The media does not always reflect the exact meaning of a presidential comment,
but I hope this one does.
The 2010 election will be the verdict on congressional action, rather than inaction.(my take)
Here are two quick clips. Senator Reid & Senator Alexander
Blair House Summit White House Summary
[Highlights]
[Special Hardball, Hardball, Hardball (1,4,7&9 of 9). *]
UPDATES:[*] 2-26-10 two links added [<-2]also these: earlier summit post , pre-summit summary, pre-summit push and pitch. Not to mention new swing. Admittedly Republicans "don't do comprehensive well". No, really well. And why.] (Really the issue addressed at Neo-Changian points to the comprehensive need, apparently Senator Alexander believes in the finger approach in spirit.
* There is a way that reconciliation will not be used on the whole bill, and I would suggest that it would be impossible for the Republicans to vote against changes that they brought up in the summit or at least getting an up or down vote. See Willie Brown and more, speaking of what will Brown do? The Senator(MA) and Attorney General(CA).
Friday, February 26, 2010
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Fair and Balanced Summit
I did not return to the livestream after the break [*] but dealt with other issues. But did tune in to FOX for a "fair and balanced" perspective paraphrased that: If you were D you were pleased with the points made, and if you were R you were pleased with the points made.
But I do quibble that there was no change, because there is a fair and balance ratio of the 52% that do not want reconciliation who are either misinformed or hypocritical about its potential, which would flip-flop that matter to the left, not to mention future polls that might determine change in support for both the Obama plan and the public option.
(Not to mention CNN covering the wrap up. Ouch, I thought that it was a re-wrap*, since it seemed FOX already had a wrap, but I guess it was a pre-rap.)
* my point was that MSNBC switched to the Olympics, FOX seemed to have called the summit a wrap, and while I watched CNN provide what I thought was highlites, then found it was not wrapped up yet.
[*] 2-26-10 two links added also these: earlier summit post , pre-summit summary, pre-summit push and pitch. Not to mention new swing. Admittedly Republicans "don't do comprehensive well". No, really well.
But I do quibble that there was no change, because there is a fair and balance ratio of the 52% that do not want reconciliation who are either misinformed or hypocritical about its potential, which would flip-flop that matter to the left, not to mention future polls that might determine change in support for both the Obama plan and the public option.
(Not to mention CNN covering the wrap up. Ouch, I thought that it was a re-wrap*, since it seemed FOX already had a wrap, but I guess it was a pre-rap.)
* my point was that MSNBC switched to the Olympics, FOX seemed to have called the summit a wrap, and while I watched CNN provide what I thought was highlites, then found it was not wrapped up yet.
[*] 2-26-10 two links added also these: earlier summit post , pre-summit summary, pre-summit push and pitch. Not to mention new swing. Admittedly Republicans "don't do comprehensive well". No, really well.
Neo-Changian
An Exchange: In segments
(These are some comments I compiled on hold, including an exchange with FB)
Thom Hartmann
Me: On hold with Thom Hartmann, AM1090 Seattle, just missing the Laffer Curve creator, and up next will be Joe Stieglitz.
Summit
Me: In the spirit of the summit, I point to the political down side of some discussion, not that politics is bad, but a process. Much like the Laffer Curve, it depends on which side you are on. Laffer seems to misuse his own curve and extend it to all taxes...
Flat metaphor
Me(cont)...while a flat tax may not be bad, what it is and where it starts is what matters. Even Milton Friedman apparently in the Libertarian wing, suggested a Negative tax. I would love to have the opportunity, ask Nobel winner Stieglitz(about these)
Neo_changian
Me: Apparently out of time, but the metaphor of the "Invisible Hand" of Adam Smith is equivalent to the Laffer Curve at least in how you look at it. There is a real curve and a real hand, although it does depend on individuals to use it and which side your are on. i.e. Neo-Keynsian or more of the change
Exchange
FB: if you want to be a capitalist, actually read Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations from cover to cover. ALL of it.
