Alan Grayson's recent self indulgent behavior has paralyzed his ability to serve as an advocate for the citizens of Central Florida. On December 16th 2009, the day on which the Sons of Liberty dumped 342 chests of tea into Boston Harbor, Central Floridians will again say no to the overreaching government intrusion propagated by Grayson. Central Floridians will drop a money bomb to show Grayson and Pelosi that an oppressive, overreaching government has not and never will be what makes America great. It's not clear what the "money bomb" is supposed to accomplish, but the video is entertaining:
#3
This guy makes "nutt" a four lettter word. I love it when he shoots his mouth off. He damages his side with every word.
Posted by: Richard of Oregon ||
10/30/2009 12:35 Comments ||
Top||
#4
He's had treatment before and he may well need it again; no shame in that. But it may not be something one wants in a person in a position like his.
The White House is promising that new figures being released Friday will be a more accurate showing of progress in President Barack Obama's economic recovery plan. It aggressively defended an earlier, faulty count that overstated by thousands the jobs created or saved so far.
Ed DeSeve, serving as Obama's stimulus overseer, said the administration has been working for weeks to correct mistakes in early counts that identified more than 30,000 jobs paid for with stimulus money. He said a new stimulus report Friday should correct many mistakes an Associated Press review found that showed the earlier report overstated thousands of stimulus jobs.
"I think you'll see a pretty good degree of accuracy," DeSeve said in an interview.
White House spokesman Robert Gibbs downplayed errors in job counts identified by the AP's review, telling reporters, "We're talking about 4,000, or a 5,000 error."
The AP reviewed a sample of federal contracts, not all 9,000 reported to date, and discovered errors in one in six jobs credited to the $787 billion stimulus program -- or 5,000 of the 30,000 jobs claimed so far.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/30/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I just got this CNN alert, "White House says 650,000 jobs were created or saved by $150 billion in stimulus funds".
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
10/30/2009 7:23 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I woke up to a 1 million jobs created/saved claim on CNBC. If one in six doesn't actually exist, that's only 833,333... and 2.3 million lost thus far, if I recall correctly. Still, inventories are up by 1%, which means retailers believe the economy is starting to improve, whether or not it lasts.
Â…and that 47 million people uninsured thing the President was talking aboutÂ…yeah we think itÂ’s more likeÂ…um..uhÂ…like 30 millÂ…so we were off by boutÂ…ohÂ…only 17 to 20 million people. And our promise to hold unemployment to 8%Â…yeahÂ…well itÂ’s prolly going to shoot over 10%. So we're talking about only 2 ta 3 percentage points. WhatÂ’s the big deal? But the numbers on Health Care reformÂ…rock solid daddy!
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
10/30/2009 15:44 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Too bad the FDA is spinning its time dealing with the claims of Cheerios rather than ones like these. One set of rules for me, another set of rules for thee.
From Greyhawk at The Mudville Gazette.
As the Obama administration debated resource requirements, October became the deadliest month for U.S. forces in Afghanistan since the beginning of the war. Even before the "record numbers" the president's approval ratings on Afghanistan were in free fall:
In previous polls, Obama received some of his highest ratings in relation to his dealings with Afghanistan, including 63 percent approval in April of his handling of the situation there. In the latest poll, 45 percent approve, down 10 percentage points in the past month alone, and 47 percent disapprove, an increase of 10 points. Nearly a third of those surveyed say they strongly disapprove.
How to turn the situation around? Some say more troops, some say change strategy, others say withdraw - but someone in the White House got the bright idea that now would be a good time for a photo op. Go read it all.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
10/30/2009 10:35 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The teleprompter canÂ’t make decisions, his cabinet canÂ’t make decisions, and the Congress and Senate canÂ’t get a bill passed into law without one thing. ThatÂ’s a decision by the president. This president is unable to make a strategic decision, he is paralyzed, just like he was before when he only voted present. You see it in combat, at auto accident, during emergencies, he is like the ones frozen in fear, frozen in indecision, frozen because he knows any decision he makes will not be perfect, so no decision becomes the course of action, it may not be the course of cowards but it certainly is not the course of a leader. Now people, good people are dying because of his inability to make a decision. He has absolutely no idea what to do, so he goes to tell the fallen farewell, like he is saying sorry and making himself feel better for his indecision, his paralysis, his cowardes.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
10/30/2009 11:27 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I'm amazed he could fit it into his schedule...what with all the WH parties and his golf addiction.
President Bush met with each of the families in private. No photos. No fanfare. No publicity.
#3
Causalities, for both sides, generally increase when you try to advance. Some of our casualites have come from moving out troops into new places, but alot are because Taliban are making major thrusts. It looks to me like they are doing a mini tet offensive. If so, my question is how much longer can they sustain this drive without showing obvious signs of depletion? Please correct me if I'm way off on this.
Posted by: Richard of Oregon ||
10/30/2009 12:46 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Richard if O, I hadn't thought of it that way, but it makes sense. So much sense that if they aren't, they probably should. It would work at least as well as the original, for exactly the same reasons.
