Open forum, June 11 - 17

Published:

 

The forums are moderated by Columbian staff and our community guidelines and terms of service still apply. To participate, login with your Columbian.com ID or register for an account at Columbian.com.

Columbian staff members create new forum threads. Don't see a forum topic here that fits your comments? Email Web Edtor John Hill -- john.hill@columbian.com -- or Social Media Coordinator Matt Wastradowski -- matt.wastradowski@columbian.com.


162 comments

Comments

Good morning everyone. It's going to be a beautiful day, enjoy.

hawkeye — June 11, 2012 at 6:53 a.m. ( | suggest removal


H.... seems there is some internal inconsistency, or some eternal inconsistency......

Unlike Bob and Ray's socialist takeover or your climate change hysteria, **my numbers can be looked up and confirmed by anyone.**

frobert — June 9, 2012 at 10:10 a.m.

**It is not as easy as linking a site, you could go to a Paul friendly site** like lemonglobal.com, but I don't believe their figures either. If you go to WSJ which has the 267 figure and check the individual states you get Santorum delegates from states like Iowa, Louisiana and Colorado, when in fact these delegates are Romney's and Paul's bound delegates (Iowa has all bound delegates for Paul). The mainstream media stopped putting bound delegates in the Paul column when he surpassed Gingrich's fake numbers.

frobert — June 8, 2012 at 5:26 p.m.

mr_basil_seal — June 11, 2012 at 7:11 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Unlike Bob and Ray's socialist takeover or your climate change hysteria, my numbers can be looked up and confirmed by anyone.

frobert — June 9, 2012 at 10:10 a.m.

Hmmmm, I'd say the data for Anthropogenic Climate Change is far more accessible and far more accurate than the numbers being spouted out regarding RP's delegate count.

And given that even you noted that the only sources that support your claim have to come from a ".. Paul friendly site...", the range of sources that support Anthropogenic Climate Change certainly points to basic accuracy.

Which tends to put your claims more in Bob and Ray territory than anything logical.

mr_basil_seal — June 11, 2012 at 7:30 a.m. ( | suggest removal


"Is Obama Administration Trying to Control the Media and Their First Amendment Rights?" -- crazytrain — June 11, 2012 at 7:15 a.m.

I suppose. They're tired of the media upstaging them and releasing economic data before they've had a chance to present it how they want. This decision was made about a month ago - don't recall exact details, but I think the reporters have to turn over all hand held devices with internet connectivity - they can type and save their reports for later use.

roger — June 11, 2012 at 7:38 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*But you can support his liberty crushing, war mongering policies?

No. I support the policies that bring "hope & change".

Four years ago, I did not support McCain's pro war anti civil liberties campaign.*

Who did you support, Bob Barr?

frobert — June 10, 2012 at 10:12 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal | Ignore User )

nailingit — June 11, 2012 at 7:48 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Unlike Bob and Ray's socialist takeover or **your climate change hysteria, my numbers can be looked up** and confirmed by anyone.

frobert — June 9, 2012 at 10:10 a.m.

Where? 'til then, here are some numbers

from your source: " Part of the discrepancy between the surface and atmospheric trends was resolved over a period of several years as Christy, Spencer and

others identified several factors, including orbital drift and decay, that caused a net cooling bias in the data collected by the satellite instruments.[5][6] Since the data correction of August 1998 (and the major La Niña Pacific Ocean warming event of the same year), data collected by satellite instruments has shown an average global warming trend in the atmosphere. From November 1978 through March 2011, Earth's atmosphere has warmed at an average rate of about 0.14 C per decade, according to the UAHuntsville satellite record. "

Also see:

"...dataset of 1,372 climate researchers and their publication and citation data to show that (i) 97–98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field support the tenets of ACC outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and (ii) the relative climate expertise and scientific prominence of the researchers unconvinced of ACC are substantially below that of the convinced researchers."

Expert credibility in climate change William R. L. Anderegg , et al

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/06/04/1003187107

mr_basil_seal — June 11, 2012 at 8:36 a.m. ( | suggest removal


{AP-NR) [OP ED] Given how far to the right the far right has moved the conversation too far right, has anyone considered this could backfire into a liberal firestorm? Analogous to putting out oil well fires with explosives, instead it's conservatives sucking all of the oxygen out of any political room.

Today's liberal could then be tomorrow's conservative. Imagine that! I've coined this theory as "nutting liberal", or "liberal nutting". The right has more than it's share of nuts, let's let the tea out of the bag and move so far left, the right will become the middle.

The teabaggers will then serve as nothing more than comedic props, reminding us of a society run amok with disinformation, which damn near drove us over the cliff of ... stupid.

nailingit — June 11, 2012 at 8:38 a.m. ( | suggest removal


We should then snip and remove the ones leaning right, those oblong eggheads determined to embrace gravity with faux moral convictions. Better to halve the eunuch, than to sever American liberty. {excerpt Volume 9 Low Hanging Fruit-67:2 sacred2acrid works} *The Skrow of lian tigni*

nailingit — June 11, 2012 at 9:07 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — June 11, 2012 at 8:36 a.m.

At the time I wrote that the numbers could be looked up by anyone, the conversation was concerning the inaccuracy of the numbers being reported by the media. Anyone can look up the official numbers from Colorado, Minnesota or Iowa and compare them to what is being reported. Lousiana is not as easy as their republican committee is maintaining that if they don't like the results of the convention they can just make up their own, so there are competing slates of delegates.

frobert — June 11, 2012 at 9:09 a.m. ( | suggest removal



A Dramatic Decline In Coal-Fired Power
FILED UNDER: Energy, Coal, Coal exports

By Cassandra Profita

Coal-fired power has declined from nearly 50 percent of the U.S. power mix in early 2011 to 34 percent in March 2012.
New graphs from the Energy Information Administration illustrate how coal is becoming a smaller component of the energy mix in the U.S. and on the West Coast.

Coal stockpiles are growing at power plants across the country, and utility executives are showing much less confidence in coal as a future energy source in the U.S. Meanwhile, exports to Asia and Europe are noticeably on the rise.

All of this seems to back up the explanations for why there are six coal export terminal proposals in the Pacific Northwest.

Coal’s share of total electricity generation dropped to 34 percent this March – the lowest it’s been since the EIA started keeping monthly stats in January of 1973.

You can see from the graph above, it’s down from nearly 50 percent in January of 2011. You can also see how natural gas is growing as a source of electricity with prices nearing 10-year lows. Natural gas generation grew about as much as coal generation shrank from March 2011 to March 2012.

http://ecotrope.opb.org/2012/06/a-dramatic-decline-in-coal-fired-power/

mr_basil_seal — June 11, 2012 at 9:11 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Show Us the Money
Eric Alterman

In an impressive bit of digging, Matea Gold and Joseph Tanfani of the Los Angeles Times recently reported that the hitherto unknown Center to Protect Patient Rights (CPPR) secretly sent more than $55 million to right-wing organizations during the 2010 election.

The center gave tens of millions of dollars to these groups—all with seemingly innocuous names like the American Future Fund, 60 Plus, Americans for Job Security and the Susan B. Anthony List—that, according to the Times, were “behind a coordinated campaign against Democratic congressional candidates.” The largest contribution by far went to the American Future Fund, which allowed the group to run a series of dishonest ads against the Democrats in 2010. The fund spent at least $23 million on this effort, of which the majority came from CPPR—all part of a reported $304 million spent to support conservative candidates in the 2010 election cycle, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, much of it apparently coming out of the pockets of the Koch brothers.

Coincidentally, CPPR is staffed by many of the same people who have traditionally worked for the brothers Koch. Its chief is Sean Noble, who the LA Times piece (citing the blog Republic Report) notes is a “key operative in the Kochs’ political activities.” Heather Higgins, one of CPPR’s original directors, is chair of the Koch-funded Independent Women’s Forum. Cheryl Hillen, who raised $2.6 million for its operation, used to be the director of fundraising for the Kochs’ Citizens for a Sound Economy. Despite the noble-sounding name, however, it was no easy task for the Times reporters to learn about the Center to Protect Patient Rights, because virtually everyone they contacted regarding the organization tended to sound like a Mafia don before a Congressional committee when asked about their relationship. (The CPPR lists a Phoenix PO box as its address.)

http://www.thenation.com/article/168260/show-us-money

mr_basil_seal — June 11, 2012 at 9:14 a.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — June 11, 2012 at 9:09 a.m.

