US Politics #2

[Ormond]

There are 300 million people in this country, surely there are qualified candidates out there not named Bush or clinton.....

Three decades with only two families running the country(ish) is more than sufficient for me.

This is probably one of the very few things where I heartily agree with Swordfish. :)

[jack-be-lucky]

Back in 2008, I was telling people, only half-jokingly, that whoever won the presidency that year was doomed by the financial crisis, which would open the door for Jeb Bush in 2012.

Bush the Elder was the head of the CIA and most probably a member of both the brandenburg and trilateral commissions.

If you can't build a conspiracy theory out of that, you aren't really trying.

Not to mention he was in Texas when JFK was killed.

[jack-be-lucky]

I'm not offering an opinion on what NYC should do based on the law. That's purely a legal question. I'm simply stating a personal preference. It might be legal to fart in an elevator, but it isn't very nice.

Pretty much my point. The average citizen believes that local boards can pick and choose what they wish to allow for property uses, so when the right-wing points at the mosque as proof that the liberals in NYC hate America and want the terrorists to win, it will have some traction with the public.

It would seem to me that those who know better, would feel obliged to point out the error in that reasoning.

[CloudFlare]

Back in 2008, I was telling people, only half-jokingly, that whoever won the presidency that year was doomed by the financial crisis, which would open the door for Jeb Bush in 2012.

He seems to be gearing up for it. He hasn't run for the Florida Senate seat, and he has turned down a number of jobs with long term commitment.

If his media profile is raised in the next year, look for him to make a run.

[Annelise]

It might be legal to fart in an elevator, but it isn't very nice.

eta: Ooops, clicked post by accident. Will add my comments soon.

[The Progressive]

Jeb Bush makes sense as someone for the GOP to nominate, but for his name.

But perhaps he makes so much sense in every other way that it may not matter?

I'm torn on this. This isn't the first time I've seen it brought up.

To be honest, I think I might want Jeb Bush more than some of the GOP's candidates, and certainly I'd take him over Palin in a heartbeat.

What happenned to Mitt Romney?

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

I'll be quite suprised if Jeb Bush wins the Republican nomination in 2012.

[CloudFlare]

What happenned to Mitt Romney?

Hanging in there for a run in '12, but probably still unacceptable to the Jesus Freak part of teh GOP base.

[Annelise]

Certainly they will try, but that doesn't mean that the facts are irrelevant. Good facts can be spun much, much better than bad facts

Since we agree they can twist it either way, I think this is splitting hairs. In this context, what difference does it even make moving it another block or two? They’ll say what they want, which is why we shouldn’t be arranging our civic planning around them. Plus, as others have said, they already have bigger and better to work with than this trumped-up drama.

Doesn't that cut both ways, though? Wouldn't tolerance and understanding perhaps suggest that a different location might be more considerate of the people who lost family members and friends on 9/11?

I’m not sure who has the moral right to dictate this sort of thing. At the risk of a tangent—at the end of the book Columbine, it talks about the memorial that was erected 8 years later or whatnot. And the parents of the 13 murdered kids were asked to write up something positive about their child, how they wanted their child to be remembered. They all did this, except one father who instead put whom he blamed. Now, there was controversy over this, many felt it was an inappropriate venue and didn’t want that sort of thing to be part of the memorial. But no one was willing to gainsay the grieving father and so his child’s memorial bears that message.

At what point does a community defer (or not) to grieving families? In this case, families who are disturbed by the inclusion of a mosque in a community center in a richly multicultural city because a loved one was killed by Islamic extremists?

I can understand how they got there, but I also don’t want to encourage or condone blanket mistrust and/or hatred and that’s what I think this business about stopping it, or moving it (another) block or two away does. It reminds me of my co-worker who is deeply uncomfortable around “foreigners” (particularly middle easterners). I don’t pat her hand and nod, I encourage her to work on getting over it because that’s not a good thing for her, the foreigners or anyone else, except maybe politicians looking to pander on the issue.

[Annelise]

On a different topic, to try to pacify Shryke a little. :)

Sen. George LeMieux (R-Fla.) on Thursday said he’s on board with the Democratic-written small-business incentives bill.

In comments to reporters and in a subsequent floor speech, LeMieux said he will support an amendment to establish a small-business lending fund, a $30 billion lending pool for banks to lend to businesses struggling with foreclosure.

LeMieux was approached earlier this week by Democratic leaders about the lending fund provision in the bill. He told The Hill that he was considering supporting it since he’s been approached by several business groups in Florida and that the state’s small-business community was struggling.