#5
Were it any other President, even Jimmy Carter, I'd have more confidence in the sincerity of the gesture. But given the overwhelming political orientation of this man and his subordinates, I see this as one more act of media theater designed to fit in with whatever actions Anita Dunn plans to include in the communications plan for policy support. Sad that it has come to this, but I cannot believe this man has any genuine feelings for the fallen he purportedly commands and cares for, only ambition and hubris.
#7
Agree that it was politcal photo op. He also was handed that bogus Nobel PEACE award.
Posted by: Tom- Pa ||
10/30/2009 15:23 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Obama could have gone without the cameras. He didn't. He fully intended to use dead service personnel as his photo op backdrop. I cannot adequately communicate my disgust over this.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
10/30/2009 18:47 Comments ||
Top||
#9
"Obama could have gone without the cameras."
No, he couldn't, Rex.
It's beyond his capabilities. >:-(
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
10/30/2009 19:30 Comments ||
Top||
#10
I didn't see TOTUS. They're getting clever on hiding it
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/30/2009 19:31 Comments ||
Top||
#11
He's worse than Cindy Shehag. At least Cindy was related to to her son....
#12
In a little noticed comment the day following he stated that the "vigil" would have a bearing on his troop level decision. this is below contempt, he had the decision made and is floating wqays to make it pass muster with us.
Lawyer John O'Quinn, who donated $2.5 million to Chris Bell in his Democratic governor's race three years ago, has died in a Houston car accident along with another as yet unidentified man. The accident happened about 8 a.m., according to the Houston Chronicle, on the Allen Parkway. The black Suburban crossed two medians and oncoming traffic before crashing into a tree.
O'Quinn was a prominent attorney who made a name and fortune for himself as a plantiff's attorney, especially with breast implants and also as a anti-tobacco lawyer hired by the state. He was also known for his philanthropy, giving large amounts to the University of Houston and for medical care.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/30/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
A lot of rain has produced very slick roads in Houston the last couple of days.
He never married and has no children. U of H (his alma mater) will surely benefit mightily.
Guess who's finally joining the administration? At the White House today, President Obama will announce that he's naming former GOP Sen. Chuck Hagel as cochair of the President's Intelligence Advisory Board, which oversees the intel community.
First reported by Foreign Policy, Hagel's move had been rumored for months--though when asked by NEWSWEEK about his status earlier this month, he declined to talk about it. "I won't talk about my conversations with the president," Hagel said.
The Vietnam veteran, who retired from the Senate last year, did not endorse Obama or his other close friend John McCain during last year's presidential race. Yet it was no secret that Hagel's views were more closely aligned to Obama's than McCain's, especially on foreign policy. Hagel, who initially supported the invasion of Iraq, ultimately became one of the war's most outspoken critics. In the summer of 2008, he traveled with Obama on the Democrat's first overseas tour, visiting Afghanistan and Iraq, and has been an informal adviser and confidant to Obama ever since.
In recent months, he has counseled both Obama and Vice President Joe Biden, another close friend, as the White House considers a strategy change in Afghanistan.
Hagel's cochair will be former Democratic senator David Boren, once chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee who currently serves as president of the University of Oklahoma.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/30/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I have far more confidence in Boren than I do Hagel.
Democratic Rep. Laura Richardson, embarrassed by a foreclosure dispute back home in California, may soon find herself the subject of a House ethics committee investigation. Sources tell POLITICO that the Office of Congressional Ethics has referred Richardson's case to the House ethics committee, which will be required to announce within days whether it's going to pursue a full investigation.
Richardson's case is one of three OCE referrals the committee will consider Thursday. The others -- both previously reported -- involve Reps. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) and Sam Graves (R-Mo.).
Richardson's case revolves around her home in Sacramento, which she lost to foreclosure and which then was sold to a third party and later regained by Richardson. Investigators for the OCE -- an independent commission tasked with recommending cases to the ethics committee -- looked into the foreclosure issue and whether neighbors who cleaned up Richardson's blighted yard made an improper gift to the congresswoman by mowing the lawn and gardening.
The ethics office dismissed part of the case but forwarded parts of it to the committee, sources said.
Jeff Billington, Richardson's spokesman, declined to comment on the case until the ethics committee decides whether to move ahead with an investigation.
The Richardson case comes amid tension between the OCE and the ethics committee on a variety of issues -- including the date on which the committee must announce its disposition of the three OCE referrals. The OCE says time's up Friday; the committee says it has until next Wednesday.
If the committee dismisses any of the complaints, it must then release the findings that were forwarded by OCE. The OCE's transparency mandate has been clashing with the ethics committee's traditional secrecy, with open-government advocates clamoring for more information and members of Congress trying to ensure that their reputations are not unfairly tarnished by the specter of ethics reviews that may turn up nothing.
Waters attracted OCE attention after media reports that she intervened with the Treasury Department last fall on behalf of a bank in which her husband had been on the board and owned stock. Waters is a senior member of the House Financial Services Committee, serving as chairwoman of the Housing and Community Opportunity Subcommittee.
