Tuesday Morning Open Thread
Posted by
Mark Noonan
in
Announcements on
March 17th, 2009 at 09:14am with
144 responses.
Tags: Democrats, Open Thread.
Tags: Democrats, Open Thread.
Click here to get Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority by Matt Margolis and Mark Noonan.
Discuss how happy you are as you contemplate the coming melt-down of Obama and his Democrats. Alternately, you can discuss how miserable liberals must be now that even the densest of them are realizing they’ve been had.
Have at it.
Thank you for visiting Blogs For Victory. If you enjoy our content, please consider making a donation to help us cover the costs of our servers.Mark Noonan is co-author (with Matt Margolis) of Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority. He also blogs at Nevada News and Views. Follow Mark on Twitter.
144 Responses to “Tuesday Morning Open Thread”
Caucus of Corruption
ohio
It was NEVER about “nukes”
it was WMD’s and 12 years of UN mandates ignored.
you cant LIE your way out of THIS………
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cwqh4wQPoQk
AF: “There’s quite a difference.”
braindead mindless stooges can be rich lugnuts…its not a description of social status….as much as it is a reflection of the content they post…empty hollow words typically come from mental midgets…ignorance begets ignorance…a reprobate mind cannot concieve dignity…pretty basic…its not hard to ID a stooge…
ill endorse that marine…lugnut stooges normally dont have a clue why the iraq conflict happened…you are right…
Chris Dodd was the largest recipient of AIG campaign contributions in 2008. Totaling over $100K.
I wonder if he gave that back?
Let’s also not forget that Dodd received more campaign donations from AIG than any other politician! (Obama was second, McCain third) Not to mention, AIG headquarters happens to be in Dodd’s home state!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2208425/posts
Would you prefer to be called “A rich out of touch wingnut” or would you prefer to be called “a braindead mindless stooge”? – Arctic
I really don’t care. I am not affected by name calling. I kind of grew out of that. You will too someday.
Maybe.
AF,
An obstructionist, as determined by some random online dictionary I just happened to look up, is:
1. a person who deliberately delays or prevents progress.
2. a person who delays or obstructs the business before a legislative body by parliamentary contrivances or legalistic maneuvers.
For the first definition, since the “progress” of Obama’s plan still isn’t universally accepted, I don’t think it can fit under that one. As for the second definition, contrivances and legalistic maneuvers imply doing something that isn’t inherent in that person’s role in the legislative body. That is to say, people are supposed to vote how they feel would best suit the nation, and the way I see it, none of the GOP voted in a way just to deliberately tick off Obama.
While I will admit that Obama did try to make some concessions, I also feel that if he hadn’t then he would have lost some major popularity. But if the two party’s views on how to fix the crisis are diametrically opposed, then concessions really won’t please anybody I think.
I think labels from both sides are derogatory. But while those on the right tend to use the surface structure of their labels to have physical impact, it seems that those on the left tend to rely on implied context and subtext, which aren’t as directly offensive but are more effective at generating long-lasting misconceptions.
It’s like the difference between two commercials. The right-wing commercial goes like, “This medicine will be guaranteed to prevent diseases and is better than all the others!” The left-wing one, though, goes, “Nothing can prevent us from getting sick, but this product may help reduce the risk of infection so your mind can be more at ease.” They both make you feel like their advertised medicine is the best thing in the world, but one is more direct and the other appeals to the brain’s inability to distinguish implications from actual spoken word.
ohioorrin says:
March 17th, 2009 at 3:15 pm
“Haven’t we always been at war with Eurasia?”
Oranges and lemons”, say the bells of St. Clement’s
“You owe me five farthings”, say the bells of St. Martin’s
“When will you pay me?” say the bells of Old Bailey
“When I grow rich”, say the bells of Shoreditch
“When will that be?” say the bells of Stepney
“I do not know”, says the great bell of Bow
Here comes a candle to light you to bed
And here comes a chopper to chop off your head!
observer 20
what planet have you been on for the last 20 years, I have never witnessed the name calling, disrespect, nastiness, of the left against a sitting President as there has been against Bush.
What we do here is kiddy land to what the left has been doing for eight years.
observer20
make that the last 8 years
@observer: Mm. Food for thought. I’m gonna think about that for a while before I decide what to say in response to any degree. Thanks for that, it’s good to debate something with someone who injects thought and provokes introspection.
Kudos to you Sir (or Madam, whichever you happen to be)
fmrmarine,
I’m assessing the general strategic derogatory remarks as opposed to what the average person says.
With the advent of the internet and assumed anonymity, people can essentially say whatever they want, regardless of how insulting it is, because they don’t have to fear repercussions. Therefore I think the behavior on both sides for anonymous derogatory remarks is normally distributed.
