home

Tuesday Open Thread

By Jeralyn, Section Blog Related
Posted on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 04:15:19 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

I'll be out for several hours, TChris is in trial and I'm not sure about BTD, who wrote a lot of good posts this morning on the economy, just scroll down.

Here's an open thread for those of you with other topics to discuss.

< U.S. Allows Family Visits at Afghan Military Prison | PPP Colorado Poll Results: Obama 51, McCain 44 >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Tuesday Open Thread | 73 comments (73 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Political ads - downticket (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by liminal on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 04:57:15 PM EST
    I don't really think that Bruce Lunsford has any chance of unseating Mitch McConnell in Kentucky this year, given that a midsummer poll had him down by 13-14 points, but it's a weird year, and Lunsford has come up with a clever ad, citing McCain's calls for change, and McCain's characterization of Mitch as one of the most corrupt members of the Senate.  HRC made a few campaign stops for Lunsford in Kentucky this week, too.

    Meanwhile, here in the Mountain State, our sole Republican, Shelly Moore Capito, can probably expect comfortable re-election, but she's feeling enough pressure to run an ad touting the fact when she broke ranks with the Republican party once in a really long while and how often (hahaha!) she stood up to Bush.  (I think she has a voting record that is 80 to 90% pro-Bush, but if you watch that ad, you'd think she running around knee-capping the Republicans at every turn.)

    Tweedle dee and dumb (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by lentinel on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 06:29:24 PM EST
    "Democrats to Let Offshore Drilling Ban Expire.
    Democrats have decided to allow a quarter-century ban on drilling for oil off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts to expire next week..." (AP)

    Ah yes.

    Nader is sooo wrong when he says that the same corporations control both parties.

    I'm so glad that he has been excluded from the debates.
    We wouldn't want nasty issues and alternative solutions brought up. It would only disrupt the semi-comatose tranquility engendered by a debate in which both parties accept the same  talking points.

    Yes, another under the bus moment... (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by alexei on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 06:38:02 PM EST
    from the Democrats.  D**n right Nader is correct!

    However, we still control the votes until November 4 so get on the phone to your reps and demand that the monies go to the people and not the fat ats.

    Parent

    Almost 70% of American support offshore drilling. (none / 0) (#48)
    by Realleft on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 07:01:43 PM EST
    And it's a big rallying cry for Republicans and appealing to over half of liberals and moderates.

    The Dems want to win.  Bucking the preferences of voters regarding an outright ban isn't going to help.  End the ban, get elected, then control the process of phasing in drilling in limited places with strong environmental protections in place, or insist upon the ban, see Republicans gain in power, and watch shoddy, unsafe, polluting drilling platforms pop up everywhere.

    Parent

    Wrong and bad politics and policy! (5.00 / 2) (#51)
    by alexei on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 07:07:22 PM EST
    It is the Dems and Obama's job to take that meme away and effectively explain why it is not going to help them and how bad the idea is and demonstrate effectively, their energy plan.

    Instead, the Dems cave again without a whimper of protest.

    Parent

    Too late. Time to win the election. (none / 0) (#55)
    by Realleft on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 07:16:10 PM EST
    Take the meme away and effectively explain and convert opinion after winning.  No new drilling platforms are going to pop up before January.

    Parent
    Once again... (none / 0) (#70)
    by lentinel on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:20:34 PM EST
    we're being told to vote for someone not on what they say, but what we are supposed to think they believe in spite of what they say. "After they're elected, they'll do the right thing". Never works. B.S. is b.s. Once these guys get adept at it, they never give it up. They will continue to support those who give them big bucks and the illusion of power. We will always come in second, if at all, with these guys. Don't be naive.

    Parent
    70% (none / 0) (#72)
    by lentinel on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:32:30 PM EST
    70% of the American people want an end to the war in Iraq.
    Doesn't mean sh-t to the dems or repubs.

    But off-shore drilling - oh yeah! Suddenly, it's the will of the people.

    You want us to believe that the dems will be real careful with the rigs - unlike the greedy careless republicans. I'm sure all the fish will be glad to hear about it.