*Anyone can look up the official numbers from Colorado, Minnesota or Iowa and compare them to what is being reported.*

Then do so. Cite your sources. At this point, "..
It is not as easy as linking a site, you could go to a Paul friendly site.." stands as a testimony to your rhetorical technique.

mr_basil_seal — June 11, 2012 at 9:30 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Good morning everyone.... What a beautifull Sunday it was...Of the Spirits drinking folks on here, has anyone compared the prices in the supermarkets to the old Liquor stores that are now back open. I dropped into an old liquor store yesterday and found my Favorite Spirit selling for $30 bucks after the so called Taxes and fees. I did not purchase however. I then went to the local Safeway and found it for $18.95 after all the taxes. I can only surmize that the folks who purchased these stores will not be around for long as I'm sure Wally World and Costco will drive the price and put these folks outa business.

vanwadreamer — June 11, 2012 at 9:34 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I'm sure someone here will claim, without any support, that this is an example of 'hysteria'.

**Approaching a state shift in Earth’s biosphere**

Anthony D. Barnosky, et al

Nature 486, 52–58 (07 June 2012) doi:10.1038/nature11018

Localized ecological systems are known to shift abruptly and irreversibly from one state to another when they are forced across critical thresholds. **Here we review evidence that the global ecosystem as a whole can react in the same way and is approaching a planetary-scale critical transition as a result of human influence.** The plausibility of a planetary-scale ‘tipping point’ highlights the need to improve biological forecasting by detecting early warning signs of critical transitions on global as well as local scales, and by detecting feedbacks that promote such transitions. It is also necessary to address root causes of how humans are forcing biological changes.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v486/n7401/full/nature11018.html

mr_basil_seal — June 11, 2012 at 9:36 a.m. ( | suggest removal


vanwa @ 9:34 *"...found my Favorite Spirit selling for $30 bucks..."*

You're kidding! The price of MD 20/20 is that much? :))

nailingit — June 11, 2012 at 9:40 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Nail,
Come on gotta give your "R" Bro some Love.... It's monday only....How was your weekend... Check this link out and it can Splain everything..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Rl1xg...

vanwadreamer — June 11, 2012 at 10:02 a.m. ( | suggest removal


vanwa- All in good humor vanwa! My week end involved yard work, family and great barbecue. I must be getting old, but it was great. Hope you enjoyed yours also. Great vid! In terms even I can make sense of!

nailingit — June 11, 2012 at 10:24 a.m. ( | suggest removal


This is so wrong.

**Medical Marijuana Patient At Cedars-Sinai Denied Kidney Transplant**

"Denying necessary transplants to medical marijuana patients is the worst kind of discrimination," said Americans for Safe Access chief counsel Joe Elford in a statement. "Cedars-Sinai would not be breaking any laws, federal or otherwise, by granting Toni Trujillo a kidney transplant, and it's certainly the ethical thing to do."

Trujillo has been using medical marijuana as an appetite stimulant since she first came to California two years ago. In doing so, she's managed to increase her protein levels, a critical concern for dialysis patients. In April, after waiting for a transplant for six years, she learned she had been delisted for "substance abuse." She said she had never before had any push back from the hospital about her medical marijuana use.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/11/medical-marijuana-cedars-sinai_n_1588223.html

nailingit — June 11, 2012 at 8:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — June 11, 2012 at 8:26 p.m.

Yet you support Obama's unconstitutional crack down on medical marijuana? And of course all of Obama's other unconstitutional impositions on our liberties and freedoms, and you refuse to support Paul because he is personally against abortion, although feels the federal government has no authority to regulate it. Your positions are confusing, unless you summarize that the (D) following the name is all that matters.

frobert — June 11, 2012 at 8:37 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*Yet you support Obama's unconstitutional crack down on medical marijuana?*

I'd ask if you were high, but you would make more sense if you were. No I don't support *Obama's unconstitutional crack down on medical marijuana*

*and you refuse to support Paul because he is personally against abortion,*

That's the reason? I wasn't aware. You statements remind me of a response I gave you in last weeks thread...hold on I'll dig it up.

Here it is...*Not one of my comments @ 6:30 are false . You re-frame them and attach non-existent absolutes in order to block the truth and falsely console yourself.*

And my commandment unto thee remains unchanged.

*RISE I SAY! In the name of Jesus I rebuke your disgruntled and foggy self. Let clarity guide your path and common sense raise it's glass to toast your new day! Lay down your misguided ways and cast them into the sea of puckering sphincterhood.*

*Your positions are confusing*

Try meditating for awhile. Let clarity guide your path.

How's Gen?

nailingit — June 11, 2012 at 9:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal



Incredible! Dude is an alien or something. So far removed. GOP cream of the crop!

nailingit — June 11, 2012 at 11:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal



nailingit — June 11, 2012 at 11:51 p.m. ( | suggest removal



Good vid mr_basil_seal. Using our military's "industrial policy" that is already in place to fix the economy seems like a winner. We could strain a good amount of corruption through honest citizen/government oversight. Infusing research with consumer demand while marrying technology with marketing defines a win win. Internet use is a great example of combining government/research/marketing/demand to enact innovative change. And we've already created the model!

The Prez needs some new faces/ideas in his circle. If his second admin doesn't change, we won't either.

nailingit — June 12, 2012 at 8:09 a.m. ( | suggest removal


And if Romney gets elected, it's hard to believe someone so far removed from mainstream America will embrace ideas outside of his own. (ideas which solely benefit the corporate sector which he has isolated himself with).

Romney World would escalate the already systemic failures that we are subjected to today, and tank our economy for decades to come.

But of course spending and liberal ideology/policies would be at fault.

nailingit — June 12, 2012 at 8:18 a.m. ( | suggest removal


To point...

**Mitt Romney Labeled 'Snobby' By 2002 Women Voter Focus Group**
Posted: 06/11/2012 11:00 pm

Others agreed with the view of Romney as an out-of-touch aristocrat. "I don't think he ever lived our lifestyle," offered one. Said another: "I just don't think he understands the problems of the poor or the middle class." The idea of Romney changing the oil in his car or driving a trash truck got a chuckle.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/12/mitt-romney-women-voters_n_1588088.html?ref=politics

nailingit — June 12, 2012 at 8:23 a.m. ( | suggest removal


***Top conservative says read my lips: Don’t sign ‘no new tax’ pledge***

As a conservative Republican, Lindsey Graham has never had a problem promising not to raise taxes. Like almost every other Republican member of Congress, he has signed the anti-tax pledge put forth by Grover Norquist's group Americans for Tax Reform.

But now Graham says the debt crisis is so severe that the tax pledge — which says no tax loopholes can be eliminated unless every dollar raised by closing loopholes goes to tax cuts -- has got to go.

"When you eliminate a deduction, it's okay with me to use some of that money to get us out of debt. That's where I disagree with the pledge," said Graham.

The Americans for Tax Reform pledge commits signers to "oppose any and all efforts to increase the marginal income tax rates for individuals and/or businesses … and oppose any net reduction or elimination of deductions and credits, unless matched dollar for dollar by further reducing tax rates."

Graham said eliminating some deductions should free up money to lower tax rates — but also to pay down U.S. debt.

"I just think that makes a lot of sense. And if I'm willing to do that as a Republican, I've crossed a rubicon," said Graham.

This puts Graham at odds with his party's leadership. Just last August, when the eight Republican presidential candidates were asked if they would reject a deal with $10 in spending cuts for every $1 in revenue, all eight said they would walk away. But Graham is now raising his hand for increased revenues — he says he could support a plan that included $4 in spending cuts for every $1 in increased tax revenue.

"We're so far in debt, that if you don't give up some ideological ground, the country sinks," said Graham

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/power-players-abc-news/top-conservative-says-read-lips-don-t-sign-101721355.html

hawkeye — June 12, 2012 at 10:24 a.m. ( | suggest removal


"We're so far in debt, that if you don't give up some ideological ground, the country sinks," said Graham.

Anyone listening? If the R's start moving toward center, will the bagger-base revolt and/or will independants move their way?

mrd — June 12, 2012 at 11:30 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Nail, yesterday at 8:26 PM, "This is so wrong."

So then, I guess what they say isn't true? I mean, cannabis *can* kill?

http://capndrift.wordpress.com/

Drift — June 12, 2012 at 11:43 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Op-Ed: Burdens Of War Unevenly Shared In U.S.

