home

Wednesday Open Thread

I missed the news today and will start catching up soon. BTD is still in trial. Here's an open thread, all topics welcome. What did we miss?

< John Lennon: It Was 30 Years Ago Today | Dream Act Passes House >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    The hacktivists strike back... (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by kdog on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 05:24:05 PM EST
    begun "Operation Payback" has.

    LONDON (AP) -- Hackers rushed to the defense of WikiLeaks on Wednesday, launching attacks on MasterCard, Visa, Swedish prosecutors, a Swiss bank and others who have acted against the site and its jailed founder Julian Assange.

    Internet "hacktivists" operating under the label "Operation Payback" claimed responsibility in a Twitter message for causing severe technological problems at the website for MasterCard, which pulled the plug on its relationship with WikiLeaks a day ago.



    Anonymous and Operation Payback (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by SOS on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 07:58:13 PM EST
    'anon' is a bunch of kids, with no real 'knowledge­' of what's going on, just a feeling that 'something­' should be done. Instead of thinking about it, they go for a temper-tan­trum of DDOSing (which actually works against their claimed goal) and hurts everyone else they're supposed to be supporting­.

    They hate the term 'script-ki­ddie', but I'm afraid that's the term that describes them and their actions perfectly. Who would have thought it possible when they clashed last month over the Pirate PArty open letter to stop DDOSing, but they're actually more ignorant, temperamen­tal, more concerned with 'now' rather than long term effects, and with such a vast sense of self importance­, that they make those in Congress look humble, farsighted (prophetic even), logical and well informed..­. and that takes some doing!

    Parent

    I find this funny (5.00 / 2) (#32)
    by waldenpond on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 08:34:22 PM EST
    Shutting a (get this) 'credit card' company down for a day, causing the billionaires brigade a day of inconvenience is hurting 'everyone'.. snort.

    Parent
    As did I... (5.00 / 2) (#44)
    by kdog on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 05:49:03 AM EST
    I'm feeling ok, unharmed by yesterdays activism...any injuries to report anybody?  

    The actions of world governments, Mastercard, Visa, Paypal, Amazon, Swiss banking, and the like otoh...there I see harm being done to liberty, free speech, free press, free markets...a long list of harm.  

    Granted I don't know this hacktivists from a hole in the wall...but I have an idea about their adversaries and how they roll.  So if it is a "you're with us or you're with Wikileaks" Bush-like ultimatum...mark me down with Wikileaks, "us" is crazy.

    Parent

    Long-term effects (4.00 / 3) (#34)
    by Inspector Gadget on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 10:02:20 PM EST
    I'm wondering what you think the positives are in the long-term of shutting down Wikileaks. Those "kids" have a sense that something should be done because something should be done.

    Parent
    Never fear! (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by jbindc on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 06:22:24 PM EST
    Working poor get tax increase (none / 0) (#28)
    by waldenpond on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 07:47:42 PM EST
    and this is priceless.... people have been running the numbers all day...

    The President isn't just transfering billions of dollars from the middle class to the wealthy: those that make $20-40k are gettin' a nice little tax increase.  FU poor people, fu.  The elite be lovin' them some oligarchy.

    Parent

    Jamie Galbraith asks "Whose side is the White (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by caseyOR on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 11:41:18 PM EST
    House on anyway?" Galbraith makes the case for a vigorous progressive defense of the New Deal, updated for the present times. And he explains why Obama is actually worse for the country than Bush.

    Read the whole thing. I am giving some very serious thought to what Jamie has to say.

    h/t Susie Madrak.

    Parent

    Link to Jamie Galbraith's speech here. (none / 0) (#40)
    by caseyOR on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 11:44:38 PM EST
    He's a true Dem (none / 0) (#41)
    by waldenpond on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 12:27:27 AM EST
    He assumes if he copies the Repubs and shrinks the party to some people with actual principles they will still be too weak to effect any change, no matter what he'll lose. jeez.  Leave me out.  

    I'm finding some of the spunk of some of the Greens interesting.  

