Wednesday Night Open Thread

Time for dinner and Big Brother here.

Anyone have any interesting Labor Day plans? Maybe you can get in the mood with Salt of the Earth with Mick and Keith -- the Concert for 9/11 version.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

< Court Case Exposes Principal Role of DynCorp in Operating Ghost Air Rendition Flights | Thursday Morning Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Keystone XL tar sands pipeline (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by MO Blue on Wed Aug 31, 2011 at 08:45:13 PM EST
    Oil from this project will be shipped overseas.

    In pushing for the Obama Administration's approval of TransCanada's proposed Keystone XL tar sands pipeline, the North American oil industry and its political patrons argue that the pipeline is necessary for American energy security and its construction will help wean America of dependence on Mideast oil. But a closer look at the new realities of the global oil market and at the companies who will profit from the pipeline reveals a completely different story: Keystone XL will not lessen U.S. dependence on foreign oil, but rather transport Canadian oil to American refineries for export to overseas markets. read on. link

    Environmentalist Objections

    TransCanada claims their pipelines are the safest in the continent. And the State Department seems inclined to agree having released their Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the Keystone XL pipeline last week. They find that the pipeline poses "no significant impacts" to the environment, and advise the project move forward.

    So what about the 12 spills along the Keystone I line in its first year of operation? Since commencing operation in June of 2010, the Keystone I pipeline has suffered more spills than any other 1st year pipeline in U.S. history.

    In addition to a nasty spill record, the proposed Keystone XL will cross one of the largest aquifers in the world - the Ogallala - which supplies drinking water to millions and provides 30% of the nation's groundwater used for irrigation. Pipeline construction will also disrupt 20,782 acres, including 11,485 acres of native and modified grassland, rangeland and pastureland, and pipeline construction will threaten sensitive wildlife and aquatic species habitats.

    According to the EPA, carbon emissions from tar sands crude are approximately 82% higher than the average crude refined in the U.S. Given the extremely toxic nature of tar sands bitumen and the fact that Keystone is TransCanada's first wholly owned pipeline in the U.S., it seems reasonable to look to TransCanada's performance with Keystone I for clues on how it would manage Keystone XL. link

    A diagram of the Ogallala (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Mr Natural on Wed Aug 31, 2011 at 09:11:18 PM EST
    I'm watching my second Sherlock (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by observed on Wed Aug 31, 2011 at 09:34:57 PM EST
    Holmes episode with Jeremy Brett as Holmes (1984-1994, British).
    He's absolutely brilliant. Highly recommended.

    Brett give the definitive Holmes performance. (none / 0) (#39)
    by tigercourse on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 08:43:15 AM EST
    Some of the later episodes dip a bunch in quality, mainly when Brett's health starts to deteriorate, but they produced alot of episodes and many were quite entertaining.

    labor day weekend plans (5.00 / 2) (#21)
    by cpinva on Wed Aug 31, 2011 at 11:20:40 PM EST
    clean up the debris left over from irene. if the weather's nice (it has been spectacular the past 3 days), get some fishing in, and fire up the grill.

    plan on making a pulled beef BBQ too, using beef briskets. i make a killer sauce.

    Awesome (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by jbindc on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 08:13:30 AM EST
    What time's dinner?  (I can even bring some garbage bags and gloves for the cleanup!)

    likewise (none / 0) (#45)
    by CST on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 09:21:30 AM EST
    we still have brush everywhere.  Hasn't the weather been something else though?  Perfect.

    Tes, I do have plans: (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by oculus on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 05:19:36 AM EST
    Fallingwater to celebrate bday ending in "Oh!!!" (the day after Labor Day)

    Going camping in the Appalachian Mts (5.00 / 2) (#25)
    by Dr Molly on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 07:01:22 AM EST
    this weekend. Hiking, fishing, swimming, campfire, etc.

    Getting ready for the end of summer.

    Stripping our resources here at home (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by MO Blue on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 07:15:21 AM EST
    Eight helicopters on loan from the Illinois National Guard were expected to arrive Tuesday night in Vermont to help the Vermont National Guard deliver food, medicine, water and other supplies to 13 Vermont towns cut off from the rest of the state in the aftermath of Tropical Storm Irene.

    The outside helicopter support is needed because all six of the Vermont Guard's Black Hawk helicopters are still in Iraq, where they and 55 Vermont soldiers are wrapping up a yearlong hospital transport mission, said Lt. Lloyd Goodrow, spokesman for the Vermont Guard.

    The eight helicopters being sent in include six massive, double-bladed Chinook choppers and two smaller Black Hawk helicopters, said Vermont Guard Capt. Doran Metzger. link

    Iraq is hard as hell on helicopters too (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 08:18:42 AM EST
    I wonder what condition you'll get them back and I wonder if they will treat them as well as they do the active duty equipment.  They will need to be sent to Germany and have all the panels pulled off, the sand pours out of them.  The sand eats the rotor blades and the engine via the air intake and all that has to be replaced too.  Historically speaking at the start of this Iraq mess, we did not fund to fix anything that belonged to the National Guard.  Hopefully that has changed and changed dramatically in this case because they will need dramatic overhauls.

    I just txt my spouse about it (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 08:22:10 AM EST
    and he said that all helicopters are supposed to go through the reset now no matter where they came from before they are allowed back in country, otherwise it is too dangerous.

    According to article (none / 0) (#36)
    by MO Blue on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 08:27:05 AM EST
    the "extensive maintenance" takes about a month. No mention was made on who picks up the tab or how much it will cost.