Ted Koppel

" I do not think that any nation should go to war simply on the backs of a few hundred thousand men and women and their families. When a nation goes to war, it needs to be as an entity. And by and large, 90 to 95 percent of the American public, probably more than that if you look at the real numbers, are paying absolutely nothing for this war. We are not paying anything additionally in money. We are not paying anything in terms of personal sacrifice. The young men and women who are over there fighting the war, they are. They're paying. Their families are paying. Their loved ones are paying. They are paying in terms of having to fight a war over and over and over again. They thought when they volunteered - many of them - that they might have to go under a war zone once or twice. So many of these young men and women have had to go back three times, four times, five times.

And, you know, frankly, we're not paying for the war financially. We're not paying for the war in terms of a draft so that there is an equitable number of young men and women who are going over from all branches of society. We're not paying for it in terms of personal sacrifice. We're not paying for it in terms of rationing. We are giving up essentially nothing to fight the war."

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129086933

mr_basil_seal — June 12, 2012 at 1:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mrd — June 12, 2012 at 11:30 a.m.

Probably just slow readers:

"The infuriating thing about this tragedy is that it was completely unnecessary. **Half a century ago, any economist — or for that matter any undergraduate who had read Paul Samuelson’s textbook “Economics”** — could have told you that austerity in the face of depression was a very bad idea. But policy makers, pundits and, I’m sorry to say, many economists decided, largely for political reasons, to forget what they used to know. And millions of workers are paying the price for their willful amnesia."

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/30/opinion/krugman-the-austerity-debacle.html

mr_basil_seal — June 12, 2012 at 2:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Drift- I guess it can. :( Is there anything man gets there hands on we don't screw up? Just the day before the Huff Post headline pertained to increased general public acceptance of legalization. Then the conservative health monster raised it's ugly head.

mr_basil_seal- I've long advocated for a graduated income stiff tax hike every time our leaders choose war. Something to get the general population's head in the game and incentivize corporations not to lobby for protracted wars in which to line their pockets with. Anymore America, apathy and war go hand in hand.

nailingit — June 12, 2012 at 4:37 p.m. ( | suggest removal


basil

I think it's painfully obvious-or at least should be-that slashing government spending in these troubled economic times is a disaster in the making. I believe it is a conservative driven notion that cutting will help, when in reality, it's them using the economic situation to convice people slashing social programs will help. That's crap. Government bennies paid out to struggling folks immediately go back into the economy. I can't imagine there are many poor folks putting government checks into a savings account for a rainy day when, for them, it's already dumping buckets.

Public hiring has typically been a major factor in a recovery from a recession, yet in this lingering nightmare, public jobs are being shed. I do believe the federal fiscal situation is way out of hand, and spending needs to be drastically reduced, but now is simply the wrong time-ask Europe.

I also think there's a HUGE disconnect between politicians and the people they're supposed to represent. Somewhere I found some stats showing the Republican party's agenda doesn't even agree with polling results of Republicans in matters of budget priorities.

I also think anyone pushing for slashing SS should be taken out behind the woodshed. Not one damn dime of federal money goes into SS's trust fund (calling SS an "entitlement" also makes my blood boil). As a self-employed goofus, I add up my annual income and send about 12% off to the trust fund. I can't understand why gradually raising the cap isn't even on the table-well, I'm beginning to ramble.

One note-

take a minute to read this-
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/47777413/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/

this is a "study" by some Aussies and Americans that annually assess wars going on in the world. I read it twice, and the funny thing was, I didn't notice Afghanistan even mentioned. Several paragraphs about Greece(?) however. What is up with that?

mrd — June 12, 2012 at 4:39 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mrd — June 12, 2012 at 4:39 p.m.

I got to tell you, SS IS an entitlement! I paid for it, I'm entitled to it!

So there!

hawkeye — June 12, 2012 at 7:41 p.m. ( | suggest removal


wonder if holder will give the house any of the withheld documents....

interesting to see the wisdom of the constitution's framers so forcefully and publicly working.

DeeLittle — June 12, 2012 at 7:53 p.m. ( | suggest removal


On Romney's "budget", Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Defense spending and all things delusional. We as a people should demand clarity from this Republican candidate for Prez.

http://www.salon.com/

http://www.cbpp.org/files/1-23-12bud.pdf

nailingit — June 12, 2012 at 8:15 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Anybody catch the story on channel 2 news tonight about Oakridge, Oregon and their problems with their accountant and the letter she sent out to all the residents about the "Secret Millionaire" show? Apparently the accountant had a huge run on the office from people wanting their $100. So much so, she quit her job. The Accountant's name was Tiffany R. Couch. Oddly enough, our own Tiffany Lemay Couch (according to her Facebook page) checked in at Oakridge, Oregon, yesterday.

Things that make you go.... Hmmmmmmmm

hawkeye — June 12, 2012 at 11:37 p.m. ( | suggest removal



hawk-

what I meant was calling SS an entitlement makes it sound as though it's NOT something you and I have paid for-like it's similiar to welfare or something. But I whole-heartedly agree, we paid for it so it's ours.

mrd — June 13, 2012 at 7:13 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Cut me some slack, Drift. It was 11:30 last night and I was sleepy.

Ya, read it. Funny what money does to people. Of course, I'll never know, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't mind trying.

hawkeye — June 13, 2012 at 7:21 a.m. ( | suggest removal


You got my curiosity up, hawk. I had to go looking, heh. It appears Tif bailed because the town is just so screwed up - administrators AND citizens!

All over a lousy 100 bones. Sheesh.

Drift — June 13, 2012 at 7:35 a.m. ( | suggest removal


DeeLittle — June 12, 2012 at 7:53 p.m.

Five Things To Know About The Republican Witchhunt Against Attorney General Holder
By Ian Millhiser on Jun 13, 2012 at 9:00 am

In 2006, during the presidency of George W. Bush, the Justice Department launched the first of a series of misguided “gunrunning” schemes that eventually led to the death of federal Agent Brian Terry. Rather than look to ways to prevent such a tragedy from happening again, however, House Oversight Chair Darrell Issa’s (R-CA) spent his tenure as a committee chair trying unsuccessfully to embarrass Attorney General Eric Holder.
Next week, Issa plans to escalate this witchhunt by holding an committee vote on a resolution to hold the Attorney General in contempt of Congress. Here’s what you need to know about this vote:
1. Issa Has No Case: Issa’s uncovered no evidence showing Holder bears any blame for the botched operations begun under George W. Bush, even though the Justice Department turned over thousands of pages of documents concerning the operations. Instead of accepting this fact, Issa has requested many more documents containing confidential information regarding ongoing law enforcement investigations, and is now threatening to hold Holder in contempt if these documents are not turned over. Holder is entirely correct to withhold these documents, however, because Justice Department documents are not subject to congressional subpoena if they would reveal “strategies and procedures that could be used by individuals seeking to evade [DOJ's] law enforcement efforts.”
2. Reagan’s Justice Department Agreed With Holder: President Reagan’s Justice Department warned in the 1980s that the Constitution’s separation of powers prevents the kind of documents Issa is seeking from being revealed to Congress because of the risk that the legislature could “exert pressure or attempt to influence the prosecution of criminal cases.”
3. Law Enforcement Rejects Issa’s Witchhunt:

4. Even Top Republicans Think Issa Goes Too Far:

5. Issa Is Fixated On A Conspiracy Theory:

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/06/13/498521/five-things-to-know-about-the-house-oversight-chairs-witchhunt-against-attorney-general-holder/

mr_basil_seal — June 13, 2012 at 8:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal


crazytrain — June 13, 2012 at 10:54 a.m

You are citing a tertiary source, at best.

So, how about going to the original source and finding where in the DRAFT text is the wording that supports the source you cited ?

BTW, here's another place you could have cited:
http://weaselzippers.us/2012/06/13/report-un-to-consider-1300-green-tax-on-american-families-to-fund-their-global-warming-efforts/

great comments there....

mr_basil_seal — June 13, 2012 at 1:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — June 13, 2012 at 1:46 p.m.

"You are citing a tertiary source, at best"

His source is just as valid as some of your favorites.

frobert — June 13, 2012 at 2:30 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Is it possible the tea-bagger's mindset will come around as they realize their political favorites are doing everything possible to insure the re-distribution of wealth only moves upward? At the expense of the baggers themselves?

From a CNN article how the recession has plundered the middle class and basically put the blame on the fed for not putting the brakes on the bubble as they were aware of it growing--

"The median wealth for families between the ages of 55 to 64 is $179,400. For families between the ages of 45 to 54, it is just $117,900.

This is everything they own -- all their savings, retirement accounts and the equity they have in their home. The typical retiree in the next two decades will be almost entirely dependent on his or her Social Security check. Remarkably, in Washington, all the important people think the most pressing matter is finding ways to cut Social Security and Medicare.