    Parent

    Green's not a bad 'color' to wear (none / 0) (#42)
    by nycstray on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 12:46:58 AM EST
    these days. I'd like to see some liberals defect in that direction. Better starting point to deal from than center right and moving more right everyday . . . .

    Parent
    He's just plain worse than (none / 0) (#43)
    by observed on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 03:30:21 AM EST
    Bush,without qualification. He's an incompetent,stupid, Reagan Republican who's still completely sure he's right about everything.

    Parent
    It was a one-day rebellion (none / 0) (#45)
    by jbindc on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 07:33:19 AM EST
    The Dems are falling in line.

    On Tuesday, the rebellious Democrats gave the impression they could mount a serious fight. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said Obama had signed on to a "morally bankrupt" and "reprehensible" policy. Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) said the deal approached "moral corruptness." Others spoke about getting "screwed" and "taken to the cleaners."

    But the angry words were little more than what Republican Sen. Jon Kyl (Ariz.) had derisively referred to last week as "a political catharsis on the Democratic side."

    By Wednesday evening, even some Democrats had embraced that theme. "This is a little catharsis going on in there," said Rep. Sam Farr (D-Calif.), midway through Biden's two-hour pummeling in the Capitol basement. "The president's on the defense, the vice president's on the defense."

    The administration fought back with a campaign-style persuasion effort. White House officials distributed to each of the Democratic lawmakers a bar graph labeled "What WE Got" and "What THEY Got." (According to the graph, "we" got more than "they.")

    The White House communications operation issued a series of press releases during the day with titles such as "Congressman Peters Backs Middle Class Tax Cut Framework," and "Detroit Mayor Backs Middle Class Tax Cut Framework." The Democratic National Committee was reduced to disseminating blog posts and editorials with half-hearted endorsements of the deal: "This morning, I awoke feeling less angry," and "Good enough for now."

    The average insurgency, the foreign policy experts say, lasts about ten years. The average liberal rebellion against Obama appears to last about a day. The crumbling began early in the day Wednesday, when Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.) issued a statement calling the tax deal "the ultimate stimulus plan."

    On Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid would only say of the compromise: "I'm going to do what I think is right when it all comes down to it." But on Wednesday, after a lengthy session with administration officials Gene Sperling and Jack Lew, Reid told reporters that "they did some explanations I think were helpful to the caucus."



    Parent
    Never believed for one minute (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by Anne on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 08:38:23 AM EST
    that the noise being made by Democrats was anything but just that: noise.  It's like they're lining up to get their official, fully laminated, "I am a B!tch of the Republican Party" ID card; sadly, it still won't get them into the GOP inner circle, but it will help Obama keep them all in line for whatever's next on his agenda.

    And I shudder to think what that might be.

    In other news, I hear that the one-time $250 payment to seniors didn't make it; sorry, old people, I guess you'll have to stick with the generic cat food...but take heart in knowing it went in aid of a good cause: protecting the standard of living of the wealthy.

    I give up.


    Parent

    What might be in the immediate future (none / 0) (#52)
    by MO Blue on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 09:05:38 AM EST
    Senate, Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) on the welfare for rich tax deal.  

    I appreciate the work of negotiators to try to provide the American people certainty; businesses and families need to know their taxes won't be going up next year. I haven't yet seen the package and look forward to reading the details when they emerge. At a minimum, I plan to offer an amendment to this bill to cap federal spending as a percentage of GDP to instill fiscal discipline and smaller government while incentivizing lawmakers to pass pro-growth policies. A binding cap on spending coupled with tax certainty would send a strong message to the American people and the marketplace that Washington will not continue to defer tough choices to future generations. link

    Much more for Obama and the Dems to give away to make sure that the lower 98% get to sacrifice to provide for the welfare of rich individuals and corporation.  

    Parent

    This is a Deficit Commission-style (none / 0) (#61)
    by Anne on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 10:18:01 AM EST
    proposal, and it tells me that Corker doesn't have a clue about how to help the economy, doesn't understand monetary theory and despite all evidence to the contrary that government has enormous power to engineer economic growth and recovery, still desires to kill as much of it as possible.