    Goodrow said the Vermont soldiers in Iraq are on their way home and should be back in the state late this week or early next week. The six helicopters, however, will need to undergo an extensive maintenance check to remove desert sand and grit from their machinery before they are cleared for use back in the state.

    Goodrow said that process could take a month to complete. ...

    They should get more than hust a check over (5.00 / 2) (#41)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 08:53:44 AM EST
    on parts that they may be able to "get away with" for awhile I hope, because of the wear and tear.  The federal government should have to pay completely for what they suck out of your state National Guard equipment.  They didn't just give that equipment to the states either, they sold it to the states.

    The feds do pay for that reset (none / 0) (#50)
    by republicratitarian on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 09:46:06 AM EST
    When the Federal Government deploys a unit, on federal title 10 orders, the feds get all of the bills.

    Not just helicopters go through reset. Two years ago after our Florida National Guard unit got back from Iraq, all of our satellite and communications equipment and vehicles went through reset. There was a separate reset budget amount for the whole thing.


    Did they return your equipment to you (none / 0) (#52)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 09:53:22 AM EST
    in the condition they got it in?  MO blue's article said that the equipment would be inspected and that concerns me, the equipment should be returned in as good condition as they received it in for their use.  I remember after the first year in Iraq they abandoned some National Guard equipment over there because it had been reduced to junk by the time they were done with it.

    Yeah, for the most part (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by republicratitarian on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 10:02:36 AM EST
    Pretty similar to the helicopters in that they go back to the contractor and they replace or refurbish any component that needs it. I'm not sure who pays for the equipment itself initially on the Guard side though, the federal government or the state government. I'll have to check on that.

    The government has a vested interest in keeping it up and working so they can deploy you again :)


    Not Sure About These... (none / 0) (#83)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 01:37:57 PM EST
     ... but I was on a helicopter carrier, and worked on the flight deck.  In a normal six month deployment, engines were changed out regularly, if I were to guess, at least twice, ditto with rotors, not as frequent, but still a regular changed, based on flight hours, not actual wear.  They were Marine aircraft, but the Navy was responsible for moving them.  They were in flight or being fixed, they never sat idle.

    I can't imagine them sending them back without complete overhauls.  The safety when I was in was beyond ridiculous, a 46 crashes in San Diego, the entire fleet would be down until they figured it out.  Every tool has to be accounted for a service aircraft could leave the shop & every spec of debris had to be picked up off the flight deck before flight ops.  I'm sure those rules have relaxed with the wars, but I know they still ground a fleet after a crash.

    They were kept in pristine condition and the although I believe you, the image of sand coming out of panels seems almost unbelievable to me.

    Side Note.  We also had Harriers, and in the early 90's those Rolls-Royce engines were changed almost monthly as a cost of $5M/each.  


    Were they flown in Iraq (none / 0) (#86)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 02:15:01 PM EST
    or are you talking about regular stateside maintenance?  The first year in Iraq my husband's unit put in for their maintenance crew chiefs to get bronze stars...but not the pilots actually flying in combat.  Everyone agreed that the crew chiefs gave more than anyone.  They slept in the hangar because of repairs due to the sucking in of the sand and the eating away on the engines and rotors was extensive.  They worked, slept, ate beside the aircraft in order to keep enough safe and in the air to handle what was going on.  But they also had to eventually send them to Germany for extreme overhauls too, after a year there when you pull the panels off sand pours out of the airframe.

    Deployment Maintence (none / 0) (#93)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 03:36:26 PM EST
    They were in the air or in the hanger, they never sat idle.  And far as land terrain, we never knew, it was 8 sides of water, but they did landings somewhere, Marines got in, they left and came back for more Marines.

    Ofter we didn't even know where were we at, middle of the Atlantic or in the Mediterranean, but rarely did we get logistic specifics and even rarer did we get to see land.

    Our ship only has one aircraft, a Huey for search and rescue, everything else was the Marines out of Camp Lejeune.

    Considering the maintenance they did just for normal flight ops, I can only imagine what they have to do in sand during a war.  Plus, for the most part, no one was shooting at them.


    Dog sitting for my daughter (5.00 / 3) (#28)
    by MO Blue on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 08:10:06 AM EST
    on Sat. and Sun. while they go visit #1 grandson at college.

    Plans while there:
    Viewing the U.S. Open tennis open on their big screen t.v. - will be great.

    Use their jacuzzi. A treat for my back which has been giving me fits the last couple of weeks.

    Go to a restaurant close to their house that serves the best walleye special in town.    

    Grandpuppy-sitting here, too (5.00 / 7) (#66)
    by Towanda on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 10:56:50 AM EST
    when my children come home to cope with the prognosis this week for their dad -- the worst prognosis possible.  

    So I have a lot of spirits to keep up around here, and I am just spending today storing up energy.  And reminding myself to listen, listen, listen, as there are no good answers, anyway.


    My heart goes out to you and your family (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by MO Blue on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 11:25:19 AM EST
    The best advise that I can give you is to take advantage of any and all support that is out there to help you financially and/or help in cope with the illness as well as being a care giver. Have family and friends, as well as organized support groups, help you too. Many have skills that will help you and take some of the burden from your shoulders. As much as possible find time to take care of yourself so that you will have the strength to help your family get through this time.  

    Thanks, and your posts on the topic (5.00 / 5) (#78)
    by Towanda on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 12:35:42 PM EST
    have been helpful before, too, MO Blue.

