I was on Kagro in the Morning for Daily Kos Radio today. You can listen here.
Big Dog on Mitt Romney:
Make a new
"Well, two things. I mean, you know, the debate, I think it's fair to say I was just too polite, because, you know, it's hard to sometimes just keep on saying and what you're saying isn't true," Obama said on the Tom Joyner Morning Show on Wednesday. "It gets repetitive. But, you know, the good news is, is that's just the first one. Governor Romney put forward a whole bunch of stuff that either involved him running away from positions that he had taken, or doubling down on things like Medicare vouchers that are going to hurt him long term.... And, you know, I think it's fair to say that we will see a little more activity at the next one."
Good Lord, man, wake up! Sounds like the perfesser hasn't learned a g*d damn thing.
Read Charlie Pierce today and weep.
What can I say? He'll either win or he won't.
I don't see the president making the same mistake twice.
After all, if we've learned anything about the mainstream U.S. media these past two decades, it's that at key moments in their political coverage, they become the functional equivalent of those hapless NFL replacement refs who were calling the Seahawks-Packers game two weeks ago.
I saw a clip this morning with Alan Arkin and John Goodman. I think I want to see this movie.
Never overlook Hollywood's ability for making something more dramatic than it ever was. There are true stories and then there are stories based on true events and then there are the movie actors who may or may not know much more than what they are told! Just think how much the actors of the recent Moslem "hate film" claim to now know about what they did.
Every adult aware of the hostage taking at the time knew some escaped to the Canadian embassy.
Ben Affleck says he has talked to some of the real people,and while I'm sure the movie will not be 100% accurate I can still enjoy it if it is well done.
Who knew I would have 3 teams making life fun right now :) But I will be torn if it comes down to Giants/Yanks :P Although, I'm still more Yanks . . . kinda hard to shake them.
It's do-or-die tonight.
I'll bet Raul didn't earn, total, as much in his 20 year career as A-rod did in his worst year.
It's the year of the underdog....All hail, "O's" and "Ibanez."
The Lie gets front page, and makes its point. The discovery and rebuttal....page 14.
Rotten Tomatoes sez it may be ok.
I have so many education questions now. Do children of other countries do better because their parents have more time to be involved in their study time? Because they have more resources?
Josh has everything he needs. What are the other kids doing? We are tech saturated, great printer, professional paper cutter for projects, three devices to get on the internet with. He has so far done two Powerpoints, he has done three projects requiring poster board and proper citation, he is doing things I never dreamed of doing at his age. His grades are great. What are his other less fortunate classmates doing? How do they crank this stuff out when your mom is single and working two jobs and you have one computer and you steal internet access in the apartment building, and who could afford printer ink in their house? I see another giant class gap looming before me.
I was helping him with his Powerpoint cites but I don't know how to use Powerpoint. Whenever I would hit the right buttom he'd say, " Very good padawan."
I'd offer that Mittens' quest for the presidency as a "severely conservative" wingbat has been the political equivalent of Julie Andrews' faux drag queen persona in "Victor / Victoria." (RIP, Alex Karras.)
All this talk about skin reminds me: he makes mine crawl.
If Romney's not comfortable as a "severely conservative" GOP candidate, which is exactly how he's heretofore been presenting himself on the campaign trail, then I believe it's quite fair to suggest that he's been completely disingenuous with American voters for the better part of six years running.
This guy is Joe Isuzu, a guy who'll say anything he thinks that people want to hear in order to make the sale.
But more importantly, which one is going to rule ? Seems like he's packing his far right foreign policy team, so at some point it really doesn't matter where he is comfortable, it matter what hat he will be wearing when signing legislation. I can't imagine any legislation too extreme for him to sign. Ditto for SCUTUS appointments.
All of which makes perfect sense, of course, given that Mittens is proposing and promoting policies fresh from that particular era.
Wishful thinking for another new & improved Mitt seems to be driving your observation in this regard, Ga6th. That combined with a longtime demonstrated antipathy toward Obama might be factors in your analysis. Don't ya think?