    And when there is the inevitable spill or accident, and all the muck flows our way, we will all take comfort from the hearty apology that will extended to us in a truly heartfelt manner.

    Parent

    FBI inverstigating Fanny, Freddie, AIG, Lehman (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by nycstray on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 06:31:18 PM EST
    for fraud.  Just in on CNN.

    First scape goats for this debacle.. (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by alexei on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 06:40:16 PM EST
    expect many more! Although, I'm not saying these corporations aren't culpable, it is the Repubs and Bush and I expect them to come out fine as far as wealth and no jail time.

    Parent
    Seeing as how the Demos (none / 0) (#62)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 08:02:47 PM EST
    opposed Bush's regulation improvements in 2003, do they get the next cell over?

    ''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

    Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

    ''I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,'' Mr. Watt said.



    Parent
    McBama and O'Cain (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by lentinel on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 06:46:17 PM EST
    Look at this video.
    It really expresses how I have come to feel.
    Relegated to the sidelines.

    Echo chamber

    yep, this time Nader is right! (none / 0) (#49)
    by alexei on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 07:03:33 PM EST


    Parent
    This is snark right? (none / 0) (#56)
    by Socraticsilence on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 07:19:44 PM EST
    Seriously, after 2000 anyone who thinks "the two parties are the same" frankly isn't very smart.

    Parent
    what if is the other way around (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by Florida Resident on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 07:32:29 PM EST
    and those of us hoping they are different are wrong?

    Parent
    Not very smart... (none / 0) (#71)
    by lentinel on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:24:12 PM EST
    Let us remember that the democrats controlled the Senate in the early days of the Bush administration. If they had stood for anything approaching integrity, we would not have had the Iraq war. They still stand for nothing.

    But - if it is comforting for you to feel that they are the good guys, dream on.

    Parent

    Then by all means... (none / 0) (#75)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 10:16:30 PM EST
    call me a dummy.

    Not exactly the same, more not different enough, there are superficial differences on issues of less importance, in my not very smart opinion.

    Parent

    Ha Ha (none / 0) (#64)
    by MichaelGale on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 08:17:02 PM EST
    That's a great video.

    I can't believe I think Nader is right.

    Parent

    John McCain story (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by zyx on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 07:32:51 PM EST
    whoo-hoo, at the NYTimes. His campaign manager Rick Davis said he hadn't taken money from Freddy for ever so long or had "any involvement". Looks like he had just a little, not so long ago--$15,000/month.

    Wow, to me, that is such a LOT of money. Just--wow.

    This is (none / 0) (#1)
    by domerdem on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 04:27:53 PM EST
    priceless:

    "We do not support government bailouts of private institutions. Government interference in the markets exacerbates problems in the marketplace and causes the free market to take longer to correct itself."

    To be fair. . . (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by LarryInNYC on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 04:31:34 PM EST
    It sounds like there's plenty of opposition to the bailout from Republicans in Congress.

    Parent
    I've never been one for accepting the bum's rush (none / 0) (#11)
    by scribe on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 05:00:25 PM EST
    which Bushie and Deadeye are so fond of using to get their way.

    Let's just kick this whole bailout thing down the road until after the election - the markets are going to continue to go down and there's not much anyone can do about it.

    It will also allow for more study of the situation, and depoliticize it for the election.

    And, if by chance McCain wins, then we can saddle him with it.

    Parent

    I see you still put politcs ahead (none / 0) (#15)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 05:15:00 PM EST
    of everything else.

    If we don't get the "bail out" in place very quickly then you are going to see millions of Americans unable to support themselves in retirement.

    That serves no one and Obama will not profit from it.

    Parent

    millions of Americans (none / 0) (#19)
    by of1000Kings on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 05:28:33 PM EST
    were probably unable to support themselves in retirement before all of this...where the outrage for that...

    millions of Americans are unable to support themselves even as they are of working age (unless you consider $180 a week supporting oneself)...no one really cares about that...

    coming from the poorest of the poor, you'll have to do a lot better than that before I believe that an immediate bailout without thoughtful consideration is the only way to ensure that the world doesn't fall apart in the next week...