    Their dad is not the sort to seek help, as he so needed when he took his mother into his home for years of her decline -- she died the day before he was diagnosed, can you imagine that day for him? -- but I was able, with my experience of years in getting the guy to do what I wanted :-), to help the kids see how to bring him around then to have home care helpers and such services.  So having done so before may help in times ahead, too, for my poor progeny who have been through so much loss lately -- and already have so many worries, being jobless in this @#$$%! economy.

    As for me, I'm again going through the process of prioritizing, of realizing that some things on my to-do list just are not that important now.  I will forgo the plan for getting that last promotion, for example.  I am reminding myself of wise words I once read:  On their deathbeds, no one says that they wished they had spent more time at the office.  


    I share your pain (5.00 / 1) (#88)
    by loveed on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 02:26:12 PM EST
     I have posted about my mom.
     The one thing I have learned is to live each day to the max. Don't dwell on the pain. And don't grieve before your love one leaves.
     The month of April I spent the whole month, preparing for her death. Will now it's September and she's still hear. She's only drinking water since July 4th.
     We've have had a wonderful time together. She developed a sense of humor. She made me buy a wig
    (I hate wigs), since I wouldn't leave her to go to the beauty shop.
     I cherish this time together. It made me take the time to thank my mom for everything she has done.
     This day me and my mom is living life.

    Oh. Towanda - I'm so sorry to hear this. (5.00 / 2) (#80)
    by Anne on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 01:28:13 PM EST
    How fortunate your children are that you can and will be a support for them as they begin to deal with what's coming.

    I don't think we realize sometimes what unconditional love really entails, but being able to listen, to be prepared to hear whatever needs to be said, to validate and not judge, to be the safety net they will so badly need - that's about as unconditional as it gets.  It not only honors them, but it honors their father, and that, I think, is going to be more important to them than maybe even they will be able to realize right away.

    Just like we have all been telling Jeff, seek out and allow yourself the things that comfort you, whenever and wherever you can; it really does help keep one stronger.

    Goes without saying that my thoughts and prayers will be with you, and I'm sending some virtual hugs, as well.


    Thanks to you and all (5.00 / 2) (#96)
    by Towanda on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 03:53:34 PM EST
    including Jeff, who also is in my thoughts a lot (and on email, off-TL), too.

    We just got the grandpuppy and all of his paraphernalia, although again his humans seem to not bring along treats.  Fortunately, we are fully prepared.

    So I just sent off the puppy's human with a hug and a message of my pride in him for giving up a lot this weekend to get here to go be with his dad now for "serious male bonding," as my son put it.  That means charring meat on the grill and watching sports on television and talking about that instead of what is ahead.  That is, until his sister has had enough of how guyz do this and gets into feelings.  That will signal time for the guyz to go to bed.  Yes, I can script the entire evening ahead! but all of that is also what their dad needs now, for as long as is possible.


    Questionable allocation of state funds (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by MO Blue on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 08:36:03 AM EST
    Idaho once again being sued over the constitutionality of its current abortion laws.

    It's not the first time Idaho lawmakers have passed abortion laws that they were warned likely would be found unconstitutional. In the past decade, Idaho has spent more than $730,000 to defend restrictive abortion laws that ended up being struck down by courts. Those costly rulings prompted legislative leaders in recent years to require that abortion-related legislation be reviewed by the Idaho attorney general's office.

    I've got a potluck wedding (5.00 / 3) (#48)
    by CST on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 09:42:56 AM EST
    to attend.  My surrogate brother (I grew up in a 2-family) is marrying his German girlfriend and will be moving overseas in a few months.  They are both pretty broke, still in school and underemployed, so instead of bringing gifts that they can't take with them anyway, the guests are bringing the meal, and it's just gonna be a big party.

    Also I've gotta clean the trees out of the yard and plan a baby shower, since I'm gonna be an aunt soon.

    Some good news (5.00 / 5) (#49)
    by jbindc on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 09:43:55 AM EST
    On the abortion-rights front

    First of all, a federal judge has blocked implementation of Texas' new ultrasound law pending a court case, luckily before a single patient was subjected to the onerous restrictions. The law would have required women to listen to a condescending lecture about abortion (from a doctor who doesn't even agree!), put through a medically unnecessary sonogram using the vaginal probe instead of a less invasive technique, and then sent home for 24 hours to think about what a naughty girl she is.


    The other beam of light in the darkness is this NPR report on the Justice Department's amped-up efforts to prosecute abortion "protesters" who move beyond mere verbal harassment of women entering family planning clinics and into physically obstructing women or employees from entering clinics.

    Labor Day (none / 0) (#1)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Aug 31, 2011 at 08:19:58 PM EST
    nothing planned as it all going to happen on Sunday when I have two events to attend--a pool party at some friend's house and a gno with a different set of friends.

    Had to google "gno" (5.00 / 2) (#46)
    by MO Blue on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 09:31:03 AM EST
    A real "duh" moment when I saw the definition as it was so obvious then. Mind was a complete blank before googling though.

    Maybe it has just been too long since my last gno for it to register.

    Anyway, sounds like a fun Sunday. Have a great time and it looks like you may need Monday to rest up.


    I don't know if that's it (5.00 / 2) (#65)
    by sj on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 10:56:05 AM EST
    Maybe it has just been too long since my last gno for it to register.
    or not but I still had to google to gno* myself
    * for other potential googlers: girl's night out.  apparently.

