home

Saturday College Football Open Thread

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Blog Related
Posted on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 08:04:12 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Hit yesterday with UCLA +9 and Kent +8 (also too Knicks -13.) I have a bushel of winners today (all picks 2 units unless otherwise indicated):

Tulsa -2 over Central Florida, Boise State -8 over Nevada, Baylor +4½ over Oklahoma State, Pittsburgh -7 over South Florida (3 units), Oklahoma -6 over TCU, Cincinnati -5 over UConn and Kansas St -10 over Texas.

BIG 10 CHAMPIONSHIP GAME - Lucas Oil Stadium - Indianapolis, IN - Nebraska -3 over Wisconsin (3 units).

ACC CHAMPIONSHIP GAME - Bank of America Stadium - Charlotte, NC - Florida State -14 over Georgia Tech (4 units).

SEC CHAMPIONSHIP GAME - Georgia Dome - Atlanta, GA -Alabama -7½ over Georgia (4 units.)

2 soccer specials: In the Bundesliga - Dortmund over Bayern Munich (+350) and in La Liga - Real Madrid (-1) over Atletico Madrid.

Open Thread.

< Friday Afternoon Open Thread | NY Funeral Held for Hector "Macho" Camacho >

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

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Saturday College Football Open Thread | 96 comments (96 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Let's have a new fiscal cliff in August (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by MO Blue on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 08:24:16 AM EST
    Shorter Obama: If I can't get my Grand Bargain, including tax cuts now, I'll create another crisis to get it in August. And it will only cost the tax payers $80 billion.

    President Obama is seeking an Aug. 1 deadline for overhauling the tax code and making changes to expensive federal health programs, the final pieces of what the administration conceives as a far-reaching plan to rein in the national debt, senior administration officials said Friday.
    ...
    That plan generally mirrors previous deficit-reduction plans Obama has submitted to Congress. In all, it would reduce borrowing over the next decade by $4.5 trillion, officials said. However, Obama is proposing to dedicate about $200 billion of those savings to new measures to boost the sluggish economy, including additional unemployment benefits and extension of a temporary payroll tax cut for most workers.
    ...
    To ensure that Congress acts by Aug. 1, Obama is proposing to delay automatic spending cuts only through that date. The so-called sequester would then act as a new trigger to force congressional action. Delaying the sequester for eight months would cost about $80 billion, officials said. They recommended covering that cost with new spending cuts and tax hikes, but did not specify which ones. link
    Silly (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 09:02:39 AM EST
    The President is negotiating this very well.

    He may screw up, but he hasn't yet.

    Be fair for once.

    Parent

    See Kuttner (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 09:04:56 AM EST
    link.

    Parent
    See summary of Obama's actual proposal (5.00 / 3) (#73)
    by MO Blue on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 10:48:32 AM EST
    Stage 2 includes $400 billion in entitlement cuts as contained in Obama's 2013 FY budget and the sequester would to serve as "hammer" for tax reform  

    A source involved in the talks provided HuffPost with a GOP summary of the White House offer as presented Thursday. A Democratic source involved in the talks confirmed that it accurately reflects the offer, adding that it's "no different than what was discussed last Friday." link

    White House Proposal
    November 29, 2012

    Stage #1
    * Immediate full "de-coupling" of both marginal rates and capital gains/dividends (*the Senate
    bill could not achieve this); estimated at $960 Billion

    • Additional tax increases to equal $600 Billion, but not effective until 2014
    • 2009-level Estate Tax exemption/rate (*the Senate bill could not achieve this)
    • Patch for SGR
    • AMT and business tax extenders
    • Payroll tax extension or new alternative policy
    • Bonus Depreciation extension
    • WH proposal for refinancing underwater mortgages
    • Mulit-year Stimulus Package: $50 Billion in new infrastructure spending for FY 2013; $25 Billion/year in FY 2014-18
    • UI extension
    • Unspecified savings from certain non-entitlement mandatory programs (ex: Agriculture programs)
    • 1-year deferral of the sequester
    • Permanent increase in the debt limit sufficient to avoid affirmative action to raise it again

    Stage #2
    • Tax Reform consistent with the $1.6 Trillion tax increase
    • Medicare/entitlement policies from the President's Budget that could total $400 Billion in savings
    • Sequester would to serve as "hammer" for tax reform

    Medicare/Medicaid cuts in Obama's FY13 Budget

    The budget released Monday would trim spending on federal health-care programs by about $360 billion over the next decade, primarily by reducing payments to drug companies and other providers. Starting in 2017, Obama also proposes to raise Medicare premiums for new retirees and seniors with higher incomes, start charging co-payments for home health-care services, and penalize patients who buy Medigap policies to take care of Medicare co-payments and deductibles ...
    On Medicaid, the White House again proposed a streamlined funding system that states do not support. The plan would combine various rates of federal funding into a single percentage. States and budget analysts say that approach would simply shift costs to the states, rather than actually controlling the cost of Medicaid. Washington Gov. Christine Gregoire, a Democrat, said last year that the consolidated payment rates could be a "huge problem" for states (Baker, 2/13).
    ...
    You'd pay more for Medicare. There's a slew of smaller provisions aimed at making Medicare slightly more means tested than it is now. Starting in 2017, the proposal would increase income-related premiums in section B (which covers doctors visits and similar services) and D (which covers prescription drugs) by 15 percent. Those higher premiums currently are required of taxpayers with income over $85,000 ($170,000 for couples filing joint returns). Obama proposes keeping the income threshold stable (not adjusting for inflation) until one in four beneficiaries are paying extra premiums which currently start at $55.60 a month (for B and D) and go up to $286.20 a month (Stern, 2/13).

    Keep in mind that the cuts to Medicare and Medicaid are Obama's opening bid and not necessarily the final product.