By detailing the economic slide of the average American, the Fed survey highlights a problem that is becoming increasing clear: growing inequality in our country. While most people are hurting badly, the very rich -- whose wealth and income have grown disproportionately big in recent times -- have largely recovered from the downturn.

Americans should not tolerate a society where the rules are rigged to redistribute income upward. Otherwise, expect to become poorer."

mrd — June 13, 2012 at 3:55 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mrd — June 13, 2012 at 3:55 p.m.

When you people start a post using a term like "teabagger" or "libtards" it loses all credibility and reasonable people stop reading.

frobert — June 13, 2012 at 5:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal


teabagger
\tea-BAG-ger\,noun;

1.
An uneasy conclave of Ayn Rand secular libertarians and fundamentalist Christian evangelicals, birthers, Birchers, racists, xenophobes, Ron Paulites, cold warriors, Zionists, constitutionalists, vanilla Republicans looking for a high and militia-style survivalists.

~Werriam Mebster doolish fictionary~

nailingit — June 13, 2012 at 5:59 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**Michigan House Passes Sweeping Abortion Bill**

“I’m flattered that you’re all so concerned about my vagina,” said state Rep. Lisa Brown (D-West Bloomfield). “But no means no.”

State Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Detroit) suggested that women withhold sex from men until they stop the bill. "Stop having sex with us, gentlemen," she said. "And I ask women to boycott men until they stop moving this through the House.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/13/michigan-abortion-bill_n_1595091.html?ref=topbar

nailingit — June 13, 2012 at 6:06 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mrd @ 3:55- *Is it possible the tea-bagger's mindset will come around as they realize their political favorites are doing everything possible to insure the re-distribution of wealth only moves upward? At the expense of the baggers themselves?*

As long as Fox & corporate purchased media define the problem as "big government" with a black ("in over his head") socialist President as the cause, I wouldn't expect a turn around. These baggers are followers like no other cult before them. All in the name of "patriotism".

They'll go down with ship rather than concede their "principles" are far too misplaced. I can hear the gurgleing as they shout racist homophobe self produced epitaphs, while their friends, family and homes sink and travel straight to the bottom.

nailingit — June 13, 2012 at 6:19 p.m. ( | suggest removal


crazytrain, Mr Winterborne and his hippie friends from the 60's are not aware that the scam is over.

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/47285

Rightwing_Extremist — June 13, 2012 at 9:18 p.m. ( | suggest removal


fro-
not sure what you mean by "you people", but whatever. I guess you'll have to define a "libtard" as that's a term I unfamiliat with. Perhaps it's a Ron Paul nomiker?
But all BS aside, I think the tea-bagger moniker stands. It's their own choice of terms.

I must assume you are unreasonable, as you evidently read the post.

mrd — June 13, 2012 at 9:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal



**FROBERT**

and eventually, a reader simply has enough and engages 'ignore user'.

DeeLittle — June 13, 2012 at 10:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal



mrd — June 13, 2012 at 9:34 p.m.

"fro- not sure what you mean by "you people""

How about "you People" means people that engage in hate and insults against those you disagree with instead of supporting your position and contrasting the differences.
+69

"I think the tea-bagger moniker stands. It's their own choice of terms."

Because one person from the group used the term once it is reasonable to use it?
Using your logic what would it be reasonable to call people of color? or people that follow Judaism?

"

frobert — June 13, 2012 at 11:24 p.m. ( | suggest removal


froberto- *"Because one person from the group used the term once..."*

You seem a bit foggy on this issue. A history lesson seems to be in order.

And before you say it.....you don't need to thank me. But..your welcome anyway. :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_FRTp...

nailingit — June 14, 2012 at 12:33 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*His source is just as valid as some of your favorites.*

frobert — June 13, 2012 at 2:30 p.m.

seems there is some internal inconsistency, or some eternal inconsistency......

Unlike Bob and Ray's socialist takeover or your climate change hysteria, my numbers can be looked up and confirmed by anyone.

frobert — June 9, 2012 at 10:10 a.m.

It is not as easy as linking a site, you could go to a Paul friendly site like lemonglobal.com, but I don't believe their figures either.

frobert — June 8, 2012 at 5:26 p.m.

Now,if you really want to support his (and by extension, your) claims, show us where in the original document is any support for the claims of the wa exam article.

mr_basil_seal — June 14, 2012 at 5:45 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Do a google image search for teabagger..... results don't change between having safe search on or off; you'll get a bunch of pictures of smiling old people with teabags stapled to the bill or brim of their hat.

mr_basil_seal — June 14, 2012 at 5:53 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Rightwing_Extremist — June 13, 2012 at 9:18 p.m.

crazytrain — June 13, 2012 at 4:50 p.m.

Tell us when you find something wrong with the science

http://skepticalscience.com/

and here's a short cartoon for you:
http://newanthropocene.wordpress.com/2012/06/14/warm-fuzzy-forecast-4/

mr_basil_seal — June 14, 2012 at 6:04 a.m. ( | suggest removal


crazytrain — June 13, 2012 at 4:50 p.m.

Your article hinges on a couple of quotes from Horner.

Who doesn't offer a single piece of evidence, just some political cant.

Until some real evidence is brought forward, this source, like yesterday's, has about as much credibility as that I-5 billboard http://www.roadsideamerica.com/tip/6002

mr_basil_seal — June 14, 2012 at 6:27 a.m. ( | suggest removal


**Romney to do 'Face the Nation'**

Via the Twitters, Mitt Romney is set to do his first non-Fox News Sunday show this weekend, with an appearance on CBS News's "Face the Nation."

http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/06/romney-to-do-face-the-nation-126115.html

nailingit — June 14, 2012 at 7:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — June 14, 2012 at 12:33 a.m.

So MSNBC grasping at straws trying to justify their offensive language somehow legitimizes yours?

frobert — June 14, 2012 at 10:34 a.m. ( | suggest removal


***See, I'm not the only one;***

Americans say Bush still more to blame than Obama for economy

More than two-thirds of Americans—including half of Republicans—still blame former President George W. Bush for the country's economic ills, according to a new Gallup poll released on Thursday, hours before President Barack Obama was to deliver a high-stakes speech defending his handling of the weak economy.

hawkeye — June 14, 2012 at 10:51 a.m. ( | suggest removal


fro @ 10:34- No dad, it doesn't. I suppose it's a matter of what one finds offensive. When a Republican nationally run cult identifies itself as "teabaggers", it would be offensive to many not to call it as such.

Anything of substance today fro? I've noticed nearly all of your posts are nothing but picking apart and exaggerating any "discrepancies" you might find in others. Any individual thought outside of ridiculous criticisms?

How is Ron doing? What's he doing with all the bagger cash he brought in?

nailingit — June 14, 2012 at 11:43 a.m. ( | suggest removal


hawk-

even if 2/3 blame the recession on Bush, me included, who do you think they'll blame for the continuance of the recession come November? I don't know if Obama will get the benefit of the doubt and folks will blame the un-cooperative House. And if weak economic numbers continue into the fall, I've got a bad feeling many might say to hell with hope & change, just gimme a change 'cause this ain't workin'. Unless consumer spending by working folks spikes soon, I don't see much improvement.

If Romney comes out with a sellable plan and House Republicans get on board, I think that could easily turn Obama into a one & done.

mrd — June 14, 2012 at 12:38 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — June 14, 2012 at 11:43 a.m.

Is it possible that Ron Paul is getting ready to endorse Mitt Romney? More specifically, is he beginning the delicate task of preparing his supporters for the day when such an endorsement might come?

Peter Grier
Washington Editor

**Why is Ron Paul still in the GOP race - and what does he want?**
We ask that question because Congressman Paul’s campaign website in recent days has posted several pieces that discuss political endorsements in a somewhat defensive manner. In one, campaign blogger Jack Hunter talks about libertarian founding father Murray Rothbard’s 1992 endorsement of President George H. W. Bush. http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/Decoder-Wire/2012/0612/Is-Ron-Paul-maybe-getting-ready-to-endorse-Mitt-Romney

mr_basil_seal — June 14, 2012 at 12:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*If Romney comes out with a sellable plan and House Republicans get on board, I think that could easily turn Obama into a one & done.*

mrd — June 14, 2012 at 12:38 p.m.

Public (minus the teabagger contingent) is also fairly aware that the House and the Senate R.s have been active in not getting any thing done.

And for Romney to come up with a "sellable plan", he'd have to do yet another Janus-like flip-flop....

mr_basil_seal — June 14, 2012 at 12:49 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*How is Ron doing? What's he doing with all the bagger cash he brought in?*

nailingit — June 14, 2012 at 11:43 a.m.