Me: Someday. But did you hear Thom Hartmann with Laffer and Stieglitz? More of your point... please. Mine may have been missed. I might quibble with the (my) equivalence, but not how we look at it mattering. Being on one side of the Laffer Curve statistically, as in raising or lowering taxes(or rather income), matters. Yet, there being no hand really, but the hand the individual has in creating government and corporations is what I meant. Not that they are Leviathans, woops other league (of a book), but it is important to note that Wealth of Nations was written in 1776 so we really have created a hand.
[Update 2-26-10 speaking of summit spirit and comprehensive... well...(is this a cheap shot?) ]
(These are some comments I compiled on hold, including an exchange with FB)
Thom Hartmann
Me: On hold with Thom Hartmann, AM1090 Seattle, just missing the Laffer Curve creator, and up next will be Joe Stieglitz.
Summit
Me: In the spirit of the summit, I point to the political down side of some discussion, not that politics is bad, but a process. Much like the Laffer Curve, it depends on which side you are on. Laffer seems to misuse his own curve and extend it to all taxes...
Flat metaphor
Me(cont)...while a flat tax may not be bad, what it is and where it starts is what matters. Even Milton Friedman apparently in the Libertarian wing, suggested a Negative tax. I would love to have the opportunity, ask Nobel winner Stieglitz(about these)
Neo_changian
Me: Apparently out of time, but the metaphor of the "Invisible Hand" of Adam Smith is equivalent to the Laffer Curve at least in how you look at it. There is a real curve and a real hand, although it does depend on individuals to use it and which side your are on. i.e. Neo-Keynsian or more of the change
Exchange
FB: if you want to be a capitalist, actually read Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations from cover to cover. ALL of it.
Me: Someday. But did you hear Thom Hartmann with Laffer and Stieglitz? More of your point... please. Mine may have been missed. I might quibble with the (my) equivalence, but not how we look at it mattering. Being on one side of the Laffer Curve statistically, as in raising or lowering taxes(or rather income), matters. Yet, there being no hand really, but the hand the individual has in creating government and corporations is what I meant. Not that they are Leviathans, woops other league (of a book), but it is important to note that Wealth of Nations was written in 1776 so we really have created a hand.
[Update 2-26-10 speaking of summit spirit and comprehensive... well...(is this a cheap shot?) ]
Health Care Summit
Progress already?
Health Care is not a car, that can be recalled and repaired? Rhetorically paraphrasing Lamar Alexander, it is like the Contract for America. My original trigger might not have been relevant, as some of the original planks* might not have made it into legislation. But in fact it was even used in apparent violation of the original intent as a Republican Congress used it and President Clinton vetoed it as being detrimental to the budget. But the real point is that legislation can be recalled and repaired, much easier than a car. It does not even have to be out-of-service or in the shop to get a tune-up. Getting the mechanics to do the job is the problem.
[Obama: Apples and Oranges, me: lemons and Bugs, red, orange, yellow ones(VW). Contrasts house insurance versus health mechanics. Catastrophic options still there but with the fruits and mechanics affordable.(medical not political)]
*[In fact the plank is walked by the president: in fact the first plank of the for America between the Health fruits and the political mechanics- require all laws that apply to the rest of the country also apply to Congress.]
[Yet** Rep. Boustany is back to a mechanical political apples and oranges of polls and messages to a step by step back from reality by ignoring other polls in support of public options. (Apologies for mixed methaphors but it is the only way to transcend the Republican flip-flop.)]
[And then there is Senator McCain. Which was addressed as a charaterizer of the process rather than progress. Not to mention Congressman Cantor. Now it's how's the beef, inspector? Not to mention the sausage or the liver worst of high risk pools and slices (2400+11)of legislation. Meanwhile Rep. Mike Pense grinds the beef on MSNBC. 9:50 AM PST. About bad TV, but several points made my Republicans can be points of agreement, if they are not already addressed. However kudos to Rep. Cummings 10:00, and Andrea Mitchell, 10:05 AM. on Cantor and McCain.(rough times)]
** prior Republican made some interesting apples and oranges which have potential
[I think that there will be some progress made, and that reconciliation may or may not be on the table, but more likely there can be some changes made to the bill or portions that can be Valentined out, and voted up or down piecemeal and get some fruits from our beefs.]
