U.S. Politics, 9 trillion

[TrackerNeil]

Anger. Fear. Disappointment. A dash or two of racism. An inability to find a balance between working "across the aisle" and advancing your agenda. I sometimes also wonder if Obama overestimated his mandate the way GWB did in 2004.

The worst economic downturn since the Depression probably figures in there, too. A little.

[alguien]

The worst economic downturn since the Depression probably figures in there, too. A little.

No doubt. Forgot that. And actually, that's probably the biggest factor of all.

[Swordfish]

Love it........

[Shryke]

They didn't prioritize the oil spill, the jobs situation, GTMO or DADT, that's for damn sure. Priority #1 seemed to be making sure playing golf with Jamie Daimon continued.

And this extremely early recess by congress shows where the real priorities are.

They prioritized the Stimulus (to deal with the economy now) and Health Care (to keep the economy from imploding in the future). Stopping the wars was always his priority, but he always said ~16 months for that.

He also prioritized GITMO (one of the first things he did), but couldn't get the backing to shut it down and deal with all the prisoners.

The early recess is because of the election I imagine. A rather important one. But still, politicians love recesses.

Again, the political opposition is overrated as a reason for the Democratic Congress' low approval rating and Obama's falling approval rating. They had two years to figure their shit out, and now, by all signs, it's got a good chance of ending completely.

I have a feeling that if the R's win over congress, we'll have a government shutdown, which would be a result of Obama losing political capital.

How is it over-rated? Have you seen the numbers on filibusters, blocked appointments and such? It's been ridiculous.

Just following the Health Care Debacle should give you an idea of just how hard anything was to do.

The Democrats had the nuclear option, and didn't play it when it mattered.

You mean the option of questionable constitutionality that not even the Republicans, in the height of their hubris, had the balls to try?

It's called "nuclear" for a reason. It's an "option" the way the US nuking Russia is an "option".

[The Progressive]

The TARP was backwards.

I see that Coco too have also missed the fact that TARP was passed under Bush. I'm curious though Coco, how would you propose to restore credit flow without TARP?

They are pretty good, but the republicans were really weak when he started, and Obama had a shit ton of good will in 2009. I mean, a ton. Where did that go?

Surely you witnessed the vomits from the teabaggers and the spineless media coverage of their ascent?

I have said this on multiple occasions. Virtually every time it has come up, and I was an advocate from the beginning.

Lol, how strange that neither I nor LoB could recall any of those multiple occasions which you alleged took this stance.

[The Progressive]

Hypocrisy would be demanding your own Medicare payments, while arguing that other people shouldn't receive their Medicare payments. To the extent there is some of that in those protestors, that woudl be hypocrisy. But there's nothing hypocritical in opposing the ACA and still wanting to get your Medicare benefits.

It's funny because the hypocrisy here would be wanting to keep your Medicare benefits while railing against government deficit, given how much of that deficit went to Medicare payment and the monies paid into it by raving teabaggers wouldn't be even close to keep them alive in their teamobiles that long.

[The Progressive]

That gets back to my original question and some of my confusion on how far the Act of 1964 went. Where does the Civil Rights Act end and where does Affirmative Action begin? Where does the EEOC fit in?

The general answers is that the EEOC enforces anti-discrimination employment practices under the various laws passed by Congress.

Guess what we've been seeing as a result of this recession? A dramatic increase in the amount of charges filed under age discrimination.

[The Progressive]

I personally doubt that I (as someone who will reach age 65 the year exact that Medicare and SS are projected to take over THE ENTIRE FEDERAL BUDGET) will see the full amount of Medicare and Social Security that has been promised.

However, I am planning for retirement as if these programs didn't exist. I would prefer it if they had never existed.

That's why you're too honest to associate with teabaggers, Chat.

The fact is that they don't pay nearly enough into it while raving about the deficit (or measures that would asjust/alleviate the cost balance) that racked up to cover the cost of the programs is rank hypocrisy.

I do plan for retirement as if these programs wouldn't keep up with inflation, but I don't mind their existence because hey ...... poor old people gotta eat too. I do think there are several ways to reform the programs which need to be implement soon.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

Michael Moore summarizes Bob Woodward's book, saying that the President has no authority over whether we go to war or not:

Of course he does. If he lacks the political balls to exercise that authority, that's nobody's fault but his own. And it's a particularly hypocritical argument with respect to Obama because he ran on the idea that Afghanistan was the "good war". He built it up as the war we "must win", and then he and Moore apparently whine that -- shock! -- there wasn't political support for a withdrawal.

Their gripe is just so freaking immature. He asks his generals for an honest opinion about what needed to be done, and they gave it to him. What the hell did he expect them to say? They're generals of a force involved in combat, and of course they want to win. If they didn't, you should fire them and get some different generals.