    Been cooking a lot (none / 0) (#2)
    by observed on Wed Aug 31, 2011 at 08:37:42 PM EST
    for my sister and her husband.
    Yesterday she had arthroscopic new surgery (went very well) and I made Jeralyn's chicken in a pot for dinner. Seemed like good post-surgery comfort food. They loved it.
    Today, I made a special dinner to celebrate my new appointment. I made Jamie Oliver's rustic braised lamb recipe for the first time. I was intetested in the recipe because he uses white wine to braise red meat. It was quite tasty, with the lamb extremely tender.

    ooops.. <knee>surgery. (none / 0) (#3)
    by observed on Wed Aug 31, 2011 at 08:43:01 PM EST
    Wish I saw this an hour ago (none / 0) (#6)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Aug 31, 2011 at 08:55:26 PM EST
    I would have made it too, I can't believe you remembered. I haven't had it in over a year and it's one of my and the TL kid's favorites:

    Chicken in a pot, with mashed potatoes. ... all you do is saute some onions and garlic in olive oil, add some chicken breasts, salt, pepper and paprika, and then after they are brown on both sides, add some chicken broth and 1/2 cup sweet vermouth.

    And of course serve it with mashed potatoes.


    Ah, I didn't remember the part about mashed (none / 0) (#7)
    by observed on Wed Aug 31, 2011 at 09:07:16 PM EST
    potatoes. I should do that next time.
    I've made the dish 3 or 4 times.
    I put orzo in it this time.

    No additional trial (none / 0) (#4)
    by CoralGables on Wed Aug 31, 2011 at 08:44:41 PM EST
    for Barry Bonds. Prosecutors drop three perjury counts.

    In other words (none / 0) (#18)
    by Peter G on Wed Aug 31, 2011 at 10:10:32 PM EST
    Bonds will be sentenced only on the one count of obstruction of justice, for which the jury convicted him at the trial.  Sentencing guideline is around 18 months, but judge could readily choose probation instead.

    Boehner wins again. Obama's speech (none / 0) (#9)
    by caseyOR on Wed Aug 31, 2011 at 09:20:05 PM EST
    moved to Sept. 8.

    So, everybody knows that Obama has promised us a big speech to lay out his plan to create jobs. And because it will be the best speech evah about jobs, Obama decided it required that he deliver the speech before a joint session of Congress, ala the State of the Union. I don't get it, but that's what he wants.

    Two possible dates, both presenting scheduling conflicts: give the speech on Wed. Sept.7 and conflict with a Republican presidential debate, or give the speech the next night, Sept. 8, and go up against the first game of the new NFL season.

    Obama opted for the 7th. Everybody was notified. The courtesy letters to Boehner and Reid, asking for permission to address Congress went out. Pretty pro forma so far.

    Boehner balked and insisted that the speech take place on the 8th. Blah, blah, blah, and the White House caves. Take that NFL.

    On the one hand have we have the president giving another speech where he proposes ideas that do not solve the problem at hand, and make no one except his reelection team happy. On the other hand, it's football! I which I'll be watching. How about you?

    I only really watch one pro football game a year (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by CoralGables on Wed Aug 31, 2011 at 09:29:30 PM EST
    I think it's February 5th next year.

    Obama's speech will be about (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by MO Blue on Wed Aug 31, 2011 at 09:35:41 PM EST
    jobs until he pivots back to the deficit. Obama to go small on jobs and big on cuts?

    The President has requested a joint session of Congress on September 7 at 8pm (amusingly conflicting with the next GOP Presidential debate at the Reagan Library), "to lay out his plan to create jobs, grow the economy, and reduce the deficit" according to White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer. That's one thing that has been lost among this jobs speech - it's also a deficit speech. This is the speech where Obama will deliver a specific plan to the Catfood Commission II, one bigger than the $1.5 trillion deficit reduction target that they have, on top of the job creation ideas. ....link

    BTW, the Top News headline on Obama's speech is

    Obama bows to Boehner; jobs speech will be Sept. 8


    Ok, I'm calling it (5.00 / 3) (#14)
    by ruffian on Wed Aug 31, 2011 at 09:42:33 PM EST
    This presidency has jumped the shark.

    It is a parody of itself at this point.


    You want a fight over the date (none / 0) (#16)
    by Politalkix on Wed Aug 31, 2011 at 10:04:34 PM EST
    on which the speech will be given (a difference of 24 hrs)?

    Even (5.00 / 2) (#26)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 07:13:56 AM EST
    Markos one of Obama's biggest fans tweeted that Boehner shouldn't ask Obama for his lunch money because Obama would go hungry that day.

    Obama should just wear a sign on his back that says "kick me". What a wuss.


    What ever... (none / 0) (#37)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 08:27:21 AM EST

    If the speech were all that important and necessary to job creation, why not today?  This looks more like a campaign tactic than a serious effort to address job creation.



    Well (none / 0) (#43)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 08:59:50 AM EST
    what difference does it make to the GOP that it is going against their debate? It's not like they are going to do anything about jobs and a debate is just politics anyway.

    The GOP would be better politically (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by ruffian on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 10:25:16 AM EST
    not calling attention to their "debate".

    Exactly, ruffian (none / 0) (#79)
    by christinep on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 01:17:51 PM EST
    Hmmm. So, the kerfuffle showing purported weakness in the WH is raised & resolved in one day. My, my...I wonder why. Two reasons: (1) The contrast with the Repubs-- wherein mention will now be made about each R candidate's "jobs plan" as well as whatever is the furthest right driver of the day.  As some are starting to note: Contrast here is precisely what the WH wants.  (2) Depending upon the time on Thursday, there may well be more tuning in (if only briefly, in view of the other events) than otherwise this early in the political season.

    Actually, ruffian, who knows? Other than to say once more: Whatever else it did for the news media types who build these stories, it increased the type of interest that may benefit the WH more than the individual Repub candidates who might not want to be playing to a "general" audience now. Funny how things could work out.