Health Care is not a car, that can be recalled and repaired? Rhetorically paraphrasing Lamar Alexander, it is like the Contract for America. My original trigger might not have been relevant, as some of the original planks* might not have made it into legislation. But in fact it was even used in apparent violation of the original intent as a Republican Congress used it and President Clinton vetoed it as being detrimental to the budget. But the real point is that legislation can be recalled and repaired, much easier than a car. It does not even have to be out-of-service or in the shop to get a tune-up. Getting the mechanics to do the job is the problem.
[Obama: Apples and Oranges, me: lemons and Bugs, red, orange, yellow ones(VW). Contrasts house insurance versus health mechanics. Catastrophic options still there but with the fruits and mechanics affordable.(medical not political)]
*[In fact the plank is walked by the president: in fact the first plank of the for America between the Health fruits and the political mechanics- require all laws that apply to the rest of the country also apply to Congress.]
[Yet** Rep. Boustany is back to a mechanical political apples and oranges of polls and messages to a step by step back from reality by ignoring other polls in support of public options. (Apologies for mixed methaphors but it is the only way to transcend the Republican flip-flop.)]
[And then there is Senator McCain. Which was addressed as a charaterizer of the process rather than progress. Not to mention Congressman Cantor. Now it's how's the beef, inspector? Not to mention the sausage or the liver worst of high risk pools and slices (2400+11)of legislation. Meanwhile Rep. Mike Pense grinds the beef on MSNBC. 9:50 AM PST. About bad TV, but several points made my Republicans can be points of agreement, if they are not already addressed. However kudos to Rep. Cummings 10:00, and Andrea Mitchell, 10:05 AM. on Cantor and McCain.(rough times)]
** prior Republican made some interesting apples and oranges which have potential
[I think that there will be some progress made, and that reconciliation may or may not be on the table, but more likely there can be some changes made to the bill or portions that can be Valentined out, and voted up or down piecemeal and get some fruits from our beefs.]
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Links back
Health Care Summit: Tomorrow live stream
Everything on Table?: Bipartisan Realities.
March on Washington: Call for Public Option*. Who signed up for Reconciliation.
Hit by Pitch: Big Pitcher Economics.
February's Posts.
* Contact: Senators Murray and Cantwell
[Is everything really on the table? I mean I can understand a starting point or even a middle point, but if you want movement to an end point, you might need more points. And to clarify a different point, there is the Bennet letter, there is the public option, and there is reconciliation. They are not linked at the hip.** Starting from scratch is not an option unless everything is on the table including up or down votes on everything. That would seem ** to be how politics should work or it is more about politics than hope or change.
* i.e. some are hesitent to sign the letter supporting the public option and reconciliation, some are for the public option, but some can be for reconciliation to let their votes count and the process work.
** point blank: reconciliation, nuclear option and up or down votes are all Republican platforms for progress until Democrats became the majority.[Speaking of preemption***, knowing the rules is not the decision to enact them, but one should follow precedence.(*** as Rachel Maddow)]
Everything on Table?: Bipartisan Realities.
March on Washington: Call for Public Option*. Who signed up for Reconciliation.
Hit by Pitch: Big Pitcher Economics.
February's Posts.
* Contact: Senators Murray and Cantwell
[Is everything really on the table? I mean I can understand a starting point or even a middle point, but if you want movement to an end point, you might need more points. And to clarify a different point, there is the Bennet letter, there is the public option, and there is reconciliation. They are not linked at the hip.** Starting from scratch is not an option unless everything is on the table including up or down votes on everything. That would seem ** to be how politics should work or it is more about politics than hope or change.
* i.e. some are hesitent to sign the letter supporting the public option and reconciliation, some are for the public option, but some can be for reconciliation to let their votes count and the process work.
** point blank: reconciliation, nuclear option and up or down votes are all Republican platforms for progress until Democrats became the majority.[Speaking of preemption***, knowing the rules is not the decision to enact them, but one should follow precedence.(*** as Rachel Maddow)]
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Health Care Summit
Live Streaming THURSDAY 7AM - 1PM PST
Senator Patty Murray's Website.