    Parent

    Here's a small clue ... (none / 0) (#20)
    by alexei on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 05:33:40 PM EST
    about "how that bailout will affect millions of Americans:

    "NEW YORK (Reuters) - Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama said on Tuesday a $700 billion Wall Street rescue plan would likely delay some campaign spending promises, as the reality sank in of the costs of the mammoth bailout.

    Obama, who faces Republican John McCain in their first face-to-face debate on Friday in Mississippi, said if elected he might have to phase in some of his plans such as an overhaul of the U.S. health care system."

    Parent

    That makes me so mad. Isn't there (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by Teresa on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 06:08:23 PM EST
    something else they can postpone? I can't put into words (that would make it through J's rules) how very angry I am.

    Parent
    I would hope that work could still be done (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Realleft on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 06:16:11 PM EST
    on developing specifics of any health care reform, but I thought that was an odd one to pick because it seems like something that is going to take a lot of planning, negotiating and vetting first anyway - a few years to even begin to see substantial budgeting in place.  Maybe I am misunderstanding.

    Parent
    Obama is throwing health care... (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by alexei on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 06:24:30 PM EST
    under the bus.  He chose that one because he now has an "out" to do nothing.  That is why we must get this Congress to pass Conyers' health care bill.

    Parent
    Health care is my #1 issue, next (none / 0) (#67)
    by kenosharick on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 08:53:59 PM EST
    to gay issues, which Obama has already thrown under the bus- it's getting really crowded under here. I guess he thinks taking care of Wall Street is more important than his other promises.

    Parent
    Look, we have to get the Democrats... (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by alexei on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 06:22:51 PM EST
    to bailout Main street.  We have to call our representatives and get them to be real Democrats and put a "New, New Deal" in place.  Obama is not the answer - it is now that we have to get this done.

    Immediate freeze on foreclosures
    Immediate re-working of mortgage loans to keep people in their homes
    Large infusion of funds to FDIC and community banks to help with credit, mortgages, heat etal
    Large infusion of funds to states with strict guidelines and requirements that those funds be used to help their citizens with heating and food costs
    Institute the HOLC now
    Expand the FDIC to take over institutions
    Charge an oil windfalls tax
    Pass Conyers' health care bill

    These are minimum talking points and what the Dems need to do.

    Parent

    Yesterday Bill Clinton was on the view (5.00 / 2) (#50)
    by hairspray on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 07:06:50 PM EST
    and said the way to stop the spiral was to keep people in their homes and that is where the bailout needs to be.  GO HOLC.  So how come we aren't seeing this in the news reports?

    Parent
    Because the MSM is... (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by alexei on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 07:10:53 PM EST
    the corporate propaganda wing.  We as voters have to force this issue - call your reps, demand these items and then vote accordingly.  It will be too late after the election - we will have lost all of our leverage.

    Parent
    Why don't we just (none / 0) (#61)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 07:53:25 PM EST
    start drilling for oil and solve the problems in just one stroke.

    Parent
    heh (none / 0) (#74)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 10:06:06 PM EST
    The outer continental shelf has around 100 billion barrels and now we have the Bakken field... ANWR and oil shale...

    It is time we do something. If we sit around and complain we will die.

    I never watch Olberman. If I want to puke I just stick my finger down my throat.

    Parent

    Well, I dunno about might (none / 0) (#60)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 07:50:46 PM EST
    but first of all he has to do two things.

    1. Win the election.

    2. Get his bill through Congress.

    Neither are a given.

    Parent
    It may just be (none / 0) (#28)
    by KeysDan on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 06:23:41 PM EST
    an 'Arlen Specter' show for the camera and the folks back home.  Come vote time, it may be different.

    Parent
    No, the Republicans are getting.... (none / 0) (#33)
    by alexei on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 06:29:04 PM EST
    political advantage and will not vote for this bill.   This gives them a huge separation from the Bush Administration and tying the Democrats to Bush and it gives voters the impression that Republicans are principled and not going for bailouts for their constituents (the wealthy).  The public will not understand the total cynicism being displayed by the Repubs who know full well that the Dems will pass this.