Looks like he's trying to throw a party (in both senses of the phrase)

Ron Paul Supporters Plan a Second Pre-Convention Festival

By KENNETH T. WALSH
June 14, 2012 RSS Feed Print

Republican presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul speaks to supporters during a town hall meeting in Idaho.
Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul's supporters are now trying to organize two festivals just before the Republican National Convention in Tampa this August, although it's unclear whether either one can proceed because time is growing short to organize such large undertakings.

One group is hoping to stage "Ron Paul Festival 2012" at the Florida State Fairgrounds to celebrate Paul's life and career. The other, concerned that the original Paul Festival will not come to fruition, is hoping to stage "Freedom Festival 2012" celebrating the Constitution from a libertarian point of view. This would be in Polk County, a half-hour's drive away from the fairgrounds. Both events would start August 24 and end August 26, the day before the GOP convention kicks off, according to tampabay.com.

However, there is considerable uncertainty surrounding both festivals. James Davis, a spokesman for the Republican National Committee, said the RNC has reserved scores of venues for that time period including the fairgrounds. Davis told me that the RNC has not yet decided what to do about the festivals.

[Ron Paul Still Roiling GOP Waters] http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/Ken-Walshs-Washington/2012/06/14/ron-paul-supporters-plan-a-second-pre-convention-festival

Or maybe a passing of the baton...

mr_basil_seal — June 14, 2012 at 1:06 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal @ 12:45- The Paul camp is all in a dither about what to do in this years election. From offering $100,000 dollars for dirt on Romney, to supporting Obama because of foreign policy.

I couldn't help but think what cheapskates those in the Paul camp are. A hundred grand? To "restore liberty" to America? Larry Flint offers a cool million for a solid Washington scandal.

http://rt.com/usa/news/larry-flynt-scandal-million-909/

http://www.dailypaul.com/228087/whistleblowers-needed-to-unravel-romneys-campaign

http://www.lewrockwell.com/block/block204.html

@ 1:06- Maybe they'll hire Ted Nugent to be master of ceremonies and chief orator.

nailingit — June 14, 2012 at 1:15 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal- About Paul's party planning. Sarah Palin is always ready to make a buck. She's been pretty schmoozy with pal Paul in the past...who knows? Both camps are limited in number and share views outside of the mainstream. Both camps have zero tolerance for ideas other than their own and both camps rake in big bucks duping the limited audiences of the fan faithful who support them. Both are rock stars in their corner of the universe.

A Paul/Palin ticket? A Palin/Paul ticket? Both abhor abortion and government. I'd give the edge to Palin for the top of the ticket. At least she showed the world how much she hated government by quitting (great creds!) , unlike Paul who has been feeding at the trough and endorsing the growth (earmarks) of big government for twelve terms.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/sarah-palin-defends-ron-paul-hes-the-only-one-doing-something-about-reining-in-govt-growth/

nailingit — June 14, 2012 at 1:31 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Wow! How sophomoric can Romney and his camp get? Next he'll be impersonating a cop and pulling over suspected gays to bully, frighten, humiliate and give haircuts.

I didn't see a brew ha ha over the Romney impersonating a cop thing. I guess since he was also busy getting together draft deferments at the time, people are giving him a pass. :)))

If this guy gets elected.......................

**Mitt Romney Tour Bus Honks, Taunts Obama Supporters**

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/14/mitt-romney-tour-bus-honk_n_1597282.html?ref=topbar

nailingit — June 14, 2012 at 1:51 p.m. ( | suggest removal


basil-

"And for Romney to come up with a "sellable plan", he'd have to do yet another Janus-like flip-flop...."

I'm pretty sure I wouldn't buy it, but a lot of folks could. As far as flip-flopping, with his experience that shouldn't be tough at all. I'm kinda looking forward to Romney & Obama together on stage and hearing him attack the health care plan.

mrd — June 14, 2012 at 2:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal


well she's still richer than Obama. he's only worth $10.3M. bur she'll have to work hard to catch Romney at $230M.

mrd — June 14, 2012 at 3:57 p.m. ( | suggest removal


The baggers idea of free speech is to silence the opposition.

Michigan needs you Matt...

**Michigan Woman Lawmakers Silenced By GOP After Abortion Debate 'Temper Tantrum'**

"It's my impression that I'm being banned from speaking as a result of my use of the term vasectomy -- a medical procedure," Byrum told The Huffington Post. "Neither of us has been contacted by Republican leadership as to why or how long we've been banned. Talk about disrespectful, that they don’t have the common decency to tell us themselves."

Ari Adler, a spokesman for House Majority Leader Jase Bolger (R-Marshall), said the lawmakers were banned from speaking because of their behavior, not because of their word choice. "They behaved in a way that disrupted the decorum of the House," Adler said. "For Brown, it was not the words she used, but the way she used them that resulted in her being gaveled down." In Byrum's case, Adler said, "I hate to put it this way, but she essentially had a temper tantrum on the House floor."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/14/michigan-woman-lawmakers-silenced-_n_1598168.html

nailingit — June 14, 2012 at 4:30 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**CRAZY**

maybe she can make up some lost income by tolling that road sf's gonna name after her.

DeeLittle — June 14, 2012 at 4:56 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Here, this is fun. Pick out the con-man.

http://www.columbian.com/news/2012/ju...

hawkeye — June 14, 2012 at 5:29 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Oh crap, I gave it away.

hawkeye — June 14, 2012 at 5:32 p.m. ( | suggest removal


One thing's for sure, the C should invest in a tripod.

nailingit — June 14, 2012 at 5:39 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hey Hawk, I thought the exact same thing when I saw the picture of him. He has exactly ONE topic, namely the bridge. Other than that, who knows what he stands for? Does he stand for anything besides hisself in a public role? In that respect, he reminds me of Romney who in my opinion runs because he wants to be prez. Kinda like a role to play.

luvithere — June 14, 2012 at 5:54 p.m. ( | suggest removal


From the 'you can't make this stuff up' category...

**RNC Latinos Site Removes Picture Of Asian Children**

The Republican National Committee corrected an embarrassing mistake on Thursday after the children in a picture used on its RNC Latinos website turned out to not actually be Latino.

A blog post on U.S. News & World Report quickly spread after the reporter found the stock photo used in the site's header had been tagged with "asia," "asian," "japanese" and "thailand" -- but nothing to indicate that the children were Latino.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/14/rnc-latinos-asian_n_1598054.html?ref=topbar

nailingit — June 14, 2012 at 7:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**Obama Administration To Stop Deporting Younger Undocumented Immigrants And Grant Work Permits**

Under the administration plan, undocumented immigrants will be immune from deportation if they were brought to the United States before they turned 16 and are younger than 30, have been in the country for at least five continuous years, have no criminal history, graduated from a U.S. high school or earned a GED, or served in the military. They also can apply for a work permit that will be good for two years with no limits on how many times it can be renewed. The officials who described the plan spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss it in advance of the official announcement.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/15/obama-immigration-order-deportation-dream-act_n_1599658.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

nailingit — June 15, 2012 at 7:42 a.m. ( | suggest removal


**High and Tight: Our Rock & Roll Baseball Experts Remember Dock Ellis and His LSD No-Hitter**

Instead of talking about how he "just went out and gave 110 percent" that day, the gregarious Ellis (who sadly passed away in late 2008) reminisced to interviewers about the challenges of throwing a ball that kept changing size and weight to a shadowy series of batters – one of whom appeared to be Jimi Hendrix swinging a guitar – with President Richard Nixon umpiring the game from behind the plate.

Dock's lysergic outing has inspired songs (Barbara Manning's "Dock Ellis," Todd Snider's "America's Favorite Pastime"), animated shorts (James Blagden's "Dock Ellis and the LSD No-No," which has racked up nearly 2.5 million YouTube views to date), a feature-length film (the forthcoming No No: A Dockumentary) and, in its own indirect way, this column.

Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/high-and-tight-our-rock-roll-baseball-experts-remember-dock-ellis-and-his-lsd-no-hitter-20120613#ixzz1xsLGBrhX

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_vUhSY...

nailingit — June 15, 2012 at 8:19 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Nail,
Come on "man".... Obama had his people out in the streets of Portland when Romney was in "PEE TOWN" it's just the way these poloticos run....Happy fathers day to you and all fathers... We put up with allot...

vanwadreamer — June 15, 2012 at 9:37 a.m. ( | suggest removal


vanwa-But he's not having a tour bus spin doughnuts at the opposition. :) Happy Father's day to you as well.