    Parent

    And Sunday news has made it crystal clear (none / 0) (#75)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 11:26:07 AM EST
    The Republicans have no plan.  They say they don't like Obama's plan, but they have not one single detail of any plan that they all agree on other than rich people can't return to their per-Bush tax rates....and that's it.  The majority of Americans are done with the rich not paying their fair share.  The Republicans have nothing, and if we go over the cliff.....OMG, Americans will discover that journalists have led them astray and it's a slope that can have remedies applied to it :)

    The Republicans got nuthin.  Candy Crowley said all morning that we don't have much time and she's full of it or at least 80% to 85% full of it.

    Parent

    It is not a fiscal cliff (none / 0) (#77)
    by Politalkix on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 12:07:06 PM EST
    but a fiscal turnip truck. Let the MSM fall off it.

    Parent
    This must be a record (none / 0) (#79)
    by MO Blue on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 12:20:16 PM EST
    I have agreed with two of your comments in one post.

    The sky is falling. ;o)

    Parent

    I do not understand (none / 0) (#78)
    by MO Blue on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 12:18:50 PM EST
    Do you thinks Obama's cuts to the safety net programs are o.k. if the Republicans have no plan? How about cuts to Tricare, military pensions and limiting military raises?  

    Obama has already agreed to the higher Medicare premiums for the wealthy and not so wealthy that the Republicans want. See details of his 2013 FY budget above.

    Obama also has documented plans on additional cuts to Medicare and Medicaid. He has plans to reform the tax code to lower corporate rates. He plans to user the sequester to serve as "hammer" for tax reform

    Parent

    In my view, means testing (4.00 / 4) (#82)
    by KeysDan on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 02:15:25 PM EST
    of Medicare weakens long term viability with political vulnerability.   Unlike social security, there is no payroll cap so greater incomes have already paid more taxes.  Medicare premiums at the lowest income level are often paid for by Medicaid. However the current means testing is  pushing capabilities for many Medicare recipients, further increases in premiums are, essentially,  cuts in benefits.  And, the premium scale for mean testing  is asymmetric with definition of means for continuation of the Bush-era tax cuts.  

    Parent
    The Medicare cuts outlined in (5.00 / 1) (#93)
    by MO Blue on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 10:16:59 PM EST
    Obama's budget also seriously penalize seniors who have serious illnesses or chronic conditions and individuals living alone.

    As someone who had numerous surgeries over a two year period, I know that various types of wound care are impossible to do by oneself. The co-payments for home health-care services would be a serious financial burden for a senior living alone who is too poor to easily absorb the additional costs and not destitute enough to qualify for additional financial aid.

    Penalizing patients who buy Medigap policies to take care of Medicare co-payments and deductibles is adding additional financial burdens on people who have on-going or chronic illnesses such as cancer who need regular care. They are already paying higher premiums for the coverage. Do we really want to force really sick people into choosing between getting the treatment they need or paying more than they can afford for insurance or treatment.  

    Parent

    I agree that additional means testing (5.00 / 2) (#95)
    by MO Blue on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 10:48:02 PM EST
    of Medicare weakens long term viability with political vulnerability (which may be the point). I do think that the writing is on the wall and means testing is basically a done deal. Too many statements from numerous Dems similar to my sweet Claire's comment below:  

    "I think it is certainly a fight and we have to be careful. We can get to means testing fairly easy, more aggressive means testing, some higher co-pays for those people who can afford it," McCaskill said.

    I do think it is extremely ironic that people making millions are too poor to pay more taxes but people making $85,000 are so rich they can pay higher Medicare premiums.

    Parent

    Agreed. It seems (5.00 / 1) (#96)
    by KeysDan on Mon Dec 03, 2012 at 07:55:36 AM EST
    curious that many progressives readily accept the idea of means testing of Medicare premiums (Part B).  This was one of those good Republican ideas that was, without much fanfare, incorporated into the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003, that started Medical Part D (drugs).

    Means-testing was not a part of the Medicare plan; for the first time in the program's history it began in 2007.  At least, there should be a discussion of the possibilities and some cautions about linking premium levels to beneficiaries incomes and its undermining of the social insurance nature of Medicare.

    The increase costs may threaten public support--we need look only to Medicaid.  A major breakthrough in ACA was the expansion of Medicaid, but we see the political obstacles to making that happen.  Steepened means-testing is also a good way to dash all future hopes for a Medicare for all to evolve.  It is no accident that additional means-testing of premiums is a demand of Senator Mitch McConnell (R. KY),   a guy who otherwise has never seen a tax increase he likes.

    Parent

    The cuts to Medicare and Medicaid (none / 0) (#80)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 01:35:44 PM EST
    That I have seen are mostly to pharmaceutical companies from what I see, and identified areas of overpayment to providers.  Big pharma has been handed enough crazed profit by our government, and I trust the administration to make well reasoned cuts to fat and abuse by providers.  When have they ever been on board to deal a lethal blow to any business.

    If you are going to cover all these new Medicaid users we can't keep up this position of not making pharma earn its supper too like everyone else.

    Parent

    Once again I am confused (none / 0) (#92)
    by MO Blue on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 09:53:49 PM EST
    Did you take the time to read the cuts to Medicare and Medicaid contained in Obama's 2013 FY Budget?

    Medicare cuts:
    Starting in 2017, the proposal would increase income-related premiums in section B (which covers doctors visits and similar services) and D (which covers prescription drugs) by 15 percent. Those higher premiums currently are required of taxpayers with income over $85,000 ($170,000 for couples filing joint returns). Obama proposes keeping the income threshold stable (not adjusting for inflation) until one in four beneficiaries are paying extra premiums

    Start charging co-payments for home health-care services

    Penalize patients who buy Medigap policies to take care of Medicare co-payments and deductibles

    Medicaid:
    The plan would combine various rates of federal funding into a single percentage. States and budget analysts say that approach would simply shift costs to the states, rather than actually controlling the cost of Medicaid. Washington Gov. Christine Gregoire, a Democrat, said last year that the consolidated payment rates could be a "huge problem" for states.