Graves, for his part, invited a business partner of his wife to testify before the Small Business Committee without disclosing his own financial ties to the witness. The congressman's wife, Lesley Graves, and Brooks Hurst are both investors in an ethanol plant in Missouri.
The Graves case sparked a nasty public dispute between OCE and the ethics committee last month when the panel accused the OCE of withholding potential "exculpatory evidence" from Graves.
Former Reps. David Skaggs (D-Colo.) and Porter Goss (R-Fla.), who run the OCE, took issue with the charge and said that the six-member OCE board had found "substantial reason to believe that a substantive violation may have occurred."
Posted by: Fred ||
10/30/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The Office of Congressional Ethics (an oxymoron if there ever was one) - where complaints against Democrats go to die of old age.
Posted by: Rambler in Virginia ||
10/30/2009 7:16 Comments ||
Top||
Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman has a clear shot to win next week's New York special election and is within one point of the lead, according to the latest Daily Kos poll out today.
The poll shows Democrat Bill Owens holding a tiny one-point lead over Hoffman, 33 to 32 percent, with Republican Dede Scozzafava lagging behind in third with 21 percent of the vote. It's clear Hoffman is gaining momentum -- in the Daily Kos survey of the race last week, Hoffman was still in third place, trailing Owens 35 to 23 percent (with Scozzafava at 30 percent).
In fact, both Owens and Scozzafava have lost ground since last week's survey, while Hoffman has been gaining steam.
This poll is consistent with internal numbers that Democrats are seeing, which is why they've been targeting Hoffman with attack ads this week. Democrats have concluded that Hoffman, with his financial resources and support from the conservative base, is the candidate with the best chance of defeating Owens.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/30/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
If it's close Owens will win after ballots are "found" during the 497th recount.
#2
this is a more difficult area to falsify votes than many others (e.g., in NJ there will probably be dozens, if not hundreds of paid off voters, forged voters, etc.).
NY 23 just doesn't have the right demographics for ACORN.
Posted by: lord garth ||
10/30/2009 11:00 Comments ||
Top||
#3
I was going to say something snarky about university campuses, but I don't see any big 'uns in that district. It really is a rural wonderland, isn't it? And I thought the Pennsylvania 5th was rural...
Posted by: Mitch H. ||
10/30/2009 13:13 Comments ||
Top||
#4
I just sent Hoffman $50 (I think). Donation website was wonky; I had to call the main headquarters to make sure they had my correct donation amount. The lady there was very nice, admitted they were having problems with the website (and were trying to get it corrected) and filled out a form to match to my donation to make sure they took the right amount from my credit card. There was constant background talking while we spoke - a very good sign (sound of it was upbeat, though I couldn't make out the words behind hers).
Normally, I'd send a check (already did earlier) but it's a little late for that now.
Hint to ALL conservative candidates: add PayPal to your donation form. I asked Scott Ott to do it this summer and he did - said it was easy, and even edited it when I pointed out something he'd missed. (Just sent him some more money too, via PayPal.)
I learned that politicians can use PayPal from McCain's Palin's campaign last year. They had a PayPal option along with the usual credit card choices. Smart thinking.
GO DOUG! Kick the high-spending bastard in the a**.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
10/30/2009 15:41 Comments ||
Top||
#5
forecast is for rain and snow showers during the day on Nov 3
that would also be bad for any freelancing Acorn types
Posted by: lord garth ||
10/30/2009 16:29 Comments ||
Top||
#6
heh - they're bringing the big guns popguns - HotAir sez Sheriff Joe Biden (the gun running the stimulus and Afghanistan troop policy) is gonna stump for Owens. Smell that? It's desperation
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/30/2009 16:49 Comments ||
Top||
#7
NY 23 just doesn't have the right demographics for ACORN.
True. The district is 92% non-Hispanic white. The GOP generally wins a majority of the white vote. The real problem is that Scozzafava and Hoffman are splitting the GOP vote. Note that McCain beat Obama by 12 points among white voters despite losing by 7 points overall, being outspent 8 to 1 and being associated with a marginalized Bush (thanks to a hugely negative media onslaught). Now that Obama is seen to be race baiter par excellence and a jerk, I'd expect the Dems to lose even more of the white vote. The GOP could have put up a scarecrow, and it would have won. I can't believe it chose Scozzafava.
Veracity? Who actually uses a word like veracity in conversation, when truth will do? Mr. White would be appalled.
(CNSNews.com) -- White House Spokesman Robert Gibbs told CNSNews.com on Wednesday that there is no "veracity" to the argument that the U.S. Constitution does not authorize the federal government to force individuals to buy health insurance. I think that means there's no controlling legal authority. I'd have to ask al-Gore to make sure, though...
The Congressional Budget Office has said that the federal government has never before in American history forced Americans to purchase any good or service.
When the health-care bill was being debated in the Senate Finance Committee, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), the former chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, raised questions about the constitutionality of forcing Americans to buy health insurance, which all congressional versions of the health care bill would do.
