How do you feel about the current administration? If you like, keep it local. How are your elected officials doing? Any of them do anything stupid lately?
60 comments:
Rick Bland
said...
My favorite Michelle Bachmann quote:
"If we took the minimum wage completely away, we could virtually wipe out unemployment."
Another good one:
"To believe in evolution is almost like a cult following ..."
Michelle Bachmann claims that she was "called by God" to run for public office. Evangelicals distributed 250,000 voter guides to Minnesota churches in an obvious effort to influence the election. The main issue she has been associated with is the banning of same-sex marriages.
First the auto industry. Then the corporate banks. Then the medical profession. Exactly what portion of the American economy will Osama Obama allow to remain capitalistic?
Newt says Obama is the most radical president ever. Poppycock. Woodrow Wilson was a wild man activist, especially for his day. Without Teddy Roosevelt before him, he would've been a stunning contrast to all those before him.
I have a friend who in 1954 was ready to be shipped to Korea when Ike settled the war. He's his 2nd favorite president bcz of that. Any presidents/or legislation you're eternally grateful for?
Obama isn't even in the top ten most radical presidents. He hasn't been around long enough to do anything. That is the knid of right-wing rhetoric that is fueling teapartiers everywhere.
Newt and people like Glenn Beck should be thanked for giving all of those people who don't do any thinking something to think about.
Huckabee is just simply unelectable. Nothing against him; he is one of my favorite candidates. Yet, sadly, he cannot be elected. Voters are, by and large, a rather ignorant bunch. They will just not vote for some one with the name of "Huckabee", "Hucklebee", "Huckleberry", or anything that odd. Lots of legislators have been elected solely because of their names. How many "Kennedy"'s do you supposed have been elected?
Both US Senators from Iowa have held their seat for over 25 years and are now in their seventies. They both indicate they will run again.
West Virginia's Robert Byrd is 92 and has held his seat for over 50 years. People need to quit voting for people who are old and feeble. None of these guys even drives an automobile anymore.
California is another state where both senators are in their 70's, one nearly 80. Even in this ultra-liberal state, voters can't resist voting for their grandparents.
Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania is in his 80's and has held his seat for over 30 years. Along the way, he has switched his party affiliation at least twice, pledging loyalty to whomever happens to be in power. He needs to pledge his loyalty to the people in his district for a change.
What will it take to get voters to stop voting for people who are so old they can barely take care of themselves?
During the 1828 presidential campaign, Andrew Jackson's opponents referred to him as Andrew "Jackass" - which was later adopted as the symbol of the party he founded, the Democratic party.
Jackson-EXCELLENT suggestion. Was 1828 the 1st election non landowning men could vote? He had an honest appreciation for what a national bank could do to centralize power and grant privileges and favors that defeat the public good. 1st president to suffer an assassination attempt, and went after the guy with his cane. He used his temper for political gain bcz nobody wanted to be too far on the wrong side of him. Fascinating, complex, yet simple man.
Huckabee's bigger problem is looking like Gomer Pyle. Lincoln wouln't have a chance today. At the Chicago Rep. convention of 1860 there was great disaapointment when they unfurled the banners carrying his likeness bcz he was nobody's pretty boy.
Lincoln could not get the Republican nomination for President today. Even in 1860 he was accused of being an atheist because he did not belong to any church. His reply: "I have never united myself to any church because I have found difficulty in giving my assent without mental reservations to the long complicated statements of Christian doctrine which characterize their articles of belief and confessions of faith. When any church will inscribe above it altars, as its sole qualification for membership, the Savior's condensed statement of the substance of both law and gospel, 'Thou shall love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul, and with thy mind, and love thy neighbor as thyself,' that church I will join with all my heart and all my soul." How's that Republican platform committee?
Lincoln suffered from "melancholia"- depression. There were a couple times friends had him on suicide watch. He lost 2 or 3 sons in adolescence and was married to the difficult Mary Todd. He served only 1 term in Congress during the Mexican War, ran and lost for US Senate in 1854 & 1858 and sought the vice-presidency unsuccessfully in 1856. He received about 40% of the popular vote in 1860 with 3 Democrats splitting their vote. The nation obviously was blessed by his "backing in" to the Presidency.
Anonymous- "Obama isn't even in the top ten most radical presidents."
I agree he is not now in the top 5. Wilson, FDR, LBJ, Jackson, Teddy Roosevelt for his enhancing government's role and bringing us into the 20th Century and Lincoln for suspending some civil liberties and financing the Civil War without paying interest through greenbacks.
I'd put the next ones after Obama. Jefferson for going against his limited presidential powers and making the (original)Louisiana Purchase and Polk for expanding the US through his war. I have difficulty calling any other presidents "radical" although somethings JFK said about the Federal Reserve would have been extremely refreshing.