    Parent
    RNC platform (none / 0) (#2)
    by domerdem on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 04:29:18 PM EST


    Parent
    Remember when (none / 0) (#3)
    by andgarden on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 04:29:54 PM EST
    Rick Davis said "watch California"? Never mind.

    No, no, no. He said. . . (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by LarryInNYC on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 04:32:10 PM EST
    "Watch Californication".  He has the hots for David Duchovney.

    Parent
    That makes two of us (none / 0) (#6)
    by CST on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 04:38:28 PM EST
    :)

    Parent
    Don't be so sure about California (none / 0) (#23)
    by stefystef on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 06:03:22 PM EST
    Isn't this the same state that polled that Tom Bradley would be the first African American governor in the state of California.  Mayor Bradley lost, badly.

    The results of that election gave us the phrase "The Bradley Effect".  

    Always remember people say one thing and do another in private.

    Parent

    A variation of that is being raised (none / 0) (#26)
    by Realleft on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 06:19:46 PM EST
    in some articles about still-undecided Hillary supporters - that many still want to hold Obama's feet to the fire some and still can't publicly support Obama or even personally commit to being behind him, but may vote for him in the privacy of the voting booth.  If true, I wonder how those might balance out.

    Parent
    I might (none / 0) (#63)
    by nell on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 08:08:32 PM EST
    be one of those people...

    Not sure yet...

    I cannot stand the thought of voting for Obama because I do not have a lot of respect for him as a person, BUT I will not vote for McCain. So, do I just not vote? I have a feeling I might walk into the voting booth and grudgingly vote for Obama...

    Parent

    Those diabetics... (none / 0) (#7)
    by desertswine on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 04:46:14 PM EST
    they have the strength of 10 men.

    ...officers repeatedly struck the man during a struggle in which he reached for an insulin pump...

    It does look like Obama's gains ... (none / 0) (#8)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 04:52:55 PM EST
    last week because of the economic meltdown were just another short term bounce.

    Ras has it back at a tie, and his six-point lead in Gallup has dropped to three.

    Although the economic news should favor a Democrat.  I think that the news essentially side-lined Obama's campaign as a story.  And that's already hurting him.

    I think if Obama wants to use the economy to create a commanding lead, he needs to be at the center of the story.

    Right now the Presidential campaign is a sideshow.  Their debate this Friday on national security probably won't help much.

    If McCain or Obama were not running (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by ruffian on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 05:27:59 PM EST
    for president, no one would have asked either one of their opinions about this issue.  Neither has a track record of credibility on the economy.  Obama's best bet is what he did - cloak himself in Bill Clinton's credibility.  But that only gets him so far.  I don't know how he gets the initiative on this particular issue.

    Parent
    And he (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 06:00:22 PM EST
    pretty much rolled all his plans under the bus today too.

    The electorate seems to be reistant to electing him. It seems largely due to his inexperience. I just hope he doesn't hurt downtickets.

    Parent

    I was mostly glad to see that he did that. (none / 0) (#30)
    by Realleft on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 06:26:43 PM EST
    I thought it showed a realism and dedication to seriousness of purpose to acknowledge that most of the partisan-favored issues are of lesser significance while this issue is front-and-center. Obama is showing he is for everyone (other than those CEOs), not just for Democrats.

    It seems to me that what could erase the inexperience concern is to have three stellar debates where he can keep focused on big picture issues rather than Democratic party wishlists.  McCain is flailing around so wildly that Obama's ability to be calm, consistent, and (uh oh) concise could be very important.  I'll be chewing on my fingernails.

    Still a ways to go yet.  Much of America still hasn't seen more than brief snippets of him on TV.

    Parent

    Give me a break! (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by alexei on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 06:32:48 PM EST
    Those aren't partisan issues, those are the American people's needs.  This is disgraceful.  I am wondering if we can draft Hillary to run against both of these fools!

    In the meantime, the Dem Congress has to pivot and focus on Main street and stop catering to the Repubs base.

    Parent

    The money isn't going to be there (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by Realleft on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 06:38:04 PM EST
    to jump on everything right away, it doesn't matter who will be President.