House Bill
Senate Bill
The President's Proposal
Unofficial summary starting with the Senate Bill.
Senator Patty Murray's Website.
House Bill
Senate Bill
The President's Proposal
Unofficial summary starting with the Senate Bill.
Everything on the table?
Post date: 2-24-10 9:20AM
The Bi-Partisan Senate Bill,
Reconciliation and Nuclear Option?
There is a fine distinction between using the process of up or down votes and ending the filibuster. One thing is clear: They are Republican ideas. Using them would be the bi-partisan thing to do. In fact, if both are not on the table, start removing the Republican amendments with up or down votes, under reconciliation, after first sacrificing the nuclear option, their idea that they have now flip-flopped on, but hold them to reconciliation. Still bi-partisan. In fact, one could end up with a fair and balanced progressive bill using Republican ideas and call it a Republican Health Care Bill, with proper use of flip-flop and government run programs.
If this seems* like fanciful reasoning, you don't know Republican logic. Or was it Marie Antoinette? More than you, knot.
[link back to March on Washington]
* 2-24-10 see point blank
The Bi-Partisan Senate Bill,
Reconciliation and Nuclear Option?
There is a fine distinction between using the process of up or down votes and ending the filibuster. One thing is clear: They are Republican ideas. Using them would be the bi-partisan thing to do. In fact, if both are not on the table, start removing the Republican amendments with up or down votes, under reconciliation, after first sacrificing the nuclear option, their idea that they have now flip-flopped on, but hold them to reconciliation. Still bi-partisan. In fact, one could end up with a fair and balanced progressive bill using Republican ideas and call it a Republican Health Care Bill, with proper use of flip-flop and government run programs.
If this seems* like fanciful reasoning, you don't know Republican logic. Or was it Marie Antoinette? More than you, knot.
[link back to March on Washington]
* 2-24-10 see point blank
Monday, February 22, 2010
Hit by pitch
or passed ball? (4:40 to 5:20)
OK, maybe a mangled metaphor, but specifically...
It seems to me that if the (above hypothetical) employee is afraid of the employer's taxes being raised, then neither have a clue as to how the economy or taxes work or in too many cases doesn't. Just as a simple exercise, if the employer can profit without an employee he would anyway, and taxes are on profits or net, not gross.
See Today's Updates: and note that the president's proposal not having the public option belies Republican protests, and in fact only proposes that the public have the Senate's options. Indeed, one should wonder how many Senator's are choosing not to take their Federal Option and have faith in the free market?
Update: 2-23-10 Recent intersections.
Economic Opportunity Institute (local)
Economic Policy Institute (ironic)
I ran across the former and checked the latter, and note that they agree more needs to be done. Not that a balanced picture can be taken easily.
Recent Posts:Salon
and comments and more,
etc. not to mention.
[Brilliant :-) advice]
I almost went out on a limb and sawed if off, and then did, but here goes again. Why not have the public option compete with for profits at a reasonable mark up? What would that be? 15% not counting bonuses? More likely 5% might be reasonable. Now I think we see who is on a limb and who might be more reasonable. Incidentally, with Carter recently complaining about comparisons, Nixon should be rolling in his grave, probably with laughter. Let alone Obama/Clinton.
OK, maybe a mangled metaphor, but specifically...
It seems to me that if the (above hypothetical) employee is afraid of the employer's taxes being raised, then neither have a clue as to how the economy or taxes work or in too many cases doesn't. Just as a simple exercise, if the employer can profit without an employee he would anyway, and taxes are on profits or net, not gross.
See Today's Updates: and note that the president's proposal not having the public option belies Republican protests, and in fact only proposes that the public have the Senate's options. Indeed, one should wonder how many Senator's are choosing not to take their Federal Option and have faith in the free market?
Update: 2-23-10 Recent intersections.
Economic Opportunity Institute (local)
Economic Policy Institute (ironic)
I ran across the former and checked the latter, and note that they agree more needs to be done. Not that a balanced picture can be taken easily.
Recent Posts:Salon
and comments and more,
etc. not to mention.