I'm not advocating for Mitt but really can you really say what someone is going to do when in office? I've seen a lot of predictions about a lot of candidates and a lot of them turned out to be wrong. And in the end, it really doesn't matter what I think but whether Mitt is able to convince those swing voters to vote for him.
Supreme court nominations are important but what if the GOP filibusters a nominee from Obama? We've seen him cave time and again to what the GOP wants.
Ga6thDem: "Supreme court nominations are important but what if the GOP filibusters a nominee from Obama? We've seen him cave time and again to what the GOP wants."
Did the GOP filibuster either of those? You're making an assumption that's not backed up in any way by the record, as far as SCOTUS nominations are concerned.
Seriously, there is no way to look at Obama's first four years and not see them as better than the first term of any democrat since LBJ
That is beyond funny.
I think if more people would be complimentary of HCR if Obama had done something simple like open up Medicare to more people. As it is, we have a policy that designed to fail.
ACA has some got some good stuff, but does that that one accomplishment alone it offset the assault on whistleblowers and on civil liberties? Does it offset the massive pass given to bankers? The creation and regular reanimation of the Catfood Commission? A good deed doesn't stand alone when measuring performance.
A wonderful way to discombobble the opposition with a smile and infectious common sense that is public persuasion at its best.
The iron fist in the velvet glove.
As we have come to see, the two supplement each other quite well, thank you very much. In my eyes: 'Love them both!
OTOH - if you consider the Republican healthcare plan of '94 to be a legacy, I guess you could try to make that claim about Obama.
Assuming it lasts ...
The Obamacare meal isn't "satisfying the most basic needs". It's handing out breadcrumbs after promising people a chicken in every pot.
Look...it really is a matter of perceptual screen & the half-full or half-empty water glass. To me, the accomplishments of this administration have to be judged by the circumstances confronting it at the outset ( as is the case with all administrations, of course.). And, most observers with whom I spoke at said outset considered the inherited conditions so daunting as to undo any newcomer. In retrospect, there seems to be support for that speculation.
Again: I remain optimistic about the progress being made under the ACA. And, I am aware that your outlook as to that aspect and others differs from mine. (BTW, when I read Romney's remark to the Columbus Dispatch that he wasn't aware that anyone died for not being able to afford medical care.... Well, it says it all; & it most definitely tells us how the $$$$resisting any change in 2009/10 was stacked .)
The conditions under which Obama took office have absolutely nothing to do with his flip-flopping and the numerous broken promises he made re: HCR.
Of course you remain optimistic about the ACA and think Obama has accomplished a great deal.
That's the biggest advantage of setting the bar so low...
Granted yman, the gains might not match the complete package that we should all aim for, but it would not be exactly forthright to discount them...whether in the course of argument or otherwise:). Recall again the growth THRU TIME of Social Security & Medicare. As we all know so well now, the expansion of those solid programs came over time, not overnight.
Obama promised a serious treatment for a healthcare system that's bleeding the country/families dry. He delivered the Republican plan of '94. When your leg is severed, a bandaid with a hopeful promise of real reform years or decades down the road is little solace.
The ACA and Social Security or Medicare?
More like the Metric Conversion Act of 1975.
I thought "jousting" is what Knights did with spears on horseback. From your tone maybe "jousting" is what you felt like doing to Yman.
But, I warn you, Yman is pretty good with backing up his claims. (His/Hers, I hate it not knowing the genders. I don't know, maybe it's best that way)
Anyway, since both of you are marvels of encyclopedic knowledge, I'd love to hear a live debate on this topic between the both of you.
(I would have said "hear" and "see," but the thought of even a tiny droplet of the crimson makes my stomach queasy)
... which is why I don't judge Obamacare with rose-colored glasses.
Since I'm not in the one- percent, it isn't hard to find lots of examples of real people helped by the ACA. What's the phrase? Let those who have ears hear....