    Parent
    Only we need a leader who... (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by alexei on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 06:50:55 PM EST
    will instill confidence.  Also, now do what many economists, some politicians including Hillary are suggesting and not wait for the next President, which will be too late.

    That is, not the massive bail out to the failures on Wall Street, but, selective for those that can make it and give the bail out to Main street.

    The housing bubble sucked all the money because there was no alternatives for investment and this just caused the huge shell game.  Alternative energy is a huge investment opportunity while providing high wage jobs across the nation.  The Dems have solid frameworks to design legislation to stop the bleeding and do the right thing and bring about real change to the corrupt system.  It is political will that is missing.

    Parent

    I realize this is a tough time, but those (none / 0) (#31)
    by Teresa on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 06:28:38 PM EST
    Democratic Party "wishlists" are why I am a Democrat.

    Parent
    Me too (none / 0) (#39)
    by Realleft on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 06:35:27 PM EST
    And I hope to see them all accomplished or at least steadily moving forward over the course of a term.  But for those who are undecided, seeing Obama insist that we'll press forward ASAP on Dem goals torpedoes be damned could turn them away.  He seemed to carefully say he wasn't dropping anything, but that some things will need to be phased in based on new economic realities.  

    Parent
    He was being careful because he doesn't ... (5.00 / 2) (#47)
    by alexei on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 06:55:40 PM EST
    want to lose voters like you who believe that he will do the policies. New economic realities bullsh**t - this trainwreck has been forecast by many including Hillary.

    Let's not wait for the next President - make the Dems do these measures now.  Health care would save billions for business, government and of course, Americans.  Stop the Obama spinning - he should be leading on this and pushing for Main Street issues, not stepping back on them.

    Parent

    He is leading. (none / 0) (#54)
    by Realleft on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 07:12:52 PM EST
    Forecasts are not realities.  There isn't the budget for everyting right now, so he can pretend that there is to please voters like you (I guess that's what you're saying), or acknowledge that plans have to be altered and earn the respect of undecided voters.

    Even if all the Dems were behind immediate healthcare reform, it needs to happen in stages or risk another 90's style debacle.  People want healthcare reform, but are concerned about costs (as well as service availability and quality).  When people are freaked out, and they are now, it's not a good time to push for quick, radical reform.  The Dems aren't in control of the executive branch and couldn't possibly get this over a veto.

    Parent

    The ones he'll lose are those to the left (5.00 / 1) (#66)
    by sallywally on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 08:39:58 PM EST
    not the ones who want a Republican or Republican lite in the WH.

    The last thing he needs to do is alienate the base even more.

    Why do you think those folks who are now undecided supported Hillary? She is more liberal than Obama!

    This move to the right crap is why the Dems have lost all these years.

    People want a real Democrat. If Obama is a real Democrat now, he will win. If he moves to the right in more areas, he will lose to someone who more completely represents the right wing.

    Parent

    Eh? (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by Realleft on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:52:10 PM EST
    Moving to the right?  By acknowledging that there isn't enough money to immediately implement everything in his proposed budget?  I think its just recognizing reality.

    I do agree that he's done several rightward jaunts, and some capitulations, and each time, I've ranged from losing some steam to losing some faith.  I'm still not over the FISA vote for one thing.

    I don't think it's a move to the right to say that if 700 billion is removed from the national coffers, not everything on the proposed platform is going to be able to be implemented right away.

    Parent

    I believe that Obama would be wise (none / 0) (#53)
    by hairspray on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 07:12:42 PM EST
    to stick to several obvious flaws in our system and leave a long wish list home.  People are already wondering where the money is coming from.  If he sticks with tough financial reforms and using HOLC as a solution to mainstreet, alternative fuels and getting us out of Iraq he will keep it simple and doable. Lots of lofty rhetoric time is OVER.

    Parent
    I think he should be near-center, but not center (none / 0) (#35)
    by Realleft on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 06:30:56 PM EST
    1. Emphasize that there is a whole Democratic team, and he will depend on those with specific expertise rather than try to steal the spotlight when having others at the center is in the best interests of governing.
    2. Protect himself from potential political fallout if things backfire.