[Brilliant :-) advice]
I almost went out on a limb and sawed if off, and then did, but here goes again. Why not have the public option compete with for profits at a reasonable mark up? What would that be? 15% not counting bonuses? More likely 5% might be reasonable. Now I think we see who is on a limb and who might be more reasonable. Incidentally, with Carter recently complaining about comparisons, Nixon should be rolling in his grave, probably with laughter. Let alone Obama/Clinton.
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
March on Washington
Ed Schultz, Norman Goldman*
Whip Congress Dot Com
Sign up to support the Public Option.
Ed Schultz has been arguing for a march on Washington ala Tea Party.
Pardon the last crack but we should listen to some of what they say.
Norman Goldman has more suggestions for addressing issues that are not being faced.
Contact: Senators Murray and Cantwell
* Depose Harry Reid: unless (I will add)he has progress and the Obama agenda (such as I hope it is) up his sleeve.
Update 2-22-10: That was fast! Two days actually: Maddow and Olbermann point to the movement politics taking effect.
[Boehner reply kicks legs out from under the table of summit. Put simply, the House Republican leader has knocked the president's proposal, even though it addresses many of the complaints that Americans have about the differences between the House and Senate plan. We are not starting from scratch but presenting and addressing proposals.]
Whip Congress Dot Com
Sign up to support the Public Option.
Ed Schultz has been arguing for a march on Washington ala Tea Party.
Pardon the last crack but we should listen to some of what they say.
Norman Goldman has more suggestions for addressing issues that are not being faced.
Contact: Senators Murray and Cantwell
* Depose Harry Reid: unless (I will add)he has progress and the Obama agenda (such as I hope it is) up his sleeve.
Update 2-22-10: That was fast! Two days actually: Maddow and Olbermann point to the movement politics taking effect.
[Boehner reply kicks legs out from under the table of summit. Put simply, the House Republican leader has knocked the president's proposal, even though it addresses many of the complaints that Americans have about the differences between the House and Senate plan. We are not starting from scratch but presenting and addressing proposals.]
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Lame
By definition not so.
Paul Krugman
But meek to the geek.*
Speaking of which I have been under the weather for a week.
Speaking of anecdotal.
BTW: it is cloudy out, that makes me a meteorologist.
P.S. to be accurate apparently the exception proves the rule.
i.e. one error makes a counter case
* self acclaimed geek, Rachel, out geeks the more political than meek geek, Bill Nye, the Science Guy. Leaving his lesson lamer** then Rachel in the case of explaining why it snows more when it is warmer. Also anecdotal but none the less relevant, it was melting!
** Lame! A favorite refrain from Almost Live.
[2-12-10: as of 11:15 AM PST in latest email]
[Flagrant(oops)Footnote: Are your galoshes on yet FAUX NEWS?]
[Closing the Tetrahedron: Republican Medicare(Krugman), Supreme Correction, Senate Add Justmeant, Re: Sources. (PBMP)]
Paul Krugman
But meek to the geek.*
Speaking of which I have been under the weather for a week.
Speaking of anecdotal.
BTW: it is cloudy out, that makes me a meteorologist.
P.S. to be accurate apparently the exception proves the rule.
i.e. one error makes a counter case
* self acclaimed geek, Rachel, out geeks the more political than meek geek, Bill Nye, the Science Guy. Leaving his lesson lamer** then Rachel in the case of explaining why it snows more when it is warmer. Also anecdotal but none the less relevant, it was melting!
** Lame! A favorite refrain from Almost Live.
[2-12-10: as of 11:15 AM PST in latest email]
[Flagrant(oops)Footnote: Are your galoshes on yet FAUX NEWS?]
[Closing the Tetrahedron: Republican Medicare(Krugman), Supreme Correction, Senate Add Justmeant, Re: Sources. (PBMP)]
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
It is hard to read this...
note. Even harder to give it a name.
But the president might just take it(the actual demands) serious, in this way. Having not waded through it, start with: OK, in exchange for no reconciliation, and everything is on the table, everything gets an up or down vote. Now that might not seem fair, that seems to be giving the Republicans everything. Well it just might get what we need.