Hatch rejected the notion that the Commerce Clause--which empowers Congress to regulate commerce "among the several states"--justifies forcing Americans to purchase a product they do not want to buy. If Congress can make people buy health insurance, Hatch argued, they can force Americans to buy refrigerators or new cars.
But Gibbs said those who make this kind of argument have no federal court cases to back them up. "I won't be confused as a constitutional scholar, but I don't believe there's a lot of--I don't believe there's a lot of case law that would demonstrate the veracity of what they're commentating on," said Gibbs.
Asked by CNSNews.com last week where specifically the Constitution authorizes Congress to mandate that individuals buy health insurance, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said, "Are you serious? Are you serious?"
A Congressional Research Service report concluded that requiring individuals to purchase or have health insurance could be challenged.
"Whether such a requirement would be constitutional under the Commerce Clause is perhaps the most challenging question posed by such a proposal, as it is a novel issue whether Congress may use this clause to require an individual to purchase a good or service," the CRS reportedly says.
In 1994, when the Clinton administration attempted to push a health care reform plan through a Democratic Congress that also mandated every American buy health insurance, the Congressional Budget Office determined that the government had never ordered Americans to buy anything.
"The government has never required people to buy any good or service as a condition of lawful residence in the United States," the CBO analysis said. "An individual mandate would have two features that, in combination, would make it unique. First, it would impose a duty on individuals as members of society. Second, it would require people to purchase a specific service that would be heavily regulated by the federal government."
Posted by: Fred ||
10/30/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The Congressional Budget Office has said that the federal government has never before in American history forced Americans to purchase any good or service. To my untutored mind, forced contributions to Social Security and Medicare by payroll deduction amount to the same thing.
Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
#5
Importantly, there is no constitutional clause forbidding a tax of first born sons, that will be thrown into cauldrons of boiling tar to honor Cthulhu, so that he will turn the oceans to blood, so clearly if congress cannot create that law in conference committee, then Obama can do so by Executive Order, or at least in a Presidential Signing Statement attached to a Health and Human Services appropriations bill.
#7
Let them pass it in a hurry then before Barry has a chance to pack the Supreme Court.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
10/30/2009 10:51 Comments ||
Top||
#8
So Baghdad Bob Gibbs is now a Constitutional law expert? Can the govmint force you to buy condoms or an abortion or a refrigerator or a hair transplant or boob job. I don't think so. If they try to push this I see trouble on the horizon.
Chris Christie, New Jersey's Republican nominee for governor, said Thursday that Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine should quit hinting at his weight with unflattering ads and "man up and say I'm fat."
Christie declared that he will be "a big fat winner" on Election Day in an interview on Don Imus's New York-based radio show Thursday morning in which the former U.S. Attorney repeatedly mentioned his weight.
"I'm pretty fat Don," Christie declared.
"You weigh?" Imus asked.
"550 pounds," Christie jokingly responded.
The Republican nominee's weight became an issue in September when Corzine launched a television ad that closes with a shot of Christie slowly stepping out of a car. Earlier in the ad, Christie is accused of "throwing his weight around" to get out of a traffic ticket stemming from a car accident that injured a motorcyclist.
Corzine surrogates have also frequently hinted at Christie's weight, and when asked if he thinks Christie is fat during an editorial board meeting earlier this month with the Press of Atlantic City, the bald governor responded: "Am I bald?"
Asked about the television ad, Christie said it was "just silly" and "beneath the office" Corzine holds.
"If you're going to do it, at least man up and say I'm fat," he said. "Afterwards he wusses out and says 'no, no, no. I didn't mean that I don't know what you're talking about.' Man up. If you say I'm fat, I'm fat. Let's go. Let's talk about it."
Imus later joked that even though many of New Jersey voters are overweight, Christie should be setting a better example. "I am setting an example Don," Christie responded. "We have to spur our economy. Dunkin Donuts, International House of Pancakes, those people need to work too."
Christie also worked a weight-related remark into his pledge to cut taxes.
"If I don't do it, you are going to unmercifully kick my big fat rear-end all over the country for the next four years, so I have a lot of incentive," he said.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/30/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Imus later joked that even though many of New Jersey voters are overweight, Christie should be setting a better example. "I am setting an example Don," Christie responded. "We have to spur our economy. Dunkin Donuts, International House of Pancakes, those people need to work too."
Self-depricating humor that Corzygote would never understand.
Since I saw elsewhere Corzine is dying the hair he has left, I imagine the Christie campaign is struggling with a way to not-comment, but at the same time reply in kind...
#2
"Let me have men about me that are fat;
Sleek-headed men and such as sleep o' nights:
Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look;
He thinks too much: such men are dangerous."
Julius Caesar by Shakespeare.
#3
I started watching Imus on Fox Biz Network in the AM before leaving for work and caught this interview. Christie came across as a bright personable self-deprecating guy. Everything Corzine is not. He helped himself with the mocking and Imus played along.