    I'm sure you saw David Dayen this morning, with some discussion about what the House bill to fund the government through September, 2011 - passed with NO Republican support - means:

    Lest you think it was a decent bill, it wasn't. Republicans just wanted an option to hack away at the FY2011 budget when they get into power. This bill is actually bad enough. Jamie Dupree has the details from a letter by David Obey, the outgoing Appropriations Committee Chair:

    This funding Act freezes FY 2011 discretionary appropriations at the FY 2010 level; providing $45.9 billion less than the President requested for the year.

    Within that ceiling, the Act adjusts funding between programs and accounts to deal with current demands and workloads and avoid furloughs.

    "At a time when we are apparently extending huge tax cuts for millionaires and we're giving families worth ten million dollars or more a bye on paying taxes on their good fortunes, this Committee has done its dead level best within the constraints under which we are operating to make some modest adjustments to salvage some investments which over the long haul just might create more jobs than a tax break for millionaires and adjustments that just might ease the financial desperation facing so many families today who cannot afford to send their kids to college, to find decent child care, or to provide adequate medical attention for their needs," said Chairman Dave Obey (D-WI).

    Let's add in some more details. The bill cuts high-speed rail funding by $1.5 billion, per the President's request. Commerce, Justice and Science get $8 billion less than last year. Financial Services gets a billion less, although they do boost funding for more regulators to enforce Dodd-Frank. Transportation and HUD get $3 billion less than last year. The discretionary spending freeze is carried through in this bill, and so is the federal employee pay freeze announced last week. Defense base closure funding is cut by $5 billion. The nuclear pork new START deal is pre-figured in this bill by $624 more in funding for nuclear weapons programs. Race to the Top of course gets $550 million. The Defense Department gets a $4.9 billion dollar bump over last year. And in a good move, the bill shifts $5.7 billion to cover Pell grants, which faced a major shortfall.

    Mind-boggling, really.


    Parent

    No, no, NO! DO FEAR!!!!! (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by nycstray on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 06:26:03 PM EST
    Will it make Obama cry? (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by observed on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 06:34:34 PM EST
    Republicans on so called "tax holiday" (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by MO Blue on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 07:10:20 PM EST
    Republicans acknowledged that the expiration of the tax holiday will be treated as a tax increase. "Once something like this goes into place, a year from now, when it expires, it'll be portrayed as a tax increase," said Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.). "So in a body like Congress, precedents matter and this is setting a precedent. I think that certainly is going to create some problems down the road if it passes."
    ...
    "Once you bring a rate down, if it goes back up, people will feel that. They'll feel their paycheck being less and that argument" -- that letting it expire amounts to a tax hike -- "eventually is bound to be made," said Sen. Mike Johanns (R-Neb.).

    "There's always a tendency to continue those things... Once something comes in, it's very difficult to change it," said Sen. George Voinovich (R-Ohio.) He then volunteered, without prompting, that "It would be detrimental to the Social Security system, especially when it's in bad shape." link

    Republicans will say mean things until the so called "tax holiday" becomes permanent and "detrimental to the Social Security system."

    Parent

    The same (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 07:24:14 PM EST
    bozos that brought you the ineffective stimulus. The same bozos that are addicted to supply side voodoo economics. I'm sorry but I'll take a pass on whatever they say.

    Parent
    The more I consider the implications (5.00 / 2) (#26)
    by Anne on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 07:25:02 PM EST
    of this tax deal the president assures us will look better the closer we look at it, I wonder if he actually believes that, or whether he wants us to focus only on the shortest of short-term effects to keep us from looking at the bigger picture.

    You know, the one where, once they cut the payroll tax, chances are it will never go back up, and while the current plan will have Social Security made whole out of general revenue, just how long does anyone think that's going to be sustainable without draconian cuts elsewhere.  I mean, look at the resistance to ending the Bush tax rates, look how intransigent these people are about raising taxes by a much smaller percentage - but we're supposed to believe that in 2 years, the 2% - much larger - cut in payroll taxes will be allowed to disappear?

    And if it doesn't, what are the chances Social Security itself won't be looked to to manage the drop in revenue that the general fund won't be able to continue to make up for?