    Still, (none / 0) (#51)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 09:50:43 AM EST

    Why not today?  You don't even a joint session to give a speech.  You only need that to look presidential.  

    This is a microcosm (none / 0) (#53)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 09:54:41 AM EST
    Of the larger debate around here:

    Rallying cry: "Obama should fight, fight fight!!!!!!!"

    Rare dissenter: "But he has no ability to do anything in reality.  It would be a fight that he would fight and then lose and then he'd be called a loser. There is no upside in that."

    Rallying cry: "But he should fight, fight, fight regardless because  . . . well because he should FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT!!!!!"

    Rare dissenter: [looks at the screen with blank stare]

    How about we just let the guy give the speech and see what he says?


    Yes (5.00 / 5) (#58)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 10:17:32 AM EST
    we all know the presidency is a powerless position unless it is held by a Republican according to you.

    Obama was stupid to place it against the GOP debate unless he was willing to stand his ground. His WH should be hold the award for political incompetency. How does it help him that all the headlines are Obama cedes ground to Boehner. You're the one that loves the narrative don't you? If I didn't know better and just read the headlines I would think that John Boehner is president not Obama.


    Actually (none / 0) (#62)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 10:40:44 AM EST
    I think they didn't care about caving because the football game will give them a huge lead in audience they would not have otherwise had and they aren't going to interfere with the game.

    I think they would have loved to have gone right before the GOP debate, but being asked to move and then conceding without an issue is another example of a harmless concession that makes Obama seem more mature.

    Doesn't matter all that much in the big scheme of things.  


    well (5.00 / 3) (#67)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 10:59:19 AM EST
    why not schedule it then in the first place if that is what they wanted? I mean this is political incompetency to the max.

    One thing you don't understand is that the electorate does not like wimps or incompetents. And people like you continually making excuses for him are hurting him more than helping. He really needs to fire a bunch of people in the WH but I know that isn't going to happen.


    This whole "making Obama look (5.00 / 2) (#74)
    by Anne on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 11:40:31 AM EST
    more mature" thing is just plucking on my last nerve, along with this laugher:
    Rare dissenter: "But he has no ability to do anything in reality.  It would be a fight that he would fight and then lose and then he'd be called a loser. There is no upside in that."

    The only response that makes sense to me is, "oh, f--k maturity."

    And f--k this garbage about Obama not being able to do anything; maybe that's your reality, but the one the rest of us are familiar with knows that that's just crap.  Seriously, if he's really as helpless as you need him to be, what's the point?  Is he just a speed bump to slow down the never-helpless Republicans?  

    Now there's a legacy for you.

    Fact is, there's very little he's done that wouldn't be instantly identifiable as Republican in nature if the names were changed to get people to take off their Obama glasses, and it isn't going to matter one whit when he gives his deficit-cutting speech that will masquerade as a jobs speech, because it isn't going to see him parting company with conservative, wrong-for-the-economy ideas.


    May not give them a huge lead in (5.00 / 2) (#76)
    by nycstray on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 11:59:56 AM EST
    How many people who are getting up for the game, (food/drinks/friends) want to sit through the downer of a speech about the sh*tty economy, lack of jobs and the unruly children in congress as a pre-game warm up?

    Something tells me, my family will be bbq-ing :)


    "a harmless concession" (none / 0) (#100)
    by Mr Natural on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 11:38:38 PM EST
    Nuance ain't working, ABG.

    Close (5.00 / 4) (#94)
    by Yman on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 03:42:45 PM EST
    Rallying cry:  "It would be nice if Obama would actually stand up to Republicans and fight for Democratic values, rather than climbing on the bipartisan pony and caving to them."

    Rare dissenter:  "What do you expect him to do?  He has to look like the grown up in the room so that voters will respect him and he can get re-elected.  That's what's most important ..."

    Rallying cry:  "What's the point of getting re-elected if you're just adopting a Repub-lite agenda, like he did with HCR, national security, tax policy, spending cuts, etc., etc."

    Rare dissenter:  "He had to do that!  What do you think ... he can wave a magic wand and do anything he wants?  He's just the POTUS ... he has no ability to do anything in reality".

    Rallying cry:  "He can use the bully pulpit of the Presidency to actually lead.  He can grow a spine and show the Republicans that we won't be held hostage by a bunch of crazy Tea Partiers.  I guess all that talk about "Change" and "Yes We Can!" really meant "Yes you can, and if you do it and get Congress to pass a bill, I'll be happy to sign it."

    BTW - I could care less what he says in a speech - a nice speech isn't going to cut it anymore (not that it ever did, for some of us).  It's over 2 1/2 years in to his Presidency, and it's well past time for him to lead and fight, not propose some bipartisan, milquetoast program that's just designed to garner some Republican votes and make it look like he's doing something.


    Because (none / 0) (#56)
    by jbindc on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 10:08:11 AM EST
    For one thing, Congress isn't in session today - they don't come back until next Tuesday (i.e. - they aren't in town).

    Congress does not need to be (none / 0) (#63)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 10:44:04 AM EST

    Congress does not need to be in session for him to give a speech!  


    They do (5.00 / 1) (#77)
    by jbindc on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 12:18:22 PM EST
    if he's giving it to a joint session of Congress!

    Besides - no one is watching TV the last couple weeks of August generally - they are on vacation, outside,getting kids ready for school, or working their three jobs. Even the main media people are generally on vacation -   It would be a HUGE waste since no one would listen.


    maybe the people without jobs? (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by loveed on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 02:38:12 PM EST
    I don't even know anymore honestly (none / 0) (#59)
    by ruffian on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 10:22:50 AM EST
    I just think the whole situation is beyond ridiculous.