    Parent

    I don't think I am the one being silly (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by MO Blue on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 09:42:19 AM EST
    I am not the one who is saying they want to overhaul the tax code and make changes to expensive federal health programs next year. Obama, his advisors and senior congressional Democrats are the ones stating that they intend to pursue the Grand Bargain next year.

    If being "fair" requires me to ignore what Obama, his advisors and senior Democrats are saying, then I guess you can continue to call me silly and accuse me of being unfair.

    Parent

    You actually are ignoring what Obama is saying (none / 0) (#5)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 09:45:41 AM EST
    What matters now is what the austerity bomb deal will be.

    Please see Kuttner.

    Yes, in fact, you are being extremely silly.

    Parent

    I'd rather see Obama than Kuttner (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by MO Blue on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 10:16:52 AM EST
    You are ignoring what Obama is saying. You are ignoring what his senior advisors and senior Democrats are saying. Unless Kutter can dictate policy or has a vote in Congress, I would prefer to rely on the words of Obama, his advisors and Congressional Democrats. If you would rather put your faith in Kutter, go for it.

    Obama, warning of "prolonged negotiations," used a campaign-style appearance yesterday in Pennsylvania to appeal for help from voters to put pressure on Republicans in Congress to pass an extension of tax cuts for middle-income Americans as a first step toward resolving the impasse. That would leave decisions on reworking the tax code and cutting spending until next year.
    ...
    Obama has proposed a framework that would raise taxes immediately on top earners and set an Aug. 1 deadline for rewriting the tax code and deciding on spending cuts, according to administration officials.

    It calls for $1.6 trillion in tax increases, $350 billion in cuts in health programs, $250 billion in cuts in other programs and $800 billion in assumed savings from the wind-down of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to the officials, who asked for anonymity. link

    BTW, this statement in Kuttner's article is contrary to every other report on Obama's offer:

    Kutter: The White House proposal included only $400 billion in spending cuts over a decade, none of which cut into Social Security or Medicare--details to be filled in later.

    Other reporting on Obama's offer contain this type of statement stating that details will be filled in later.

    In exchange the administration agreed to make $400 billion in spending cuts to entitlement programs, an aide confirmed.



    Parent
    You see what you want to see (none / 0) (#11)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 10:43:36 AM EST
    I've been as critical of Obama's negotiating as anybody but when you write what you write when the President i holding a strong line just makes your valid criticisms look suspect.

    I have no patience for it.

    But have it.

    Parent

    I see what Obama is saying on record (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by MO Blue on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:09:30 AM EST
    I see what his senior advisors have said on record.

    I see the statements by senior Congressional Democrats that are known as strong supporters of Obama and his Grand Bargain.

    You choose to supply one article as the basis of your argument and choose to ignore the actual statements by Obama and his cohorts. You choose to substitute name calling for legitimate debate.

    If I am seeing only what I want to see, you certainly have displayed the same lack of willingness to look at any other information on the subject.  

    Parent

    Nooo (none / 0) (#18)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:25:17 AM EST
    You are ignoring what Obama has said on the record in the form of his offer on the austerity bomb deal.

    this is mindless stuff.

    Add notes of caution, express concern that Obama will not stick to his line on these negotiations, all fine.

    But that's not what you are doing.

    You are playing the bizarro ABG role today.

    You are better than this.

    Parent

    I have not said one word about the politics (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by MO Blue on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:58:13 AM EST
    of what he is doing right. What I have done is post quotes from various articles that indicate that Obama plans to set a deadline of Aug 1 for overhauling the tax code and making changes to expensive federal health programs. IOW his Grand Bargain.

    Obama, warning of "prolonged negotiations," used a campaign-style appearance yesterday in Pennsylvania to appeal for help from voters to put pressure on Republicans in Congress to pass an extension of tax cuts for middle-income Americans as a first step toward resolving the impasse. That would leave decisions on reworking the tax code and cutting spending until next year.

    To ensure that Congress acts by Aug. 1, Obama is proposing to delay automatic spending cuts only through that date. The so-called sequester would then act as a new trigger to force congressional action. Delaying the sequester for eight months would cost about $80 billion, officials said. They recommended covering that cost with new spending cuts and tax hikes, but did not specify which ones.

    Now let's talk about the politics of NOW and the politics of establishing another "fiscal cliff" in August.

    If Obama sticks to his guns and requires the Republicans to go on record with the exact cuts that they want to domestic and safety net programs, I will be the first to say it is a very clever move. If they take the bait and recommend something less harsh than the Ryan plan, they will be on the hot seat with some of their base. If they recommend the Ryan plan, they will be on the hot seat with a majority of Americans who don't want cuts to domestic and safety net programs. Either way Obama can make cuts to the programs slightly to the left of their position and claim that he prevented the Republicans from slashing the programs.

    If the Republicans come up with the some form of revenue in exchange for reforming the entitlement programs, he can claim he was successful in creating a situation where there is "shared sacrifice."

    Barring agreement (unlikely) by year end, recreating the fiscal cliff in August allows the politicians, corporate American and the media to continue to ratchet up the "We are falling off the fiscal cliff - We are doomed" scenario for another eight months and gives Obama another chance to get the Grand Bargain that he has been pursuing since he became President.

    Is Obama engaging in clever politics? Yes

    Will these political moves result in good policies? I don't think so.    

    Parent

    I don't think you understand (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 01:29:42 PM EST
    Obama's offer.

    Parent
    Sometimes one can (1.00 / 2) (#29)
    by christinep on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 02:07:42 PM EST
    Work him or herself into a letter...and get trapped by it.  Perhaps, that is what may be the dilemma confronting MO Blue here.

    Parent
    "letter" should read "lather" (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by christinep on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 02:09:00 PM EST


    Parent
    Don't feel trapped by my comments at all (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by MO Blue on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 02:14:29 PM EST
    Maybe christinep doesn't have anything relevant to say about the subject(s) under discussion and has to resort to a typical discounting statement to cover up for her lack of substance.