But Obama has definite possibilities to get into at least the top 4. Thomas Sowell, given to more temperate statements then myself, says how a day politically can be a lifetime. Conservatives who wrote Obama and his healthcare plan off after Scott Brown became a Senator were sorely mistaken. Sowell is concerned that immigration reform/amnesty may be shoved through to increase the voter rolls by 10-20 million in time for 2010 or 2012.
Obama is a federal government expansionist last seen with the hefty majorities given LBJ in 1964. The good news from that- many federal civil rights laws. But we checked the upward rise of black families economically with the welfare laws and have largely expelled fathers from their family responsibilties with these.
Sarah Palin may have found her place with her Cheri Oteri head cheerleader impersonation for the tea partiers. I am more of a tea partier than Republican. Palin may help keep the TPers on the ranch. This may well be the most valuable public function she ever provides.
My main concern with the tea party is a disruptive 3rd party radically changing the 2012 election and the present occupant being reelected. 1824's disputed 4 candidate campaign settled in the House and stirred Jackson's blood. 1860-the Civil War, 1912-the worst progressive won, 1968 and 1992.
Sarah Palin commented on a possible Romney-Palin with her admiration for Romney.
I was online paying bills tonight and noticed I pay over $7200.00 yearly for insurance on 4 vehicles. I think everyone should push for a National Auto Insurance Plan.
"Conservatives who wrote Obama and his healthcare plan off after Scott Brown became a senator were sorely mistaken" -
You really need to analyze this in more detail. The healthcare bill which was passed bore virtually no resemblance to the bill as it was initially introduced. Conservatives who wrote off the public option were correct - it was DOA.
Every president since FDR has expanded the federal government. Obama has not succeeded in doing that yet, for the most part. The healthcare bill does not (as passed). Obama seems to be getting a lot of credit here for doing very little. Conservative rhetoric is not accurate when it depicts Obama having passed all types of radical legislation. It simply is not true.
You are talking about putting Obama in the top five most radical presidents of all time - even though he has done virtually nothing at all. You need to ask yourself why you are giving him so much credit. Obviously, this is what happens when one listens to Glenn Beck too much. Quit listening to those guys and do some personal research instead.
If you want to get away with calling Obama an expansionist in the LBJ mold, you'd better be ready to pony up some hard evidence - and not justthings he's said or supported. I mean things he has done as president. All these other presidents you mention have track records while in office of making major changes. Obama has not.
How 'bout that Supreme Court? FDR had no S.C. nominees in the 1st 5-6 years of his reign, so he wanted to ramp the # of justices from 9-15. The Democratic controlled Congress would not stomach that. Ex-Klansman Hugo Black, who marshalled the forces in the Senate for the Court-packing bill, was 1 of the 8 justices that FDR appointed in his last 6 years. Black, a virulent anti-Catholic and opponent of religious freedom, along with William O. Douglas, anither FDR appointee, were still on the Court, 28 years after FDR's death, usurping the baby's right to life and nationalizing the supposed right to abort your baby through Roe v. Wade.
When the Clintons were mentioned as possible justices, I believe I would be on board, simply bcz they are 62-63 years old. I'd rather have them for 20 or so years, than some other loon for 30-35. These are the mental gymnastics played bcz of lifetime appointments and our increasing life expectancy.
Rick- Bill Ayres, his bomb-throwing wife, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Saul Alinsky's style zealots, tons of appointees w/leftist, statist beliefs some who've already left town bcz of public pressures. It's like the anticipation of a highly touted rookie. The hopes usually exceed the outcome bcz our imagination, fear & greed takeover.
And, as you know, President Obama voted agst. both Roberts and Alito for the high bench. If this was a 48-52 Senate either way, this would be great sport. As is, not so much.
Diamond Dave is on the money in his observation that the amount of radicalism expected from an Obama presidency will not be achieved.
Mostly this gap is due to certain ultra-right-wing elements unwittingly playing to the mob mentality of an underinformed electorate. Most of the isuues cited by DD made Obama a somewhat radical candidate; they do not necessarily make him a radical president.
It's funny when we describe presidents we consider radical, Obama is the only one on the list whose radical credentials occurred solely before he held office. Once again, he gets held to a different standard than everyone else.
Thanks to all that have put up with my rantings. I cannot, however, continue when there is nothing presented to rant about. All that is presented is political shit that even at it's best is not that good. See you later. B.Nasty
Bear with us, guys. We had a couple requests to run some of these threads. I always try to talk about what people want. Why else even do this?
We'll bring in some more local threads next. In the meantime, if you have an idea, post it on the open discussion thread and I'll try to accomodate you.
