lose; he got his plow and his clock both cleaned. A rented mule comes to mind. What's the matter with those Texans? Explanations please.

Posted by: Brigade | November 6, 2010 1:15 PM | Report abuse

There is one thing about making money, as opposed to making political points. Making money is completely results driven. Political opinions don't have any correlation to making money, in fact, IMO, get in the way because they cloud judgment. CNBC, being targeted at people who make money, will avoid the political spin to a large degree.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | November 6, 2010 1:17 PM | Report abuse

Curious, Obama wants to go to Mumbai and make a statement against terrorism there - by renting out 500 Hotel rooms paid for by the US taxpayers.


However, Obama will not stop the Mosque at Ground Zero - Obama will not say there is a "compelling interest" in stopping the Mosque.


Again - Obama is out-of-touch - ignoring what the American People want, but then going to Asia and putting out a muddled message there - on a topic which few American see as on the top of their priorities.


We all know that Obama should be concentrating on the economy, and this trip is about exports and all.

However, we don't see Obama talking about the economy right away - it is all about some "message" Obama is now sending on terrorism. We all know Obama has been soft on terrorism for two years and renting out 500 hotel rooms isn't going to help.

Posted by: PolarBearMadness | November 6, 2010 1:18 PM | Report abuse

"Explanations please."

Brigade (1)
Well you see, here in America, we have blue states and we have red states. Texas is a red state.

Posted by: shrink2 | November 6, 2010 1:20 PM | Report abuse

"avoid the political spin to a large degree"

I think Rick Santelli is tolerated, even encouraged there because he does not take himself so seriously as most baggers do.

Posted by: shrink2 | November 6, 2010 1:23 PM | Report abuse

@shrink,

In line with your comment that Wall Street and the banks are back in business with their bonuses and executive compensation, I am getting long term buy signals on a whole long list of regional banks. Up, up and away.

If I didn't have the ability to make money as an investor, I would find this completely depressing.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | November 6, 2010 1:24 PM | Report abuse

I think Rick Santelli is tolerated, even encouraged there because he does not take himself so seriously as most baggers do.
---------------------------------------------
Santelli is a trader and has a trader's perspective. His political views are totally irrelevant to his pov about the markets. There are good traders who are liberals.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | November 6, 2010 1:29 PM | Report abuse

Test ... lost my handle but trying to remain pragmatic

Posted by: pragmaticagain | November 6, 2010 1:30 PM | Report abuse

"Explanations please."

Brigade (1)
Well you see, here in America, we have blue states and we have red states. Texas is a red state.

Posted by: shrink2 | November 6, 2010 1:20 PM
------

But aren't leichtman1 and mark_in_austin aware that Texas is a red state?

Posted by: Brigade | November 6, 2010 1:42 PM | Report abuse

shrink2 at 1:20 PM

We have ONE America

People do not divide themselves by red and blue.


The democrats are the ones who constantly prefer to divide people - and find someone to hate.


But we should concentrate on what unites us - and that is a common desire to cut the budget and spur economic growth.

Posted by: PolarBearMadness | November 6, 2010 1:54 PM | Report abuse

For all the liberals who claim the the right is about to get violent,

The liberals in Oakland rioted last night.


I agree that the sentence was too light, however the liberals should not be getting violent either.


.

Posted by: PolarBearMadness | November 6, 2010 1:57 PM | Report abuse

"Says the guy making up names like a 5 year old."

Nonsense. "Ubermoron" is at least worthy of a 13 year old.

KO is so completely devoid of credibility, so far out into lunacy and irresponsibility, and so unworthy of any respect that he's very deserving of a name reflecting his achievements. MSNBC is a bigger joke, however, for putting the loon on the air for all these years and then firing him over this. They are so out of touch with reality that it is comical.

Posted by: quarterback1 | November 6, 2010 1:58 PM | Report abuse

Olbermann is obviously one-sided, but I have never heard him being called out for making things up, the way that right wingers seem to have happen all the time.

Posted by: DDAWD | November 6, 2010 2:07 PM | Report abuse

Obama is NOT a racist.

Obama thinks everyone is equally inferior to him.

.

Posted by: PolarBearMadness | November 6, 2010 2:09 PM | Report abuse

imsinca

You can't tackle the trade deificit without addressing currency. The largest foreign holder of Treasuries in the world is China. We can't finance the government operation without them. On the other hand, we are attempting to undercut both their dollar holdings and their exporting economic basis by devaluing the dollar and causing inflation.

Not suprisingly then, China laughs at the things we say at G-20 and elsewhere, both because it is do as I say and not as I do, and because we have no power to enforce our efforts.


" He will have to act for the United States in ways that get other nations, especially China, to take him seriously. Washington could, for example, declare a financial emergency, enacting legislation to put a ceiling on US trade deficits and begin a gradual process of reducing them. That would be a signal to exporting nations and multinational corporations that the good old days are over."


This whole paragraph deines the current state of the American economy. We are a consumer and service economy, not a manufacturing one anymore. So by reducing the influx of cheap consumer goods, you would cause a rise in unemployment in all the sectors associated with that activity.

Also any legislation such as this would be met by a Chinese withdrawal from the Treaury market, AND and end to the renewabble energy market in this country. Through it's 95% control of the lanthanides and rare earth market (the US has no current production) China completely controls renewable energy. Just last month in a territorial dispute with Japan, they ceased shipements of these to Japanese markets. The Japanese caved in to them about 2 days later. The Chinese could easily do the same thing to us.

Posted by: 54465446 | November 6, 2010 2:12 PM | Report abuse

Obama is NOT a racist.

Obama thinks everyone is equally inferior to him.

.

Posted by: PolarBearMadness | November 6, 2010 2:12 PM | Report abuse

polarbear/STRF:

I have seen repeated glimpses throughout these months that you are an intelligent person who COULD engage in intelligent debate if you chose. So while all the infantile and child-like behavior?

Why aren't you embarassed by all your attention seeking?

Posted by: 54465446 | November 6, 2010 2:18 PM | Report abuse

KO is so completely devoid of credibility, so far out into lunacy and irresponsibility, and so unworthy of any respect ...

Posted by: quarterback1 | November 6, 2010 1:58 PM
==================

Amusing, coming from you. I've saved this image, just for the laughs.

http://i54.tinypic.com/2d2cdps.jpg

As for K.O. and MSNBC, they are a sideshow. G.E. makes sure its interests are represented on NBC, this week featuring liberal (haha, kidding) Governor Chris Christie (R-NJ) and conservative Senator Jim DeMint (Psychopath-SC).
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | November 6, 2010 2:19 PM | Report abuse

DDAWD:

"Olbermann is obviously one-sided, but I have never heard him being called out for making things up..."

You should get out more. There are entire websites dedicated to calling out Olberman and his, shall we say, creative presentation of the facts. Like this one:

http://www.olbermannwatch.com/

Just google "olbermann lies" and see how rarely he gets called out for making things up.

Posted by: ScottC3 | November 6, 2010 2:25 PM | Report abuse

@Brigade, I should be in a position to explain that, but I can't. A whole bunch of OR conservatives thought Dudley was going to beat Kitzhaber and even that Ron Wyden would lose. Some out of state business man spent millions attacking Peter DeFazio, hope it was worth it. Then there were all the people in and out of WA who thought Patty Murray would lose to Dino, but once again, Dino narrowly lost, did I mention, again?

The explanation is not "hope", because all of these folks are smart and were pretty sure; they weren't saying, gee Dino might win this time. Heck I remember some partisans were predicting the Seattle Times would endorse Dino and that, laughably, The Oregonian would endorse Dudley for Governor.


Posted by: shrink2 | November 6, 2010 2:25 PM | Report abuse

"This whole paragraph deines the current state of the American economy. We are a consumer and service economy, not a manufacturing one anymore."