    Parent
    For one thing (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by christinep on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 02:21:01 PM EST
    I don't think imagining the course of these negotiations--based upon one's own bias (mine or yours)--adds much other than emotional conjecture.  All negotiations have phases, positioning, etc.  Let's see what the next few weeks bring.  As BTD noted, things are moving well now & the President's negotiation strategy looks good... Now.

    Parent
    Actually I think that Obama's (none / 0) (#34)
    by MO Blue on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 02:47:04 PM EST
    negotiation strategy NOW is a vast improvement over his previous attempts. My original comment and the majority of the following comments referenced what Obama and the Democrats said they were planning for next year.

    IOW August 1, 2013 does not by any stretch of the imagination equal NOW.

    Parent

    It is an opening bid in the negotiation (none / 0) (#28)
    by MO Blue on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 02:03:16 PM EST
    It is more in tune with The Madman Theory Of Political Bargaining than Obama's normal style.

    But Democrats say the Republican response is little more than faux outrage, and that the White House offer is simply how negotiations are conducted, especially given that Obama comfortably won reelection after campaigning for higher taxes on the wealthy.
    ...
    "What harm comes from him asking for more than he thinks he's going to be able to get?" said Frank, who did not seek re-election this year.
    ...
    House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) even went so far as to agree that the president's proposal looked little different than a Democratic wish list.

    But Hoyer also said that was wholly appropriate for an opening bid.

    "I don't think it's a take-it-or-leave-it offer. I think it is, frankly, responsive to what the Republicans said they wanted, which is a specific offer," Hoyer added during his weekly press briefing in the Capitol. "That doesn't mean they have to like the offer. It does mean that they should put a very specific offer back on the table." link



    Parent
    One part of Obama's tactic (none / 0) (#33)
    by MO Blue on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 02:36:26 PM EST
    has had some results. While these comments are not from Boehner, they do put forth a Republican position on what cuts they want as part of the deal.

    Mr. McConnell (R., Ky.) said bipartisan agreement on higher Medicare premiums for the wealthy, an increase in the Medicare eligibility age and slowing cost-of-living increases for Social Security could move both parties closer to a budget deal that averts the so-called fiscal cliff, the combination of spending cuts and tax increases that start in early January unless Washington acts.

    In return for the support of Democrats, he said, Republicans would agree to include more tax revenue in a budget deal, though not from higher rates.

    "Those are the kinds of things that would get Republicans interested in new revenue," Mr. McConnell said. link




    Parent
    This is good and I missed it (5.00 / 3) (#35)
    by MO Blue on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 03:01:37 PM EST
    In response, the White House laid down a marker: "A senior administration official said the White House would make no new offers until Republicans changed their opposition to raising top tax rates."


    Parent
    Yes, that is an excellent (5.00 / 3) (#54)
    by MKS on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 09:04:21 PM EST
    response.

    You can tell how it is going by how much the Republicans are complaining....

    Perhaps the ending may not turn out well, but right now it is steady as she goes good.

    The Dems have all said Social Security is off the table.  Medicare costs need to be contained.  There are all kings of ways of doing that, and not all of them are nefarious.

    There are a lot of amibigous terms being thrown out.   The only concrete thing we know of is Obama's opening offer, which was great.

    Parent

    Dems have said that Social Security is off the (none / 0) (#58)
    by MO Blue on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:51:25 PM EST
    table during the fiscal cliff negotiations.

    Social Security does not contribute to the federal deficit and should not be a part of ongoing negotiations to avoid the so-called fiscal cliff, Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said Tuesday.
    ...
    White House spokesman Jay Carney appeared to back up Durbin's position, suggesting a "separate track" be used to reform Social Security. "We should address the drivers of the deficit, and Social Security currently is not a driver of the deficit," he said.

    On Tuesday, asked to respond to Durbin's remarks, Carney said, "I can simply say it is the president's position when talking about a broad, balanced approach to dealing with our fiscal challenges that that includes dealing with our entitlements."

    Durbin suggested that a separate commission to study Social Security be formed and charged with making recommendations by the end of 2013, which would then be voted on or amended by Congress. link



    Parent
    Are you speaking of the politics or (5.00 / 2) (#8)
    by Anne on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 10:26:05 AM EST
    the policy?  Because, as we have seen too many times to count, what may be good politics for this president may not be in service to good policy.

    And like many others, I don't think there's much benefit in cheering this preliminary effort, not when we've seen, time and again, that these strong opening salvos only last as long as it takes to get the people over on his side, at which point he uses that support to obtain a result that was more to his liking all along.

    I mean, it's not like Obama hasn't been pushing the Grand Bargain, getting behind his good friends Bowles and Simpson, for several years now, and I don't think it's silly of anyone to be skeptical about this little snapshot of where things are, given that history.

    And as lovely as it is to have photo ops with "average" Americans and go on a public tour with more opportunities for great photos and clips, I think we really should be more focused on what's going on out of the public eye, who he's meeting with behind the WH doors, because I think we all know that that's where the real wheeling and dealing take place.

    We are not naive or uninformed, and we certainly aren't "silly," as much as you'd apparently like us to be seen in order to, I don't know, reduce our opinions to nonsense.

    Parent

    I'm speaking of both (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 10:41:35 AM EST
    To pretend the President has not drawn a strong line in THIS negotiation is ridiculous.

    MoBlue's comment is simply ridiculous  RIGHT NOW.

    Of course the President can screw it up but to pretend he is not standing fast NOW is just a caricature of PUMA.

    Parent

    No one's pretending he isn't (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by Anne on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 10:56:38 AM EST
    standing fast now, BTD - at least in public appearances - and I can give him all kinds of credit for that now, if I put my blinders on and refuse to look at the history of this Grand Bargain.  Or if I refuse to ask what's going on in all his meetings with corporate bigwigs and campaign bundlers, what he's promising them in all of this.  And if I refuse to pay attention to the little leaks and what-not that are trickling out.