Whether or not to pull out is a political decision that should be made by elected politicians, not generals. He got the wrong answer because he asked the wrong people. And what he's really pissed about is that their opinions don't match his, because he wanted the political cover of their opinions backing up what he really wanted to do. But again, if he didn't want their honest opinions (which he apparently did not), he should not have asked them. He's still the C-in-C and can order a withdrawal regardless of whether it matches their recommendation or not.

Bush ordered the Surge in Iraq despite the fact that most of his senior military advisors opposed it, and despite the fact that it was unpopular politically.

http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=5075

[TrackerNeil]

However, I am planning for retirement as if these programs didn't exist. I would prefer it if they had never existed.

Then the Republican Party might make a good home for you, Chataya. Hard as it sometimes is for me to believe, the repeal of Social Security and Medicare, both popular programs, is now a mainstream Republican position.

[Shryke]

Newscorp (ie - Fox News and Co) continue to try and buy the election:

News Corp., the parent company of Fox News, contributed $1 million this summer to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the business lobby that has been running an aggressive campaign in support of the Republican effort to retake Congress, a source close to the company told POLITICO.

It was the second $1 million contribution the company has made this election cycle to a GOP-aligned group. In late June it gave that amount to the Republican Governors Association.

The parent companies of other media companies such as Disney (which owns ABC) and General Electric (which owns NBC) have also made political contributions, but typically in far smaller chunks, and split between Democrats and Republicans.

Specifically, the chamber has said it plans to spend $75 million in connection with the 2010 election, and has so far has directed substantial amounts to Republican Senate candidates. As of Sept. 15th, the group had spent $6,747,946 airing more than 8,000 ads on behalf of GOP Senate candidates

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0910/42989.html

[TrackerNeil]

Triskele, don't bring up that Social-Security-as-Ponzi scheme thing, even in jest. I have witnessed a number of insipid assertions on this board, but that may very well have been the all-time winner.

[alguien]

Might wanna double-check your link... :)

[alguien]

hahahahaha, thanks. I wonder if Sanchez could link stuff online better than me?

No worries, heh. Outkast is always good too.

Just listened to the interview. Wow. Sanchez does himself no favors. He's basically saying, "I don't like him because he makes me look like a moron" and trying to dress it up as though he's exposing bigotry. Its a little sad.

[alguien]

Well, this is the same network that hired Erik Erikson and Eliot Spitzer...

Clearly they're desperate for ratings.

[Andriy Czarchenko]

Has everyone heard about Rick Sanchez's meltdown.

.

I've never understood how Sanchez got his job. I know it's pretty harsh to call somebody "dumb," but it's hard to argue that he isn't. Jon Stewart has ripped Sanchez pretty hard on The Daily Show (quite appropriately, if you ask me). Sanchez called Stewart a bigot and then does a horrific job of trying to explain why he thinks this.

CNN has fired Sanchez.

[dalThor]

Just what we've all been waiting for:

The Tea Party Coloring Book

Wayne Bell, publisher of the 32-page coloring book, claimed in a CBS interview that the book is ”not really making a political statement." Like anyone would even suspect that a book about a political movement had anything to do with politics. The Los Angeles Times reports that the coloring book is rife will grammatical errors. “Government is "suppose [sic] to use our tax dollars" wisely. Federal debt has "become a life style because as [sic] this will bankrupt our country," reads one sentence, according to the Times. So at least the coloring book will prepare children to write out the signs carried at Tea Party rallies.

According to a St. Louis TV station, a branch of the US military bought 3,000 copies of the book to pass out to children. Our nation’s military using tax dollars to politically indoctrinate kids should strike you as a bad idea, whatever your politics. More alarming, however, is the fact that crayons are not included with the book, meaning children may be forced to engage in the socialistic practice of sharing crayons. My guess is that the manufacturer didn’t want to risk the wrath of Glenn Beck when the conservative pundit found out that a brown crayon would have to be included.

Taxpayer dollars are being spent on this crap? Were it not for that fact I would find this both terribly funny and terribly sad.

[ThinkerX]

I saw a 'Sarah Palin' coloring book up here in a book store a few days ago.

The caption that sticks in mind was along the lines of 'Sarah can see the end of the Republican Party from her window.'

[ThinkerX]

http://www.dailyjobcuts.com/

[BloodRider]

They controlled the entire government except for SCOTUS. You guys are really telling me that I should feel bad for him despite that fact?

How soon we forget that Al Franken was not sworn in until July 7, 2009. Then on August 25th Ted Kennedy died. So the Dems had a filibuster proof control of the Senate for 1 1/2 months. And that is only when Lieberman wanted to play nice.