But the president might just take it(the actual demands) serious, in this way. Having not waded through it, start with: OK, in exchange for no reconciliation, and everything is on the table, everything gets an up or down vote. Now that might not seem fair, that seems to be giving the Republicans everything. Well it just might get what we need.
Thursday, February 04, 2010
A Wing and a Prayer
I preface this with the name sake President of FOX NEWS, Roger Wings(Ailes by definition): a constitutional amendment has taken flight and the President appears at the National Prayer Breakfast.
[2-5-10 "Wings" & "definition" links added. Bold "flight" is local.]
[Earlier: Obama takes questions from Senate Democrats.]
[Not to mention "sake", "NEWS".]
[2-6-10 President Obama to the Democrats.
"I am not going to walk away from health insurance refrom..."
Ed Schultz to both. Fired up!
Jobs(and health and regulatory reform) are in the Balance.]
[2-5-10 "Wings" & "definition" links added. Bold "flight" is local.]
[Earlier: Obama takes questions from Senate Democrats.]
[Not to mention "sake", "NEWS".]
[2-6-10 President Obama to the Democrats.
"I am not going to walk away from health insurance refrom..."
Ed Schultz to both. Fired up!
Jobs(and health and regulatory reform) are in the Balance.]
Friday, January 29, 2010
Anachronistic...
Review:[**]
The State of the Union was Wednesday Evening[*], my preemption was Tuesday, and an update with local implications the Morning of, and my review the Morning After.
My point is that the Honeymoon is over, but Obama has not exactly called for a divorce from bi-partisanship, but is still willing to talk.[***]
[Links added 1-31-10]
[*](as time passed there are now missing links)
[**](ibid.)
[***]President's Question Time (MSNBC-Rachel and Keith)1/5
[2-3-10: asterisks noted as missing]
The State of the Union was Wednesday Evening[*], my preemption was Tuesday, and an update with local implications the Morning of, and my review the Morning After.
My point is that the Honeymoon is over, but Obama has not exactly called for a divorce from bi-partisanship, but is still willing to talk.[***]
[Links added 1-31-10]
[*](as time passed there are now missing links)
[**](ibid.)
[***]President's Question Time (MSNBC-Rachel and Keith)1/5
[2-3-10: asterisks noted as missing]
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Presidential SOTU
Huffington On Bipartisanship *.-Text-
PBS Annotated SOTU text/video
GOP Responds to SOTU
and promoteown solutions.
Oh, it's the economy(brainy)! -Newsweek**
My summary of SOTU: Heavy on hope, light on hype.
My reply to response: It was "fair and balanced" and with less rhetoric almost a Blue Dog, and with better facts almost a someone that could work across the aisle. Talk is cheap and hype costly. Hope is very economical, but progress takes investment.
* It seems that the following is very odd(my bold):
BTW: we don't have to worry about deficits anymore**, there is no looking back and it is the President's economy.
footnote:
asterisk * is post I am commenting on
asterisk ** refers back to preemptive crack and source(Newsweek/YouTube)
But seriously.
*** see comment 3 of more there re: change agent
[UPDATE: On Thom Hartmann, Congressman Blumenauer suggests Valentines for the Senate (Valentines are the broken parts of the bills that need passing. Progressively: ping pong, reconciliation, nuclear option, Valentines [*] . Seemingly how I put it[**] & within the mechanics of the process and politics.)]
[*] 1-29-10 link to Valentines for the Senate
[**] The Nature of Things (posted 1-20-10) also "up, down, or side ways" not to mention the Mass A Choose Its Dilemma. Make it so! May the force be with you.[Is there a Mass A Choose Its Lesson?]
PBS Annotated SOTU text/video
GOP Responds to SOTU
and promoteown solutions.
Oh, it's the economy(brainy)! -Newsweek**
My summary of SOTU: Heavy on hope, light on hype.
My reply to response: It was "fair and balanced" and with less rhetoric almost a Blue Dog, and with better facts almost a someone that could work across the aisle. Talk is cheap and hype costly. Hope is very economical, but progress takes investment.
* It seems that the following is very odd(my bold):
Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), the second most powerful Republican in the Senate, was just as blunt and brutal. "It was a campaign speech," he said. "I thought it was a very partisan speech. He did not help himself with Republicans tonight. You do not bash the opposition and then encourage them to work with you."Especially as it continues:
How, specifically, did he bash?
"Every third paragraph was complaining about the mess that George Bush got him in. He didn't mention the words George Bush but he didn't have to," said Kyl. "After more than a year, take ownership of the problems you have. You campaigned for president to solve these problems so stop complaining about the mess that you inherited. That was okay for a few weeks or a few months, but after awhile it gets a little tiresome."
Kyl went on to complain about "thinly veiled suggestions that all Republicans do is say 'no,' that we have to stop saying 'no' to everything. That's not the way to encourage productive cooperation with the other side."
Was he offended by the shot at skeptic(sic) of the science behind climate change?I thought that was pretty much what President Obama did, and it seems odd if not forced that this Republican take makes any sense. Of course they believe in an invisible force (Ctrl F hand) not to mention freedom as a force, which is even less accurate.(just speaking economics and physics). It seems that MassAChooseIts independents, moderates, democrats, and apparently the Senate's #2 Republican has given the president a mandate. Now congress, "may the force** be with you".
"Well, he probably meant it as such, but frankly I didn't receive it as such, since I'm one of the skeptics," he said.
Anything else?
"He started out talking about the constitutional requirement to report on the state of the union and in the very first part of the speech he did. And then he veered off of it and got into this big campaign mantra, which just isn't done. I know this is his first one, but still, it shouldn't be so much about him, and how he didn't come here to do this and he didn't come here to do that and he's going to fight on and so on. It's not about that. It's about the American people and how you're going to react to what they've been telling you -- or trying to tell you -- about what they'd like to see done."
BTW: we don't have to worry about deficits anymore**, there is no looking back and it is the President's economy.
footnote:
asterisk * is post I am commenting on
asterisk ** refers back to preemptive crack and source(Newsweek/YouTube)
But seriously.
*** see comment 3 of more there re: change agent
[UPDATE: On Thom Hartmann, Congressman Blumenauer suggests Valentines for the Senate (Valentines are the broken parts of the bills that need passing. Progressively: ping pong, reconciliation, nuclear option, Valentines [*] . Seemingly how I put it[**] & within the mechanics of the process and politics.)]
[*] 1-29-10 link to Valentines for the Senate
[**] The Nature of Things (posted 1-20-10) also "up, down, or side ways" not to mention the Mass A Choose Its Dilemma. Make it so! May the force be with you.[Is there a Mass A Choose Its Lesson?]
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
"or nuanced"[P.M. Update]
[Morning after moved and continued in new post]
[Subtitle: "Mass a Choose Its Dilemma" (*)]
P.M. Update: Just a note on Mike Malloy (self-described of the "Real Left"[***])had a good rant for people tonight. Actually, I wish I could be more detailed or nuanced*, but I hope it will come back to me. Now that's the story. But it just might be...come on, give Obama a shot.
*I wonder if sarcastic irony comes out even?
P.S. heard on way home from hearing two "progressive"(uncertain if really so-described[**]) Congressional candidates for the WA 8th, but they will fight for the Dem nod.]
[**]1-27-10 Hint: see which is which,the Left or Democrat.]
[***]link added 1-27-10
(*) Washington State is undergoing a simultaneous electoral evolution and court fight over the Top Two Primary. Hence(apparently)the difficulty in finding out how the ballot will look with or with out labels of D and R selected by the parties or just preferences by the candidate at their choosing. It is not a direct correlation to the other state, but how the masses choose to party.
[Speaking of Mass a Choose Its, Obama won, not Obama-one: How do you know you are Right? If you find anything wrong with this(**).]
(**) place holder for Hardball/Game Change
[Subtitle: "Mass a Choose Its Dilemma" (*)]
P.M. Update: Just a note on Mike Malloy (self-described of the "Real Left"[***])had a good rant for people tonight. Actually, I wish I could be more detailed or nuanced*, but I hope it will come back to me. Now that's the story. But it just might be...come on, give Obama a shot.