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/30/2009 17:06 Comments ||
Top||
This year, New Jersey's registered voters can request a mail-in ballot for any reason. (Before 2005, voters needed to provide a reason for why they needed an absentee ballot.) The state received about 150,000 absentee-ballot applications this year.
On about 2,300 of those applications so far, the signature on the request form does not match the signature on the voter's registration forms with the state.
In a development that is depressingly predictable, the New Jersey Democratic party is asking the state to provide provisional ballots for all these voters. Those ballots could, presumably, be used to overcome any narrow lead by Republican Chris Christie over Democrat Jon Corzine on Election Day.
A mass distribution of provisional ballots, at the request of a political party, would represent a significant change from established law. Currently, when a county clerk rejects an absentee-ballot request, the clerk tries to contact the voter -- through mail, by phone, and in some cases, by attempting to contact the voter in person. And a person who has spoken to some of New Jersey's county clerks says they're granting wide latitude on signature styles; for them to reject a ballot request because of the signature, it has to be dramatically different from the one on file.
Could some of these cases be an election official misjudging the natural deviation in two handwriting samples from the same person? Certainly, and that's why the current system has clerks reaching out to rejected voters (presuming they actually exist) to sort out the discrepancy. But Democrats want to short-circuit the established methods of sorting out the problem, and in fact to ban rejections based on signature mismatches entirely.
Paul P. Josephson, a lawyer representing the New Jersey Democratic State Committee, wrote to Secretary of State Nina Mitchell Wells, asking her to "instruct County Clerks not to deny (vote by mail) applications on the basis of signature comparison alone."
Josephson claims that "the data reveal a troubling disparity in rejection rates -- from hundreds of applications in Atlantic (271 rejections, or 5.84 percent) and Hudson (362, or 4.13 percent) to just a handful in counties such as Hunterdon (6, or .20 percent) and Mercer (35, or .49 percent). We also note that staff and unaffiliated voters are being rejected at a far higher ratio than Republicans by a ratio of three-to-one." But a source who has seen the data disagrees, contending the number of rejections is consistently proportional to the number of absentee ballots requested. This source described the rate of rejections as within a normal range, and he saw no clustering in particular regions.
Josephson contends that "even if the county clerks notify voters by mail that their applications have been rejected, too many of those voters will not have an opportunity to correct the situation." But besides the county clerks' efforts to contact voters laid out above, those who have not received an absentee ballot will still be able to vote on Election Day.
Democrats have never made this request before, not even in 2008, where many more New Jersey residents were voting through absentee ballots. Of course, that year Democrats Barack Obama and Frank Lautenberg were expected to win the statewide races handily.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/30/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
So, like, why even bother with signatures at all if they're not being used for authentication? /rhet question.
#2
"even if the county clerks notify voters by mail that their applications have been rejected, too many of those voters will not have an opportunity to correct the situation."
You know because dead people only get out on Halloween and imaginary people not at all......
#3
The only way to solve this is to have Jersey Democrats tell us how many votes are going to be cast and for whom. It would save a lot of time wouldn't it?
If you're an elected Democrat anywhere to the right of Barney Frank, and trying to defend a competitive seat next November, you've got to be starting to sweat. But don't get too fired up. I don't think the populace is fond of Publicans. Their primary advantage is not being Dems...
You wake up in the morning and just like every other morning as far as the eye can see the only thing in the news is the president's health-care reform. It's starting to look like Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are leading the Donner Party, the snowbound emigrants who bogged down in the Sierra Nevada winter in the 1840s and resorted to cannibalism to survive.
The betting is that with raw political muscle and procedural magic, the Congressional Democrats will pass something, call it reform and hand Barack Obama a "victory." Maybe, but I think what we are seeing with this massive legislation is that the Democrats in Washington have a bigger problem: Their party is looking so yesterday.
In a world defined by nearly 100,000 iPhone apps, a world of seemingly limitless, self-defined choice, the Democrats are pushing the biggest, fattest, one-size-fits all legislation since 1965. And they brag this will complete the dream Franklin D. Roosevelt had in 1939.
The culture still believes the U.S. has a hipster for president. But the Obama health-care bill, and maybe this whole administration, is starting to look totally out of sync with the new zeitgeist, the spirit of the age.
Everything about the health-care exercise is looking very old hat, starting with the old guys working on it. Max Baucus, Patrick Leahy, Pete Stark-all were elected to Congress in the 1970s, and live on as the immortals in Washington's Forever Land. But it's more than the fact that Congress looks old. The health-care bill is big, complex, incomprehensible and coercive-all the things people hate nowadays.
It's easy to make jokes about how insubstantial the millions of people seem to be who are constantly using technologies like Twitter. But these new digital and Web-based technologies, which have decentralized virtually everything, now occupy most of the average person's waking hours at work or at home. Mass media is struggling to stay massive in a world whose people want to break up into many discrete markets.
The one lump that won't change is government. Government in our time is looking out of it. It'd be one thing if government were almost cool in an old-fashioned way, but it's not. When everyone else's job gets measured by performance, its hallmark is malperformance--whether in Congress, California or New York.