Personally, it seems that it may be extremely difficult for you to move from your position that little if any good will come from the ACA...it may be that you are dug in. While you repeat the generalized claim that many still won't have the insurance they deserve ( and, I agree that the universe should truly be universal), you fail to see or acknowledge the many millions of people who now have the access to healthcare they did not have before. Somehow, anecdotes and well-publicized testimony of real people seem to be grudgingly accepted... Ala "oh yeah, there is a bit of that. So here we are with the half-glass of water again: Those "anecdotes" that are hard to miss (unless one doesn't want to see them) matter very much to the people who are living them.
I sincerely wish you well in your striving for a more complete health care system in our country. It would be better...just like there is every historical reason to think that the evolving ACA will grow better over time. Fir now, I repeat: it is good that we have finally come this far to a fair start.
Thanks, yman. I have enjoyed the discussion.
It occurs to me that --and just my personal opinion only--the course of any further "debate" between us on this matter will likely have a circular destiny. For that reason solely, you may have the closing statement.
... but I don't need your permission.
BTW - It's not just a "generalized claim" that people won't have the insurance they deserve. It's the fact that Obamacare does virtually nothing to contain skyrocketing healthcare costs, with (to some degree) the exception of government costs and the costs to the poor. It's a fact that Obama made backroom deals with the pharmaceutical and health insurance companies in order to get something passed ... something that's virtually identical to the Republican Plan of '94. Finally, it's a fact - one that you keep ignoring - that Obama backtracked on numerous promises on this issue, resulting in a healthcare bill that is faaaaarrrr less than what it should have been ...
... and what he promised.
I actually do know 2 people who have been helped by the ACA (a misnomer, if there ever was one). OTOH, there are millions more who lost their health insurance on the way to record-setting levels of uninsured while Obama wasted his majorities in order to pass the Republican Plan of '94. There are millions more who cannot afford their prescription drugs because Obama made a backroom deal with big Pharma to prevent his promised importation of cheaper drugs. There are millions more who can't afford the insurance they must now buy because of the wasteful private insurer system Obama decided to prop up. There are millions more who will remain without insurance (31 million at last count?) because a public plan was not opened for them, as Obama promised.
What's the other phrase? La Vie en Rose?
BTW - A couple of retired senior level federal employees? Perhaps not the 1%, but probably top 2-3% ...
A correction: The so-called back-room deal (aside: I've never heard of a "front-room" deal) regarding prescription drugs really seems to stem from the pre-ACA land of Bush & the then misguided AARP in an agreement leading to the infamous donut-hole. The latter situation, of course, was corrected by the ACA, resulting in a noticeable amelioration of costs to many seniors and others with chronic illness who require multiple/expensive prescriptions.
The expansion of the coverage universe is an essential first step...and it was a significant accomplishment in the ACA. As you note, the costs to the insured are still too high, but the mechanisms mentioned in an earlier screed as to the 85% proviso & the exchange competition should begin to bring the costs down. Also: the Medicaid coverage is significantly expanded to cover those who cannot meet the mandate $$$.
Yep, it's complex. With 300 million citizens, one would expect that would be the case. But, again, the start is so so so so much more than lamenting what had never been nor what we didn't have. So much better than throwing up one's hands.
As far as your "correction", try again. The backroom deal to deny importation of cheaper drugs was well-publicized ... as was the backroom deal with the health insurance companies to throw the public option under the bus. Not to mention his promises to allow Medicare to negotiate cheaper drug prices and prevent drug companies from blocking generic drugs.
(Aside - No one has inventd a perjorative label for "front-room deals", as there is no need. They're simply deals made in public - say, ... televised on C-SPAN even ... as candidate Obama had promised back when he needed your vote):
To achieve health care reform, "I'm going to have all the negotiations around a big table. We'll have doctors and nurses and hospital administrators. Insurance companies, drug companies -- they'll get a seat at the table, they just won't be able to buy every chair. But what we will do is, we'll have the negotiations televised on C-SPAN, so that people can see who is making arguments on behalf of their constituents, and who are making arguments on behalf of the drug companies or the insurance companies. And so, that approach, I think is what is going to allow people to stay involved in this process."