*I wonder if sarcastic irony comes out even?
P.S. heard on way home from hearing two "progressive"(uncertain if really so-described[**]) Congressional candidates for the WA 8th, but they will fight for the Dem nod.]
[**]1-27-10 Hint: see which is which,the Left or Democrat.]
[***]link added 1-27-10
(*) Washington State is undergoing a simultaneous electoral evolution and court fight over the Top Two Primary. Hence(apparently)the difficulty in finding out how the ballot will look with or with out labels of D and R selected by the parties or just preferences by the candidate at their choosing. It is not a direct correlation to the other state, but how the masses choose to party.
[Speaking of Mass a Choose Its, Obama won, not Obama-one: How do you know you are Right? If you find anything wrong with this(**).]
(**) place holder for Hardball/Game Change
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
or nuanced
it is just
thinking
for people
It is too early to tell if Obama is getting it.
But at least look at what we are getting,
what we aren't and what we could.
We must acknowledge the 3D world, not counting change. Time takes time, and more than two perspectives. I am not sure where that goes, but I am talking just left and right. See? One needs to be off line to see that, and the answer is not even or fair and balanced, let alone in the middle.
BlogOn and play Hardball!
(See comment 1)
(there is more than one emphasis 4bold)
[P.M. Update: moved and continued]
thinking
for people
It is too early to tell if Obama is getting it.
But at least look at what we are getting,
what we aren't and what we could.
We must acknowledge the 3D world, not counting change. Time takes time, and more than two perspectives. I am not sure where that goes, but I am talking just left and right. See? One needs to be off line to see that, and the answer is not even or fair and balanced, let alone in the middle.
BlogOn and play Hardball!
(See comment 1)
(there is more than one emphasis 4bold)
[P.M. Update: moved and continued]
Friday, January 22, 2010
There is only one letter...
Between I Rock and a Hard Place
I don't know which is which but at least there is a fight.(or vice verse us)
There has been much silliness out there, but the message from Massachusetts seems to be about the lack of change.
Obama aside(I think he will get it and in fact has a message), people are not as incremental and pragmatic or nuanced, and independents and moderates, not to mention the Democratic base feel left behind.
Rather than blogOn, I will leave this as framed.
[On the other hand or rock or hard place...or nuanced might be the proper place to mirror*: a fair and balanced fight, and no faux crack.(TPM:Obama/Hardball:Dean/The Nation:Greider)(See labels and comment).]
*oops- see "framed" for hard place.
There has been much silliness out there, but the message from Massachusetts seems to be about the lack of change.
Obama aside(I think he will get it and in fact has a message), people are not as incremental and pragmatic or nuanced, and independents and moderates, not to mention the Democratic base feel left behind.
Rather than blogOn, I will leave this as framed.
[On the other hand or rock or hard place...or nuanced might be the proper place to mirror*: a fair and balanced fight, and no faux crack.(TPM:Obama/Hardball:Dean/The Nation:Greider)(See labels and comment).]
*oops- see "framed" for hard place.
Continue the Ping Pong!
I don't care if you just get it over the net(Reconciliation) or spin for the corner(Nuclear Option) but the House should have an up or down vote to let the voters know where they stand. If the Senate bill does not pass, then pass the 80% that is the same as the House or pass them in sections. Then only the Senate will suffer the Massachusetts effect, et al.
(if there is one link you open make it the bold)
BTW: Happy Anniversary! 1-20-09 Honeymoon Over!
[Remember the Hype]
[Remember the A Chord]
[Remember the Change]
See comment!
Yes, my comment on Arianna and the blessing of course corrections, but one more thought that occured earlier. (Lessons learned: a Marshal Plan for Haiti.)
(if there is one link you open make it the bold)
BTW: Happy Anniversary! 1-20-09 Honeymoon Over!
[Remember the Hype]
[Remember the A Chord]
[Remember the Change]
See comment!
Yes, my comment on Arianna and the blessing of course corrections, but one more thought that occured earlier. (Lessons learned: a Marshal Plan for Haiti.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)