    I'm sure... (5.00 / 2) (#19)
    by desertswine on Wed Aug 31, 2011 at 10:54:50 PM EST
    that if Obama says anything important or anything that I need to know, I'll find out right here at TL.  Who's playing?

    ESPN for football? (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by nycstray on Wed Aug 31, 2011 at 11:02:48 PM EST
    I could give a sh*t about the speech (I'm thinking it will be more than a tad predictable!), football is a whole 'nother feeling though :)



    Pretty Much Describes How the GOP... (4.50 / 2) (#84)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 01:53:36 PM EST
    ... views this 'breaking' news and probably shows the excitement they will have in helping craft legislation for it.

    Sorry, but the most awesome team eva, the Green Bay Packers, at home for the Monday Night Opener will not be interrupted by a speech that IMO is two years too late.

    I don't blame Boehner, I'm sick of Obama's speeches and I voted for him.  I am predicting this jobs plan will be heavy on helping Corporate America and light on the people needing jobs.  I also predict the GOP will fight it tooth and nail, making it even more watered down.  I know, hardly a prediction, more like a guarantee.

    Obama missed the jobs train long ago.


    it's not as if (none / 0) (#13)
    by The Addams Family on Wed Aug 31, 2011 at 09:40:58 PM EST
    people can't TIVO the debates or watch them on demand

    & the GOP already changed the date of this debate twice

    & yet the NY Times describes the scheduling of the speech as a "challenging move" by Obama


    A thought, Addams Family (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by christinep on Wed Aug 31, 2011 at 09:58:57 PM EST
    The skirmish about the date (aka the size of the table window-dressing) serves to draw a teensy bit of attention...but, more interestingly perhaps, by having the motley bunch of Repub wannabes the day before, they may find a loss of control of subject matter, somewhat. Now, instead of just how far right to go on various social agenda & how many cuts can be carved out in the name of "deficit reduction," the group is guaranteed to be asked a number of questions about how they plan to address the overriding jobs issue. Etc. etc.

    Whatever is said, the focus inevitably shifts the next day to the President's job discussion at the joint session. The contrast could be interesting in view of the timing, and the little bit of orchestrated jostling preceding.  (It would seem that Romney has a double-duty problem now: On Wednesday, he will have to directly confront front-runner Perry, but he will have to sound "presidential" about jobs...especially in view of the timing for the Presidential jobs presentation the next day.)

    What I'd like to see: A thematic presentation--with emphasis on where we are going as opposed to a rehash of how we got here--filled in with example actions of 4-6 major initiatives/proposals to advance the economy. In brief: An integrated "going big" via the theme of what ties it all together with "legislative proposals" used as significant, needed steps to help get us to the goal. (I like combos...much more doable than the all or nothing.)


    it just seemed to me (5.00 / 2) (#22)
    by The Addams Family on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 02:35:25 AM EST
    that Boehner's action was gratuitously & provocatively disrespectful of the president

    unless it was Obama's scheduling that was clueless, or possibly itself provocative

    anyway, i never forget that Boehner is a creature of the party that attempted a coup with its impeachment of Bill Clinton, & actually pulled one off in 2000 (& quite possibly in 2004 as well)

    Boehner is a thug


    I think both of them are guilty (5.00 / 6) (#24)
    by caseyOR on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 06:14:44 AM EST
    of provocation. Obama knew the Republican presidential debate was scheduled for the 7th. And still he set that as the date for his big speech, and then had his press secretary, Jay Carney, feign ignorance about the scheduling conflict by calling it a coincidence.

    Boehner decided to throw his weight around by refusing what is ordinarily a pro forma request from the WH to address Congress. And why wouldn't he? He probably figured the chances were good Obama would be the first to blink. I mean, Obama is always the first to blink. Why should this time be any different?

    This, my fellow Americans, is the very low level at which our political elites now operate. I have long believed that social development tends to stop in the 10th grade. And man, the politicians make the case for me every day.


    Obama "caves" to football ;o) (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by MO Blue on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 08:43:26 AM EST
    A White House official says "We won't conflict with football," meaning an early time frame for the speech. link

    Now that is a compromise we can believe in. ;o)


    I've known (5.00 / 2) (#61)
    by Zorba on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 10:29:08 AM EST
    10th graders who behaved much more maturely.  I would say that the current crop of politicians (many of them, at any rate) are stuck more in a middle school mentality.   ;-)

    I have to agree that it was a challenge (none / 0) (#69)
    by Towanda on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 11:00:25 AM EST
    by Obama to the Republicans.

    If not, then his advisers and schedulers are so bad that a much bigger game is over, already.


    I believe (none / 0) (#32)
    by jbindc on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 08:15:30 AM EST
    The speech will be before the start of the NFL game.

    Who handles their PR (none / 0) (#57)
    by loveed on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 10:13:57 AM EST
    Another stupid confrontation that is unnecessary. He should have given this speech in August.
     Boehner saved him from his self. What if the rating for the debate is higher than the speech? Or the repub. push the debate back til 9:30, and all the candidate spend the whole debate tearing it apart? Or spend the time laying out their job's plan?
     Are you guy's really sure,you want these people for another 4yrs.?

    Since he wanted to give the speech (none / 0) (#64)
    by jbindc on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 10:44:43 AM EST
    before a joint session of Congress, he could not do it in August - they have been out of session all month.

    He never mention in August (none / 0) (#90)
    by loveed on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 02:44:56 PM EST
    he wanted a joint session of congress for this speech.
     He should have asked for it in August.

    It seems to me that (none / 0) (#68)
    by KeysDan on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 10:59:49 AM EST
    President Obama would be better off if he presented his speech from the White House and indicate that he is sending his jobs bills to Congress.  The speech would be on his turf, give legs to his proposals and require Congress to react (and, no risk of a headline-grabbing rude comments from congressman).

    The joint session as a political backdrop to the speech would be understandable, but  I worry that its goal is really  another dangerous bipartisan reach-out not for purposes of the jobs component of the speech, but rather, for the deficit reductions--especially a call for the success of Cat Food II (Petraeus and Panetta are sounding the alarm bells that the across the board cuts of a fail, that include military/security budgets, will undermine our defenses and security).

    Coordination of dates in private rather than in public could have benefited from the administration's customary penchant for opaqueness. In any event, standing-up to Republicans on this issue is not  the new stout heartedness I was hoping for.


    The New Resentment of the Poor (none / 0) (#17)
    by Politalkix on Wed Aug 31, 2011 at 10:09:13 PM EST

    Huntsman gets a lot of praise in this blog with one commenter never missing a beat in praising him (while always accusing Obama of not caring for the poor or unemployed). Just look at his tax restructuring plan....

    I think his plan is a start (none / 0) (#54)
    by loveed on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 09:55:07 AM EST
    I don't think it's an attack on the poor.
    Getting rid of all the deduction is a good idea.This would bring in a lot of revenue from corporation and the super wealthy.
      The lower tax rate, helps the middle class. And any plan can be adjusted, to help lower income family.
      Your argument is ,let Warren Buffet continue to pay a lower tax rate than his secretary. Let GE continue to pay no taxes. All to save this one program. This program could be paid for from the taxes on Buffet alone.
      The tax holiday for overseas firms would bring in huge revenues. Business and banks will not sit on all there money, because it will be taxed.
    This will increase jobs and increase wages.

      Huntsman at least have a plan. It's a bold move.



    You are totally wrong about (5.00 / 5) (#70)
    by MO Blue on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 11:06:55 AM EST
    Huntman's tax plan.

    Huntsman's tax plan is revenue neutral. IOW it will not generate any additional tax revenue.  It is not a bold move. It is a boon to the rich at the expense of the poor. It eliminates all taxes on Capital Gains And Dividends which is a boon to the rich and is offset by eliminating the Earned Income Tax Credit and the Child Tax Credit which reduces or eliminates federal income tax liability for the poor. Current policies:

    Low-income households pay relatively low federal taxes, primarily because tax credits reduce or eliminate their income tax liability, and some (called refundable credits) result in net payments to them. Stimulus measures enacted to offset the adverse effects of the 2008-09 recession further re-duced the tax-burden on these families. In 2011, tax units in the lowest income quintile (that is, the 20 percent of all tax units with the lowest incomes) on average paid federal income, payroll, and es-tate taxes equal to 0.8 percent of their cash income, less than a twentieth of the 18.1 percent average effective tax rate for all tax units (see table).
    Because the earned income tax credit (EITC) is refundable and the child tax credit (CTC) is partly so, the average effective individual income tax rate for the bottom two income quin-tiles in 2011 was negative; that is, the tax credits more than offset positive income tax liabil-ity, so that the average household in these quintiles received a net payment from the gov-ernment. link

    Let's look at what this would mean. A person who receives $1 million in capital gains and dividends would pay absolutely nothing (zero, zilch) in federal taxes.

    A poor person in the first quintile would see their total federal tax liability increase from .8% to 8.8% and a person in the second quintile would see an increase from 5.7% to 13.7%.

    Once again his proposal is a massive shift of money away from the poor and into the pockets of corporations and the mega wealthy.

    The tax holiday for overseas firms will not
    increase jobs and increase wages here in the U.S. but only result in more jobs being outsourced to the lowest cost provider of wages.  In 2004 Congress enacted the American Jobs
    Creation Act of 2004 (Jobs Act, P.L. 108-357), enabling U.S. firms to repatriate foreign profits at a reduced tax rate for one year. Empirical research suggests most of the repatriated
    funds were distributed to U.S. shareholders.

    You really need to educate yourself on the ramifications of his tax plan before you jump on the Huntman band wagon.  


    We can't keep slicing the same money (none / 0) (#91)
    by loveed on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 03:09:19 PM EST
    Not only millionaires would benefit. Small business and the middle class.
     The upper 1% already controls all the money.These tax loopholes has got to be closed. And the tax code needs to be changed.
     First stop the flood of money, or lost revenues from these loopholes. In every bill passed by congress comes with another loophole.
     If it truly tax neutral. The 8% could be 2%.
     The plan is a outline, it is not set in stone.
     Wipe out all the loopholes, and start from scratch. You could add the EIC,the child credit,mortgage credit.



    You are IMO still incorrect in your (5.00 / 2) (#92)
    by MO Blue on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 03:27:24 PM EST
    assessment. You would not have Huntman's plan if you did what you suggest.

    You could add the EIC,the child credit,mortgage credit.

    It would no longer be revenue neutral. Eliminating the EIC,the child credit,mortgage credit is how Huntman is paying for eliminating taxes on Capital Gains And Dividends and taxes on offshore earnings. It would reduce revenue.

    You are right here

    The upper 1% already controls all the money

    but Huntsman plan makes sure that they control even more at the expense of the poor and the middle class.

    You are letting your blind faith in Huntsman and the lack of knowledge of the subject get in the way of reality.


    So we keep complaining (none / 0) (#97)
    by loveed on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 07:12:44 PM EST
    and doing nothing.
     You can write a bill for what ever you want.This is not the final plan. Those program we like can be included.
     Huntsman has already instituted this plan in Utah. This plan made Utah the #1 state. I also think he has given great thought to how this would work in the country.
     Yes I know Utah is not the USA. It a start.
    Obama was elected, his only experience was as a community organizer.
     I think Huntsman has better qualification.He is the only candidate with experience in foreign affairs. This is a global economy. He ran an international business. Ambassador to China is also a big plus.
     No one thought Bill Clinton could win either. But he did.

    I could almost believe that if I did (none / 0) (#75)
    by ruffian on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 11:40:57 AM EST
    not know for a certainty that the rich and connected will find deductions somehow. All that will happen is lower rates with a new round of deduction-createn by the powerful.

    Huntsman's "plan" (none / 0) (#81)
    by christinep on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 01:30:34 PM EST
    encapsulates the Repub's approach to government...i.e., that everything is about tax structure; and, more particularly, about ensuring that lower corporate taxes be a part of any "plan." At least, he (Huntsman) does not throw in the rightwing social agenda. But, since the effect of his "plan" supports the Reagan financial structural concepts, well....

    Frankly, it seems more & more as if Huntsman is captive of his own party.  (BTW, what does he have to say about using $$$ directly for job creation?)


    He believes in the confidence faire (none / 0) (#82)
    by MO Blue on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 01:37:53 PM EST
    Huntsman (none / 0) (#72)
    by CoralGables on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 11:24:12 AM EST
    is trying to be an electable Republican, but he really can't bend that far even with a full time team of chiropractors on staff. He is holding down the cellar in the national polls for the GOP nomination, but he has in fact moved into next to last (ahead of Gingrich) in New Hampshire.

    Nothing exciting (none / 0) (#29)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 08:11:55 AM EST
    I got a new attic (that's not exciting either).  We put in pulldown stairs in an area of our house where the roof peak is steep and floored it.  Now we will go through the different storage places and spaces in the house below moving items into the new attic area.

    When we are done though (5.00 / 2) (#30)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 08:12:44 AM EST
    we are having an appletini taste off.  That may be exciting but probably not :)

    taste off (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by sj on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 11:11:47 AM EST
    Looking forward to your analysis.  It may not be exciting but it will probably be fun.

    I Did That Years Ago (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 02:10:17 PM EST
    ... above the garage.  My fiend pushed a piece of sheeting up and I monetarily forgot where I was and took a step back.  As they say, 'that last step was a dooozie...'  

    Ended up with a sheet rock screw going through a shoe and into the heel of my foot.  Barely felt it, then it came time to pull it out.  Then it hurt, so bad I didn't even notice the deep scrape on my chest that luckily missed a key nerve area by like a half inch.

    Don't even get me started on the insurance boondoggle that the Tetanus shot started.

    Funny thing, that space turned out to be nothing but a bunch of junk I ended up throwing away.


    My Christmas stuff is up there now (none / 0) (#87)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 02:17:06 PM EST
    EEOC makes driving safer (none / 0) (#35)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 08:22:39 AM EST
    Disturbing news out of Libya (none / 0) (#42)
    by MO Blue on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 08:58:49 AM EST
    Libyan rebels round up black Africans

    TRIPOLI, Libya (AP) -- Rebel forces and armed civilians are rounding up thousands of black Libyans and migrants from sub-Sahara Africa, acccusing them of fighting for ousted strongman Moammar Gadhafi and holding them in makeshift jails across the capital.

    Virtually all of the detainees say they are innocent migrant workers, and in most cases there is no evidence that they are lying. But that is not stopping the rebels from placing the men in facilities like the Gate of the Sea sports club, where about 200 detainees -- all black -- clustered on a soccer field this week, bunching against a high wall to avoid the scorching sun.

    Horrible (none / 0) (#44)
    by star on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 09:15:37 AM EST
    This is indeed very disturbing.. I know and have seem for myself the amount of racial discrimination Arabs are capable of. I hope someone intervenes on behalf of these helpless people ..and women and other minorities ...the list goes on .

    More "Free Trade" agreements (none / 0) (#47)
    by MO Blue on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 09:42:35 AM EST
    being planned by Obama administration?

    Next week in Chicago, the Administration kicks off the eighth round of Trans-Pacific free trade agreement talks with multiple Asian nations. The nine-day negotiation includes talks with Vietnam, Brunei Darussalam, Singapore, Malaysia, New Zealand, Australia, Peru and Chile, but whatever comes out of the talks is intended to be a "docking agreement" to which larger nations in Asia and South America can sign up. That would include Japan, India and Taiwan; heck, it could include mainland China. This has been in the works for many years, and the Obama Administration has been negotiating since late 2009. The soft deadline for a Trans-Pacific FTA is November, just two months from now. link

    First Time Ever (none / 0) (#95)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 03:49:50 PM EST
    Hoping, not praying, for rain.

    Seriously, yesterday was the first day in 45 that is wasn't 100+.  Suppose to rain through Sunday, possibly an inch, which is more then we have gotten all summer.  A normal summer, 6 days over 100, not consecutive.  

    It's weird, they are running low on water, not because of the drought per se, but the clay soil here shrinks without water and we are having water main issues, schools having to use portable toilets, and millions of gallons just running down the streets, they city can't keep up.  

    The plan is to grill by the pool with friends in hopes that it's raining so hard we have to cancel, which is a first in my lifetime, and hopefully a last.

    SITE VIOLATOR (none / 0) (#99)
    by caseyOR on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 07:55:33 PM EST