    And now we have the same Larry Summers, who is allegedly largely responsible for recent economic policy telling us that if we don't pass this tax deal which is estimated to have a minimally stimulative effect, the economy is going to dip into another recession.  Is there some reason we should believe him now when he has little to show for the mad economic skills he applied the last two years?

    I don't think so.

    I think the whole thing - other than the extension of unemployment - stinks.  Where are the Build America Bonds?  Where is the Making Work Pay credit?  Those actually helped and could help again.  Cutting the payroll tax?  The only thing that's going to do is put us on a fast track to killing Social Security as we know it.

    And, since we know that all these tax cuts are going to inspire spending cuts, and we know Republicans love them some cuts to all things progressive, whatever minimal stimulative effect from these measures - assuming they pass - will be more than offset by cuts to spending.

    Hoe does Obama not know this?  Or does he know it and agree with it?  Either way, I see little to inpsire confidence in what lies ahead.

    It's so depressing (5.00 / 3) (#38)
    by Madeline on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 11:33:40 PM EST
    Even if I can keep afloat "if" everything gets worse, I don't think I have ever felt so powerless as a citizen.

    I feel we are leaderless and being crushed more every day. No confidence in this present government.
    None.


    Parent

    He's innumerate---just like W. (none / 0) (#27)
    by observed on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 07:39:34 PM EST
    1 trillion is only ONE ,so it's not so bad.

    Parent
    is Obama being blackmailed or what? (none / 0) (#30)
    by The Addams Family on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 08:00:37 PM EST
    Nah (5.00 / 3) (#33)
    by MO Blue on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 09:26:03 PM EST
    Just doing what he was sent to do by the people who supplied the seed money for him to run.

    Parent
    More good news about this deal (none / 0) (#62)
    by jbindc on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 10:30:24 AM EST
    Naked Capitalism calls it a "black swan" buried in the tax deal.

    Congressional Republicans appear to be quietly but methodically executing a plan that would a) avoid a federal bailout of spendthrift states and b) cripple public employee unions by pushing cash-strapped states such as California and Illinois to declare bankruptcy. This may be the biggest political battle in Washington, my Capitol Hill sources tell me, of 2011.

    That's why the most intriguing aspect of President Barack Obama's tax deal with Republicans is what the compromise fails to include -- a provision to continue the Build America Bonds program. BABs now account for more than 20 percent of new debt sold by states and local governments thanks to a federal rebate equal to 35 percent of interest costs on the bonds. The subsidy program ends on Dec. 31. And my Reuters colleagues report that a GOP congressional aide said Republicans "have a very firm line on BABS -- we are not going to allow them to be included."

    In short, the lack of a BAB program would make it harder for states to borrow to cover a $140 billion budgetary shortfall next year, as estimated by the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities. The long-term numbers are even scarier. Estimates of states' unfunded liabilities to pay for retiree benefits range from $750 billion to more than $3 trillion.

    My head is spinning.

    Parent

    Yep, saw that (none / 0) (#68)
    by waldenpond on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 10:59:37 AM EST
    They won't stop until they collapse wages.  Going after CA and IL pension funds will go along way towards that.  D@mn that CA for contributing to economic growth for so long.

    I am seeing a lot of writing on what they are doing.  I would like to see an assessment of why Obama is doing it.  I go with: he's conservative and wants the oligarchy as he's a member.  No one is that much of a wimp and he is at least book smart enough to understand exactly what he's doing.

    Parent

    Apparently Kos is a cheap date (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by waldenpond on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 10:05:21 PM EST
    OK read this:

    [If you want to broker a deal with the Republicans you should have had the SEIU, Kos, and every single person you had any expectation had any kind of following on your side first. Even if you had to bribe them or flatter them or whatever the f*ck. That's only logical. I'm not saying that because I believe in feelings first, politics second but because Obama needs people on his side. He clearly needs the Senate and the House to support him in this bargain.]

    and tell me you don't get the impression that these folks think Kos is a cheap date.  Picture it.....  the war of taxes is heavy, O calls a blogger conference, O has no time to talk as the room is booked for a cleaning, O shakes each hand but zeros in on Kos.... O actually pats Ks shoulder and drags his hand across Ks back.  Kos abandons all belief in a progressive tax structure and begins trumpeting that O needs to go with a flat tax.  Kos changes his site name to the Orange Oligarchy (because of a few seconds of flattery).