    Parent
    He's already bailed, imo (5.00 / 2) (#42)
    by nycstray on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 06:38:35 PM EST
    He stated 4 things he would like to see in the bailout, but like McCain, wouldn't commit to vote against. He said he would "strongly recommend" etc. I wonder if strongly recommend will be in a sternly written letter . . . .

    It seems this wouldn't be a bad time to appear to be leading with Dems behind him. They seem to agree what needs to be done and some republicans agree. They've (Rs) already said they wouldn't back the bailout if McCain didn't and from the snippets I caught, Obama and McCain seem to agree on the main street issue, CEO compensation etc. Heh, maybe McCain and Obama could draft a bill . . .

    Parent

    I really disagree (none / 0) (#59)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 07:40:49 PM EST
    and I'm not stark raving mad about Obama either.  I think he'll do very well.  I'm not expecting him to lose any ground at all, he will only gain ground and firm up swings that have been swinging wildly.  Just because McCain will bomb bomb bomb Iran doesn't mean that the country can't see right through him to his unprincipled inner child during a presidential debate on national security.  We can always talk about how much security for our dollar Iraq has bought all of us.

    Parent
    Most Colorado polls (none / 0) (#10)
    by WS on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 04:58:29 PM EST
    have good news for Obama.  Anybody familiar with Colorado tell us about how the CO campaign stands at your vantage point?

    There's an extended post (none / 0) (#16)
    by scribe on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 05:15:16 PM EST
    down the site about Colorado, with a lot of commentary.

    Parent
    Welp, here come the budget cuts (none / 0) (#12)
    by nycstray on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 05:03:01 PM EST
    1/2 Billion this year and 1 billion next due to loss of WS tax revenues. Cuts across the board. Bloomberg has been putting budget dollars aside for the past couple/few yrs once he got the city on track, so I guess things could be a lot worse . . .

    Also, a 7% property tax. . . (none / 0) (#13)
    by LarryInNYC on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 05:10:11 PM EST
    increase is proposed (basically wiping out last year's 7% decrease).

    Parent
    That's right, forgot about that one (none / 0) (#14)
    by nycstray on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 05:14:13 PM EST
    well, at least he has a history of giving back what he takes away? Are we back to limited trash PU again . . . .

    Parent
    Repeal (none / 0) (#32)
    by WS on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 06:28:41 PM EST
    Is the city going to repeal the two term term limit in NYC?

    Parent
    Leave it to New York to do it one better (none / 0) (#17)
    by scribe on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 05:17:20 PM EST
    "Twenty Years in Solitary", an article about a NY state prisoner who has been in solitary for 20 years and is scheduled to be released from solitary confinement around 2046.

    Revolting.  I hope Governor Carey and the rest of New York State are duly proud all their tax dollars go to this kind of torture.

    Warren Buffet (none / 0) (#21)
    by themomcat on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 05:49:48 PM EST
    today invested $5 billion in the investment bank Goldman Sachs.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/24/business/24goldman.html?hp
     

    Good! (none / 0) (#38)
    by Radiowalla on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 06:32:59 PM EST
    Then maybe they will need less of OUR money.

    Parent
    So far (none / 0) (#65)
    by MichaelGale on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 08:29:55 PM EST
    Buffett buys Goldman...their stock went up from $14 and cents to $125 +. BA buys Merrill and and it becomes a holding bank, what ever that means. Sounds like these guys are making out okay.

    The Democrats present a plan; the Republicans will veto it. The Democrats will present another plan with less, the Republicans will veto it. Now it' going to be October 31 and the Democrats will surrender to with the original plan.

    Wanna bet?

    Parent

    Field & Stream candidate interviews (none / 0) (#76)
    by nycstray on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 10:51:13 PM EST
    October issue arrived yesterday* and it has interviews with both of the candidates on conservation, gun rights and the outdoors if anyone is interested.

    * for some strange reason, they just started sending me this magazine a couple of months ago.

    Tuesday Open Thread | 73 comments (73 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment