Patting the wrists, rolling the eyes.

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

Originally posted by Spanky
Does anyone else find it amazing that Bush has not Vetoed any bill yet. I realize that the Republicans control both houses of Congress, but still, it is a little amazing. I know Carter vetoed a lot of bills when he was in office and the Dems controlled both houses. Did Clinton veto any bill in his first two years when the Dems controlled both the House and the Senate?

Dems tend to be more fragmented and less disciplined than Repubs. It's one reason why we rarely run Fortune 500 corporations. Can you see Hastert or Lott/Frist sending Bush a bill he doesn't want on his desk? Me neither.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by chickmagnet
Wake up! its all staged and orchestrated by Rove.

Ty, I thought we told you not to give this url to your DU friends?

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Ty, I thought we told you not to give this url to your DU friends?

Hank spends more time over there than anybody. I think he did it to stop the morality discussion.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Daniel Okrent, until recently the NYT's ombuds-type, took a cheap and unsubstantiated shot at Paul Krugman on his way out the door, and Krugman has now responded. I didn't think Okrent was an idiot, but picking (and losing) this fight doesn't reflect well on him.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Spanky
Does anyone else find it amazing that Bush has not Vetoed any bill yet. I realize that the Republicans control both houses of Congress, but still, it is a little amazing. I know Carter vetoed a lot of bills when he was in office and the Dems controlled both houses. Did Clinton veto any bill in his first two years when the Dems controlled both the House and the Senate?

Yes. But it also says how little Congress has done in the last four years.

Didn't his dad go until the last year of the admin without having a veto overridden?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Daniel Okrent, until recently the NYT's ombuds-type, took a cheap and unsubstantiated shot at Paul Krugman on his way out the door, and Krugman has now responded. I didn't think Okrent was an idiot, but picking (and losing) this fight doesn't reflect well on him.

does Krugman think Bush will be reelected?

[chickmagnet]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Ty, I thought we told you not to give this url to your DU friends?

the attorneys I know at DU took one look into the frothing defective gene pool of insanity at the infirm board years ago and concluded that the crazy and inane ramblings and cyber skidmarks of you all would drive even the sanest democrat nutso.

in my case, i am immune to insanity and i have made you knobs my pet project.

[chickmagnet]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
does Krugman think Bush will be reelected?

question for u:

if the first election was an invalid fraud, what affect does that have on the re-election?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by chickmagnet
question for u:

if the first election was an invalid fraud, what affect does that have on the re-election?

Once an Empire is in full swing, it herlps little to ask how the emperor came to power

Cicero on Julius Ceasar

[Bad_Rich_Chic]

Originally posted by Spanky
I believe this is just a speed bump on the road to European unity. The polling showed that most of the French are for a Constitution, but it just needs to be rewritten.

I disagree. The constitution can't be rewritten in any way more favorable to France (since any future renegotiation would include the new eastern European countries). France completely shot its wad getting the constitution into the condition it was in already. (And a sorry-ass condition it was, too.)

Then again, I think the EU was effectively dead as a potential unified political entity when they admitted Britain. It is now in French interests to kill it as an economic entity as well, since all future developments will be contrary to its interests (reduction of subsidies and further opening of markets). They are well on their way to doing this (see: the destruction of the Maastricht criteria).

I think they are worried by two things. 1) The union forcing a neo-liberal (as they like to say "Anglo") economic system. Which will make them too much like the United States (God forbid) and flood their country with cheap labour destroying their social safety net. 2) Turkey - since most French envision a much tighter union that goes beyond just Economics they don't want Turkey in. The British, who see a loose European confederation, don't mind Turkey so much.

I agree with (1), but their social net is pretty fucked anyway in the long term since it structurally entrenches increasing unemployment. I think (2) is a superficial concern (though Americans certainly underestimate the zenophobia of Europe). I think the rejection of "Europe" is much deeper than details of the constitution or immigration concerns.

I think the real underlying concern is that, in an expanded Europe, France can't steer policy (foreign, internal, regulatory or economic). The French have long fancied the EU as the tool by which they will reestablish their role as a real global power (with the oomph of a bunch of other contries quietly following their lead). There's no longer a chance in hell for that, and so the EU is now something that frustrates the exercise of French power rather than magnifying it. Why would they vote to further entrench that situation?

Europe needs to unify it is even going to have half a chance to keep up with the US in the near future, and China and India in the far flung future. At a certain point Economic unity also requires social integration (especially for socialist leaning nations).

I agree 100%. But it will never happen. Therefore Europe is destined for global irrelevance, for a generation or so at least.

[chickmagnet]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Once an Empire is in full swing, it herlps little to ask how the emperor came to power

and you thusly expose yourself as a useful idiot of the regime.

the whole of the W experience reminds me of my college roommate. a dupe if there ever was one. he fell prey to a con man who had a "natural weight loss" pill mlm scam going. the guy eventually went to prison, but not before he ruined the futures of thousands of little people.

it came out in court that when the feds busted him he was in his office at kneeling stand reading aloud from the bible.

sounds like W's fate when the revolution comes knockin'.

[chickmagnet]

Originally posted by Bad_Rich_Chic
Therefore Europe is destined for global irrelevance, for a generation or so at least.

at least until the caliphate of the islamic republic of europe is firmly established.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by chickmagnet
the whole of the W experience reminds me of my college roommate. a dupe if there ever was one. he fell prey to a con man who had a "natural weight loss" pill mlm scam going. the guy eventually went to prison, but not before he ruined the futures of thousands of little people.

If they were little people, why did they spring for natural weight loss?

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Spanky
I believe this is just a speed bump on the road to European unity. The polling showed that most of the French are for a Constitution, but it just needs to be rewritten. I think they are worried by two things. 1) The union forcing a neo-liberal (as they like to say "Anglo") economic system. Which will make them too much like the United States (God forbid) and flood their country with cheap labour destroying their social safety net. 2) Turkey - since most French envision a much tighter union that goes beyond just Economics they don't want Turkey in. The British, who see a loose European confederation, don't mind Turkey so much.

Europe needs to unify it is even going to have half a chance to keep up with the US in the near future, and China and India in the far flung future. At a certain point Economic unity also requires social integration (especially for socialist leaning nations).

I think (2) will largely prevent a political union, and (1) will to the extent that the countries cannot agree on the overall regulatory framework.

Social integration may come but it will be the tail on the dog of economic unity.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Daniel Okrent, until recently the NYT's ombuds-type, took a cheap and unsubstantiated shot at Paul Krugman on his way out the door, and Krugman has now responded. I didn't think Okrent was an idiot, but picking (and losing) this fight doesn't reflect well on him.

Dissent. Krugman is considered a jackass these days. He lost his fucking mind over W.