I think you're spot on. Palin is a lightning rod that changes the focus of the campaign. Being Governor of Alaska for a couple years, having a best-selling book, big speaking fees and a show on Fox adds little or nothing to her resume. President Reagan (who was California Gov. for 8 years)from 1975-1981, was on the radio with 5 minute spots and wrote a substantive newspaper column on the issues, in between running for president twice. He was not given his due as a great writer or negotiator. He wrote the speech after coming back from the Reykjavik the arms talk in 1986.
Larry Kudlow on Rasmussen Reports on the tea party
"So much is being written in the mainstream media about who the tea partiers are, but very little is being recorded about what these folks are actually saying."
"Of the top-10 planks in the Contract, the No. 1 issue is protect the Constitution. That's followed by reject cap-and-trade, demand a balanced budget and enact fundamental tax reform. And then comes number five: Restore fiscal responsibility and constitutionally limited government in Washington." ...
"Filling out the Contract, the bottom-five planks are end runaway government spending; defund, repeal and replace government-run health care; pass an all-of-the-above energy policy; stop the pork; and stop the tax hikes.
What's so significant to me about this tea-party Contract From America is the strong emphasis on constitutional limits and restraints on legislation, spending, taxing and government control of the economy. Undoubtedly, the emphasis is there because no one trusts Washington.
As I read this Contract, tea partiers are reminding all of us of the need for the Constitution to protect our freedoms. They're calling for a renewal of constitutional values, including -- first and foremost -- a return to constitutional limits on government. The tea partiers who responded to this poll are demanding a rebirth of the consent of the governed. The government works for us, we don't work for it."
With all the talk of the tea party, I'd never seen listed what they stand for. I don't understand what is stated about energy policy. Because of the unprecedented deficits and spending I would put reducing/changing tax policy at the end of the list. Otherwise, I'm for it. Other than welfare reform and reducing taxes, the Republicans have never taken back substantive ground from the New Deal, Fair Deal, Great Frontier, or Great Society policies of the expansionist Democrats. This needs to change before we go Thelma and Louise off the cliff.
What members of the Bush administration, for instance, were assigned to that? And by the way, taking care of the planet isn't something you just "assign" some people to. YOU should be taking care of it too.
It's so comforting to hear that we may be aiding the common good, and that First Lady/Senator/Secretary of State Clinton is part of the oversight committee. How does one wrangle there way into the Politburo?
Even though the Republican Party appears to have a great deal of momentum going into this election cycle, I honestly think they will squander nearly all of it by the time the election rolls around.
They always have a tendency to pander to the least popular and weakest element of the party - the extreme religious right. This wing usually steers them completely off the normally beaten path, and discourages any cross-over voters they otherwise might have gained.
A better strategy for the GOP right now would be to make efforts to attract moderate independent voters - perhaps even some who may have voted for Obama. This will probably not happen. The ultra-right consistently overestimates their popularity and drags the rest of the party right with it.
If voters are forced to choose between a liberal candidate and a fervent, right-wing religious conservative, the liberal will almost always win. That is simply the make-up of the electorate right now.
Rick- You have a valid concern with the endless possibilities for Republicans snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. The Tea Party may threaten the Republican quest for the presidency in 2012. The issue right now is the Democrat rule which feels the need to get what can be got while the gittin is good. The political hijinks passing the healthcare bill angered the majority against it. Shoving anything down someone's throat is best done in a totalitarian state, not in a democracy where the shovee's can become the shovers.
A good strategy would be to 1) have a central message like 1994's Contract w/America; 2)follow Rahm Emanuel's lead in taking Congress back for the Democrats in 2006 by recruiting moderates in Democratic districts/states and 3)tap into the Tea Partiers (before they form another party or slate of candidates) by giving them work where candidates who believe in a limited federal government that respects rather than tramples the Constitution.
The Tea Partiers need to get off the "Stop the Tax Hike" mantra. President Obama passed the largest middle-class tax cuts since Ronald Reagan. As a pure socialist, he has instead opted to heap additional tax burdens on the top 10% of wage earners. Virtually every single person in the tea party has experienced real tax cuts since 2008. That is why they appear so ridiculous chanting their "stop the tax hikes" mantra. They are being led in this chant by the likes of Glenn Beck. Mr. Beck, who earns $32 million per year, finds himself in the group whose taxes have increased, and doesn't like it one bit. The tea partiers appear to be composed of people who blindly recite Glenn Beck, perhaps the biggest rewriter of history I've ever seen.
Forget the tea partiers; they are a paper tiger. Their appearance of strength is derived solely from Fox News' branding them as players.
Fox News has degenerated into five or six muti-millionaires sitting around in Brooks Brothers suits complaining about all the taxes they have to pay. Get off it.
I agree that high taxes is not my main beef. We need to present people with an honest accounting and bill, so they can help make policy and spending decisions and, I hope, cutbacks.
I believe people fear President Obama's intentions and wish list. A value added tax, cap and trade, and immigration reform(amnesty)are my fears.
I don't know what exactly the fear of amnesty for illegals is. It seems to me that everything that would entail are already available to them in one form or another, and we are already paying for it. On the other hand, many millions would be added to out tax rolls.
Votes. Republican Gov. Pete Wilson of California went AZ hard-core on immigration in 1994 and single-handedly changed CA from a battleground state to safely Democrat in one election cycle. Nationally Democrats could see a net gain of over 5,000,000 popular votes.
I just read "The Two Income Trap". It claims that a couple in 1970 with the husband only working is better off than a couple with both spouses working in 2000. Now families have had to chase housing (that has gone up 75% after inflation in a generation) in safe neighborhoods with good schools. The wife was the safety net for the family a generation ago, and still is. Most families are now operating without a safety net. College education continues to go up in real terms bcz it is the key for the next generation's success. Bankruptcies are booming. The middle class is chasing the dream.
In 1978 the courts allowed usury laws to be usurped by allowing credit card companies to operate out of high interest states (South Dakota) and charge 24% throughout the nation. This led us into the Wild, Wild West generation of lending. The most profitable borrower for vulturous credit card companies is the one Guido checks with to convince to pay. I'm not Mr. Regulation, but that is so wrong. Banks are jealous of cc co's, cc companies are jealous of payday loan stores practices and triple digit interest rates. The government needs to protect the poor, most desperate and most vulnerable.
She would reinstate usury laws and link them to a moving interest rate like the prime rate, LIBOR or 10 year Treasury bonds and add an additional 8%, give or take. Credit quality grows dramatically with this change. It lets the market regulate lending rather than government playing the critical role. We do need to temper all these huge late charges that lenders inflict on customers.
Houston, TX demographics- 70% of the people over 60 are Anglos. 75% of those under age 30 are non-Anglos.
Enthusiastic voters favor Republicans over Democrats 57-37. This is the stat that looked most encouraging in the Scott Brown MA Senate race when he was down 9-17% in the other polls 3 weeks before that election.
Sounds like there is a successor group to Pres. Obama's 2008 campaign juggernaut called "Organizing for America" (OFA). It's goals are to support President Obama's agenda via continued community organizing for the 2010 Congressional elections. They are hoping to shock America with their effectiveness.
Contrast all of the liberals' talking points about the Tea Partiers supposed racism and potential terrorism threat vs. the actual deaths, arson, riots and strikes in Greece coming from necessary austerity measures and cutbacks for governmental labor unions to prevent Greek national bankruptcy.
Mona Charen on the current Greek economic tragedy as it applies to the U.S.
"As economic historian John Steele Gordon points out, "Federal workers now earn, in wages and benefits, about twice what their private-sector equivalents get paid. State workers often have Cadillac health plans and retirement benefits far above the private sector average: 80 percent of public-sector workers have pension benefits, only 50 percent in the private sector. Many can retire at age 50."
"...he (President Obama)has looked after union interests with particular zeal, whether at General Motors and Chrysler, or by funneling one-third of stimulus spending to state and local governments, or by repealing the rule that required unions to disclose their spending.
And in a corrupt feedback loop that may not be so very different after all from the Greek practice, public employee unions give generously to Democratic candidates, both in cash contributions and by manning phone banks, getting out the vote, and so on.
It's no coincidence that the states with the most powerful public sector unions -- New Jersey, California, and New York -- are facing the most severe budget crises."
America can see its fiscal and economic future in Greece and with European socialism. Will it change it's course?
60 comments:
My favorite Michelle Bachmann quote:
"If we took the minimum wage completely away, we could virtually wipe out unemployment."
Another good one:
"To believe in evolution is almost like a cult following ..."
Michelle Bachmann claims that she was "called by God" to run for public office. Evangelicals distributed 250,000 voter guides to Minnesota churches in an obvious effort to influence the election. The main issue she has been associated with is the banning of same-sex marriages.
First the auto industry. Then the corporate banks. Then the medical profession. Exactly what portion of the American economy will Osama Obama allow to remain capitalistic?
Mitt Romney wins the straw poll in Louisiana, edging out Ron Paul. Sarah Palin is a distant third.
Where'd Huckabee come in?
Newt says Obama is the most radical president ever. Poppycock. Woodrow Wilson was a wild man activist, especially for his day. Without Teddy Roosevelt before him, he would've been a stunning contrast to all those before him.
I have a friend who in 1954 was ready to be shipped to Korea when Ike settled the war. He's his 2nd favorite president bcz of that.
Any presidents/or legislation you're eternally grateful for?
Obama isn't even in the top ten most radical presidents. He hasn't been around long enough to do anything. That is the knid of right-wing rhetoric that is fueling teapartiers everywhere.
Newt and people like Glenn Beck should be thanked for giving all of those people who don't do any thinking something to think about.
Huckabee is just simply unelectable. Nothing against him; he is one of my favorite candidates. Yet, sadly, he cannot be elected. Voters are, by and large, a rather ignorant bunch. They will just not vote for some one with the name of "Huckabee", "Hucklebee", "Huckleberry", or anything that odd. Lots of legislators have been elected solely because of their names. How many "Kennedy"'s do you supposed have been elected?
The most "radical" president in U.S. history? Andrew Jackson.
Both US Senators from Iowa have held their seat for over 25 years and are now in their seventies. They both indicate they will run again.
West Virginia's Robert Byrd is 92 and has held his seat for over 50 years. People need to quit voting for people who are old and feeble. None of these guys even drives an automobile anymore.
California is another state where both senators are in their 70's, one nearly 80. Even in this ultra-liberal state, voters can't resist voting for their grandparents.
Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania is in his 80's and has held his seat for over 30 years. Along the way, he has switched his party affiliation at least twice, pledging loyalty to whomever happens to be in power. He needs to pledge his loyalty to the people in his district for a change.
What will it take to get voters to stop voting for people who are so old they can barely take care of themselves?
Nasty, I was telling Diamond Dave that very thing last night.
During the 1828 presidential campaign, Andrew Jackson's opponents referred to him as Andrew "Jackass" - which was later adopted as the symbol of the party he founded, the Democratic party.
Jackson-EXCELLENT suggestion. Was 1828 the 1st election non landowning men could vote? He had an honest appreciation for what a national bank could do to centralize power and grant privileges and favors that defeat the public good. 1st president to suffer an assassination attempt, and went after the guy with his cane. He used his temper for political gain bcz nobody wanted to be too far on the wrong side of him. Fascinating, complex, yet simple man.
Last president we had no national debt with.
Huckabee's bigger problem is looking like Gomer Pyle. Lincoln wouln't have a chance today. At the Chicago Rep. convention of 1860 there was great disaapointment when they unfurled the banners carrying his likeness bcz he was nobody's pretty boy.
Lincoln could not get the Republican nomination for President today. Even in 1860 he was accused of being an atheist because he did not belong to any church. His reply: "I have never united myself to any church because I have found difficulty in giving my assent without mental reservations to the long complicated statements of Christian doctrine which characterize their articles of belief and confessions of faith. When any church will inscribe above it altars, as its sole qualification for membership, the Savior's condensed statement of the substance of both law and gospel, 'Thou shall love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul, and with thy mind, and love thy neighbor as thyself,' that church I will join with all my heart and all my soul." How's that Republican platform committee?
Lincoln suffered from "melancholia"- depression. There were a couple times friends had him on suicide watch. He lost 2 or 3 sons in adolescence and was married to the difficult Mary Todd. He served only 1 term in Congress during the Mexican War, ran and lost for US Senate in 1854 & 1858 and sought the vice-presidency unsuccessfully in 1856.
He received about 40% of the popular vote in 1860 with 3 Democrats splitting their vote. The nation obviously was blessed by his "backing in" to the Presidency.
Anonymous-
"Obama isn't even in the top ten most radical presidents."
I agree he is not now in the top 5.
Wilson, FDR, LBJ, Jackson, Teddy Roosevelt for his enhancing government's role and bringing us into the 20th Century and Lincoln for suspending some civil liberties and financing the Civil War without paying interest through greenbacks.
I'd put the next ones after Obama.
Jefferson for going against his limited presidential powers and making the (original)Louisiana Purchase and Polk for expanding the US through his war. I have difficulty calling any other presidents "radical" although somethings JFK said about the Federal Reserve would have been extremely refreshing.
But Obama has definite possibilities to get into at least the top 4. Thomas Sowell, given to more temperate statements then myself, says how a day politically can be a lifetime. Conservatives who wrote Obama and his healthcare plan off after Scott Brown became a Senator were sorely mistaken. Sowell is concerned that immigration reform/amnesty may be shoved through to increase the voter rolls by 10-20 million in time for 2010 or 2012.
Obama is a federal government expansionist last seen with the hefty majorities given LBJ in 1964. The good news from that- many federal civil rights laws. But we checked the upward rise of black families economically with the welfare laws and have largely expelled fathers from their family responsibilties with these.
Sarah Palin may have found her place with her Cheri Oteri head cheerleader impersonation for the tea partiers. I am more of a tea partier than Republican. Palin may help keep the TPers on the ranch. This may well be the most valuable public function she ever provides.
My main concern with the tea party is a disruptive 3rd party radically changing the 2012 election and the present occupant being reelected. 1824's disputed 4 candidate campaign settled in the House and stirred Jackson's blood. 1860-the Civil War, 1912-the worst progressive won, 1968 and 1992.
Sarah Palin commented on a possible Romney-Palin with her admiration for Romney.
I was online paying bills tonight and noticed I pay over $7200.00 yearly for insurance on 4 vehicles. I think everyone should push for a National Auto Insurance Plan.
Also, Andrew Jackson would put big barrels of whiskey punch on the White House grounds to try to get people out of the house. Radical.
"Conservatives who wrote Obama and his healthcare plan off after Scott Brown became a senator were sorely mistaken" -
You really need to analyze this in more detail. The healthcare bill which was passed bore virtually no resemblance to the bill as it was initially introduced. Conservatives who wrote off the public option were correct - it was DOA.
Every president since FDR has expanded the federal government. Obama has not succeeded in doing that yet, for the most part. The healthcare bill does not (as passed). Obama seems to be getting a lot of credit here for doing very little. Conservative rhetoric is not accurate when it depicts Obama having passed all types of radical legislation. It simply is not true.
You are talking about putting Obama in the top five most radical presidents of all time - even though he has done virtually nothing at all. You need to ask yourself why you are giving him so much credit. Obviously, this is what happens when one listens to Glenn Beck too much. Quit listening to those guys and do some personal research instead.
If you want to get away with calling Obama an expansionist in the LBJ mold, you'd better be ready to pony up some hard evidence - and not justthings he's said or supported. I mean things he has done as president. All these other presidents you mention have track records while in office of making major changes. Obama has not.
How 'bout that Supreme Court? FDR had no S.C. nominees in the 1st 5-6 years of his reign, so he wanted to ramp the # of justices from 9-15. The Democratic controlled Congress would not stomach that. Ex-Klansman Hugo Black, who marshalled the forces in the Senate for the Court-packing bill, was 1 of the 8 justices that FDR appointed in his last 6 years. Black, a virulent anti-Catholic and opponent of religious freedom, along with William O. Douglas, anither FDR appointee, were still on the Court, 28 years after FDR's death, usurping the baby's right to life and nationalizing the supposed right to abort your baby through Roe v. Wade.
When the Clintons were mentioned as possible justices, I believe I would be on board, simply bcz they are 62-63 years old. I'd rather have them for 20 or so years, than some other loon for 30-35. These are the mental gymnastics played bcz of lifetime appointments and our increasing life expectancy.
Rick-
Bill Ayres, his bomb-throwing wife, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Saul Alinsky's style zealots, tons of appointees w/leftist, statist beliefs some who've already left town bcz of public pressures.
It's like the anticipation of a highly touted rookie. The hopes usually exceed the outcome bcz our imagination, fear & greed takeover.
And, as you know, President Obama voted agst. both Roberts and Alito for the high bench. If this was a 48-52 Senate either way, this would be great sport. As is, not so much.
Diamond Dave is on the money in his observation that the amount of radicalism expected from an Obama presidency will not be achieved.
Mostly this gap is due to certain ultra-right-wing elements unwittingly playing to the mob mentality of an underinformed electorate. Most of the isuues cited by DD made Obama a somewhat radical candidate; they do not necessarily make him a radical president.
It's funny when we describe presidents we consider radical, Obama is the only one on the list whose radical credentials occurred solely before he held office. Once again, he gets held to a different standard than everyone else.
I will no longer comment on this site. I do not comment on political viewpoints.
This site has become a political forum.
Thanks to all that have put up with my rantings. I cannot, however, continue when there is nothing presented to rant about. All that is presented is political shit that even at it's best is not that good. See you later. B.Nasty
Im with you nasty. Im out until we can discuss things other than politics and religion.
Bear with us, guys. We had a couple requests to run some of these threads. I always try to talk about what people want. Why else even do this?
We'll bring in some more local threads next. In the meantime, if you have an idea, post it on the open discussion thread and I'll try to accomodate you.
Every Democrat voted against Roberts and Alito for the bench. Don't read too much into that.
Mitt Romney is way to astute to put Sarah Palin on a ticket with himself. She would single-handedly bring down his candidacy, no question.
Michelle Bachmann has stated that gay marriage is "the single biggest issue that will impact our nation in the last thirty years."
Roberts and Alito confirmation votes
Only 4 Democrats voted for Samuel Alito. 22 Dems voted for John Roberts.
Buford- I had not seen you posting of late. You add plenty to a discussion. Good to see you back, if only briefly.
Anonymous about Romney-Palin
I think you're spot on. Palin is a lightning rod that changes the focus of the campaign. Being Governor of Alaska for a couple years, having a best-selling book, big speaking fees and a show on Fox adds little or nothing to her resume. President Reagan (who was California Gov. for 8 years)from 1975-1981, was on the radio with 5 minute spots and wrote a substantive newspaper column on the issues, in between running for president twice. He was not given his due as a great writer or negotiator. He wrote the speech after coming back from the Reykjavik the arms talk in 1986.
Larry Kudlow on Rasmussen Reports on the tea party
"So much is being written in the mainstream media about who the tea partiers are, but very little is being recorded about what these folks are actually saying."
"Of the top-10 planks in the Contract, the No. 1 issue is protect the Constitution. That's followed by reject cap-and-trade, demand a balanced budget and enact fundamental tax reform. And then comes number five: Restore fiscal responsibility and constitutionally limited government in Washington." ...
"Filling out the Contract, the bottom-five planks are end runaway government spending; defund, repeal and replace government-run health care; pass an all-of-the-above energy policy; stop the pork; and stop the tax hikes.
What's so significant to me about this tea-party Contract From America is the strong emphasis on constitutional limits and restraints on legislation, spending, taxing and government control of the economy. Undoubtedly, the emphasis is there because no one trusts Washington.
As I read this Contract, tea partiers are reminding all of us of the need for the Constitution to protect our freedoms. They're calling for a renewal of constitutional values, including -- first and foremost -- a return to constitutional limits on government. The tea partiers who responded to this poll are demanding a rebirth of the consent of the governed. The government works for us, we don't work for it."
With all the talk of the tea party, I'd never seen listed what they stand for. I don't understand what is stated about energy policy. Because of the unprecedented deficits and spending I would put reducing/changing tax policy at the end of the list. Otherwise, I'm for it. Other than welfare reform and reducing taxes, the Republicans have never taken back substantive ground from the New Deal, Fair Deal, Great Frontier, or Great Society policies of the expansionist Democrats. This needs to change before we go Thelma and Louise off the cliff.
Tea partiers should stop worrying about protecting the constitution and start worrying about protecting the planet.
I thought we already had people assigned to that. Constitution protectors were sadly lacking in D.C., where the power is.
What members of the Bush administration, for instance, were assigned to that? And by the way, taking care of the planet isn't something you just "assign" some people to. YOU should be taking care of it too.
If this counts for anything, I'm not a big consumer.
Great Hillary Clinton quotes -
In 1998 she said "I won't have reporters going through all my papers. WE are the president."
Recently she stated to a town hall questioner "We are going to take things away from you for the common good."
It's so comforting to hear that we may be aiding the common good, and that First Lady/Senator/Secretary of State Clinton is part of the oversight committee. How does one wrangle there way into the Politburo?
I'll settle for the condensed version.
Even though the Republican Party appears to have a great deal of momentum going into this election cycle, I honestly think they will squander nearly all of it by the time the election rolls around.
They always have a tendency to pander to the least popular and weakest element of the party - the extreme religious right. This wing usually steers them completely off the normally beaten path, and discourages any cross-over voters they otherwise might have gained.
A better strategy for the GOP right now would be to make efforts to attract moderate independent voters - perhaps even some who may have voted for Obama. This will probably not happen. The ultra-right consistently overestimates their popularity and drags the rest of the party right with it.
If voters are forced to choose between a liberal candidate and a fervent, right-wing religious conservative, the liberal will almost always win. That is simply the make-up of the electorate right now.
Rick- You have a valid concern with the endless possibilities for Republicans snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. The Tea Party may threaten the Republican quest for the presidency in 2012. The issue right now is the Democrat rule which feels the need to get what can be got while the gittin is good. The political hijinks passing the healthcare bill angered the majority against it. Shoving anything down someone's throat is best done in a totalitarian state, not in a democracy where the shovee's can become the shovers.
A good strategy would be to 1) have a central message like 1994's Contract w/America; 2)follow Rahm Emanuel's lead in taking Congress back for the Democrats in 2006 by recruiting moderates in Democratic districts/states and 3)tap into the Tea Partiers (before they form another party or slate of candidates) by giving them work where candidates who believe in a limited federal government that respects rather than tramples the Constitution.
The Tea Partiers need to get off the "Stop the Tax Hike" mantra. President Obama passed the largest middle-class tax cuts since Ronald Reagan. As a pure socialist, he has instead opted to heap additional tax burdens on the top 10% of wage earners. Virtually every single person in the tea party has experienced real tax cuts since 2008. That is why they appear so ridiculous chanting their "stop the tax hikes" mantra. They are being led in this chant by the likes of Glenn Beck. Mr. Beck, who earns $32 million per year, finds himself in the group whose taxes have increased, and doesn't like it one bit. The tea partiers appear to be composed of people who blindly recite Glenn Beck, perhaps the biggest rewriter of history I've ever seen.