    Given the sad history of watching Obama's and the Dems' strong lines in the sand disappear, I have no reason to trust this particular strong stand will last.

    As for your PUMA crack, since when did you start channeling ABG?  Cheap shots do not become you.

    Parent

    Blinders on what is happening now (1.00 / 1) (#15)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:22:15 AM EST
    is where the PUMA crack comes from.

    And it will come again when I feel it fits.

    Just like I give ABG no quarter in any of my posts.

    You may not recall but ABG is banned from my threads, including my one threads because he is the flip side of what Mo Blue has been in this thread.

    Parent

    Even ABG believes (none / 0) (#17)
    by MO Blue on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:24:45 AM EST
    that Obama is just posturing now and everyone knows he will make the "tough choices" soon.

    What is happening here is posturing.

    In the last few crisis, Obama was criticized for starting with a moderate proposal and being pulled right.

    Now he has changed tactics and is starting with a more favorable position with the hopes that the final concessions will be more favorable.

    But let's not pretend that both sides don't understand that the eventual compromise will be painful to all.  I am looking down the road 20 days to what will be the talking points after the negotiation posturing is done. link  

    One of the few times I agree  with 90% of an ABG post.

    Parent

    Who cares what ABG believes? (none / 0) (#19)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:26:17 AM EST
    I don't. I find him a ill informed and a bore.

    One of the reasons why he is banned from my threads.

    Parent

    $400 billion in spending cuts over a decade (none / 0) (#6)
    by Mr Natural on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 10:10:30 AM EST
    - from your source, Kuttner.

    What's silly is defending the president of the bipartisan participatory clown act that allows Obama to get away with selling the idea that $400 Billion "saved" over ten years will solve any of the problems created by what is now a $1.3 Trillion/year budget deficit.

    "making changes to expensive...... federal health programs," - Kuttner

    Too funny!  Read between the lines.  Geezers stacked like cordwood - under the bus.

    But hey, I did find this illuminating pic of the latest White House strategy sessions.

    Parent

    Ugh (1.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 10:42:16 AM EST
    PUMA central today.

    Parent
    The fastest way to go from (5.00 / 2) (#13)
    by Anne on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:07:56 AM EST
    voicing opinions that people take seriously, to opinions they don't, is to start lobbing PUMA shots across the bow.  

    Just ask ABG.

    Parent

    Just ask me (3.00 / 2) (#16)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:23:25 AM EST
    ABG is gone from my threads for mindless Obamabotness.

    I don't want mindless PUMAism either. That's what has been on offer in this thread.

    I don't want any of it.

    Parent

    I thought J banned the P-word? (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by nycstray on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 09:26:58 PM EST


    Parent
    Banning from Saturday (none / 0) (#61)
    by oculus on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 01:07:58 AM EST
    college football open thread. That's got to be a first.

    Segue: "first."  Is the first Evan "Big 10" [meh,] championship play-off?

    Parent

    He should take a page out (none / 0) (#53)
    by MKS on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 08:57:53 PM EST
    out of Jerry Jones' playbook.

    Back in the day, before the rookie salary structure was in place, Jerry Jones would wait until a week before training camp before he began to negotiate with the draft picks.....Compressing the time like that tended to focus everyone.....

    I like Obama's opening offer, and the word out today is that he will not provide any counters until the Republicans first agree to let the tax cuts expire on the top 2%.

    Good stuff from Obama so far.

    Parent

    Congress can get rid of the sequester (none / 0) (#21)
    by ruffian on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:51:08 AM EST
    at any time - I doubt Obama would veto getting rid of it. In lieu of that I am all for kicking it down the road till August or whenever.

    What happens to the expiration of the Bush tax cuts under this idea? Tax reform gets pushed back, which is also fine with me, but what about the expiration of the cuts?

    Parent

    I'd be happy if we had ANY "leaders"... (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 01:00:35 PM EST
    ...who were not so bought and paid for that they could explain to the American people exactly what kind of economy they live in, just what worthless blips and trinkets that economy's fiat currency is, how it is factually impossible for a nation sovereign in is own currency to go bankrupt, and how because of that we can do whatever we want as a free nation, we can have as great an economy as we choose to have, and the only thing it takes is a plan and the will, and a modicum of generosity across the board.  

    A leader who could explain the obvious: that because we trade in worthless blip and trinkets and not things that have other uses, the only real way to ensure a baseline prosperous economy in all times is to tie the value of your currency not to the casino billionaire lottery mentality that it is rigged to now, but you tie the value of the dollar to a human and overly generous floor that guarantees work if necessary. When you have established and solidified that floor, the sky is genuinely the limit.  When you make nothing but lottery madness solid, then the floor will collapse beneath you every time.

    IOW, phuck the roof, RAISE THE FLOOR!!

    Instead, we are "led" by people who really don't have a problem with our economy being run by junkies -- degenerates who are addicted to money like heroin. Like the Papa John's CEO pissing and moaning about adding a dime to his prices to cover healthcare reform, er, insurance reform, for his employees. Ten lousy cents. You HAVE to be a financial junky to complain like that, the kind of guy who will stab you rather than let you have even a tenth of a gram of his stash.

    Blow the bubble again, here comes the next burst. I hope not, but my logical mind is screaming it.

    Parent

    Time to engineer a mutiny on The Boehner (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by Politalkix on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:37:51 AM EST
    Madame Speaker, please do it! link
    There are lots of districts across the country (plenty in blue states like OH, PA, NY, WI, IL, etc) that have elected Republicans where Medicare, Social Security and Defense spending cuts will push people over the edge. People in these relatively less affluent and purple and conservative districts often vote for Republicans, not because they want to see cuts in the safety net or defense spending (where a sole defense contractor may be the largest employer in town) but because they wrongly think that cuts in spending only mean that less of their tax money is going to be spent on the urban poor in far away cities. It is time for Democrats to reach people in these purple and conservative districts and explain to them how spending cuts that are being proposed by Republicans will directly affect them and their communities.