Despite your efforts to turn a sow's ear into a silk purse (or predict that it will do so at some point in the future), I find the opinion of Dr. Marcia Angell, past editor-in-chief of the New England Journal of Medicine, more persuasive:
"First, health costs will continue to skyrocket, even faster than they are now, as taxpayer dollars are pumped into the private sector. The response of payers - government and employers - will be to shrink benefits and increase deductibles and co-payments...people will conclude that we've tried health reform and it didn't work. But the real problem will be that we didn't really try it. I would rather see us do nothing now, and have a better chance of trying again later and then doing it right."
Why would anyone ever want to go into public service if they have to run the risk of appearing before Congressional Republicans such as these?
So why the grandstanding, do they just really love confrontation, what purpose does it serve ?
Surely ain't no wonks.
Chaffetz looked foolish on CNN trying to justify that position while bashing the State Dept for not providing greater secuity.
But hell, I think they all do, including my guy Conta.
Waste of resources (but that's what we pay USADA to do.)
The evidence of the US Postal Service Pro Cycling Team-run scheme is overwhelming and is in excess of 1000 pages, and includes sworn testimony from 26 people, including 15 riders with knowledge of the US Postal Service Team (USPS Team) and its participants' doping activities. The evidence also includes direct documentary evidence including financial payments, emails, scientific data and laboratory test results that further prove the use, possession and distribution of performance enhancing drugs by Lance Armstrong and confirm the disappointing truth about the deceptive activities of the USPS Team, a team that received tens of millions of American taxpayer dollars in funding.
Together these different categories of eyewitness, documentary, first-hand, scientific, direct and circumstantial evidence reveal conclusive and undeniable proof that brings to the light of day for the first time this systemic, sustained and highly professionalized team-run doping conspiracy. All of the material will be made available later this afternoon on the USADA website at www.usada.org.
This article also states this from the report:
"The path he chose to pursue that goal ran far outside the rules. His goal led him to depend on EPO, testosterone and blood transfusions but also, more ruthlessly, to expect and to require that his teammates would likewise use drugs to support his goals if not their own. The evidence is overwhelming that Lance Armstrong did not just use performance enhancing drugs, he supplied them to his teammates. ... It was not enough that his teammates give maximum effort on the bike, he also required that they adhere to the doping program outlined for them or be replaced."
The release of the report came hours after the agency issued a statement alleging that Armstrong participated in "the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping program that sport has ever seen."
This is truly shocking.
Scott was at a Florida Cabinet meeting on Tuesday when he publicly announced a toll-free hotline's 866 number, but mixed up the numbers, according to WUSF News.
A spokesperson for Scott said he inadvertently released the wrong number, and the correct number for the Florida Fungal Meningitis Hotline is 866-523-7339.
All those numbers, how is one person suppose to keep them straight ? I wonder how many times he called the Meningitis Hotline to relieve some stress ?
Why the push this time? The three up for retention were nominated by Dem Governors and getting rid of them would help the Republicans stack the court.
My advice, had I known what I know now?
Finding extra votes in a swing state is always extra pleasurable on election day, and all it costs me is a phone call and throwing a little extra gas in my car.
I say it was first complained about by the college (USF) radio station because it was heterosexist site, and nothing more!
Biden will need to prepare for all three with the overarching Paul Ryan of door number 4: his Tampa Convention speech that earned him the well-derserved, "lyn' Ryan."
"I don't trust Romney. He shouldn't make my son's death part of his political agenda. It's wrong to use these brave young men, who wanted freedom for all, to degrade Obama."