Forget the tea partiers; they are a paper tiger. Their appearance of strength is derived solely from Fox News' branding them as players.
Fox News has degenerated into five or six muti-millionaires sitting around in Brooks Brothers suits complaining about all the taxes they have to pay. Get off it.
Impossibly twisted Newt Gingrich quote:
"The idea that a congressman would be tainted by accepting money from private industry or private sources is essentially a socialist argument."
Tea Party tax thinking-
I agree that high taxes is not my main beef. We need to present people with an honest accounting and bill, so they can help make policy and spending decisions and, I hope, cutbacks.
I believe people fear President Obama's intentions and wish list. A value added tax, cap and trade, and immigration reform(amnesty)are my fears.
I don't know what exactly the fear of amnesty for illegals is. It seems to me that everything that would entail are already available to them in one form or another, and we are already paying for it. On the other hand, many millions would be added to out tax rolls.
Fear of amnesty for illegals
Votes. Republican Gov. Pete Wilson of California went AZ hard-core on immigration in 1994 and single-handedly changed CA from a battleground state to safely Democrat in one election cycle. Nationally Democrats could see a net gain of over 5,000,000 popular votes.
I can only assume that if this bloc was leaning Republican, you would then favor amnesty?
Immigration amnesty
Not with the nationalistic fervor and desire by some to reclaim the lands in the southwest they owned before 1848.
I just read "The Two Income Trap".
It claims that a couple in 1970 with the husband only working is better off than a couple with both spouses working in 2000. Now families have had to chase housing (that has gone up 75% after inflation in a generation) in safe neighborhoods with good schools. The wife was the safety net for the family a generation ago, and still is. Most families are now operating without a safety net. College education continues to go up in real terms bcz it is the key for the next generation's success. Bankruptcies are booming. The middle class is chasing the dream.
In 1978 the courts allowed usury laws to be usurped by allowing credit card companies to operate out of high interest states (South Dakota) and charge 24% throughout the nation. This led us into the Wild, Wild West generation of lending. The most profitable borrower for vulturous credit card companies is the one Guido checks with to convince to pay. I'm not Mr. Regulation, but that is so wrong. Banks are jealous of cc co's, cc companies are jealous of payday loan stores practices and triple digit interest rates. The government needs to protect the poor, most desperate and most vulnerable.
She would reinstate usury laws and link them to a moving interest rate like the prime rate, LIBOR or 10 year Treasury bonds and add an additional 8%, give or take. Credit quality grows dramatically with this change. It lets the market regulate lending rather than government playing the critical role. We do need to temper all these huge late charges that lenders inflict on customers.
Houston, TX demographics- 70% of the people over 60 are Anglos. 75% of those under age 30 are non-Anglos.
Enthusiastic voters favor Republicans over Democrats 57-37. This is the stat that looked most encouraging in the Scott Brown MA Senate race when he was down 9-17% in the other polls 3 weeks before that election.
Sounds like there is a successor group to Pres. Obama's 2008 campaign juggernaut called "Organizing for America" (OFA). It's goals are to support President Obama's agenda via continued community organizing for the 2010 Congressional elections. They are hoping to shock America with their effectiveness.
Contrast all of the liberals' talking points about the Tea Partiers supposed racism and potential terrorism threat vs. the actual deaths, arson, riots and strikes in Greece coming from necessary austerity measures and cutbacks for governmental labor unions to prevent Greek national bankruptcy.
Mona Charen on the current Greek economic tragedy as it applies to the U.S.
"As economic historian John Steele Gordon points out, "Federal workers now earn, in wages and benefits, about twice what their private-sector equivalents get paid. State workers often have Cadillac health plans and retirement benefits far above the private sector average: 80 percent of public-sector workers have pension benefits, only 50 percent in the private sector. Many can retire at age 50."
"...he (President Obama)has looked after union interests with particular zeal, whether at General Motors and Chrysler, or by funneling one-third of stimulus spending to state and local governments, or by repealing the rule that required unions to disclose their spending.
And in a corrupt feedback loop that may not be so very different after all from the Greek practice, public employee unions give generously to Democratic candidates, both in cash contributions and by manning phone banks, getting out the vote, and so on.
It's no coincidence that the states with the most powerful public sector unions -- New Jersey, California, and New York -- are facing the most severe budget crises."
America can see its fiscal and economic future in Greece and with European socialism. Will it change it's course?
Marty - You should give Diamond Dave his own political forum and let it fall off the bottom of the screen.
Post a Comment