“I know a lot of my colleagues on my side of the aisle oppose this. I hope they come around,” LeMieux said. “This is a bill that we all should agree upon.”

With centrist Sen. Ben Nelson's (D-Neb.) vote secured, LeMieux is expected to serve as the 60th vote for the measure.

LeMieux and Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) collaborated on the lending fund provision, and LeMieux worked with Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) on another provision he promoted on the floor Thursday to combat Medicare fraud.

It is unclear if LeMieux would make the necessary 60th vote, but his support is key since Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) is now considered a non-supporter. Assuming all 59 Democrats support the bill, Democratic leaders would need one Republican vote to reach the critical 60 votes.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/110365-lemieux-to-back-dems-on-small-business-bill-amendment

[Annelise]

Hanging in there for a run in '12, but probably still unacceptable to the Jesus Freak part of teh GOP base.

I was reading this the other day, which argues Palin could be his biggest threat if she decides to run. Evidently shots have been fired.

But then there's Sarah Palin. She may ultimately decide not to run, but this past week brought fresh evidence -- in the form of her suddenly ramped-up and professionalized national political organization -- that she's serious about it.

It was certainly enough to catch Team Romney's attention. On Thursday, a Romney advisor -- unnamed, of course -- told Time's Mark Halperin that Palin is "not a serious human being," while another Romney "intimate" opined that "if she’s standing up there in a debate and the answers are more than 15 seconds long, she’s in trouble." The Palin camp then fired back (anonymously) and Romney took to his Twitter feed in an effort to put the fire out.

http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/07/18/mitt_romney_palin

[Zelgrath]

I think this story was discussed in one of the previous political threads. Or maybe the gay marriage threads? Lesbian teen wins suit over cancelled prom.

A Mississippi teenager who was prevented from attending her high school prom with her girlfriend has settled a suit against her school district.

[Annelise]

A Republican senator on the president’s fiscal commission said Thursday it will likely recommend tax increases as part of a solution for the nation’s fiscal woes.

Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) said on ABC’s “Top Line” webcast that he believes the large majority of the proposal should be composed of spending cuts, but said that the panel should not rule out tax increases to bring in more revenue.

”Well everything has to be on the table, there is no question about that,” he said. ”I think it’s likely there is going to be a revenue component.”

[Annelise]

I'll say it again. Until the Repubs come up with a platform that is not more of the same, they are not worthy of my vote or money again.

Apparently National Review is not impressed either:

Congressional Republicans who don’t think the party needs an agenda should consider the performance of Rep. Pete Sessions and Sen. John Cornyn on Meet the Press over the weekend. Asked about their affirmative program, the leaders of the GOP campaign committees in the House and the Senate sounded a very uncertain trumpet — indeed, one that was halting to the point of being embarrassing.

Sessions talked of balancing the budget, although without daring to mention anything close to a specific, and of reading bills before they pass. Out of desperation, Cornyn was forced to say he’d like to see the work of Obama’s fiscal commission before addressing spending. If GOP consultants who are advising the party to avoid embracing a substantive agenda prior to the November elections get their way, this will be the pitiful Republican dance for the next three-and-a-half months.

We understand the Republicans’ temptation to believe that they can beat the Democrats with nothing. The public has recoiled from President Obama’s agenda and seems set to swing to the Republicans as a check against his liberal overreaching. Why not just play it safe and ride the wave that’s already building?

One, this wouldn’t be as safe as it seems. The consultants think Republicans risk putting targets on their backs by associating themselves with particular policy ideas. But Republicans will be targeted regardless. The White House wants to define them as mindless apostles of “No,” and as “Bush Republicans.” Both of these charges could hurt, and they are more likely to stick if Republicans lack a forward-looking agenda of their own.

Two, a campaign agenda is, if nothing else, a sign of seriousness for voters. The danger in the kind of cynical calculation urged by the consultants is always that the public will recognize it for exactly that and react accordingly.

Three, if Republicans plan on having a majority in either house after November, they had better have some idea in advance of how they will conduct themselves in power. If they have an agenda that has won at least loose assent from voters, they’ll be better-off than if they were trying to come up with something on the fly in the flush of victory, when giddiness will rule and special interests will all want a piece of the pie.

Fourth, Republicans should have confidence in their ideas. If they can’t offer an alternative to Obama now — with the president sagging in the polls, with tea partiers in the streets, with conservative sentiment on the upswing across the board in the public — they should be in a different business.

http://article.nationalreview.com/438361/get-with-the-program/the-editors

[DanteGabriel]

Back to the Sherrod controversy... Andrew Breitbart continues to follow the right wing plan of refusing to own up to his lies, playing himself as a whiny victim of the librul media, and blaming the people he snookered. Oh, and he's a total fucking egomaniac too.

An unrepentant Andrew Breitbart told POLITICO on Thursday that the Obama administration and its allies have manufactured a controversy over the video he posted of Shirley Sherrod's speech to the NAACP as part of an orchestrated effort to take him down.

"I am public enemy No. 1 or 2 to the Democratic Party, the progressive movement and the Obama administration based upon the successes my journalism has had," Breitbart said in a telephone interview late Thursday morning as he headed to the airport for what he said was a long-planned, three-day vacation.

Breitbart asserted that liberal media outlets are shifting the focus to the misleading excerpting in the videos he posted -- as well as his erroneous statement about the context of the footage -- to divert attention from what he asserts is a double standard on racist behavior exposed by the video, which he released Monday to push back against a recently passed NAACP resolution expressing concern about "racist elements" in the tea party movement.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/40117.html

I am pretty sure we've seen enough of Breitbart's bullshit to conclude that he is a sociopath.

[TrackerNeil]

I'll be quite suprised if Jeb Bush wins the Republican nomination in 2012.

I'm with Ser Scot on this one. It's hard to imagine that the Bush brand will have recovered sufficiently by 2012 to permit Jeb to take the nomination.

Also, I think 2012 is going to be a bit of a clusterf*ck for Republicans. There will be alot of contenders, and I suspect this will result in those potentials who might actually have a chance getting drowned out by those who have waited their turn (Romney), or those who can make a splash (Palin). I imagine 2016 will be a different story.

Speaking of Palin, I honestly can't see her seriously running for the nomination. It's just too much work, and if there is one consistent thing about Ms. Palin it's that she doesn't care for hard work. Is she really going to put in sixteen-hour days in Iowa, shaking hands at diners and bake sales, and speaking at senior citizen events? The woman who couldn't finish a single term as governor, or even as an energy commissioner? Nah. I think there will be drama of some sort, at the end of which Palin will find some face-saving way to drop out of the race. The excuse won't really matter; regardless of what she says her followers will come up with a narrative of their own.

[Tormund Ukrainesbane]

I'd never describe any of Tormund's posts as "given with an almost groveling deference" but I do have a fair amount of respect for his honesty and consistency of principles.

:love:

The fact the Jeb Bush is in discussion for a white house run screams that the game is rigged. Seriously, there has been a Bush or Clinton in the White house since I was two years old. Give me a break.

also

Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...

Game. Set. Match.

[Jaime L]

The fact the Jeb Bush is in discussion for a white house run screams that the game is rigged. Seriously, there has been a Bush or Clinton in the White house since I was two years old. Give me a break.

If only a Bush would marry a Clinton then we wouldn't have to choose.

Chelsea Clinton-Bush for President, 2020! Lack of change we can believe in!

[Lightning Lord]

The fact the Jeb Bush is in discussion for a white house run screams that the game is rigged. Seriously, there has been a Bush or Clinton in the White house since I was two years old. Give me a break.

While echoing the respectful disagreement with Tormund (I just don't fancy guns so much), not even the dimmest conservatives are claiming Obama is really a Clinton or Bush family member.

ETA: Didn't see Triskele's response.

[jack-be-lucky]

:love:

The fact the Jeb Bush is in discussion for a white house run screams that the game is rigged. Seriously, there has been a Bush or Clinton in the White house since I was two years old. Give me a break.

I was very surprised when W walked so easily into the nomination. His father had never been very popular with the right-wing voters who had always suspected he wasn't on their side on social issues and had never really accepted Supply-side economics. But his cash just swamped the other candidates in the primaries in 2000.

Most polls I see have about 25% of the US population still believing that W was a great President. Doesn't sound good, but the fact is that's over 50% of the Republican Party. Thats a huge base, and more importantly the active base. And lets face it; the far right wing types which embrace Palin scare Republican businessmen as much as they scare Democrats. And those are the people who supply the money, and money is everything in the primary.

And finally, don't miss the fact that Jeb is the Anti-Christ. Really. Just look carefully: J is a backwards 6 with a little smudge removed from the top of the circle; e is an upside down 6; b is a straight 6. 666; it's a fact that can't be denied! It's blatant! Never, never, bet against the anti-Christ.