    Additionally funny is the writer is criticizing Obama's ability to negotiate and writes:  I supported Obama in the past-raised money for him, door knocked for him and I will do so in the future.

    Rumors about Unified Quest 2011 (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 08:43:55 AM EST
    futures war game that has been and will be held at the Army War College is that it will contain a component that entertains an economic crash within the United States and the Army having to address riots and civilian unrest.  Phuck Posse Comitatus I guess.  It's just me, but such a "futures" war game should never be entertained or played out within the institution of the United States military.....not ever, not even in jest.

    Scary... (none / 0) (#50)
    by kdog on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 08:56:35 AM EST
    though I can't argue with what they see coming down the pike in the crystal ball, if current trends continue.

    It might be wise for we the people to start practicing as well...stealing bread from the mouth of decadence, for example.

    Parent

    It is horrible (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 09:08:05 AM EST
    that anyone at the Pentagon feels that it is okay to reenact turning on the United States civilian population.  But of course that isn't how they are selling it, they are selling it as maintaining order....which means the people can be utterly deceived and robbed blind and if they rise up they will smacked down.  I'm having a very hard time dealing with this today.  If we are this close to collapse that we are playing out "war games" in case it happens then let's fix the God Damned $hit and stop enabling those who are collapsing us.  If crossing the Rubicon is now on the table we have lost our phucking minds as we give even more money to the robber barons.  I'm so mad and disgusted I just can't see straight.

    Parent
    I hear ya sister... (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by kdog on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 09:18:40 AM EST
    but there is no incentive for those in on the grift to fix anything to avoid unrest...the army ain't dragging them to a detention camp when the riots start.

    As the grifters have shown, they can't help themselves...they can't see past the fiscal quarter.  They will slay every golden goose in the pond unless we do something about it.

    Parent

    in case I forget to mention this tomorrow (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 11:23:53 AM EST

    (its office christmas party/potluck tomorrow so I get to go home and cook in the afternoon)

    the day after tomorrow, SATURDAY DEC 11TH on SPIKE TV on the VGAs (video game awards) that thing that I have been unable to talk about for the last six months involving that famous mexican director who must, today, remain nameless, will be OFFICIALLY ANNOUNCED!!

    finally!

    not sure how big a deal it will be but judging from the internet buzz I expect it will be hard to miss.
    but if you do I will be talking about it on monday.

    Funny. Just received via e-mail: (5.00 / 2) (#80)
    by oculus on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 12:19:37 PM EST
    DADT (none / 0) (#1)
    by CoralGables on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 05:14:11 PM EST
    Murkowski & Brown on board for repeal. Collins out for tonight.

    You have to look pretty hard (none / 0) (#2)
    by andgarden on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 05:16:07 PM EST
    to find a situation where Collins votes without Snowe, or Murkowski votes without a dozen other Republicans (though circumstances have changed for her recently).

    I'm not seeing the votes.

    Parent

    Murkowski Today (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by CoralGables on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 05:20:06 PM EST
    "America is the loser when it denies those who are willing to make the great sacrifices demanded of our men and women in uniform the opportunity do so on grounds of sexual orientation,"

    Parent
    Is there a reason (none / 0) (#7)
    by CST on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 05:48:31 PM EST
    people are discounting Snowe?

    I haven't been able to find much except in Sept or something when she said she wanted to wait and see for the report.

    Brown said the same thing.  The report is out, and now he's on board.  Why wouldn't Snowe be as well?  Since "in theory" she supports a repeal.

    Parent

    Snowe may be up for re-election (none / 0) (#18)
    by MKS on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 06:35:34 PM EST
    sooner--2012?

    Collins is not up until 2014.  So Snowe may want to lay low and escape Tea Party wrath--at least until a lot of other Republicans jump ship and vote for DADT repeal.....

    Parent

    Snowe's biggest problem (none / 0) (#22)
    by andgarden on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 07:04:22 PM EST
    is the Republican primary. It is unlikely that she could ever lose the general election.

    Parent
    Tonight's Vote (none / 0) (#9)
    by CoralGables on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 05:50:22 PM EST
    postponed. Likely to have more negotiating time to make sure they have Collins and Murkowski in the fold.

    Parent
    Well (none / 0) (#11)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 06:13:18 PM EST
    one day Lieberman says he has the votes and the next day he is chasing Susan Collins and then the next day Collins makes more demands and on it goes.

    Good grief, could Collins make a decision if her life depended on it? I guess this is what you have to do when your party is run by tea baggers and you're going to be put out in the primary if you vote for it but know you can't win the general elections without voting for it.

    Parent

    Patience (none / 0) (#15)
    by CoralGables on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 06:27:38 PM EST
    Collins said she'd vote for the package, just wants more debate and possibly a tax vote first. Murkowski is in the same camp with Collins wanting more debate time before voting for cloture.

    Parent
    TPM says final deal is Collins gets 4 days (none / 0) (#19)
    by MKS on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 06:36:45 PM EST
    of debate....So, it should be a deal that Reid can do....

    Parent
    Four days? (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 06:43:10 PM EST
    So she can get calls from Republicans all over Maine telling her to vote no and then she can change her mind?

    Parent
    I think it is on the entire Defense Bill (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by MKS on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 07:10:32 PM EST
    I assume she is already getting calls....from both sides....

    Parent
    Urban Meyers resigns-- (none / 0) (#5)
    by oculus on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 05:40:37 PM EST
    again. CNN.

    Saw his press conference (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by CoralGables on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 05:47:14 PM EST
    He looked happy. Thus, this Gator grad is very happy for him and thankful for the time we had him coaching.

    Parent
    Locally, we are awaiting TV coverage, (none / 0) (#8)
    by oculus on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 05:49:27 PM EST
    live, of the Sheriff's Dept. burning down a house filled with explosives.  Defense counsel's request for a stay so he could go inside and examine the evidence was denied in federal district court today.

    Parent
    Is that the one with home made (none / 0) (#56)
    by jeffinalabama on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 09:27:22 AM EST
    land mines, and so forth? Interesting family there...

    Parent
    Here you go: (none / 0) (#82)
    by oculus on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 12:57:05 PM EST
    bomb house

    You can watch it live on local TV!!!!!

    Parent

    How long till he goes to the Broncos? (none / 0) (#46)
    by ruffian on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 08:08:11 AM EST
    I think he was missing Tebow this year.

    Parent
    Well, how is Tebow doing? I haven't (none / 0) (#83)
    by oculus on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 12:57:39 PM EST
    kept up.

    Parent
    Is Congress above the law? (none / 0) (#10)
    by jbindc on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 05:54:16 PM EST
    An interesting piece from the Cato Institute.

    Here's a teaser:

    The first item on this election campaign's Contract with America was that, if elected (as they have been), the House Republicans would require that all laws that apply to the rest of the country also apply to Congress.  We'll see if that and the other promised reforms materialize, but it does raise yet another issue in the context of Obamacare.

    As my colleague Michael Cannon pointed out to me, the new health care law kicks congressmen out of the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program.  (The current FEHB is no different from the health coverage provided by any private employer -- federal employees choose from a series of private plan options (none of which is run by the government), and receive a subsidy from the federal government acting in its role as an employer.)

    My first reaction to hearing this was:  Good -- if the rest of us lose our health care freedom, so should those who forced this new atrocity on us.  But apparently this result was not intended, so the Obama administration has decided to ignore that part of the law.

    Interesting questions at the end of the post - somethings I hadn't heard of or considered before.

    Aretha Franklin (none / 0) (#13)
    by jbindc on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 06:25:11 PM EST
    Gators lose chief (none / 0) (#16)
    by MKS on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 06:32:46 PM EST
    BTD won't be happy about that....

    Julian Assange for Nobel Peace Prize (none / 0) (#21)
    by Dan the Man on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 06:43:27 PM EST
    Because he's just as much as an American/western dissident as Liu Xiaobo is a Chinese dissident.

    DREAM Act passes the House (none / 0) (#31)
    by andgarden on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 08:04:18 PM EST


    GOP Tom Emmer concedes MN gov race finally (none / 0) (#36)
    by DFLer on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 10:20:22 PM EST
    this AM. Mark Dayton is in. I guess if one doesn't live around here, one didn't hear this, as I have seen no coverage. Anyway, it's a good thing, as both state houses have gone GOP, and we need may a Dem gov's veto to save essential programs.

    Emmer's concession speech was longer than the recount.

    I heard about it (none / 0) (#37)
    by andgarden on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 10:21:38 PM EST
    It's a fairly important deal at least for redistricting. With the shift of a few thousand votes, the GOP would have been in a position to really s*rew you guys.

    Parent
    what Howie said (none / 0) (#47)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 08:21:07 AM EST
    WASHINGTON -- As President Obama channels Ronald Reagan he risks turning himself into Jimmy Carter.

    By staking his next two years on hundreds of billions of dollars of new or renewed tax cuts -- none of them tied directly to compensating cuts in government spending -- Obama is alienating his own Democratic base in a way that could make him what Carter was: a one-term, ineffective "outsider" president.



    News flash for Howard Fineman: (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by Anne on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 09:05:13 AM EST
    Democrats aren't mad because the tax cuts aren't offset by spending cuts, they're mad because too much benefit is going to the wealthy, the payroll tax cut is going end up becoming permanent (as will - no doubt - the extension of the lower rates on incomes above a certain level), putting Social Security at risk because the shortfall won't be able to be sustained out of general revenue, there is little in the deal that will actually stimulate the economy in the right way - and anyone who can see past the end of their nose understands that the spending cuts are coming, and they are going to hurt progressive programs across the board, limit the ability of government to actually help people who need it and - bonus! - not help the economy AT ALL.

    Parent
    I think we have moved beyond (none / 0) (#59)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 10:01:44 AM EST
    any pretense.  its not about the broader economy anymore.  the republicans are going to defend and protect their base.  millionaires.  they are not even trying to dress it up any more.


    Parent
    Captain, so what should progressives do now (none / 0) (#60)
    by Politalkix on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 10:11:38 AM EST
    I agree that we have moved beyond any pretense.

    Parent
    his argument (5.00 / 1) (#66)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 10:44:57 AM EST
    which has a lot of truth, is that there is about half the country that now has their own reality.  their own set of facts.  their own mass media.

    how do you deal with that.  I honestly have no idea.


    Parent

    Honestly (none / 0) (#70)
    by CoralGables on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 11:11:26 AM EST
    Isn't it probably closer to 86% of the population that create their own reality? That's the percent that wanted tax breaks of one kind or another. And any kind of tax break right now is failure to accept reality.

    Parent
    you got me (none / 0) (#64)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 10:42:22 AM EST
    was having this conversation with a friend.  it was his argument for the tax deal being the best Obama could probably ever get.
    the republicans have dropped the pretense and they have a noise/talking points machine that works.

    Parent
    The Republicans? (none / 0) (#69)
    by waldenpond on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 11:04:34 AM EST
    The same money people elect the Dems as elect the Repubs.  What about the Pres?  Remember that guy, he's supposed to be a Dem.  Obama is Bush.

    Parent
    Westboro Baptist Church (none / 0) (#54)
    by Anne on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 09:13:36 AM EST
    plans to picket the funeral of Elizabeth Edwards...according to this:

    Westboro Baptist Church, a group with a history of staging protests at funerals and issuing anti-gay statements, is planning to picket the Saturday funeral of Elizabeth Edwards.

    The group said it will picket outside Edenton Street United Methodist Church in Raleigh from 12:15 until 1 p.m. when the funeral is scheduled to begin.

    What a contemptible group of people.

    really looking forward (none / 0) (#65)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 10:43:32 AM EST
    to the reaction should they actually repeal DADT

    Parent
    John Edwards... (none / 0) (#73)
    by kdog on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 11:26:42 AM EST
    better get proactive and hire some muscle for the funeral...there should be no shortage of people looking for a days work and happy to to give the Phelps crew a taste of street justice.

    Parent
    For Capt Howdy and Kdog (none / 0) (#57)
    by jeffinalabama on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 09:51:04 AM EST
    Hello Kitty combat Gear.

    You're inspiring me to find Teh Srange.

    wow (none / 0) (#58)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 09:59:56 AM EST
    so wrong

    Parent
    Corporate American Exceptionalism (none / 0) (#63)
    by Politalkix on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 10:38:30 AM EST
    may soon be headquartered in China!

    WS already building (none / 0) (#71)
    by waldenpond on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 11:12:45 AM EST
    Competition up sure, but not gone from here.  WS servers are almost complete.  It's all about programming now... if you are someone who can write language and formulas to scim even a penny per transaction, you will be able to gain a short term advantage.  

    The market has nothing to do with strength, profitability nor performance.  Anyone with money in it, is gambling pure and simple.  Actually, you would be allowing someone else to blindly gamble with your money.  That would be stupid.

    Parent

    Jan "Brewercare" is alive and well in AZ (none / 0) (#67)
    by jbindc on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 10:52:17 AM EST
    Or maybe "alive" is a bad choice of words.

    The Republicans ran around shouting about "death panels" - funny that they are silent on Jan Brewer's very own "death panels".

    House Dems reject Obama plan (none / 0) (#74)
    by Anne on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 11:36:06 AM EST
    as currently structured; from Dday:

    House Democrats, after taking an internal vote, decided against bringing up the Obama-brokered tax deal in its current form.

    Defying President Obama, House Democrats voted Thursday not to bring up the tax package that he negotiated with Republicans in its current form.

    "This message today is very simple: That in the form that it was negotiated, it is not acceptable to the House Democratic caucus. It's as simple as that," said Democratic Congressman Chris Van Hollen.

    "We will continue to try and work with the White House and our Republican colleagues to try and make sure we do something right for the economy and right for jobs, and a balanced package as we go forward," he said.

    The Senate planned to take up the bill first anyway, and I assume they'll go forward. But the House won't take up the bill unless the Democratic leadership agrees to it, and according to this they just won't take up the bill.

    [snip]

    UPDATE: From Progressive Caucus Co-Chair Raul Grijalva:

    "The House was not consulted during the negotiations that produced this package, and our support cannot be taken for granted now or in the future," said Rep. Raúl M. Grijalva, co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. "Slashing taxes for the wealthiest two percent during a major recession is simply unreasonable, and the hardworking American people deserve a better deal. I was proud to vote against this hastily produced package, and I believe the House made the right decision today."

    Any chance they hold their ground?  

    It's a non-binding vote (none / 0) (#75)
    by jbindc on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 11:44:50 AM EST
    It was taken within their caucus (and not everyone was there).

    It's pretty meaningless, except to send a message.

    Parent

    Oh, I know it wasn't a vote on (none / 0) (#78)
    by Anne on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 12:01:19 PM EST
    the legislation itself, just an internal-caucus vote saying "don't send us a bill that looks like this, because we won't vote on it in this form."

    As messages go, it's a good one, but I have almost no confidence that it will result in any changes to the deal.

    As to why the Senate is taking it up first, I don't know the answer to that.

    Parent

    And how (none / 0) (#76)
    by jbindc on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 11:45:54 AM EST
    is the Senate taking it up first?  All tax bills have to originate in the House.....

    Parent
    I hope House Democrats (none / 0) (#77)
    by Politalkix on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 11:59:44 AM EST
    have learnt something from the Olympia Snowe school of negotiations, i.e. bargain to have your own demands inserted before voting NO.

    Parent
    Folks (none / 0) (#79)
    by Politalkix on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 12:11:24 PM EST
    Please refer to this tax plan as the Obama-GOP tax plan or the Obama-McConnell tax plan. The strategic reasons for doing so should be obvious to a Progressive Democrat.

    Parent
    From the Onion: (none / 0) (#81)
    by jeffinalabama on Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 12:22:42 PM EST