I know 54465446, the point is we need to change this dynamic somehow. Surely there's something China wants from us in return. Some sort of bargaining chip, otherwise I just don't see how we get out of this mess. I'll leave it to the economic diplomats to figure it out, hopefully, but I'm finding it very interesting that we're discussing "tax cuts" when clearly we have much larger issues. Let them all expire afaic, if it buys us some time.

I admit to not understanding all of the trade issues, but it's a problem with a solution, I'm sure. And they've re-opened a mine in Northern CA to mine for lathanides, I'll try to find the link for you. I see this and other technological developments in both energy and even water as our way out. Let's hope the Republicans don't find a way to cut higher education any more than the economy already has, or we're all SOL.

Posted by: lmsinca | November 6, 2010 2:27 PM | Report abuse

DDAWD, now you have:

http://michellemalkin.com/2010/02/15/the-sun-rises-birds-sing-olbermann-lies/

Posted by: clawrence12 | November 6, 2010 2:29 PM | Report abuse

Polar Bear

You are right on many of your points. Obama is sending the wrong message by leaving the country and not addressing the Republicans right away.

Besides, the democrats have the majority for a few more weeks, and that might be helpful on such things as unemployment extensions.

But Obama seems to not want to take advantage of these last days to the fullest. The nation is left wondering.

Posted by: BeautifulBeginning | November 6, 2010 2:31 PM | Report abuse

Regarding CNBC, we watch it here as well. But to say that it is essentially non-partisan is living in denial. I can't stand the buffoon Santelli, and yes he's a political hack IMO, and there's one guy in the morning on squack box that literally reminds me of qb and even strf based on his complete and utter disregard for Obama and liberals for that matter. You won't hear them wonder very often how to re-invigorate the middle class either.

I think if you follow and invest in the market it's essential to watch it though and there's some really interesting people on every day.

Back to work.

Posted by: lmsinca | November 6, 2010 2:33 PM | Report abuse

DinOH, have you tried this little thing called "Google"?

Posted by: clawrence12 | November 6, 2010 2:35 PM | Report abuse

I don't think it is a good idea for the democrats to constantly try to divide people in this nation - along the lines of tax brackets.

It is not a good strategy.

The smart thing to do would have been to get the issue off the table, but Obama didn't do that. And now the issue is starting up again.

Posted by: BeautifulBeginning | November 6, 2010 2:40 PM | Report abuse

ScottC3, great minds think alike.

Posted by: clawrence12 | November 6, 2010 2:41 PM | Report abuse

544 (5) Imsinca said he went out to rake leaves, but of course I agree with you; getting tough with China is a non-starter (cf. Paul Krugman's beggar they neighbor rants a few months ago, talk about needing to get out more, but liberals think he not only has a clue, they think he should be the President fC'sake. He is the EF Hutton of liberal thinking on political economy).

I don't think many people realize what happened over the last two decades. They just don't get it. So, if I am upside down with my mortgages, can I get tough with my bank so then they'll take me seriously?
No, I maintain a great credit rating and so they take me seriously; they want to loan me more money than I can think about what to do with. Investing is a lot of hard work, I already spend too much time in front of this screen.

America has its head stuck firmly where the sun don't shine. The whole "get tough with other countries" path to prosperity, that ended a long time ago. We have to look in the mirror and we have to learn about austerity as a path to growth. We've done it before, we can do it again.


Posted by: shrink2 | November 6, 2010 2:42 PM | Report abuse

Michelle Malkin claims that the reason that stents are on the market is because Clinton needed them??

Posted by: DDAWD | November 6, 2010 2:42 PM | Report abuse

Obama would have been wise to stay in the US this week and engage the message of the voters

Obama has completely lost the communications this week since the election

He should be seen as responsive to the people. Instead Obama is pointing his fingers at reporters.

Posted by: OrangeDogs | November 6, 2010 2:46 PM | Report abuse

In America, the sentiments of the people matter. Obama is constantly acting like that is not the case.

The idea that Obama did not communicate well enough, and somehow the people were wrong - that is completely ridiculous.

The people know where Obama stands - and it has been rejected.

Leaving the country??

WHAT is that all about?

Posted by: BeautifulBeginning | November 6, 2010 2:52 PM | Report abuse

shrink:

"Imsinca said he went out to rake leaves"

FYI, lms is a she, I believe.

Posted by: ScottC3 | November 6, 2010 2:53 PM | Report abuse

claw:

"ScottC3, great minds think alike."

Indeed. I almost used the Malkin leak as well, but thought the other one had even more to it.

Posted by: ScottC3 | November 6, 2010 2:59 PM | Report abuse

Thanks. A good person, most of my friends think like she does. When you get left of liberal, you circle around to conservative on a lot of issues.

Posted by: shrink2 | November 6, 2010 3:01 PM | Report abuse

The American People deserve a better response from Obama and the democrats.

If there was a Board of Directors, the response to Obama and the democrats would have been - we should FIRE you too.

How did all these democrats stay in power? Is it all gerrymandering, the Senators whose terms have not run out yet?

It appears to me that the next two years are going to be hard for the democrats


The country wants to push out the rest of the democrats - what Obama and the democrats have said this week only makes people more determined. The democrats are probably done as a party - and a new centrist party will probably emerge.

Posted by: BeautifulBeginning | November 6, 2010 3:03 PM | Report abuse

Interesting that claw thinks he and Scott share great minds.

Also interesting that anyone might think that someone lies more than Hannity and/or Beck and/or Malkin and/or (fill in name of right wing pundit).

Posted by: pragmaticagain | November 6, 2010 3:04 PM | Report abuse

Super! And apparently Scott thinks it's a good thing to share thoughts with claw.

Good luck with that, fellas.

Posted by: pragmaticagain | November 6, 2010 3:07 PM | Report abuse

NBC is right. Get some fresh faces in there

Something the democrats do not understand.

The best thing the democrats can do is replace Harry Reid as Leader, replace Pelosi and get Obama to resign in favor of Biden
Totally fresh and new approach. New program. New ideas

The democratic ideas have been rejected

If the democrats try to force it, their party will be destroyed

Posted by: OrangeDogs | November 6, 2010 3:08 PM | Report abuse

The Republicans are happy to see the democrats make basic PR mistakes. For the democrats, it must be sapping to all their energy.

Who would want to defend Pelosi for one more minute, much less two more years.

Posted by: BeautifulBeginning | November 6, 2010 3:12 PM | Report abuse

prag:

"Interesting that claw thinks he and Scott share great minds."

Are you really unfamiliar with the phrase "Great minds think alike" and what it indicates? FYI, it is not intended to be taken literally.

"And apparently Scott thinks it's a good thing to share thoughts with claw."

I am happy to share thoughts with most people here. Even you!

Posted by: ScottC3 | November 6, 2010 3:18 PM | Report abuse

Polar Bear - you are right, the democrats should not try to divide people by pushing the tax cut issues the way they have.

All it does is make those people want to make political contributions to the Republicans.

How smart is that? Sometimes one really has to wonder about Obama - it appears that he lacks the intelligence to think ahead. It's like chess, you have to think 2 or 3 moves down the road - Obama can not do that.


Posted by: BeautifulBeginning | November 6, 2010 3:19 PM | Report abuse

The first item on the Orange Agenda is to cut the budget

Posted by: OrangeDogs | November 6, 2010 3:20 PM | Report abuse

Texas Eagle Forum out to protect everything white and fundamentalist...

"In the U.S., there are Muslim training camps across the country actively planning attacks on American soil. Young Americans are being converted to Islam in our jails, our military, public schools and universities, and in churches that preach Liberation Theology. Muslims have gained two seats in the U.S, Congress and have won seats in state and local races. Public school textbooks are becoming pro-Islam and anti-Christian. Muslims are buying Fortune 500 companies and high tech companies. There is a Dow Jones Islamic Index. Islamic banks, insurance companies and mortgage companies are springing up across the country. Our open borders welcome Muslims.

The challenge to America is to stop the spread of Islam in the U.S. before it is too late.

SOLUTIONS:

1. Congress MUST outlaw Shariah and international law
2. Eliminate Muslim government employees
3. Outlaw Muslim terrorist organizations, such as The Muslim Brotherhood, CAIR, etc.
4. Muslims should be ineligible to run for political office
5. All Muslim military personnel should be removed from the U.S. armed forces
6. Monitor mosques
7. Shut down terrorist training camps in the U.S."
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/texas-eagle-forum-calls-banning-muslims-military-government-jobs-and-running-office

Constitution schmonstitution, as those alien jewish people still alive might put it.

Posted by: bernielatham | November 6, 2010 3:32 PM | Report abuse

Polar Bear

You are starting to have a point there. Obama may be heading for a crack-up.

The pressure must be difficult. No human being can not be second-guessing himself right now.

Obama is rejecting the verdict of the American People. However, that is not how democracy works. If Obama doesn't want to represent the sentiment of the American people correctly, Obama should resign.

Obama's defiance might signal some mental problems.

We all know Obama has some sort of ego problem. However, Obama's statements this week indicate some sort of lack of sanity and disconnect from reality. If a Republican President started acting like this, I would be concerned. Leaving the country right after an election like this, is just another way to ignore the American people. First Obama was ignoring the Economy, now it is the voters.

This is a sign of mental instability.

Also, addicts tend to go back to their drugs in times like these.

I wonder if Obama is experiencing the urge to go back to cocaine. Obama sounds like an addict in denial actually. The lies, the cover-ups. The "enabling" Only in this case, Obama has a whole staff to enable him.


Biden isn't so bad. I think he wouldn't be a horrible President.

Posted by: BeautifulBeginning | November 6, 2010 3:41 PM | Report abuse

bernielatham at 3:32 PM

I think you are just quoting some outside group - and you are actually opposed to those views.

The situation is this: Most muslims who come here and live, like the US. They don't want to go back to a society and an economy like there is in the Middle East.

WHY? Because if they love the society and the economy in the Middle East so much, they can just get on a plane and go back.

So, there is no major movement like the one you describe.


This country is getting invaded - but from hispanics. OH well, they are of European blood (and native American blood) - and they are Roman Catholics for the most party.


So that is what we have - that is where this nation is headed.

Posted by: BeautifulBeginning | November 6, 2010 3:47 PM | Report abuse

shrink

"No, I maintain a great credit rating and so they take me seriously; they want to loan me more money than I can think about what to do with."

Except that's not what they were doing. They were telling every Tom, Dick and Harry they could get a loan, forgot to check their credit history and income, then sold them some bs loans with all sorts of tricky interest increases and balloon payments, then fudged the credit ratings and sold them off to unsuspecting investors. And vicariously even the people like you and me who could afford our homes have lost. I sure don't call that conservative, criminal is more like it. Why should we trust any of the banks now or conservatives for that matter?

And when you talk austerity that affects the top 10% as much as it affects the rest of us, I'll listen. Otherwise, we need to invest in our future, and quit living in the past.

We need an economic plan going forward that incorporates a place for us in the World Market and the Republicans want to talk about tax cuts and de-regulation as a jobs program. That's why I'm not a conservative.

In our business, our customers run the show. The banks and wall street screwed their customers on both ends, the ones buying the home and then the ones they sold the mortgage to, aided and abetted by the MOTU on Wall Street who helped them figure out how.

Posted by: lmsinca | November 6, 2010 4:24 PM | Report abuse

B of A Doublespeak

By James Kwak

Investors are claiming that Bank of America’s servicing operations are milking delinquent mortgages to earn fees rather than either foreclosing or modifying the mortgages. Bank of America’s defense?

“We have no financial incentive to keep mortgages on the books longer. Isn’t it better to modify the loan and keep people in their homes rather than foreclosing?”

I’m glad you feel that way. Then why do you have the second-lowest permanent modification rate of the seventeen servicers and two other servicer categories whose data have been released by Treasury?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | November 6, 2010 4:45 PM | Report abuse

54465446 at 2:18 PM


I supposed the answer to your question is that I have found the blogs on the Post over the past three years to be extremely hostile territory.

I never liked the slew of Obama people who were harassing and mocking people people, almost on a minute-by-minute basis.

In 2008, I found that practically every comment by anyone who did now fawn over Obama was met by harassment and hostility. This was going on over at the Fix and the archives are there for everyone to go back and review if one would like.

In that hostile environment, I learned to just state my opinion in a extremely simple way and be done with it.

Whether these people were paid and co-ordinated by Obama's campaign, or Organizing for American or some other democratic group is a matter yet to be completely proven. I have heard that the Obama campaign did have an internet operation - whether they were the ones with such obnoxious behavior on the Fix only they know and only they can tell us.

However, the attitude of the Obama people has been poor.

Then the false charges of racism came. First, it was against the Hillary people. Then against anyone who voiced any scepticism at Obama's platform.

It just seemed like any discussion on any topic, there were two or three people who would always just drop in some comment like "well, their motivation is really racist." Or, "you aren't saying that because you really believe that position, it's because you are racist."

The intimidation tactics have been pathetic, sad and unAmerican.

544 - it is clear to me that the "culture" on this blog is different from that which the Fix had. You can see that some posters have brought their hostility from the Fix over to here. Some have recruited other people from the Fix to here. There is still a measure of hostility.

I feel bad that everyone hasn't been able to get along better.

My sense is that at first, when I was here with the old regulars, it was bumpy, but we were handling it.

When 12Bar came in, with her daily hostile comments, brought other people, and started to encourage the regulars here to harass Greg Sargent into "doing something," that is when things got intolerable.

There have a good amount of hostile, nasty comments from the "regulars"

Overall, I have constantly gotten the message that the group as a whole doesn't care if they are hostile or not, or if they are nasty or not.

So I just state my opinion and let it be.

Posted by: PolarBearMadness | November 6, 2010 4:49 PM | Report abuse

lms:

"That's why I'm not a conservative."

I have a feeling that the reasons run much, much deeper than that.

Posted by: ScottC3 | November 6, 2010 4:54 PM | Report abuse

54465446

Many times I felt as if the Conservatives were outnumbered 8 to 1. We were getting hammered.

On the most basic level, the fantasies of the Obama platform are of course more appealing than the realities of the world.


A little over-simplification so the Obama people can understand the ideas, because they weren't going to read a long explanation.

Alot of Hyperbole to illustrate points.

And a bunch of Capital letters - and at least I was getting the message out against the 8 to 1 odds, of which may have been a paid team of bloggers working in shifts with an overall budget of $700 million dollars.

That was wrong to begin with.

If Obama had agreed to be on a level playing field for campaign expenditures that year, I think this nation would have been better off on several accounts. We ended up with excesses in many areas, including tv commercials and in the Senate races.

At the end, Obama has turned out to be the best argument against himself.


.

Posted by: PolarBearMadness | November 6, 2010 5:04 PM | Report abuse

Scott

I was referring to fiscal conservatism, although I used to consider myself one. I run a tight ship with our personal and business finances but have seen and experienced what "so called" fiscal conservatives have done to the country and I'm not impressed.

Socially, I've considered myself a liberal since I was about 10, so you're right on that anyway.

Posted by: lmsinca | November 6, 2010 5:04 PM | Report abuse

54465446

So what do you want to talk about?

Posted by: PolarBearMadness | November 6, 2010 5:10 PM | Report abuse

54465446


I think the intimidation tactics of the Obama people of false charges of racism have been out-of-bounds and definitely have no place in American politics.

The democrats seem to want to brush the complaint aside, and ignore those who want this addressed.

For a group of people to claim that they want a post-racial atmosphere in the nation, and then to stand silent when people on their side level false charges of racism - that is hypocrisy which will end all discussions until we can have elections end the matter.


In addition, the Obama people appear to believe that these False Charges of Racism are their legitimate response to the Jim Crow era.

That somehow they are entitled to engage in intimidation tactics against white people. Mind you, False Charges of Racism are NOT being used against blacks, it is only the whites. So, a False Charge of Racism is RACIST AGAINST WHITES AT ITS CORE.

Again, from the group that claims it wants to be post-racial.


Affirmative Action has created problems in our society - people are getting promoted who really should not - those people look for the next Affirmative Action program to go into

I suspect Obama was one of these people. Get in trouble or facing a situation in which the quality of one's work really does not measure up, and the response is to complain about racism.

That takes the heat off the quality of work issues - and usually gives everyone enough time to get the next Affirmative Action promotion.


It is all related - CRY RACISM - and somehow the society gives these people what they want.

So once the Pavlovs's dogs have been given their first few sets of treats, it just goes on without end.


I am really not too happy with the white democrats who have sat by silently - watching this whole episode go by. Obviously, they have had partisan motivations. However, these democrats have only proven that they are unfit to have any role in government, on any level.


I suppose that Obama and the democrats have already decided that they will take a defiant attitude which will lead to more election defeats in the future.


Add to that re-districting, I'm not sure what will be left of the democratic party when all this is over.

Both sides are determined to continue fighting. Obama seems oddly unaware of how bad his position is.

Posted by: PolarBearMadness | November 6, 2010 5:33 PM | Report abuse

Just read Kristol's "defense" of Olbermann. Predictable to 100%. Here's the key passage...

"Perhaps Olbermann violated NBC News “policy and standards.” But NBC doesn’t have real news standards for MSNBC—otherwise the channel wouldn’t exist."

What the chap is up to here is a defense of the the fist-bump network and the other components of the rightwing media system where his description applies perfectly. Draw Bill out further and he'd identify MSNBC with the "liberal mainstream media" but though he's implying an equivalence here with FOX particularly, he'd also not describe FOX as demonstrating "no real news standards", would he?

Such a joik.

Posted by: bernielatham | November 6, 2010 5:38 PM | Report abuse

"Olbermann is obviously one-sided, but I have never heard him being called out for making things up, the way that right wingers seem to have happen all the time."

I could refer you to an exchange on this very blog in which I linked conclusive proof of several KO lies, including a lie about Fox News supposedly lying, (and beating down in the process one of the most depraved and dishonest lefties ever to pollute this blog with his poison).
KO tends to lie about other people's supposedly lying.

Posted by: quarterback1 | November 6, 2010 5:41 PM | Report abuse

"And when you talk austerity that affects the top 10% as much as it affects the rest of us, I'll listen."

But I am in the top 5% and I am not giving up a dime until the people above me give up a proportional amount. And therein lies the problem, doesn't it? If there is no austerity for the rich, there will be no austerity, just disaster.

Posted by: shrink2 | November 6, 2010 5:46 PM | Report abuse

"Amusing, coming from you. I've saved this image, just for the laughs.

http://i54.tinypic.com/2d2cdps.jpg"

Thanks for reminding me. Thomas has indeed been a distinguished and original Justice.

I'm reminded of the recent leak of Larry Tribe's letter to Obama advising against nomination of Sotamayor because she isn't that bright but is arrogant. LOL Barry really went for the most qualified.

Posted by: quarterback1 | November 6, 2010 5:51 PM | Report abuse

DDAWD posted that he had never heard of Olbermann being accused of making things up, so ScottC3 and I were simply helping DDAWD to see the whole picture. That's what I was referring to. Now, if you want to debate whether Olbermann actually lied, or just purposefully withheld information, let's go.

Posted by: clawrence12 | November 6, 2010 5:54 PM | Report abuse

12 Bar and James Kwak ideas:

The financial incentives with the servicing units should be examined.

In addition, the tranches should be examined too. I have been told that if there is a foreclosure, the lowest tranches take the hit.

If there is a modification, all the tranches get an equal hit. That is an important difference - especially if the big banks are still holding onto large positions in the higher tranches, which I believe is the case.


In addition, the servicing units have a pre-set fee schedule with the foreclosures, and there is no pre-set fee schedule for modifications.

So, one potential solution would be to re-set the financial incentives for the servicing units toward modifications.


In addition, one bizarre point may be this: some of the mortgage portfolios have a pre-set rule that the servicing units have to advance the portfolios in the event of missed payments.

This creates an unusual situation, the big banks are actually borrowing money and loaning it to the mortgage portfolios in order to maintain a steady stream of income. This money is only paid back during at the foreclosure.


So there is another incentive to foreclose quickly, and avoid modifications.


The whole thing comes back to how the portfolios were set up - who has what positions in the tranches, and whether the big banks are playing this game or not.

The whole thing adds up to a massive fiduciary swamp of interests.

Add to that the fact that little has been done about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, there are serious problems.


I saw a story in the past few days about B of A disclosing their current lawsuit exposure. I didn't get the details.

Posted by: PolarBearMadness | November 6, 2010 5:56 PM | Report abuse

Isn't the world a better place without Olberman on television?

He isn't helping the liberal cause one bit, much has liberals may enjoy his mocking tone.


Posted by: PolarBearMadness | November 6, 2010 5:59 PM | Report abuse

Nah, not interested in debating Olbermann's honesty. People posted links and I'll take their words for it (well, not the Malkin one, obviously)

Posted by: DDAWD | November 6, 2010 5:59 PM | Report abuse

Ddawd

You should concentrate on your own honesty

.

Posted by: PolarBearMadness | November 6, 2010 6:03 PM | Report abuse

bernie,

I'm fascinated by your defense of Olbermann and MSNBC. GE is one of the largest defense contractor's in the country, making them (MSNBC) intregal to the government/military industrial complex propaganda machine. GE also receives untold subsidies from the government as well, how likely are they to "disobey" their master? Finally, Olbermann appears to be a relatively smart guy and must know that what he broadcasts is essentially the government/military industrial complex approved propaganda to appease the county's left. Essentially, he and Kristol are working for the same people doing the same thing. Olbermann is as knowlingly complicit as Kristol. How can you defend a player in this propaganda game?

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | November 6, 2010 6:19 PM | Report abuse

GE sold NBC - there are new masters

Comcast I think

Posted by: PolarBearMadness | November 6, 2010 6:20 PM | Report abuse

The nation gave its answer to Obama and the democrats.

The Republicans have the mandate, not Obama.

This is the NEW REALITY. Does Obama even realize that???


If Obama thinks he is going to take his remaining votes, and try to make a case for massive government programs and hold onto his health care plan, he is sadly mistaken.


The nation has voted to GET RID OF OBAMA'S HEALTH CARE PLAN.


Obama should heed the election results and agree to an orderly repeal.

Otherwise, what is going to happen? Obama is going to continue to implement and waste billions getting massive government agencies set-up - agencies which are certain to be repealed later?

Obama should AGREE TO IMPLEMENT WHAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WANT.


Posted by: PolarBearMadness | November 6, 2010 6:30 PM | Report abuse

That's what I thought, DDAWD. Just remember that I will have the link to this thread handy just in case you post "I've never heard of Olbermann being accused of making things up" again.

If anyone else wants to debate whether Olbermann or Hannity and Beck lie more often, let me know.

Posted by: clawrence12 | November 6, 2010 6:31 PM | Report abuse

PolarBearMadness, the problem is that polling shows Americans want some of the individual programs. It's a slippery slope to just base policy decisions on popularity. We send our representatives to Congress to make the best decisions even if those aren't the ones that poll the best. The Republicans should do whatever they can to repeal Obamacare.

Posted by: clawrence12 | November 6, 2010 6:37 PM | Report abuse

clawrence

A few individual programs can be handled by regulation - one to five pages.

We do not need a 2,000 page bill - complete with IRS agents trying to collect money so that Obama's benefits get paid out to those Obama thinks will show their gratitude by voting for the democrats.


There are economic incentives in the bill - like those for small business which encourage them to take a penalty instead of providing health insurance.

These incentives have not been debated enough, or thought out. If they have been thought out, it has only been by the left - for the benefit of their own agenda.

_______________________

If there ever was a midterm election on an issue, this was it - Obama should recognize that his health care bill has been rejected and he should reverse himself.

It is a serious situation to have such a situation in which the leader of a country is so far disconnected from the nation.

Posted by: PolarBearMadness | November 6, 2010 6:52 PM | Report abuse

Bernie:

"Just read Kristol's "defense" of Olbermann. Predictable to 100%. "

Be honest Bernie...there is nothing - absolutely nothing - that Kristol could have possibly said that you would not see as confirmation that he is a "joik". Your convictions about Kristol are no different to a true believer's religious convictions, and all events are necessarily seen as confirmation of the beliefs.

You are, in your own way, a religious zealot.

Posted by: ScottC3 | November 6, 2010 6:54 PM | Report abuse

I agree.

Posted by: clawrence12 | November 6, 2010 6:58 PM | Report abuse

@Troll
Yeah, you said it! And all of them have driven Highway 61 and you know what that means.

Posted by: bernielatham | November 6, 2010 7:11 PM | Report abuse

clawrence

Think of Obama's job approvals if he would just agree to repeal the health care.

At some point, Obama has to make a practical calculation, does he want to be re-elected or not???


And it isn't a question of health care or re-election. It is a question of what will remain of health care after he loses versus getting re-elected.


Obama has lost his relevance.

Posted by: PolarBearMadness | November 6, 2010 7:16 PM | Report abuse

"The Republicans should do whatever they can to repeal Obamacare. "

They can't and they don't want to.

Posted by: DDAWD | November 6, 2010 7:19 PM | Report abuse

Bernie,

Sarcasm and a Bob Dylan reference (I prefer Desolation Row) are you agreeing that MSNBC and Olbermann are knowing propagandists for the government/mip? Or are you saying that GE and MSNBC, and therefore Olbermann, are able to resist the billions of government/mip dollars and speak "truth to power?". If so, how?

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | November 6, 2010 7:32 PM | Report abuse

Obama announces major trade deal. And from the right?

A gust of wind. A dog barks. Cue the truck. Exit Boehner…

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | November 6, 2010 7:32 PM | Report abuse

I supposed the answer to your question is that I have found the blogs on the Post over the past three years to be extremely hostile territory.

Posted by: PolarBearMadness | November 6, 2010 4:49 PM | Report abuse

---

There's a simple solution to that…

Move to San Diego.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | November 6, 2010 7:40 PM | Report abuse

Fairlington

Are you supposed to be out looking for an old Civil War fort?


Posted by: PolarBearMadness | November 6, 2010 7:50 PM | Report abuse

@ScottC3: "'That's why I'm not a conservative. ... I have a feeling that the reasons run much, much deeper than that."

I think it's genetic. Just take a look at political affiliations and twin studies. ;)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | November 6, 2010 7:53 PM | Report abuse

"Bernie,

Sarcasm and a Bob Dylan reference (I prefer Desolation Row) are you agreeing that MSNBC and Olbermann are knowing propagandists for the government/mip? Or are you saying that GE and MSNBC, and therefore Olbermann, are able to resist the billions of government/mip dollars and speak "truth to power?". If so, how?"

Possibly see if Olbermann ever had any commentary prior to the Obama administration.

Posted by: DDAWD | November 6, 2010 8:00 PM | Report abuse

And here I thought Scot was a derivatives guy, not a psychologist. And Kevin, aren't you a computer geek artist. LOL

I grew up during the 50's & 60's surrounded by conservatives but I managed to turn out alright anyway. When I was old enough to keep a secret my Grandma, the one who taught me to play poker, would let me sneak down the street and play with the little "colored" girl, the first in the neighborhood. MLK, JFK and the Vietnam war twisted me in some unspeakable ways I guess, but I don't think I'd call it genetic.

Posted by: lmsinca | November 6, 2010 8:04 PM | Report abuse

@Scott - Well, you're right. I'm pretty firmly committed to the opinion that Bill Kristol is a jerk. His father too, we ought to add. And let's toss in Gertrude for gender balance. Of course, I know a fair bit about these folks, their histories and what they've wrought on America (not to mention on the women, children and grandparents who were unlucky enough to be beneath the bombs that blew their brains and guts to hell).

But more to the point above, as I said, Kristol was absolutely predictable in what he would say about Olbermann. That's his game and thus no slightest surprise.

Posted by: bernielatham | November 6, 2010 8:16 PM | Report abuse

"...I maintain a great credit rating and so they take me seriously; they want to loan me more money than I can think about what to do with."

"...I am in the top 5% and I am not giving up a dime until the people above me give up a proportional amount."

Wow, Shrink, sucks to be you, huh?

Posted by: carolanne528 | November 6, 2010 8:18 PM | Report abuse

Cute datum I'd missed from Nate Silver...

"Silver stated that Rasmussen's error was the largest "ever recorded in a general election in FiveThirtyEight's database, which includes all polls conducted since 1998.""
http://mediamatters.org/research/201011050013

Having a polling entity which so consistently forwards a biased result has propaganda value (suggestion of a desired consensus) and that's Rasmussen's role.

Posted by: bernielatham | November 6, 2010 8:19 PM | Report abuse

. . . and it was absolutely predictable what bernie would say about Kristol's absolutely predictable response.

Perhaps we should see who can best predict the other side's responses to events. Virtually everything Greg says is predictable, as is virtually every liberal comment about controversies of the day. So is virtually every reaction of Obama, Gibbs et al.

Posted by: quarterback1 | November 6, 2010 8:26 PM | Report abuse

.....so is virtually every comment may by qb, scott, strf, jake, brigade, blah, blah, blah. Elitists, LOL. Why the hell do we even bother then?

Posted by: lmsinca | November 6, 2010 8:30 PM | Report abuse

bernie,

Do you hold Olbermann in the same contempt as the Kristols? After all, they are all knowingly employed by the government/mip and equally culpable in "what they've wrought on America (not to mention on the women, children and grandparents who were unlucky enough to be beneath the bombs that blew their brains and guts to hell)." No?

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | November 6, 2010 8:32 PM | Report abuse

".....so is virtually every comment may by qb, scott, strf, jake, brigade, blah, blah, blah. Elitists, LOL. Why the hell do we even bother then?"

Addiction? Losers with nothing better to do? Eternal optimists? (No, surely not that.) Egotists? Boredom? Frustrated pundits?

Your question is exactly what I had in mind.

Posted by: quarterback1 | November 6, 2010 8:41 PM | Report abuse

Well, my motivation is to promote propaganda behalf of my dark Lord, Cheney. But I predict that bernielatham will have predicted that already.

There is a fine line between predictability and consistency. As Robert Zimmerman so eloquently wrote, "I came in from the wilderness, a creature void of form."

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | November 6, 2010 8:50 PM | Report abuse

Bernie:

"Well, you're right."

I know. Which raises the question of why you bother even presenting links to or quotes of what Kristol says. It doesn't matter in any way what he actually says...you will always spin it as evidence that he is what your overactive imagination has led you to believe him to be. You could simply blurt out at random times "Kristol is a jerk" and it would be as meaningful and useful. In fact, this could become your own version of "Amen" or "Allah be praised". A nice little public expression of your faith without the tedious pretension that it is based on anything rational.

Posted by: ScottC3 | November 6, 2010 8:50 PM | Report abuse

Bernie:

"Having a polling entity which so consistently forwards a biased result has propaganda value (suggestion of a desired consensus)..."

I'm not sure in which bizarro world a pollster that was consistently wrong would have "value" to anyone, but it isn't this one.

Posted by: ScottC3 | November 6, 2010 9:07 PM | Report abuse

"It doesn't matter in any way what he actually says...you will always spin it as evidence that he is what your overactive imagination has led you to believe him to be."

Why do you feel the need to single Bernie out for this? Aren't most of us guilty of the same? I could've told you in advance what qb would have to say about the Olbermann story, what you and TMW would have to say about Bernie's Kristol link, and pretty much what 99% of us would have to say about any Palin story.

Posted by: schrodingerscat | November 6, 2010 9:08 PM | Report abuse

qb

I'm pretty sure I'm the eternal optimist, the rest of you are something else I think. :>)

We have close friends and the guy is the MOST predictable person I've ever know. We play pinochle and whenever he loses, I can tell just by the bidding what his excuse will be. It's hysterical. And then he'll bring up politics just to get my goat, he's diametrically opposite from me, and he can pretty much figure out my response to just about every outrageous thing he says. It's almost like a game we play. ??????

As far as the Plumline goes, I'm actually fascinated by the psychology, although I hate to give myself away. Interestingly enough, I actually do learn a few things from commenters and some of the links. I also think we just enjoy arguing even though the argument seldom changes.

Posted by: lmsinca | November 6, 2010 9:10 PM | Report abuse

lms:

"Why the hell do we even bother then?"

The same reason that people masturbate. (Was that comment predictable?)

Posted by: ScottC3 | November 6, 2010 9:12 PM | Report abuse

Actually not from you Scott, you're a little more reserved than that normally. It was funny though. I'm not sure I'd characterize the Plumline as pleasurable although it is somewhat addictive.

Posted by: lmsinca | November 6, 2010 9:15 PM | Report abuse

It was predictable that Scott would find an unpredictable response to challenge the thesis -- predictable unpredictability. ; )

Troll, you kill me. But I don't think bernie would allow that servants of the Dark Lord are supposed to be aware of their servitude and "motivations," so to speak. But this would be a very clever way for Lord Cheney to mess with bernie's head. The Dark Lord does psy-ops in addition to propaganda.

lms,

I think, too, most people here or other hangouts care about issues and like to argue. Just plain like to argue about them. Sadly, whereas 200 years ago people might have argued at the tavern or the market, we do it through electrons and pixels.

Posted by: quarterback1 | November 6, 2010 9:31 PM | Report abuse

lms:

"I'm not sure I'd characterize the Plumline as pleasurable although it is somewhat addictive."

I actually think time spent here is probably perfectly analagous to time spent masturbating. Nothing productive comes of it apart from personal satisfaction. (Except for Kevin, who apparently got help remedying his gout. Being here, I mean, not masturbating, although maybe that works too. Kevin?)

Posted by: ScottC3 | November 6, 2010 9:33 PM | Report abuse

Taibbi in his inimitable manner of cutting through the crap...

"[Olbermann] should pay the price? Is Bob Steele kidding? What the hell is wrong with people?

We had a whole generation of journalists who sat by and did nothing while, for instance, George Bush led us into an idiotic war on a lie, plus thousands more who spent day after day collecting checks by covering Britney's hair and Tiger's text messages and other stupidities while the economy blew up and two bloody wars went on mostly unexamined... and it's Keith Olbermann who should "pay the price" for being unethical? Because, and let me get this straight, he donated money, privately, to politicians?"
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/matt-taibbi/blogs/TaibbiData_May2010/231499/83512

Re Ims post above and the others that precede it...

There really is little purpose in engaging almost all of these folks. Kevin has a good resilience and tao is fun but otherwise, it's pretty much a waste of time. We did have one exceptional and minimally cliche-stuffed conservative here for a while, freehold, but he drifted off to greener places I guess. Pity, but that's the way it is.

Not sure how this will all play out but it's hard to imagine it ending in a good place. Yesterday's anniversary of the assassination of Rabin hit me unexpectedly hard. When societies build up extremist elements that promote or buy into the promotion of severe hatreds and fears and where the threat of real violence simmers, it becomes a bit of a crapshoot on what might come down the pike. And America, of course, has a history of political assassinations and attempted assassinations from abortion providers up to Presidents. It's a scary time.

I'll write a bit more tomorrow then say goodbye to you folks.

Posted by: bernielatham | November 6, 2010 9:33 PM | Report abuse

qb:

"It was predictable that Scott would find an unpredictable response to challenge the thesis -- predictable unpredictability. ; )"

My head is spinning.

Posted by: ScottC3 | November 6, 2010 9:36 PM | Report abuse

Ya know, I predicted almost every word of bernie's comment above. Here's what I missed: "Re Ims post above and the others that precede it..."

I predicted he'd write Imsinca. Damn.

"There really is little purpose in engaging almost all of these folks. Kevin has a good resilience and tao is fun but otherwise, it's pretty much a waste of time. We did have one exceptional and minimally cliche-stuffed conservative here for a while, freehold, but he drifted off to greener places I guess. Pity, but that's the way it is."

Do you seriously expect to post your comments and links unchallenged? On a WaPo blog? Why?

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | November 6, 2010 9:47 PM | Report abuse

What a bizarre segue by bernie from dismissive comments about us to random "extremism" and assassination paranoia. Oh well"

"When societies build up extremist elements that promote or buy into the promotion of severe hatreds and fears and where the threat of real violence simmers, it becomes a bit of a crapshoot on what might come down the pike."

Like this, I suppose:

http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=612

http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=621

That was all okay, as was numerous Democrat leaders' comparing Bush and Cheney to the Nazis. But any criticism of Obama's radical agenda is dangerous extremism. Got it. Very unpredictable.

Posted by: quarterback1 | November 6, 2010 9:51 PM | Report abuse

"(Except for Kevin, who apparently got help remedying his gout"

Well at least I accomplished something. I don't know about everyone else, but I'm usually working while I'm also visiting the PL. I have my office at home, actually we have a warehouse at home, so I tend to probably work more hours than I should. The PL is a distraction for me while I'm doing the dreaded paperwork and bookkeeping, which I hate.

Bernie, in case I miss you tomorrow, I want you to know if you're really leaving, I've taken your posts with the spirit they're intended. I'm a little nervous sometimes where all this will take us. The last time things seemed this dicey to me was the late 60's and the '68 election.

Hope your family situation will be resolved satisfactorily. We've had a good time communicating IMO.

Posted by: lmsinca | November 6, 2010 9:59 PM | Report abuse

bernie: "We had a whole generation of journalists who sat by and did nothing while, for instance, George Bush led us into an idiotic war on a lie, plus thousands more who spent day after day collecting checks by covering Britney's hair and Tiger's text messages and other stupidities while the economy blew up and two bloody wars went on mostly unexamined... "

And, as I noted above, NBC News used retired military generals who had financial ties to the war machine or the Pentagon as paid war commentators and opiners, and still to this day, have not disclosed it to their viewers, or owned up to it.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | November 6, 2010 10:04 PM | Report abuse

qb:

"Like this, I suppose"

I suspect the odds are not outrageous that Bernie is actually in one of those photos.

Posted by: ScottC3 | November 6, 2010 10:13 PM | Report abuse

bernielatham--

If you're leaving for good, or just for a long time, I hope all goes well with you.

Posted by: carolanne528 | November 6, 2010 10:15 PM | Report abuse


I also answer to the Dark Lord Cheney


.... But not when he's doing hi Potter impressions


Posted by: OrangeDogs | November 6, 2010 10:56 PM | Report abuse

Imsinca (12) Whew, fun with the kids and all, where were we, oh yeah, "Why should we trust any of the banks now or conservatives for that matter?" I'd never trust a bank, nor a conservative, nor a liberal. I trust very few people and no institutions. But I can still live happily and easily, because good people trust me. Thats the thing, its a variation on the aphorism, its not who you know, its who knows you.

Austerity is coming, the die is cast. The only question is how the pain will be distributed. Usually it hits poor children and women hard, then the middle class gets smaller, then if there is any austerity left over, the upwardly mobile, those just past middle class status, they might have to dial it back on the heli-skiing. If the rich ever had to dial it back, I'd be shocked and surprised for the first time in a long, long time.

Posted by: shrink2 | November 6, 2010 11:06 PM | Report abuse

This is the Age of Orange

It's is wnderful diversity Orange deserves to get it's time


What ? You can't handle having an Orange Speaker?

You wouldn't be saying that if the Speaker of the House wasn't Orange


You are so racist against that Colored guy.

Posted by: OrangeDogs | November 6, 2010 11:20 PM | Report abuse

I predict that Bernie Latham will make his final swan song here before he would ever admit that Andrew Sullivan's credibility on all things Palin has been demolished by his Trig obsession.

Posted by: clawrence12 | November 6, 2010 11:22 PM | Report abuse

shrink

I know what you mean, we're happy and secure here ourselves and managed to help the four kids remaining get a great start in life and they'll be okay as well. We've all been setting ourselves up for this since 2007. I just have a tendency to wait for the guy on the white horse to rescue the USA. Maybe we just haven't met him or her yet?

I've played politics for 40 years, 50 if I count JFK's campaign as a 5th grader, and I've never been anything but disappointed with the results. Sometimes I don't know why I bother. Guess I'm just trying to get the best deal available for everyone. It's a little like a rubic's cube but no one has the answer, the code's been lost.

Posted by: lmsinca | November 6, 2010 11:23 PM | Report abuse

Bernie

Just do a chicken dance and chill out

The liberals got violent in Oakland last night and no one cared


You are having a hissy fit when nothing has happened yet. The liberals are going to get voted out and they will lose their pathetic gerrymandered districts. No on has to die


Posted by: OrangeDogs | November 6, 2010 11:29 PM | Report abuse

bernie

All this can be settled by elections and compromise


But seriously the liberals have adopted an attitude that they are going to force their agenda on the American People. The liberals are the dangerous extremists


Obama has a chance now to sign the repeal of health care. Or he can get voted out and watch someone else do it


His ego has been contained. The House now has to take the lead on Economic policy now that Obama refuses to come up with a viable Economic policy

Posted by: OrangeDogs | November 6, 2010 11:54 PM | Report abuse

Obama seems oddly unaware of his reduced political position

He can't be that stupid that he didn't see this coming


So why did Obama play so difficult with the Republicans last spring over the Financial Reg bill??? He now needs to work with these same people

That is what is so concerning about Obama. It's not just the apparent lack of judgement, it's the irrationality of it all

If Obama is really this irrational. All the evidence points to the fact that he is. If Obama really is this unbalanced, the nation has something here.

Posted by: OrangeDogs | November 7, 2010 12:23 AM | Report abuse

"Sometimes I don't know why I bother. Guess I'm just trying to get the best deal available for everyone."

Yaaaay. And that is a fine thing to try for. It is worth it to be a good person, studies show. Have a good night all.

Posted by: shrink2 | November 7, 2010 12:49 AM | Report abuse


The market rates may have gone down, or remained the same. For the homeowner to get qualified for lower rates, there are certain prerequisites but I would recommend you search online for "123 Mortgage Refinance" before you decide because they can find the 3% refinance rates.

Posted by: davidboner07 | November 7, 2010 12:50 AM | Report abuse

The explanation is this: the affirmative action has driven Obama insane.

Obama has constantly been pushed into positions he can not handle

So Obama's issue is really an inferiority complex. A napolianic complex

This usually end ugly , right ?

Posted by: OrangeDogs | November 7, 2010 1:04 AM | Report abuse

This is actually an interesting set of ideas : Obama has developed a Napoleonic complex as a from his constant sense of inferiority resulting from affirmative action programs. This explains Obama's irrational behavior.

Time after time, affirmative action put Obama into positions which he knew he could not handle.

Instead of gaining a sense of accomplishment from actually mastering a job, Obama never had any adequate job performance, and instead just went from affirmative action program to affirmative action program.


It is a good theory.


This clearly explains why Obama is overcompensating with overly aggressive behavior. This can explain Obama's desire to intimidate people with False Charges of Racism. It also explains Obama's reaction to the Scott Brown election.

Instead of being rational and dropping health care, Obama went for reconciliation.


Obama is being overly aggressive in domestic politics - and he is being irrational - irrational in his management of the democratic party and irrational in his political decisions.

Obama is undoubtedly suffering from a mental condition causing him to be irrational.

That much is clear.

The question is: does this disqualify him from office - and make him a danger to the country if he remains in office.


These are serios questions which must be answered.


.

Posted by: BeautifulBeginning | November 7, 2010 1:36 AM | Report abuse

Clearly, Obama's statements this week indicate an irrationality which raises a good number of questions about Obama's abilities to properly make decisions.

Obama is clearly destroying his own career, and now it is certain that Obama is destroying the democratic party as well.

The only way to stop this is a 25th Amendment solution.


I don't know where all this is going - but this Obama is one strange bird. He is not acting rationally - and whether this comes with an obsession over a left-wing agenda, or some actual mental disability should certainly be examined.


Somehow, someway, something is seriously wrong. The wheels are off the track.

Posted by: BeautifulBeginning | November 7, 2010 1:53 AM | Report abuse

The monumental victory of Republicans in 2010 should spell doom for illegal "immigration", AMNESTY schemes that were floated by Obama and the open borders, pressure groups.

This is a very good thing for America. America has perfectly good, immigration laws already on the books. The problem is that the interlopers from south of the border are too lazy and dishonest to obey American laws. They prefer that some sucker president and crony congress grant them easy amnesty and free American citizenship.

That is exactly what Obama and the Pelisites wanted to do in exchange for the millions of votes the former illegals would cast for Democrats. What a crooked scam!

Luckily, the American people smelled the rats in the attic and exterminated them.

Arizona has shown the way for immigration enforcement in America. All branches of law enforcement must pitch in and help stop the invasion. It's the only way.

Posted by: battleground51 | November 7, 2010 3:46 AM | Report abuse

shrink,

Your claims about "austerity" and class are a testable hypothesis at least if given a bit of definition. I'm curious whether you are aware of any actual data that support or contradict it. Is there data that show that "the rich" do or don't "share the pain," or that they are last to share any?

Posted by: quarterback1 | November 7, 2010 5:37 AM | Report abuse

shrink2, do you believe Obama is suffering from a mental condition which is causing him to be irrational?

Posted by: clawrence12 | November 7, 2010 5:38 AM | Report abuse

I've worked as a grip on one movie and one tv series. In terms of content, neither was much fun - a psychological drama and a crappy teens-forming-band thing. But there are some film projects that would be a hoot to be involved with and this film would surely be one... http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/nov/07/vibrator-victorian-women-film-hysteria

Posted by: bernielatham | November 7, 2010 6:43 AM | Report abuse

Bernie:

"I've worked as a grip on one movie and one tv series..."

What does a grip do? I've always wondered every time I see it in the credits.

Posted by: ScottC3 | November 7, 2010 6:55 AM | Report abuse

qb:

"Is there data that show that "the rich" do or don't "share the pain," or that they are last to share any?"

My guess is that the reason shrink doesn't think "the rich" share the pain is that, when they feel it enough for him to notice, they are no longer "rich".

Posted by: ScottC3 | November 7, 2010 7:16 AM | Report abuse

@Scott - a lot of different tasks fall to the grip. Probably best to think first of what doesn't. Lighting is done by one specialized team, traffic control by another, props by another, camera work by another, special effect (eg rain) another, (then there's make-up, food services etc). Most everything else the grips handle. Providing and setting up light reflectors, running dolly track for moving camera shots (and muscling the car with cameraman and director along its path), blacking out a building by putting up light-blocking tarps over all the windows if shooting a nightime scene during daylight, providing and running the rigs used for elevated camera angles, etc. Lots of heavy lifting, and if you're on location rather than a set, lots of carrying heavy stuff over distances often in inclement weather and over unsmooth and wet ground. If you ever have the opportunity to peek inside a grip truck, you'll see a bazillion things which have indiscernable functions and which also have, commonly, more than one name (which makes the learning curve for a new grip really steep). Not glamorous at all, really, just a lot of hard work. But there's some problem-solving challenge about every ten minutes (how do we get a light up in that tree? we need a purple/orange glow on that highrise, etc. I did it for a few months but the schedules for filming are just crushing to any normal family life so I decided to end off. But a great learning experience re film production.

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

"C.E.O.’s of the largest American companies earned an average of 42 times as much as the average worker in 1980, but 531 times as much in 2001. Perhaps the most astounding statistic is this: From 1980 to 2005, more than four-fifths of the total increase in American incomes went to the richest 1 percent."
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/07/opinion/07kristof.html?hp

Thus the "I want my America back" makes some sense. But I expect that banning gay marriage, placing the Ten Commandments in the city park, and giving that one percent even more while all others get even less probably won't do the trick.

Posted by: bernielatham | November 7, 2010 8:05 AM | Report abuse

"giving that one percent even more while all others get even less"

Not that there is anything cliche-driven about that.

One would think that after two years the O Admin would have put in place its nominee for Commissioner of the Income Allocation Agency as well as its policy to more fairly equalize the income checks we all receive from the government. Or perhaps it doesn't actually work that way.

Posted by: quarterback1 | November 7, 2010 8:29 AM | Report abuse

54465446

Here's that article I was looking for regardng lathanides. The mine was apparently closed for 9-10 years and re-opened in 2007. I know it's only one mine, in CA btw, but I'll check with my daughter when I talk to her later today to see what if anything she knows. A lot of her friends are in mining but since her main interest is water, she went with oil if that makes any sense. I also know that Chevron gives a lot of money to CSM, her research is entirely supported by them.

"In 2008, lanthanide concentrates were processed by Chevron Mining Inc. (previously Molycorp Inc.) at its mine site at Mountain Pass, CA. Chevron Mining sold its entire holdings in the rare earths mine to Molycorp Minerals LLC in September and operations continued at the site throughout 2008. Major uses for these mineral commodities were in automotive catalytic converters, petroleum fluid-cracking catalysts, permanent magnets, glass-polishing compounds, ceramics, metal-alloying additives, phosphors and rechargeable batteries. Three domestic companies produced and sold lanthanide intermediate concentrates and refined products.

Chevron Mining sold its interests in the Mountain Pass Mine to Molycorp Minerals LLC on Sept. 30, 2008. Molycorp Minerals LLC is an investment company owned by Resource Capital Fund IV L.P., Pegasus Partners IV, LP, The Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Traxys North America LLC, Carint Group LLC and Mark Smith. The Molycorp operation previously mined the rare earth fluocarbonate mineral bastn�site by hard-rock surface methods, and the mine remained on care and maintenance in 2008. Molycorp maintained significant stocks of bastn�site concentrates, intermediate concentrates and high-purity rare earth compounds at its operations at Mountain Pass. In October 2007, Chevron Minerals completed phase one of its threestage plan and restarted the rare earth separation plant at Mountain Pass. The company also processed intermediate rare earth concentrates from existing stocks during the first three quarters of 2008. Molycorp Minerals LLC maintained production in the last quarter of the year. The mine at Mountain Pass has been closed since 1998. Future plans are to restart processing of stockpiled bastn�site concentrates followed by reopening of the mine. "

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb5976/is_200907/ai_n32426772/

Posted by: lmsinca | November 7, 2010 9:02 AM | Report abuse

All, here's a fresh Open Thread for you:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/11/open_thread_11.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | November 7, 2010 9:03 AM | Report abuse

Lindsey Graham wants to start a third war with Iran. He wants to be "bold", which is like wearing a bright tie or a pastel fedora. And it seems like a good idea to me. What will we get?

1) obviously, another war will help cut the debt
2) a rousing cheer of support from reformers in Iran who have cousins and brothers and sisters they don't really like and war will help kill them off
3) the further friendliness from all other western countries who, it must be said, are already brimming with affection for US foreign policy as implemented over the last decade
4) a recognition from muslims worldwide that the US is so "bold" that it deserves love and respect rather than enmity, thus terrorist dangers will disappear further reducing military and security costs and the deficit
5) many more young American men (boys) and women (girls) who would, if they stayed in their communities with all the modern temptations and corrupting social influences, be spared such degradations through mortality or the character-building associated with moving about on no legs.

I can't think of a better future.

Posted by: bernielatham | November 7, 2010 9:11 AM | Report abuse

Bernie:

"a lot of different tasks fall to the grip."

Interesting, thanks. You can now depart today comforted in the knowledge that I finally learned something from you.

Posted by: ScottC3 | November 7, 2010 9:35 AM | Report abuse

qb:

"Or perhaps it doesn't actually work that way."

Heh. It's quite amazing how the "reality based community" is so unaware of, well, reality.

Posted by: ScottC3 | November 7, 2010 9:40 AM | Report abuse

imsinca:

In fact the mine is currnetly closed but will reopen sometime in 2011. It supposedly has just restarted processing previously mined ores this month. No mining is currently being done.

Various analysts have been warning about buying Molycorp stock for sometime, as it is a company essntially without revenues. It does have some signed contracts for future delivery. There is another US company, whose name I forget, in the same boat, but their mine is not scheduled to open until 2013.

So my point is still the same. Most "green" people have no concept that we are handing our energy production and consumption essentially speaking to Chinese control.

Posted by: 54465446 | November 7, 2010 11:25 AM | Report abuse

battleground wrote:

"Arizona has shown the way for immigration enforcement in America. All branches of law enforcement must pitch in and help stop the invasion. It's the only way"

In 2008 according to US statistics about 7.3 million people were under some form of correctional supervision nationwide (probation, prison, jail, parole). That's at every level of govenment.

Estimates vary, but the minimum number of illegals in the US that I have seen is 10 million.

Where on earth would you come up with the resources in the criminal justice system to double the number of people being adjudicated?

Furthermore, where would you hold them temporarily, and how would you transport them back to other countries?

Your suggestions may be well-intentioned, but are totally inconsistent with the reality of the undertaking.

Posted by: 54465446 | November 7, 2010 11:35 AM | Report abuse

54465446

I know my article was from last year (it was just one I happened to remember reading quite awhile ago) so not up to speed, and I'm not arguing your point necessarily, but at least people here in the U.S. and elsewhere are aware of the problem. I also read somewhere today that they're addressing the problem at the G20, which doesn't mean anything satisfactory will come of it of course. I just can't believe that when the scientists and mining experts get their head around this that it will be an unsolvable problem. But then I'm a glass half full gal with a great deal of faith in our intellectual resources still. It's sure an interesting dilemma to follow though. Isn't it true that the rare earth minerals are not so much rare as difficult to mine in order to be cost effective?

Posted by: lmsinca | November 7, 2010 11:38 AM | Report abuse

54465446

I'm also aware that it's environmental activists who are at least partially responsible for this problem. Hopefully, a compromise will be found. It's always a balance between the environment and energy.

Posted by: lmsinca | November 7, 2010 11:46 AM | Report abuse

imsinca:

Switched to the new thread already. see you there, at least until kickoff.

Posted by: 54465446 | November 7, 2010 11:51 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