We define the past 25 years in terms of entrepreneurs and visionaries in places like Silicon Valley who took a small idea and ran with it. Congress does the opposite. It takes something already big . . . and makes it bigger.
We've got Medicare for the elderly, with spending claims out to Mars, so let's create Medicare for All! One of the least noticed parts of the health-care legislation is its intention to make Medicaid even bigger, when Medicaid's cost is arguably the main thing destroying California.
There was a time when contributing to the common good meant joining something relatively small like the Peace Corps or Teach for America. Now it means being willing to just fall into line behind some huge piece of legislation.
Read Mr. Obama's speech last week at MIT on climate change: "The folks who pretend that this is not an issue, they are being marginalized." This, ironically, sounds a lot like the 2007 antiHillary "Big Brother" TV commercial. Its message was that Hillary represented something big and ominously coercive. Boot up that ad now and put Obama's face where Hillary's is.
The larger point here isn't necessarily partisan. It's a description of the way people live their lives in a 21st century world, and how disconnected politics has become from that world.
If we were really living in the world of leading-edge politics that many people thought they were getting with Barack Obama, he would have proposed an iPhone for health care-a flexible system for which all sorts of users could create or choose health-care apps that suited their needs. Over time, with trial and error, a better system would emerge.
No chance of that. Our outdated political software can't recognize trial and error. What ObamaCare is doing with health care-the "public option"-may be fine with the activist left, but I suspect it's starting to strike many younger Americans as at odds with their lives, as not somewhere they want to go. Wait until EPA's ghost busters start enforcing cap-and-trade.
People thought something small, agile and smart was coming to government, but so far it's turning out to be just big-box politics.
None of this is to suggest the Republicans are any better. They do, however, have a better chance of breaking out of the ancient political castle. So long as the Democratic Party is the party of the Old Hat People, dependent on public-sector unions with Orwellian names like the Service Employees International Union, it will remain yoked to a pre-iPhone political model that will increasingly strike average everyday American voters as weird and alien to their world.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/30/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
When you don't like the Demlicans, you vote them out and put the Republicrats in. Or something like that.
#2
The big advantage of the Republicans is that their rank and file are in open revolt against their unresponsive and worthless leadership, unlike the Democrat rank and file, who are still being arm twisted and half-responsive to their unresponsive and worthless leadership.
The real action that may turn into a very powerful political movement is at the multi-State level, where the demand for federalism is boiling over. It is both bi-partisan and starting to band together.
#4
I think there is a large ground swell for a third party this time around. Conservatives of all flavors are disgruntled and would capture the Trunks, Donks, and Independents if they put forth a strong candidate.
#5
Donk, Trunk, whatever. There is the Beltway Party and those who are tied or have special interests in it maintaining/concentrating/retaining power. Then, there is the non-Beltway Party which is everyone else, most of whom just want to be left alone.
#7
It's starting to look like Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are leading the Donner Party
Interesting observation. It truly seems as though congressional leadership is so insular that they have no clue how angry most everyone is. It`s as though Nancy, Harry & Co. have a bunch of yes-men and sycophants telling them there is no problem with the public, and that the problem is all FOX News, and Talk Radio. Evidence of this is the RSVP-only unveiling of the health bill yesterday by Pelosi, and the dismissive attitude towards questions about misconduct by Cong. Loon Grayson of Florida, when confronted by the FOX news guy.
#8
They may be sweating because their 38-seat majority might be dwindled down to 10 or so, but I don't see even that happening if unemployment is down and the economy is up (even marginally).
Add to that the many one-party districts held by Dems and it becomes even more bleak for Republicans. We can hope the blue-dogs don't get replaced by radicals, though.
#9
It`s as though Nancy, Harry & Co. have a bunch of yes-men and sycophants telling them there is no problem with the public
Yep. That's it. In spite of what naysayers like #8 say, 2010 will be a blood bath. However I expect it to be a slaughter that crosses party lines. I think it will be a free for all.
Both of the established parties will be seriously mauled and it (I hope) will be a wake up call for the survivors. 2012, I have no idea. Barry, if he is still around, is probably gone.
I've consulted with a "Tea Leaf" reader in New Delhi, he's completely disconnected from politics, especially American politics. Animal entrails have BO slipping on the soap in the shower. Or something like that.
In all seriousness, I expect O'dingleBarry to self immolate and take himself out of play.
Candidate Barack Obama made a big deal about government transparency and giving citizens ample opportunity to read pieces of legislation before they're voted on.
With this in mind, all 40 Republican Senators signed a letter sent to Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) Thursday demanding the new healthcare reform proposal be published on the Internet so that ALL Americans can "learn how the federal government is spending their money."
Posted by: Fred ||
10/30/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I believe this will be the Democratic response:
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/30/2009 9:45 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Ok, so could someone else scan it and publish it that way? (Yeah, I know, it would take a damn long time....but if you release it little by little, it might force this gang o' idiots to finally release the whole thing.)