    Discharge petition (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by MO Blue on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 01:24:22 PM EST
    I agree that would be a good political move.

    It's not going to be easy to achieve, because she needs 218 signatures for the petition to work, and that means getting 25 Republicans on board. But even if forcing the bill to the floor isn't likely, this would be another way to shine a bright light on the fact that Republicans are holding the middle-class tax cuts hostage on behalf of the wealthiest Americans. That doesn't look good, particularly in the weeks before Christmas, and will give Democrats another cudgel to beat Republicans with. link


    Parent
    If no deal is made during (none / 0) (#81)
    by KeysDan on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 01:48:23 PM EST
    this Congress and all the Bush-era tax cuts expire, the bill previously passed by the senate (that maintains just the tax cuts below $250,000), a discharge petition would have a much greater chance should the Republican House leadership continue to block what would then be a tax cut for most Americans.  

    Parent
    Good point (none / 0) (#94)
    by MO Blue on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 10:25:35 PM EST
    Although the Republicans have been known to seriously punish any member who steps out of line.

    Parent
    Great comment and link (none / 0) (#23)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 12:16:26 PM EST


    Parent
    This is big news (5.00 / 2) (#36)
    by MO Blue on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 03:14:40 PM EST
    WEST POINT, N.Y. (AP) -- The landmark church at the center of spiritual life at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point has hosted its first same-sex wedding.

    Brides Penelope Gnesin and Brenda Sue Fulton, a West Point graduate, exchanged vows in the regal church in a Saturday afternoon ceremony attended by about 250 guests.

    The couple have been together for 17 years. They had a civil commitment ceremony that didn't carry any legal force in 1999, and had long hoped to formally tie the knot. link

    This is the second same sex wedding held at West Point. Another couple was married at another campus chapel a couple of weeks ago.

    I purchased an NYT subscription (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by lilburro on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:25:11 PM EST
    over Thanksgiving weekend (their Black Friday offer was pretty good).  So far it is worth it.  I didn't realize how much I missed being able to peruse the NYT online.  My interests so far have strayed to restaurants I will never go to, food, art, etc. but I'm sure my interest in politics will eventually return.

    Pinterest and Christmas decorating is (none / 0) (#68)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 08:38:14 AM EST
    Addictive as hell.  I was smiling this morning looking for new ideas to spring on my husband today, he gets out of bed and asks me if I'm getting high on Pinterest again.

    Parent
    I love Pinterest, but, man is it a time suck. (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by Anne on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 08:57:31 AM EST
    Which is great if you have time you need sucked away, but usually for me, there are 9,000 other things I should be doing - and for some reason, Pinterest gives me an f-that attitude about all that other stuff!

    Last night, I got intrigued by the "snow globes" you make in upside-down stemware...I think they would look great on the table.

    I pinned about a million other things last night, too, lol.

    Parent

    I try to find people who have similar tastes (none / 0) (#71)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 09:11:53 AM EST
    To mine and then I follow them.  Still takes time, but makes getting my high a shorter process.   Some people must spend all day pinning the coolest stuff on Pinterest, and I'm happy to follow them when I can find them :)

    Parent
    I have overcome TalkLeft (5.00 / 2) (#64)
    by oculus on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 01:16:19 AM EST
    w/d syndrome by signing up for "cellular at sea."  Please send donations.  And stop fighting w/each other!  This is too expensive to read.

    I don't like Obama derangement syndrome (4.00 / 4) (#37)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 03:34:54 PM EST
    Any better than I liked Clinton derangement syndrome.

    Ooh. You got a "1" for that. (none / 0) (#62)
    by oculus on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 01:10:07 AM EST


    Parent
    You know how that upsets me (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 08:38:42 AM EST


    Parent
    I'm at a loss. (none / 0) (#24)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 12:20:00 PM EST
    Who do I root for between two of the most obnoxious fan bases in the B1G--behind Ohio State, of course (why do they all wear red?).  Cheeseheads or Cornshuckers?

    Guess I'll have to go with Bucky, even though the ex's niece and nephew's half-brother plays wide receiver for Nebraska.  If they win, her and the rest of the family will be absolutely insufferable--as will the rest of Big Red nation.  A lot more of them out here than Bucky fans.  Besides, Bo Pelini is a major tool.

    Pelini is a tool. And, as I had hoped, his (none / 0) (#56)
    by caseyOR on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:15:26 PM EST
    Huskers were pummeled by the Badgers 70-31. Pelini was standing on the sideline looking a bit shell-shocked through the entire second half.

    Wisconsin is not that good a team. I expect Stanford will beat them handily in the Rose Bowl. The addition of Nebraska to the Big 10 has done nothing to raise the quality of play.

    Parent

    Never underestimate a football team ... (none / 0) (#59)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 12:03:58 AM EST
    ... that's coming off a 39-point romp in a game where a lot of people wrote them off. Wisconsin will be playing with nothing to lose in Pasadena on New Year's Day, and the Badgers we saw tonight were apparently in hibernation all season. Stanford will have their hands full at the Rose Bowl.

    The big question now is where MAC champion Northern Illinois (12-1) will be ranked tomorrow. If the Huskies move into the top 16 -- which is a distinct possibility, after their win over Kent State and with Texas, UCLA and Nebraska all losing this weekend -- they will receive a BCS invitation, because they will have achieved a higher ranking than Wisconsin, champion of an automatic-qualifying conference (Big Ten).

    Parent

    I would think (none / 0) (#65)
    by CoralGables on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 07:54:14 AM EST
    the very best NIU could hope for is #17. Kent State was the highest ranked team they played all season and that won't help much.

    To their credit, they went out of Conference to play major conference foes Kansas and Iowa this season. The problem is Kansas and Iowa were awful, combining to go 2-15 in their conference games and NIU lost one of those games.

    If Kent State won, the MAC was in. With NIU winning they will very possibly get shut out. If by chance the voters decide a mid major should be in anyway and boost them way up in the human polls, expect NIU to go to the Orange Bowl as about 18 point underdogs to FSU.

    Parent

    I'll be maikng a huge investment on Stanford (none / 0) (#72)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 10:30:56 AM EST


    Parent
    KC Chiefs player kills girlfriend, and then, (none / 0) (#38)
    by Anne on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 03:58:39 PM EST
    he drove to the team facility where, after speaking with several team officials in the parking lot, shot and killed himself.

    Kansas City Chiefs linebacker Jovan Belcher fatally shot his girlfriend Saturday, then drove to Arrowhead Stadium and committed suicide in front of his coach and general manager.

    Authorities did not release a possible motive for the murder-suicide, though police said that Belcher and his girlfriend, 22-year-old Kasandra M. Perkins, had been arguing recently. The two of them have an infant child.

    Belcher thanked general manager Scott Pioli and coach Romeo Crennel before shooting himself in the parking lot of the team's practice facility, police spokesman Darin Snapp said. Police had locked it down by midmorning and reporters were confined to the street just outside the gates.

    The Chiefs said they will play the Carolina Panthers on Sunday at Arrowhead Stadium as scheduled after discussing it with the league, Crennel and the club's captains. A spokesman for Kansas City told The Associated Press that Crennel plans to coach the team.

    Just horrifying.

    I agree, Anne (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by Zorba on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 04:36:23 PM EST
    Zorba son had a comment upon learning of this:  "I wonder if they'll do an autopsy of him, and find that there is a significant amount of brain injury."  
    As he pointed out, linebackers' whole careers involve hitting other players, and hitting them hard.  And many of these football players started quite young, well before they were legal adults.
    Not that this exonerates him from the violence in any way.  But it is something to think about.

    Parent
    He was only 25, and from what I'm (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by Anne on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 04:53:50 PM EST
    reading, just no indications at all that there were problems, either with his health or mental state.  By all accounts, just a good kid, with impeccable character.

    I can't stop thinking of that 3-month old baby who's been orphaned.

    Parent

    And shot in front of (none / 0) (#46)
    by CoralGables on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 05:10:48 PM EST
    the victim's grandmother who was visiting.

    Everything about the player makes him sound like a pretty good hard working guy that went undrafted out of college from the University of Maine and worked his tail off to make the team and become a starter.

    Parent

    Junior Seau autopsy (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by oculus on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 01:11:55 AM EST
    revealed nothing.

    Parent
    No drugs, alcohol or brain injury? (none / 0) (#83)
    by MKS on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 02:29:41 PM EST
    That would send everyone back to trying to figture this out.

    Parent
    And sometimes (none / 0) (#84)
    by Zorba on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 02:51:49 PM EST
    There are causes way beyond what current medical examinations or postmortems can determine.
    We are still a long, long way from understanding everything that goes on in the brain, or being able to identify every cause or every abnormality.
    We get closer every day, but there is still a whole lot that is unknown.

    Parent
    Zorba, honey, this is not Seau related, (none / 0) (#85)
    by caseyOR on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 03:07:45 PM EST
    but do you have any good recipes for cranberries? I'm looking for a chutney type thing. You know, something with a little kick to it.

    I am especially interested in a recipe for canning some of it so that I can indulge my love of cranberries through the winter.

    Parent

    Do you mean real chutney? (none / 0) (#86)
    by Yman on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 03:24:16 PM EST
    As in Asian/Indian?

    If so, this might fit the bill - CRANBERRY CHUTNEY WITH A KICK - As adapted from Katherine Sharma's Kitchen

    Parent

    That sounds good, Yman (none / 0) (#88)
    by Zorba on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 03:28:25 PM EST
    ;-)

    Parent
    This is pretty free-form (none / 0) (#87)
    by Zorba on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 03:27:37 PM EST
    But chop up a bunch of tart apples (Granny Smith works well), a bit less than that of cranberries, then throw in a bunch of brown sugar, some cider vinegar, and some or all of the following ground spices: cinnamon, ginger, cloves, allspice.  A bit of salt, some hot red pepper flakes for some heat,  some raisins, if you like raisins.  And a some red wine.  Simmer for maybe  20 minutes, but no more than 30 minutes.
    Sorry this isn't exact, but I make this and don't really measure.  I just start throwing things in.
    I have never canned this, but if you want to do so, I would not cook it very much before canning, because it will cook while being canned.


    Parent
    Thanks to both yman and zorba. (none / 0) (#90)
    by caseyOR on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 06:02:29 PM EST
    I'm thinking I'll try both recipes.

    Parent
    Really sad n/t (none / 0) (#42)
    by lilburro on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 04:48:10 PM EST


    Parent
    George Bush non person (none / 0) (#39)
    by MO Blue on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 04:16:57 PM EST
    The Wall Street Journal editorial page has a chart on Presidencies and Growth - Annual increase in real gross domestic product. Look at the chart very closely.

    The years for George W. Bush are missing.

    And HW missing too (none / 0) (#47)
    by Rupe on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 05:48:34 PM EST
    For those curious:
    2001  1.9%
    2002  1.8%
    2003  2.6%
    2004  3.5%
    2005  3.1%
    2006  2.7%
    2007  1.9%
    2008 -0.4%

    And HW:
    1989  3.6%
    1990  1.9%
    1991 -0.3%
    1992  3.4%

    Parent

    Florida State should be playing Miami (none / 0) (#40)
    by indy in sc on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 04:25:20 PM EST
    in the ACC championship game!!!  I have been waiting for that since the 'Canes moved to the ACC.  What is taking the NCAA so long to come to a conclusion and levy whatever punishment it is going to levy for Shapiro-gate???