And we do put up with a lot!

nailingit — June 15, 2012 at 10:10 a.m. ( | suggest removal


vanwadreamer — June 15, 2012 at 9:37 a.m

Are you saying that he actually got people to protest Romney, himself?

Or are you saying that there were people protesting Romney that were for Obama?

And do you have proof of the first?

hawkeye — June 15, 2012 at 1:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hawk,
No proof and YES I do believe his local minions gathered up some folks , not all but definitely the organizers...Both parties have these organizers everywhere they go..Thats why it's called dirty polictics and noone plays it dirtier than Obama. I really don't care because these things are what they are. My vote isn't swayed by any of this stuff, Actually I it find quite humorous...Kinda like the Folks back in NY City when the first 1% rally started. My wife and I watched becasue it was quite interesting to hear those who were protesting and what they had to say...Everyone has an opinion and thats there right....

vanwadreamer — June 15, 2012 at 2:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*and noone plays it dirtier than Obama.*

vanwa- Now you're just repeating partisan talking points and/or not paying attention. One of the reasons I voted for Obama and endorsed him over Hillary is because he ran a clean campaign. You want dirty just reference McCain's out of wedlock black baby he sired. Or even better the swift boating of a true war hero (John Kerry). Both coming from the Bush camp.

It's the blurring of lines that is so pervasive in today's easily led right wing political realm that's responsible for the spread of much misinformation. Fox news right at the top. The folks that say they all do it, even though they all don't. Obfuscating the facts with half truths and lies, pretty soon the average Joe and/or the easily misled fall victim.

The great political debacle of 2010 is a prime example of politicians duping voters into believing something that was never intended. Remember, 2010 Republican's mantra was jobs jobs and jobs. We now know the goal was to obstruct and defeat this President at any cost.

Not all play dirty, but unfortunately those that do tend to win.

nailingit — June 15, 2012 at 6:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal




roger @ FB- A good well thought out answer on Obama's immigration stance. After checking out FB comments yesterday, from mouthy truckers measuring their cardboard to Waters running off the cliff, your comments are appreciated. At least sanity exists at some level in Columbian's FB comments section.

nailingit — June 16, 2012 at 8:11 a.m. ( | suggest removal


**The Republicans' Dirty Little Secret**

President Bush once told the President of China, Hu Jintao, that what "keeps him up at night" is terrorism. Hu Jintao responded that what keeps him up at night is "creating 25 million jobs a year for my people."

As a nation, we need leaders who will be sleepless over what actions they will take to get jobs here. We need to be restlessly obsessed with creating jobs for America in a global economy. So what keeps me up at night is the fear that people will vote to go back to the policies that got us into this mess. Have we learned nothing? We need national economic policy, and President Obama yesterday articulated one to make us globally competitive with energy, education, infrastructure and innovation. He is moving us forward.

Mitt Romney's trickle-down, laissez-faire, hands-off economic platform is not just stuck in the George W. Bush era, it's firmly planted in Adam Smith's 1700s. His policies are worse than merely "been-there-done-that." Going backwards to those policies would actually sabotage our future.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jennifer-m-granholm/the-republicans-dirty-lit_b_1600656.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

nailingit — June 16, 2012 at 8:17 a.m. ( | suggest removal


"Another problem: It’s not clear how much U.S. banks have at risk to Europe through credit default swaps because regulations let banks keep that information a secret.

“You could have American banks up to their necks in CDS liabilities,” Blythe says. “We don’t even know.”"

what's that they say-"those that don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it?"

mrd — June 16, 2012 at 8:33 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — June 16, 2012 at 8:11 a.m.,

Gee, Nails - Thanks.

Go read my comment to Editor Lou on his column today.

roger — June 16, 2012 at 10:09 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I'll echo Lou B's comment earlier. "Let the sunshine in".

nailingit — June 16, 2012 at 10:35 a.m. ( | suggest removal


obama is a traitor. He has and will sell the country out for votes, which is what he has been doing for the last four years. Of course you will never convince the dyed in the wool obama puppets of this. I pray that it comes back to bite them all in the butts, hopefully before his arrogance and his minions completely destroy the country. After this last move by the dictator wannabe, I will vote for anyone who is running against him and urge everyone I see to do the same. Hopefully there will be enough of us to do it. Otherwise, this once great country is in deep doo doo.

cranky — June 16, 2012 at 7:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal


cranky — June 16, 2012 at 7:43 p.m.

Living up to your name, as always. Good job.

hawkeye — June 16, 2012 at 7:48 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**Obama’s rhetorical deficit**

During that decade, there was a specific theory in Washington about how to meet this challenge. We were told that huge tax cuts — especially for the wealthiest Americans — would lead to faster job growth. We were told that fewer regulations — especially for big financial institutions and corporations — would bring about widespread prosperity. We were told that it was okay to put two wars on the nation’s credit card; that tax cuts would create enough growth to pay for themselves. That’s what we were told. So how did this economic theory work out?

For the wealthiest Americans, it worked out pretty well. Over the last few decades, the income of the top 1 percent grew by more than 275 percent — to an average of $1.3 million a year. Big financial institutions, corporations saw their profits soar. But prosperity never trickled down to the middle class.

From 2001 to 2008, we had the slowest job growth in half a century. The typical family saw their incomes fall. The failure to pay for the tax cuts and the wars took us from record surpluses under President Bill Clinton to record deficits. And it left us unprepared to deal with the retirement of an aging population that’s placing a greater strain on programs like Medicare and Social Security.

Without strong enough regulations, families were enticed, and sometimes tricked, into buying homes they couldn’t afford. Banks and investors were allowed to package and sell risky mortgages. Huge, reckless bets were made with other people’s money on the line. And too many from Wall Street to Washington simply looked the other way.

Read more @

http://www.salon.com/writer/joan_walsh/

nailingit — June 16, 2012 at 10:03 p.m. ( | suggest removal



crazytrain — June 17, 2012 at 12:09 a.m.

Straw man argument.

Do the research:

Step 1: study more data than they refer to.

Step 2: study the data yourself.

Step 3: look at more than they show you.

(from: Open Mind
Defense Against the Dark Arts http://tamino.wordpress.com/2012/04/22/defense-against-the-dark-arts/ )

By the way, most of what you are attempting with placing the housing crisis blame on Rep. Frank fits to the above also. Not to mention that the Atlantic article you link to doesn't support your claims.

But that could be blamed for copy pasting a chain email.

mr_basil_seal — June 17, 2012 at 5:50 a.m. ( | suggest removal


40th anniversary.

http://www.columbian.com/news/2012/ju...

mr_basil_seal — June 17, 2012 at 6:07 a.m. ( | suggest removal


**Public overwhelmingly supports large defense spending cuts**

To trim the deficit, Americans favor much deeper reductions at the Pentagon than their leaders do
By R. Jeffrey Smith

While politicians, insiders and experts may be divided over how much the government should spend on the nation’s defense, there’s a surprising consensus among the public about what should be done: They want to cut spending far more deeply than either the Obama administration or the Republicans.

That’s according to the results of an innovative, new, nationwide survey by three nonprofit groups, the Center for Public integrity, the Program for Public Consultation and the Stimson Center. Not only does the public want deep cuts, it wants those cuts to encompass spending in virtually every military domain — air power, sea power, ground forces, nuclear weapons, and missile defenses.

According to the survey, in which respondents were told about the size of the budget as well as shown expert arguments for and against spending cuts, two-thirds of Republicans and nine in 10 Democrats supported making immediate cuts — a position at odds with the leaderships of both political parties.

The average total cut was around $103 billion, a substantial portion of the current $562 billion base defense budget, while the majority supported cutting it at least $83 billion. These amounts both exceed a threatened cut of $55 billion at the end of this year under so-called “sequestration” legislation passed in 2011, which Pentagon officials and lawmakers alike have claimed would be devastating.

“When Americans look at the amount of defense spending compared to spending on other programs, they see defense as the one that should take a substantial hit to reduce the deficit,” said Steven Kull, director of the Program for Public Consultation (PPC), and the lead developer of the survey. “Clearly the polarization that you are seeing on the floor of the Congress is not reflective of the American people.”

http://www.iwatchnews.org/2012/05/10/8856/public-overwhelmingly-supports-large-defense-spending-cuts

mr_basil_seal — June 17, 2012 at 6:21 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Naming Names: Jamie Dimon Is Not Alone
by Abby Zimet

Following the 2008 financial collapse, at least 18 former and current directors from Federal Reserve Banks worked in banks and corporations that got over $4 trillion in low-interest loans from the Federal Reserve - that is, they bailed out themselves. The findings of the Government Accountability Office report were released for the first time by the tireless Sen. Bernie Sanders.