#5
Bet reid did not even open the letter, he looked and say it was from the Repubs and shredded it. Never saw it, never read it, no need to act on it, perfect cover.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
10/30/2009 12:23 Comments ||
Top||
#6
so could someone else scan it and publish it that way?
There are lots of copiers that scan to pdf and email the resulting file. Memory limits would require multiple copiers but it shouldn't take all that long.
Republicans and Democrats are debating whether voting next Tuesday in Virginia and New Jersey governor's races will render a first judgment on President Barack Obama.
Republicans, looking ahead to 2010 congressional elections, hope the races will show they have signs of life as they try to claw back from devastating 2006 and 2008 losses.
In Virginia, which Obama won in 2008 to become the first the first Democratic presidential candidate to carry the state since 1964, Republican Bob McDonnell leads Democrat Creigh Deeds by double digits in the polls. He is widely considered a shoo-in in Tuesday voting.
Democrats, attempting to keep Republicans in a deep political hole, have doubts that the results from two states will tell much at all about the mood of the country.
Whereas, of course, if both Dhimms were to win, it would say everything about the mood of the country, and the MSM would spend weeks telling you about it.
Analysts say the results could provide some clues about Obama's standing among Americans.
In Virginia, which Obama won in 2008 to become the first the first Democratic presidential candidate to carry the state since 1964, Republican Bob McDonnell leads Democrat Creigh Deeds by double digits in the polls. He is widely considered a shoo-in in Tuesday voting.
In heavily Democratic New Jersey, incumbent Democratic Governor Jon Corzine has righted the ship and holds a narrow lead in the polls and may squeak out a victory over Republican Chris Christie, depending on how many votes independent candidate Chris Daggett pulls from Christie.
A wild-card race is under way in New York's 23rd district for a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives. Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman, endorsed by former Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin, is running close with Democrat Bill Owens while Republican Dede Scozzafava trails.
Political analysts are trying to determine what the outcome will mean for the national picture and what, if anything, can be said about Obama, who is struggling to revive U.S. job growth, get a U.S. healthcare overhaul through Congress and manage wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Democrats have held Virginia's governor's seat for eight years and Larry Sabato, a political scientist at the University of Virginia, said a Republican victory in the state would be significant for the party.
Obama traveled to Virginia twice to campaign for Deeds but, in general, Democrats have not been able to come even close to generating the same type of enthusiasm among voters that Obama received a year ago.
"Obama is a factor here," Sabato said. "He's energizing Republicans and the turnout is going to be heavily Republican. The Democrats just aren't showing up."
Posted by: Fred ||
10/30/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
WSJ - no subscription required at present (can't guarantee future)
We can only hope that world leaders will do nothing more than enjoy a pleasant bicycle ride around the charming streets of Copenhagen come December. For if they actually manage to wring out an agreement based on the current draft text of the Copenhagen climate-change treaty, the world is in for some nasty surprises. Draft text, you say? If you haven't heard about it, that's because none of our otherwise talkative political leaders have bothered to tell us what the drafters have already cobbled together for leaders to consider. And neither have the media.
Enter Lord Christopher Monckton. Heh.
The former adviser to Margaret Thatcher gave an address at Bethel University in St. Paul, Minnesota, earlier this month that made quite a splash. For the first time, the public heard about the 181 pages, dated Sept. 15, that comprise the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change--a rough draft of what could be signed come December.
Lord Monckton warns that the aim of the Copenhagen draft treaty is to set up a transnational "government" on a scale the world has never before seen. That's the standard, everyday aim of the Useless Nitwits; this is just the latest obnoxious twist.
The "scheme for the new institutional arrangement under the Convention" that starts on page 18 contains the provision for a "government." The aim is to give a new as yet unnamed U.N. body the power to directly intervene in the financial, economic, tax and environmental affairs of all the nations that sign the Copenhagen treaty. Oh, you mean like the EU does now?
The reason for the power grab is clear enough: Clause after complicated clause of the draft treaty requires developed countries to pay an "adaptation debt" to the UN kleptrocrats developing countries to supposedly support climate change mitigation. Clause 33 on page 39 says that "by 2020 the scale of financial flows to support adaptation in developing countries must be [at least $67 billion] or [in the range of $70 billion to $140 billion per year]."
And how will developed countries be slugged to provide for this financial flow to the developing world? The draft text sets out various alternatives, including option seven on page 135, which provides for "a [global] levy of 2 per cent That's a TAX by the Useless Nitwits, folks.
on international financial market [monetary] transactions to Annex I Parties." Annex 1 countries are industrialized countries, which include among others the U.S., Australia, Britain and Canada. Howzabout we tell them NO? I doubt even this worthless Senate would sign this piece of trash.
To be sure, countries that sign international treaties always cede powers to a U.N. body responsible for implementing treaty obligations. But the difference is that this treaty appears to have been subject to unusual attempts to conceal its convoluted contents. Bambi's Administration must be involved up to their eyebrows, then.
Ask yourself this question: Given that our political leaders spend hundreds of hours talking about climate change and the need for a global consensus in Copenhagen, why have none of them talked openly about the details of this draft climate-change treaty? After all, the final treaty will bind signatories for years to come. What exactly are they hiding? Their plans to take over the world, of course. Soros must be involved in there somewhere....Anyone in our gummint who even discusses this monstrosity is guilty of treason.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
10/30/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Eh, if those guys at the UN get too uppity we will just vote them out of office. Oh, wait ...
#2
ION WAFF > AZER DEFENSE MINISTER WARNS ARMENIAN PRESIDENT SARKISIAN [no more Armenian official visits to disputed NAGORNO-KARANAKH regions = "occupied Azerbaijan territories/lands", or else?]. Also warned that Azeri armed forces are fully capable of "liberating" "occupied" Azeri territors/lands; + MACEDONIAN PM IN AUSTRALIA STATES [Maced ethnic]TERRITORIAL INTENTIONS AGZ GREECE [ + BULGARIA + possib regions of SERBIA]???
#6
Not really new to us, g(r)omgoru. The UN has been trying this shit for years. Now they have a chance to get it through the US with such a liberal communist government in place.
#7
Lord Monckton will be appearing on today's Glenn Beck show on tv @ 5pm edt if you want to hear it from the 'horse's mouth' himself.
Posted by: Tom- Pa ||
10/30/2009 9:37 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Personally, I don't give a flying flip what Lord Christopher or Lord Barack or Queen Nancy come up with regarding the U.N. They are pledged to uphold our Constitution. Treason comes to mind.
#9
I saw Lord Monckton on Glen Beck today and he is trying to sound the alarm regarding the dangers of this treaty. I downloaded the treaty to read. I will write to my Senators regarding this treaty should it ever come up in the Senate.
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/30/2009 18:27 Comments ||
Top||
#12
If he signs it, it is treason. The Senate voting to kill the treaty does not obsolve Obama of his treasonous intent.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
10/30/2009 18:43 Comments ||
Top||
#13
ISRAELI MIL FORUM > LABOUR PARTY [ee PM Tony Blair, etal.] DELIBERATELY [but QUIETLY= COVERTLY] ENCOURAGED MASSED MIGRATION TO UK [oer past Decade = 10 years]. Desires for idealist "MULTICULTURALISM/DIVERSITY-IN-UK" gone serioulsy awry = out of control???
* SAME > MILIBAND GIVES SUPPORT TO TONY BLAIR FOR EU PRESIDENCY.
HMMMMM, HMMMMMM, Wehell, BY THE FORMER ARTIC AGZ THE LATTER > may be read, FUTURE EU DEMANDS TO TURN INTO REGIONAL EURO-CALIPHATE.
ALL PC/DENIABLE- + LEGAL-LIKE???
"FORT APACHE" Movie > HARD-DRINKING GRIZZLED VETERAN CAVALRY SERGEANT > "Now we don't want to show any prejudice about this, but you're now an ACTING CORPORAL = OWG ANTI-AMERICAN, ALL-EURO, MILITANT-TERRORIST"!
#14
OOOPSIES, forgot SAME > MEMRI - AHMADINEJAD AND ASSAD: IRAN AND SYRIA ARE LEADING A NEW WORLD ORDER: TIME OF AMERICA AND THE WEST IS OVER [ USA cannot save ISRAEL widout IRAN, SYRIA = MUSLIM STATES; NEW WORLD ORDER EMERGING, NEW "NEXUS OF COOPERATION" + GEOPOL ALTERNATISM TO US-WEST BETWEEN IRAN, SYRIA, + MAJOR REGIONAL POWERS, STATES [mostly Muslim] INCLUD TURKEY.
ALso, SAME > BRITISH SCHOOL DROPS EDUCATION IN FEAR OF ISLAM. Ditto for educ in ANTWERP = LOWLANDS.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
The White House is promising that new figures being released Friday will be a more accurate showing of progress in President Barack Obama's economic recovery plan. It aggressively defended an earlier, faulty count that overstated by thousands the jobs created or saved so far.
Lawyer John O'Quinn, who donated $2.5 million to Chris Bell in his Democratic governor's race three years ago, has died in a Houston car accident along with another as yet unidentified man. The accident happened about 8 a.m., according to the Houston Chronicle, on the Allen Parkway. The black Suburban crossed two medians and oncoming traffic before crashing into a tree.
Chris Christie, New Jersey's Republican nominee for governor, said Thursday that Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine should quit hinting at his weight with unflattering ads and "man up and say I'm fat." 
This year, New Jersey's registered voters can request a mail-in ballot for any reason. (Before 2005, voters needed to provide a reason for why they needed an absentee ballot.) The state received about 150,000 absentee-ballot applications this year.
If you're an elected Democrat anywhere to the right of Barney Frank, and trying to defend a competitive seat next November, you've got to be starting to sweat.
Candidate Barack Obama made a big deal about government transparency and giving citizens ample opportunity to read pieces of legislation before they're voted on.