    Many former UM players (none / 0) (#44)
    by CoralGables on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 05:05:38 PM EST
    not cooperating in the investigation. Expect the UM to get hit pretty hard. Of course they've already self banned from two bowl games which likely helps minimize the future punishment a little.

    Parent
    And Miami (none / 0) (#45)
    by CoralGables on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 05:08:06 PM EST
    could have been playing today if they wanted to. Not playing was their own choice and had nothing to do with any ruling from the NCAA.

    Parent
    I know it was self imposed, but (none / 0) (#48)
    by indy in sc on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 05:57:42 PM EST
    it was self imposed on the assumption it would be imposed by the NCAA anyway.  They were trying to avoid Ohio State's fate--they did not self impose any post season ban while the investigation was pending and now they are home when they should be playing for the national title.  Being a 'Cane, I have no love for Ohio State given the championship they stole from us ;), but the NCAA was way to hard on them given the relatively minor infractions.

    If the NCAA gives Miami a 3 year bowl ban, then at least Miami will have already served 2 of those years!

    The NCAA is flailing and resorting to desperation tactics.  They cannot force former players to talk and shouldn't be allowed to punish the school based on hearsay from a convicted felon (or anyone for that matter) if they have nothing else to corroborate it.  I'm more than a little biased in this, but I think the NCAA has been dreadful in this process.

    One last thing while I'm on my soapbox--pay the players and limit the ability for "boosters" to influence programs and student athletes like this.  

    Parent

    One objection (none / 0) (#51)
    by CoralGables on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 07:28:16 PM EST
    It's not hearsay when the man that supposedly gave the money to the players goes on the record as saying he gave them money.

    Parent
    Details. Why let (none / 0) (#89)
    by indy in sc on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 03:55:36 PM EST
    facts get in the way of my defense of the 'Canes?? :)

    Parent
    Great, great game (none / 0) (#49)
    by NYShooter on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 06:48:09 PM EST
    Alabama vs Georgia

    Alabama 32 - 28, one minute to go

    Georgia's ball

    Scratch that.....Bama just intercepted

    Hold it (none / 0) (#50)
    by NYShooter on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 06:51:34 PM EST
    under review.....

    georgia keeps ball

    Because Donald has been so quiet on this (none / 0) (#52)
    by CoralGables on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 07:52:37 PM EST
    Good luck to the Rainbow Wahine. After their opening round win last night they play the University of Washington tonight for the right to advance to the sweet 16 of the NCAA Division 1 Volleyball Championship.

    The Gators with 2 wins have already advanced.

    NCAA Women's Volleyball Tourney: (none / 0) (#60)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 01:06:47 AM EST
    No. 5 Washington held off No. 8 Hawaii in a five-set thriller tonight, 20-25, 25-20, 19-25, 27-25, 15-11. The Rainbow Wahine's season comes to an end, and the Huskies move on the Sweet Sixteen in Omaha, where they will face No. 4 Nebraska.

    The good news for the Wahine is that they have no seniors, and everyone will be back next season. That bodes well for the immediate future.

    Defending NCAA champion UCLA was upset by Michigan State in four sets tonight, so the Bruins go home, too. Oh, wait, they were already playing at home. They just have to walk back to their dorms. Congratulations to the Spartans on  a big win; they face in-state rival Michigan next. The Wolverines upset Louisville in four sets to move on.

    Purdue upset No. 9 Florida State in Tallahassee, while unranked Wichita State stunned No. 11 Kansas, and both will also advance to the round of 16. Others advancing this weekend include Stanford, Oregon, USC, BYU, Iowa State, Texas, Penn State, Minnesota, Florida and Kentucky.

    Interestingly, a few hours before tonight's match in Seattle, Washington coach Jim McLaughlin roundly criticized the NCAA selection committee's decision to send Hawaii on the road unseeded in the first two rounds, while unranked Kentucky was allowed to host opening weekend matches.

    No doubt, McLaughlin and the UW athletic department will be hearing from the NCAA this week about his eyebrow-raising comments to KOMO-TV this afternoon, in which he openly suggested that tournament cost-cutting, and not the Rainbow Wahine's performance this season, was the primary motivation driving the selection committee's decision making: "Hawaii should be hosting, and Kentucky received an undue perk. You don't save money by undermining your own credibility as an honest broker."

    BTD CFITP (none / 0) (#66)
    by CoralGables on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 08:13:56 AM EST
    If anyone needs cash, it may be time to hit BTD up for a loan. That makes it 5 straight winning weeks of college football.

    For the weekend 9-3 (+10 units)
    For the season 145-119-9 (also +10 units)

    I'm on fire!! (none / 0) (#74)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 10:56:30 AM EST
    Actually two ridiculous losses last night - FSU should be ashamed and Bama should have won by 20.

    Parent
    To those SEC haters (none / 0) (#76)
    by CoralGables on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 12:03:04 PM EST
    Alabama has opened as an 8½ point favorite over Notre Dame in the BCS Title Game.

    If you think Notre Dame can stop the Bama running game the 8½ is a gift.

    Parent

    Candy Crowley is interviewing Geithner (none / 0) (#67)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 08:32:38 AM EST
    On the cliff.  Two of BTD's very favorite people.  Geithner is making Obama's case extremely well.  I can't decide if Candy is looking for a way to prove via Geithner that Obama isn't really taking the stand he is on the cliff because she is a Republican at heart or if she wants to prove without question what Obama's position is.

    If Tim Geithner continues this cliff performance, some of us might have to discover a couple of other adjectives to use when discussing him.  He did very well, and he was crystal clear who has brought nothing to the table and only pouts and yells NO.  The administration has brought it's plan with details to the table.

    If I were a reporter... (none / 0) (#91)
    by unitron on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 07:05:03 PM EST
    ...constantly covering politicians, I'm sure I'd be far too disgusted with both parties to be an adherent of either one.

    Parent
    Saturday College Football Open Thread | 96 comments (96 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment