Posting Towards Gomorrah

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Given where the R's have been in the House the last few years, her boast may be viable.

The problem is that all the Dems voted against CAFTA, and that was the litmus test for most business lobbies. Before they could argue they were relatively probusiness, but the CAFTA vote sent that argument right out the door.

The Dems thought they could use all sorts of political double talk to just hide the fact the reason why they voted against CAFTA was just to stick it to Bush. In fact some of the Dems own bankbenchers bought the political double talk (that CAFTA wasn't really pro-free trade) and now are completely amazed that the business lobby has abandoned them. The business lobby, unlike the general public, is less susceptible to the political spin, and the Dems should have realized this.

Normally, the Business lobby would back both horses in the race just in case the Dems won. But now the business lobby isn't backing the Dems at all even thought the Dems have a strong chance of taking over
(which is a huge shift).

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Articles of IMpeachment, yes or no?

Of course not. The "progressive" tide will carry the Dems to power in the House, but will not be so strong as to overcome the institutional safeguards and common sense.

(Or so I hope -- that theory is my basis for supporting a bunch of "progressive" candidates in this election cycle with whom I have very substantial disagreements.)

S_A_M

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
I remember her. She was a lunatic.

S_A_M

Yes, she was a liberal. Thanks.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by taxwonk
If they knew, and had the ability to actually get the message out, I might have more faith they could retake the House. As it stands, I'm not holding my breath.

The problem is that there is no agenda that would work. They have done the polling, and the population is unhappy with the Republicans but the population is divided over why they are upset. If the Dems take any firm positions they will alienate half the people that are upset at the Republicans. They are in a tought spot.

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
I recalled that you enjoyed bantering with some of the early Yankee Doodle Greedy and Dr. Whoopies of the world.

I was younger then, mostly unmarried, most importantly no kids. Much higher energy levels and tolerance for bullshit.

P.S. YDG never did explain how one could "lock and load" a shotgun.

S_A_M

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Righty nutcase Dinesh D'Souza has a new book explaining how terrorist attacks on America are our fault:
[list]In THE ENEMY AT HOME, bestselling author Dinesh D’Souza makes the startling claim that the 9/11 attacks and other terrorist acts around the world can be directly traced to the ideas and attitudes perpetrated by America’s cultural left.

D’Souza shows that liberals—people like Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Barney Frank, Bill Moyers, and Michael Moore—are responsible for fostering a culture that angers and repulses not just Muslim countries but also traditional and religious societies around the world.

Presumably other conservatives will be lining up to tell D'Souza that it's just wrong to blame America for Islamic terrorism.

Without having read the book or the link that you posted, I wonder, is he really blaming America or rather certain individuals or political organisations that have warped and perverted the American way of life and the ideals that make us great?

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
I was younger then, mostly unmarried, most importantly no kids. Much higher energy levels and tolerance for bullshit.

P.S. YDG never did explain how one could "lock and load" a shotgun.

S_A_M

Lol. good memoury. that was part of his charm.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Here's a correction to that map from the Detroit Free Press showing change in median income over the last six years. The national numbers are somewhat better than the Free Press reported, but still show a decline over the last six years. Some of the state-by-state numbers are quite different, though. Median income has declined the most in Wisconsin (-16.5%) and Michigan (-14.9%) and has increased the most in Hawaii (+14.3%) and North Dakota (+10.3%).

I hate to sound like a broken record, but these adjustments show what tripe the word "Median" is. The only chart that would really have any meaning is one that showed the average change in different sections of the population.

The fact that the Democrats are not trotting one out suggests to me that such a chart would show income growth in all five sections of the population.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
The Dems thought they could use all sorts of political double talk to just hide the fact the reason why they voted against CAFTA was just to stick it to Bush.

While there will surely some Democrats who were happy to stick it to Bush, there were also a lot of Democrats who thought it was bad policy.

From the Washington Post
But a core group of as many as 50 pro-trade Democrats are voting against CAFTA; those lawmakers say the agreement is a step backward on labor standards after years of steady gains under previous trade accords.

They complain that the administration failed to consult them during negotiations, taking their votes for granted. And they say past trade agreements were accompanied by increased support for worker-retraining programs, education efforts and aid to dislocated workers -- support that the president has not provided.

"Free and open trade is an important component to widening the winner's circle for all Americans, but it's not a Johnny One Note part of the puzzle," said Rep. Ellen Tauscher (Calif.), a co-chairman of the centrist New Democrat Coalition, who voted for the most contentious trade bills of the past half-dozen years.

You know Ellen Tauscher and her district. She's not interested in sticking it to Bush for the sake of sticking it to Bush, and that kind of thing is not helping her get re-elected.

As I've posted before, it's not a coincidence that CAFTA was written with labor standards that Democrats didn't support. The GOP leadership doesn't want Democrats voting for its bills. They don't want business giving money to Democrats. All the better to draft a bill designed to get Democrats to go the other way.

But now the business lobby isn't backing the Dems at all even thought the Dems have a strong chance of taking over
(which is a huge shift).

I can understand why someone in your position would be saying that, but it's not what I hear.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
I missed this one too. :blush:

You do know about Beijing and Mumbai, right?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
I hate to sound like a broken record, but these adjustments show what tripe the word "Median" is. The only chart that would really have any meaning is one that showed the average change in different sections of the population.

The fact that the Democrats are not trotting one out suggests to me that such a chart would show income growth in all five sections of the population.

If the median income is down 2.8%, how is it possible for there to be income growth in all five quintiles (a/k/a "section," right?) of the population?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Without having read the book or the link that you posted, I wonder, is he really blaming America or rather certain individuals or political organisations that have warped and perverted the American way of life and the ideals that make us great?

Once you get the answer, could you do up a condensed version of his post, the support, and our spin/ talking points?

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Righty nutcase Dinesh D'Souza has a new book explaining how terrorist attacks on America are our fault:

• In THE ENEMY AT HOME, bestselling author Dinesh D’Souza makes the startling claim that the 9/11 attacks and other terrorist acts around the world can be directly traced to the ideas and attitudes perpetrated by America’s cultural left.
  
  D’Souza shows that liberals—people like Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Barney Frank, Bill Moyers, and Michael Moore—are responsible for fostering a culture that angers and repulses not just Muslim countries but also traditional and religious societies around the world. Their outspoken opposition to American foreign policy—including the way the Bush administration is conducting the war on terror—contributes to the growing hostility, encouraging people both at home and abroad to blame America for the problems of the world. He argues that it is not our exercise of freedom that enrages our enemies, but our abuse of that freedom—from the sexual liberty of women to the support of gay marriage, birth control, and no-fault divorce, to the aggressive exportation of our vulgar, licentious popular culture.
  
  The cultural wars at home and the global war on terror are usually viewed as separate problems. In this groundbreaking book, D’Souza shows that they are one and the same. It is only by curtailing the left’s attacks on religion, family, and traditional values that we can persuade moderate Muslims and others around the world to cooperate with us and begin to shun the extremists in their own countries.

Presumably other conservatives will be lining up to tell D'Souza that it's just wrong to blame America for Islamic terrorism.

I realize it's just a handicap of your education, but you should really know better than to pay attention to clowns like D'Souza

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Spanky
I hate to sound like a broken record, but these adjustments show what tripe the word "Median" is. The only chart that would really have any meaning is one that showed the average change in different sections of the population.

The fact that the Democrats are not trotting one out suggests to me that such a chart would show income growth in all five sections of the population.

That's not what the Statistics of Income Bulletin says. But I've posted the numbers before.

[SlaveNoMore]

Hank Chinaski
have you met any other stand up comedians?

Depends on your definition of "comedy"