“This report reveals the inherent conflicts of interest that exist at the Federal Reserve. At a time when small businesses could not get affordable loans to create jobs, the Fed was providing trillions in secret loans to some of the largest banks and corporations in America that were well represented on the boards of the Federal Reserve Banks. These conflicts must end.” http://www.commondreams.org/further/2012/06/15-2

mr_basil_seal — June 17, 2012 at 6:25 a.m. ( | suggest removal



the recent House budget actually gave the Pentagon more money than they had requested. I would have thought their tea-bagger supporters would have been incensed, but maybe they're still looking for that birth certificate, who knows. But the cut, cut, cut folks must be OK with this massive waste knowing their leaders will whack the social programs harder to make up for this increase, I guess. Just keep that money flowing upward and the job-creators will take care of all of our ills, right?

mrd — June 17, 2012 at 6:59 a.m. ( | suggest removal


crazytrain — June 17, 2012 at 7:44 a.m

**Fox News Viewers are the Most Misinformed: A Seventh Study Arrives to Prove It**

I noted in my prior posts that the studies documenting the “Fox News effect” do not necessarily show causation. **In other words, watching Fox may make you more misinformed, but people who believe lots of political misinformation may also gravitate towards Fox.**

I actually think both things are going on simultaneously—but the new Feldman study does make a strong causal case that Fox is actively driving a lot of the problem.

In other words, why are Americans so divided today over reality and what is factually true? There are surely many causes—but one is that **a news network with a powerful sway is constantly sowing right wing misinformation, and an army of followers are watching and believing it.**

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2011/11/22/374434/fox-news-viewers-misinformed-study-jon-stewart

mr_basil_seal — June 17, 2012 at 7:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal


crazytrain — June 17, 2012 at 8:11 a.m.

crazytrain — June 17, 2012 at 7:44 a.m

So, basically two posts just attacking, personal attacks mostly, with no refutation of any basic facts.

As the studies - -7 studies - show, misinformed.

So, tell us why you think all seven are wrong......

mr_basil_seal — June 17, 2012 at 9:17 a.m. ( | suggest removal


“When Americans look at the amount of defense spending compared to spending on other programs, they see defense as the one that should take a substantial hit to reduce the deficit,” .... mr_basil_seal — June 17, 2012 at 6:21 a.m.

OK -

Let's start by closing down our overseas presence, to include at least two combat zones, and bring all our military back to the US. That should at least allow us to be able to pay back what we borrowed to introduce democracy to the Muslim world. We can just let the rest of the world take care of itself - survival of the fittest is a fundamental law of nature, after all.

And then we can go about cutting out the couple of hundred billion spent each year on maintaining DOD (affectionately known as the Military Industrial Complex). I mean, we won't need all those weapons systems - will we? Will Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, General Dynamic, Raytheon, KBR, and all the other defense contractors have to find legitimate work or go under????? What will that do to our economy? And perhaps a 30% unemployment rate, by the time all the secondary and tertiary suppliers go under?

This argument can go on. But let me close with something I've said, or implied, before - that to take what "the average American" wants as anything useful isn't the best thing to do - that's how we ended up with the crowd we have in DC these days.

roger — June 17, 2012 at 9:21 a.m. ( | suggest removal


roger — June 17, 2012 at 9:21 a.m.

*And perhaps a 30% unemployment rate, by the time all the secondary and tertiary suppliers go under?*

I haven't seen any numbers even close to that; perhaps you could show us how you got to that.

mr_basil_seal — June 17, 2012 at 9:30 a.m. ( | suggest removal


.

crazytrain — June 17, 2012 at 9:42 a.m.

May be more than 'both sided of any issue' to study. Generally, to see what Fox doesn't want you to see, all you need do is a short search on C-Span for the unedited version.

As the studies - -7 studies - show, misinformed.

So, tell us why you think all seven are wrong......

But, thanks for the tiny bit of an attempt to discuss the issue, even if you still indulged in more attacking (3 for 3!)

mr_basil_seal — June 17, 2012 at 9:53 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*Time to pony up some of these millions in tax revenue.*

**Can Conservatives Overcome Washington's Secular Bent To Ban Gay Marriage?**

Killen said evangelical and Catholic leaders in the state are actively working to overturn the same-sex marriage law, but said it's impossible to know how much influence they have over the "unchurched."

"They have a very impressive track record of winning these campaigns, and we expect them to spend millions to roll back the law," Silk said.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/17/can-conservatives-overcom_n_1601589.html?ref=topbar

nailingit — June 17, 2012 at 10:01 a.m. ( | suggest removal


roger-This argument can go on. But let me close with something I've said, or implied, before - that to take what "the average American" wants as anything useful isn't the best thing to do - that's how we ended up with the crowd we have in DC these days.

Repudiating democracy? Once in power refuse to bend to the will of the people that put you in office? Part of the problem is a refusal to do just that. We don't have to eliminate programs, but streamline and bring DOD/military complex into the 21st century. D.C. politicians tend to live in a bubble and discard the will of the people and produce policy that appeals to their donor base.

We need politicians to listen to the folks that elected them. Our wonderful existing Congress is a prime example.

nailingit — June 17, 2012 at 10:36 a.m. ( | suggest removal


"This argument can go on. But let me close with something I've said, or implied, before - that to take what "the average American" wants as anything useful isn't the best thing to do - that's how we ended up with the crowd we have in DC these days."

I think the problem lies in the fact most folks we send to DC end up with a different agenda than the voters that paid for their ticket. I find it difficult to accept if DC delivered what the "average American" wanted this country would be circling the drain as it is now. I feel the biggest disconnect is the fact elected critters seem to, in a lot of cases, support positions that are not in the best interests or wishes of the "average American". Budgeting more for the Pentagon than was requested is an example.

When drafting the framework for our government, the writers had in mind citizen-legislators, a far cry from today's career politicians. I can accept the fact as a representive style government, elected officials are going to make decisions I don't agree with. But there also comes a time to which the degree these folks go the other way, against the "average American" becomes excessive.

The old notion that what's good for GM is good for the whole country doesn't hold up any more. What's good for GM is good for GM and it's stockholders and that's about it. GM might not be a good example as I believe the taxpayers might still be shareholders-not sure if GM has cashed out the government yet. But if and when they do, I'm positive I'll get rich off the deal as a shareholder, and trickle down money will enhance my bank accout, right? I think I'll use my profit to add a room onto my house to store my trickle-down windfalls.

mrd — June 17, 2012 at 10:48 a.m. ( | suggest removal


As (I believe) I've mentioned previously: Somewhere along the line we went from the United States of America to the United Corporations of America.

Congress Critters are nothing more than contractors of.

I'd like to see that change. How to accomplish that -- short of throwing the bums out -- I've not a clue.

Remember, boys and girls, "Money is the root of all evil." ;^)

Drift — June 17, 2012 at 11:04 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I haven't seen any numbers even close to that; perhaps you could show us how you got to that. -- mr_basil_seal — June 17, 2012 at 9:30 a.m.

My using 'perhaps' is because this was a supposition. However, I'm thinking my guess is on the conservative side.

Here's a wiki page that shows Boeing's defense contracts, to include a few of their major subsidiary companies and where they're located. And you have to figure these plants just develop and assemble; most of the components used are bought from other companies, who in turn buy raw materials from still other companies. And you can bet these are critical contracts for most of the companies involved; they'd all have a hard time staying afloat without them. In 2008, 51% of Boeing's income was from their defense contracts. Take this away, and just what will the domino effect be? Perhaps a few tens of thousands of jobs lost due to plants folding?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_D...

And that's just one defense contractor - though granted a high dollar one. Moving beyond the aerospace industry, we have to clothe, feed and provide a variety of other logistical support - KBR is just one of several businesses with billion dollar plus annual contracts. What about the tens of thousands of Dell computers and printers spread throughout the military - how many jobs get lost when we start canceling those contracts? What about the fuel? What about on and on and on.... And then we get to the thousands of government employees who are contract specialists or who work in DFAS paying the bills.

Yep, whether you accept the gov't figures placing unemployment at about 8% (2,700,000 people), or whether you believe it's actually much higher - this is nothing compared to what we'll see if we start defunding the military.

Why do you think the Senators and Congressman are fighting to preserve this funding? This isn't a matter of old and poor folks dying, or our people becoming increasingly uneducated because we won't pay for education - this is about preserving our entire economy.

roger — June 17, 2012 at 11:08 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*"My using 'perhaps' is because this was a supposition. However, I'm thinking my guess is on the conservative side."*

So basically doubling down

mr_basil_seal — June 17, 2012 at 11:19 a.m. ( | suggest removal


My, my - touched a sore point with my elitist comment - huh?

For the sake of argument, our "enlightened" forefathers were only planning on allowing white male landowners vote - the (mostly educated) elite. The rest of us got added on later in the day.

I believe someone here recently kept referencing a study that said people who rely on FOX for their news know less about our government functioning than those who read/watched no news at all? If we're saying these people know less than nothing, should they be allowed a voice in our government?

What about then thousands who still follow Rush, and his "just do what I say"?

And can't leave the other side out - Ed Schultz, Rachel Maddow, Keith Olbermann and their ilk pass on a great deal of somewhat skewed information too.

It's pretty much come to the point that maybe we should just turn running the country over to all the illegal Mexicans people like to rail on about - at least they know what we're supposed to stand for and believe in hard work, etc.

roger — June 17, 2012 at 11:24 a.m. ( | suggest removal


"Why do you think the Senators and Congressman are fighting to preserve this funding? This isn't a matter of old and poor folks dying, or our people becoming increasingly uneducated because we won't pay for education - this is about preserving our entire economy."

I also find it difficult to believe that channeling some, not all mind you, money spent on "defense" into other venues would not have the same effect. Infrastructure renovation, education, health care, there would be a lot of industries that would benefit, and create jobs. And the benefits would be long term, after all, the interstate highway system, Bonneville Dam, and on and on, are much older than any of the Pentagon's weapon systems.

But you're right. A shift away from being by far and away the world's largest merchant of death wouldn't be painless, but more sustainable.

mrd — June 17, 2012 at 11:55 a.m. ( | suggest removal


roger- Another echo if I may...*So basically doubling down*

We have all kinds roger. Informed, uninformed, stupid, smart, black white red handicapped...etc. etc. It's America. It's Democracy.

*My, my - touched a sore point with my elitist comment - huh?*

I didn't catch any elitism at all. None. What comes through (correct me if I'm wrong) is disdain for our system/process of American democracy.

Is this your argument for forced sterilization? Not trying to pick a fight here, just trying to grasp your reasoning based on your comments.

*If we're saying these people know less than nothing, should they be allowed a voice in our government?*

Yep.

nailingit — June 17, 2012 at 11:59 a.m. ( | suggest removal


This IS Fathers day, RIGHT?

So how did P-town turn it into "Gay Pride" day?

Seems to be a disconnect between the two.

hawkeye — June 17, 2012 at 12:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal



hawkeye — June 17, 2012 at 12:20 p.m.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_prid...

mr_basil_seal — June 17, 2012 at 12:35 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*Austerity Survives! Grab the popcorn! A misinformed baggers dream for MittAmerica! We won't need popcorn then, just our knees!*

**Greece election: pro-bailout right to attempt coalition**

"There will be no more adventures. Greece's place in Europe will not be put in doubt."

"The sacrifices of the Greek people will bring the country back to prosperity," he promised.

He also said Greece would "honour its obligations".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-18478982

nailingit — June 17, 2012 at 1:28 p.m. ( | suggest removal



Check this - It's going to be quite interesting to see how the implementation of this plays out.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-eye/post/pentagon-to-observe-gay-pride-month-for-first-time/2012/06/14/gJQAke62cV_blog.html

There is a strong traditional Christian presence in the military - Evangelicals, Baptists and others. It's one thing to say you have to accept the right of a homosexual solder to serve; it's an entirely different thing to say you have to "celebrate" their presence when what they do is (supposedly) frowned upon by your religion.

I predict a widespread refusal to participate in these observances. This will cause problems, in that the chain of command is expected to ensure the success of the EO observance program (numbers attending observances are reported). Something says this won't happen.

roger — June 17, 2012 at 2:33 p.m. ( | suggest removal


roger- This is going to be hard for many to swallow. :))))))))))))))))))))))))))

nailingit — June 17, 2012 at 2:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Oh, I'm sure the issue can be licked, nail.

Drift — June 17, 2012 at 2:54 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Only with stiff penalties.

nailingit — June 17, 2012 at 2:55 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I'm not going within a mile, Nails.

And that's not GNR - don't care what Axl says. Here's the "right" video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_S8tR...

roger — June 17, 2012 at 2:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Oh, and nail, thanks for the Neil Young. ...reminds me of a daughter of mine.

Drift — June 17, 2012 at 3 p.m. ( | suggest removal


And to help celebrate Gay Pride --

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NU-Iod...

roger — June 17, 2012 at 3:18 p.m. ( | suggest removal



roger — June 17, 2012 at 3:19 p.m. ( | suggest removal



He says he's "ex-gay" - whatever. Music is still great!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVIVkCUhfpQ&feature;=relmfu

roger — June 17, 2012 at 3:31 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Drift- If I was given a choice to hang out/jam for a day with any living musician, it'd be Neil. I wish a great song would remind me of one of my (3) daughters. The only song I equate with is with my oldest. And it's sung by a mermaid.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iZPK77...

nailingit — June 17, 2012 at 3:33 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Last one.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLhD-h...

roger — June 17, 2012 at 3:36 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nail, sorry, Neil can't sing. Almost as bad as Bruce.

Now, in other news;

WASHINGTON (AP) — Rick Santorum is sticking by earlier questions he posed about former rival Mitt Romney's authenticity, saying the points he made during the primary campaign were legitimate.

Santorum said Sunday "I don't back away from any of those things."

Santorum had also argued in March that Republicans should give President Barack Obama a second term because Romney wasn't conservative enough. The former Pennsylvania senator now says "clearly, the difference between President Obama and Mitt Romney is a chasm."

Should Romney win in November, Santorum says he would advise Romney if asked but not serve in his administration. He said: "It's pretty much a flat no."

***Santorum tells CNN'S "State of the Union" that he wouldn't consider working for a Romney administration because his priority lies with his family.***

If that's the case, why did he run at all?

hawkeye — June 17, 2012 at 3:53 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**The World from Berlin Banning Salafists 'Won't Solve Social Problems'**http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/german-commentators-welcome-action-against-salafists-a-839036.html

if GERMANY can do this, why can't we?

DeeLittle — June 17, 2012 at 6:57 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawk- Neil's not the greatest guitar player either. But his mix of singing writing and playing, blended with soul & his heart of gold produces a kind of magic few come close to. His ballads are wrought with emotion, and banging on "old black"he can burn the house down.

nailingit — June 17, 2012 at 8:48 p.m. ( | suggest removal


It was kind of a long article, Dee. I lost interest after about the fifth paragraph. I gave a quick surf down the page and decided I wouldn't bother going any further.

See the R.I.C.O. act, Dee. Punch "McCarthyism" into your favorite search engine. Then... ask yourself if they've any commonality.

Then. Then! Search for Klu Klux Klan and the Black Panthers.

And while you sit there wondering what this has to do with your post about Germany, consider fishing in another hole.

Night guys... it's time for me to go to work.

Drift — June 17, 2012 at 9:51 p.m. ( | suggest removal


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5wV4ke5gfQ

Tearing it up!

nailingit — June 17, 2012 at 10:01 p.m. ( | suggest removal


While bringing the tears...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYWrlf...

nailingit — June 17, 2012 at 10:05 p.m. ( | suggest removal


If anyone cares...Neil Young & Crazy Horse with Los Lobos for openers are playing the KeyArena in Seattle November 10. Tickets are available.

nailingit — June 17, 2012 at 10:36 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**DRIFT**

simply put, point is: if *germany* can call them muslim extremist terrorist groups, why can't WE?

DeeLittle — June 17, 2012 at 11:17 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Countless American based publications refer to groups such as this. There's certainly isn't a shortage. Even the "liberal" times!

Me thinks it turns some folks on to converse about hate and bigotry. Some can't get enough. Although false, it lends a feeling of superiority, and provides an outlet for displaced anxiety.

**Radical U.S. Muslims Little Threat, Study Says**

WASHINGTON — A feared wave of homegrown terrorism by radicalized Muslim Americans has not materialized, with plots and arrests dropping sharply over the two years since an unusual peak in 2009, according to a new study by a North Carolina research group.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/08/us/radical-muslim-americans-pose-little-threat-study-says.html

nailingit — June 18, 2012 at 1:04 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Forum Login