But for remarks that are manufactured by those in charge of the party or for top bureaucrats, they operate differently. Very rarely will you see a Democratic Congressman stand up and actually say Bush is Hitler. Instead they’ll just draw contrived parallels and leave that up to the populous. Conservatives, though, seem to be a lot less unabashed at calling Obama a socialist or terrorist-empathizer or whatever.
Of course there are exceptions on both sides, but this is merely what I think happens. This is what I believe is the normative case.
“In the last 20 years American International Group (AIG) has contributed more than $9 million to federal candidates and parties through PAC and individual contributions. That’s enough to rank AIG on OpenSecrets.org’s Heavy Hitters list, which profiles the top 100 contributors of all time.”–Open Secrets.org
Over the last 20 years 1989-2009 Chris Dodd got 208 000 USD from AIG individual and PAC contributors. This makes him #1 in the US government in money recieved from AIG. Number 2 on the list with just over 200 000 USD is former President George W Bush. Following closely are Seantor Chuck Schumer of NY, President Obama, and Senator John McCain AZ. Notablt absent from the list are two men that have been blamed by both sides as bearing some responsibility in this financial mess Barney Frank MA and Phil Gramm TX. Neither ever got money from AIG.
observer20
Very rarely will you see a Democratic Congressman stand up and actually say Bush is Hitler. Instead they’ll just draw contrived parallels and leave that up to the populous. Conservatives, though, seem to be a lot less unabashed at calling Obama a socialist or terrorist-empathizer or whatever.
what Republic congressman can you quote -standing up and actually say O-CHIMPY a socialist or terrorist?
Dodd did put that in there. Here is what I found on it:
So Dodd did put a provision in there, however, there is also a provision that the Govt can change those rules and can determine if bonuses are in the public interest.
Are you at least giving Dodd credit now for trying to take back the bonuses?
And regarding the contributions Dodd received, I would expect him to have the largest number considering his place on the banking committee.
joe
Are you at least giving Dodd credit now for trying to take back the bonuses?
NO way.
The bonuses belong to those who deserve them per their contracts.
As we conservatives have long said let them FAIL.
Instead of worrying about BILLIONS sent to shore up foreign banks you marxists want to argue about a few million paid to some execs……TYPICAL LIE and misdirect!
joe
Wall st Journal
“President Obama joined yesterday in the clamor of outrage at AIG for paying some $165 million in contractually obligated employee bonuses. He and the rest of the political class thus neatly deflected attention from the larger outrage, which is the five-month Beltway cover-up over who benefited most from the AIG bailout.
Taxpayers have already put up $173 billion, or more than a thousand times the amount of those bonuses, to fund the government’s AIG “rescue.” This federal takeover, never approved by AIG shareholders, uses the firm as a conduit to bail out other institutions. After months of government stonewalling, on Sunday night AIG officially acknowledged where most of the taxpayer funds have been going.
Since September 16, AIG has sent $120 billion in cash, collateral and other payouts to banks, municipal governments and other derivative counterparties around the world. This includes at least $20 billion to European banks. The list also includes American charity cases like Goldman Sachs, which received at least $13 billion. This comes after months of claims by Goldman that all of its AIG bets were adequately hedged and that it needed no “bailout.” Why take $13 billion then? This needless cover-up is one reason Americans are getting angrier as they wonder if
fmrmarine says: March 17th, 2009 at 4:23 pm
“As we conservatives have long said let them FAIL.”
whaa – where do i start?
first, southern social wingnuts DESTROYED the conservative party in the US which was built by western conservatives fm goldwater to reagan.
in just 2 election cycles, big govt southern socials drove off all the reagan dems, moderates, & indies plus undid a generation of true conservative effort at the local, state, & federal levels.
next, ur boy W & his wall street pals like paulson rolled out TARP 1 !
in doing so, they stated they were helping banks which were too big to fail.
…success is failure…baath is al Qaeda…mission acomplished…
fmrmarine,
Okay, I can’t seem to find any right now. Perhaps I wasn’t thinking clearly when I said that. But I do still think there is a marked difference in method and mode of labeling between the two parties aside from frequency of the action. It’s difficult for me to try and quantify it.
first, southern social wingnuts DESTROYED the conservative party in the US which was built by western conservatives fm goldwater to reagan. – ohio
You really do have the talking points down, but you’ll see in 2010 how “destroyed” conservatism is.
Trust me.
cluster says:
March 17th, 2009 at 6:04 pm
I’d really like to know what socials plan to run on if the economy turns around by the first quarter of 2010.
Just another comment on the “southern socials”.
Do you realize that it was the African American community that voted down, and defeated same sex marriage?
I don’t give a F^&K what socials want to run on. The American people are more concerned with security and the economy moreso than same sex marriage and abortion.
The economy may recover, but the deficits and debts never will and that will be easy to run against. Secondly, the grafting and corruption will be an issue as will the weak foreign policy efforts.
I like our chances.
Horse crap. The vote in Orange County, Kern County, Riverside County alone dwarfed the black vote in the entire state. Do you know how many white people there are in California??
cluster says:
March 17th, 2009 at 6:23 pm
You said the same thing even in the face of mounting poll data to the contrary in 2006 and 2008. Why should anyone believe that the GOP has any petrol left in the tank now? Where are the new ideas?? The big GOP plan is to wait and pray that Obama “fails” and when he does Middle Class white moderates will flock back to a GOP that is going to cut taxes and raise defense spending and that will be the “new” solution and if it fails it will be the fault opf “libruls” that hate Amurrikah.
Didn’t we all just dance to that tune for 8 years??
But the heaviest blow came in California, where a gay-marriage ban, Proposition 8, overrode a state Supreme Court ruling that had legalized same-sex marriage. A surge of black turnout, inspired by Barack Obama, didn’t help liberals in the Proposition 8 fight. In fact, it was a big reason why they lost. The gay marriage problem is becoming a black problem.
http://www.slate.com/id/2204534/
bloch darling,
In 1981, the accumulative wealth of all American households was approx. 10 trillion. By 2008, that wealth had reached 60 trillion.
This was all accomplished primarily because of Reagan’s economic policies that filtered through Bush I, Clinton and then Bush II, with a small corrective recession in 2000.
Because of Reagans corporate tax incentive policies, companies like Texas Instruments and IBM achieved a breakthrough in micro chips which stimulated the tech boom, which also had a huge influence on that wealth. But the point being is that Reagans policies relied on the private sector, not government, and that resulted in unprecedented wealth growth.
Now for the last time, conservatives don’t have ideas (I don’t know how many times I have to tell you this). Conservatives have principles, that never change. And that is what we will once again run on.
Didn’t we all just dance to that tune for 8 years?? – bloch
First of all, you’d have to have a memory longer than 8 years to properly discuss the issue, and it would also help if you actually lived here.
Do you know how many white people there are in California?? – bloch
This comment is just too rich for words. The racism is just starkly blatant.
Cluster, just for fun, try adjusting your “statistics” for inflation.
It is also interesting to adjust for inflation the real wages of working Americans during the time period you cite.
Also of interest is to examine the ways in which the “accumulated wealth of American households” has been distributed amongst the various stratas of wage earners during this period. Lots of activity there.
The stock market has been in protracted “bear” status since the early 1980s. The dot-bomb “correction” is still with us, more oppressively than ever.
I don’t believe Reagan or his policies are responsible for the increasing poverty of the middle class. I also don’t believe that the last thirty years have been any sort of triumphant example of financial fortitude to brandish and cheer. As we are seeing in today’s news, Wall Street often calls the shots — not the government.
Not really. Conservatives don’t think about people that way, putting them all in a box. We see individuals.
How can the congress critters complain about the AIG bonus money when they did nothing and let thier automatic pay raises go though?
fool,
The rate of inflation outside of 1985 has remained consistently low, about 3% – 4% annually. So not a big factor.
Also of interest is to examine the ways in which the “accumulated wealth of American households” has been distributed ….fool
Big problem here. Wealth, or income is not “distributed”. It’s earned. Now that being said, there has been a lot of criminal activity lately in high profile private companies as of late, with government involvement I might add, but that doesn’t mean that the free market system is flawed, which is what liberals want us to believe. Honest capatilism is the best economic platform ever.
Throw out the criminals, not the system.
You seem to want a system that delivers equal outcome, moreso than equal opportunity. If you do that, you take away a financial incentive that historically, has been responsible for creating what America is today; an economy that is envied worldwide.
If 70% approval is a “meltdown”, then George Bush’s 30% must have been a, what, full blown global thermonuclear war? With a couple of asteroids mixed in for variety?
cluster says:
March 17th, 2009 at 6:40 pm
So if you take credit for the success you must take the responsibility for the failure of recent months as well?
cluster says:
March 17th, 2009 at 6:52 pm
Why is it always racism [ I prefer the term racial bigotry] when I make a statement of fact about white American culture and norms and when other make a generalization about minorities these things are applauded? Are my own people [white German ancestry from central Pennsy] now so thin skinned they cannot be called into question?? The tribalism among the lunatic fringe seems to run deep.
bloch,
Nearly every conversation with you results in you blaming white christians for most everything, and refering to the “browning” of America. It’s sad that you identify groups of people in that manner. Like Teach said, real conservatives view everyone as equal and the same. We are no different than anyone else on this planet. We all share the same physical and mental possibilities, and it’s all a choice on how to use those skills. I despise group mentality thinking, it’s a weakness, and limits personal growth.
The GOP should have taken a hit and they did, but it’s not because liberalism is all so popular, it’s because conservatives stopped being conservative and got us into a hell of a mess.
But I guarantee you that liberalism is not the way out, and the voters will soon realize that, and then true conservatism will return.
Observer:It’s like the difference between two commercials. The right-wing commercial goes like, “This medicine will be guaranteed to prevent diseases and is better than all the others!” The left-wing one, though, goes, “Nothing can prevent us from getting sick, but this product may help reduce the risk of infection so your mind can be more at ease.” They both make you feel like their advertised medicine is the best thing in the world, but one is more direct and the other appeals to the brain’s inability to distinguish implications from actual spoken word.
Excellent analogy. I find it very interesting that though very effective in illustrating your point on labelling it can also be used to show why the right has lost so much ground. The first commercial is in plain English and easy for anyone to understand. There’s no debating that. However, it also would imply a cure for all diseases, one size fits all if you will. The second, though indirect, it takes extenuating circumstances and known history into consideration. For example, everyone does get sick and barring any accidents or disasters eventually everyone will die from one disease or another. The first is the more promising and appealing theory, the second is a more practical and reality based solution.
Excellent analogy. I do think you nailed the labeling on both sides to a T with this, but I also thought it perfectly exemplifies the power shift from right to left in this country.
WRT labeling, the past election it seemed as though both sides took this to new levels. The right with taking everything out of context to fit their message to the left trying to put everything in the context of race.
Personally, I think people just need to relax and try to find common ground with one another. After all, even the strictest conservative has common ground with the most die hard liberal. Find that and the walls will crumble with time. This is primarily why I’m anti-label… but then I guess that would be a label in itself. heh
WRT obstructionism,
For the first definition, since the “progress” of Obama’s plan still isn’t universally accepted, I don’t think it can fit under that one.
I’d argue against the universally accepted bit. His plan, maybe not, however almost every economist around the globe does agree that something needed to be done and quickly. For those who said we should do nothing, I would call them obstructionists. They may whole heartedly believe it is the right approach, but then some people believe the world was only 6000 years old and the end of days is nearing therefore science is irrelevant. I would call them obstructionists of science as I would call the ‘do nothing’ brigade obstructionist of this economy. I believe even Ron Paul conceded that some money had to be injected though far less then what was proposed.
I wouldn’t consider the ear marks meme obstructionism. It was bound to get play. The way I see it, you can lay a ceramic tile 1000’sq floor perfectly with the exemption of one tile. The floor could be laid properly and last for 50 years but the first thing that’s going to get your attention is that one tile.
Do you know how many white people there are in California??
Probably too many, in your racist view. Do you know how many illegals are in California? I’ll bet you have no problem with them, given that Earbama’s gonna attempt to give them amnesty and voting rights.
Once again, bloch–when and where did you see combat, as you so claimed to FmrMarine? Are you too cowardly to answer?
“Virginia state Republican Party Chairman Jeffrey M. Frederick fired back Tuesday at party leaders seeking to remove him from his post, reiterating that he will not resign and responding to charges of mismanagement made by his opponents.”–The Washington Times
1luv2h8lib5 says:
March 18th, 2009 at 1:37 am
Sorry, got a little busy yesterday.
Western Maryland under the command of Colonel Gouvernor Warren “V” Corps September 1862. I was a courier and supplier for 3rd Brig 2 Div near Antietam.
bloch,
That sounds like one hell of a mescaline bender you were on.
This man is an embarrassment.
Obamateur cannot make a simple speech and thanking a foreign envoy without a teleprompter.
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Barack-Obama-Thanks-Himself-In-Teleprompt-Blunder-During-Address-With-Irish-PM-On-St-Patricks-Day/Article/200903315243932?lpos=World_News_First_World_News_Article_Teaser_Region_1&lid=ARTICLE_15243932_Barack_Obama_Thanks_Himself_In_Teleprompt_Blunder_During_Address_With_Irish_PM_On_St_Patricks_Day
tiredoflibbs,
Do you really want to play that game after 8 years of Bushisms? I mean… really?!?!
To call Obama an embarrassment for this after the past 8 years is hysterical. Is there any sane conservative left on this site?
Western Maryland under the command of Colonel Gouvernor Warren “V” Corps September 1862. I was a courier and supplier for 3rd Brig 2 Div near Antietam.
Thanks, bloch–I knew your claim was bullsh*t.
OBAMA=One Bad Ass Mistake America…