And Glen Doherty's best friend of two decades, Elf Elefsen, recalls his buddy's account of his introduction to the GOP presidential nominee:
"He said it was very comical. Mitt Romney approached him ultimately four times, using this private gathering as a political venture to further his image. He kept introducing himself as Mitt Romney, a political figure. The same introduction, the same opening line. Glen believed it to be very insincere and stale. [...] He said it was pathetic and comical to have the same person come up to you within only a half hour, have this person reintroduce himself to you, having absolutely no idea whatsoever that he just did this 20 minutes ago, and did not even recognize Glen's face."
Suffice to say that Romney certainly didn't win any political converts amongst Glen Doherty's family and friends with his cheap stunt.
It would be one helluvan accomplishment for San Francisco to come to Cincinnati and take three straight from the Reds in their own ballpark, especially after looking so pathetic in dropping the first two at home by The Bay.
Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel | October 10, 2012
State legislator criticized for comments on rape - "A state representative is drawing heat for saying that his father had told him when he was young that "some girls rape easy" as a way to warn him that a woman could agree to sex but then later claim that it wasn't consensual. Freshman Rep. Roger Rivard (R-Rice Lake) in December discussed a case with the Chetek Alert newspaper in which a 17-year-old high school senior was charged with sexual assault for having sex with an underage girl in the school's band room. The newspaper quoted him as saying his father warned him, 'Some girls rape easy' - meaning after the fact they can change what they say about whether sex was consensual. On Wednesday, Rivard told the Journal Sentinel the article did not provide full context of his comments and that his father's exact words had been slightly different from how they appeared in the Chetek Alert."
For the record, what Rep. Rivard actually said was as follows:
"He also told me one thing, 'If you do (have premarital sex), just remember, consensual sex can turn into rape in an awful hurry.' Because all of a sudden a young lady gets pregnant and the parents are madder than a wet hen and she's not going to say, 'Oh, yeah, I was part of the program.' All that she has to say or the parents have to say is it was rape because she's underage. And he just said, 'Remember, Roger, if you go down that road, some girls,' he said, 'they rape so easy.' What the whole genesis of it was, it was advice to me, telling me, 'If you're going to go down that road, you may have consensual sex that night and then the next morning it may be rape.' So the way he said it was, 'Just remember, Roger, some girls, they rape so easy. It may be rape the next morning.' So it's been kind of taken out of context."
Rep. Rivard -- who's locked in a tight race for re-election against Democrat Stephen Smith -- then issued even more clarification about three hours later:
"Sexual assault is a crime that unfortunately is misunderstood and my comments have the potential to be misunderstood as well. Rape is a horrible act of violence. Sexual assault unfortunately often goes unreported to police. I have four daughters and three granddaughters and I understand the importance of making sure that awareness of this crime is taken very seriously."
Whew! I'm glad we finally got that cleared up!
How wonderful it must be to live in the Midwest Republicans' fantasy world in which everyone's a pious Protestant Christian, good girls and boys don't think about sex until they are married (and even then ...), wives refuse to work outside the home because they have to ensure that dinner's ready when their husbands get home from the office, and minority members of society know their place and promise to stay there.
American conservatives: our very own Taliban.
Romney and Obama remain in a virtual tie in Virginia and Florida, and the Democratic incumbent maintains a slight advantage in Ohio.
Romney saw his largest gain in Virginia, where he now edges the president 48 percent to 47 percent, a 3-point reversal from last week's poll, released the day of the first presidential debate. The spread is within the poll's margin of error.
Romney saw his largest gain in Virginia, where he now edges the president 48 percent to 47 percent, a 3-point reversal from last week's poll, released the day of the first presidential debate. The spread is within the poll's margin of error.
Florida went from O 47 R 46 to O 48 R 47. And Ohio is O 51 R 45. When early voters are taken out of the equation (the article provides explanation of this) Obama leads 48-46.
Not terrible, IMO. I'm sure expert (and non-expert) analysis awaits us on the flipside, as usual.
Can the Oakland A's, following yet another walk-off win last night, emulate their cross-Bay rivals's accomplishment and dropkick Detroit from the playoffs? We'll find out soon.