“Thank you Bunny!! As one who worked to GOTV for Obama, and who voted for Obama, I have been sorely disappointed. I have been equally disappointed in the stupendous cheering section (aka "shills") who badmouth anybody who dares to oppose Obama's policies. Face facts: Obama has not been a good president. McCain would very likely have been worse, but that does not mean Obama was good. The shills try to posit the same tired disproven discredited excuses over and over again. They're like Republicans, but with different words.”
“Does anyone else notice that McCain is an empty shell, who just repeats what he is told by his staffers? Like Ronald "Trickle Down" Reagan, McCain sure knows public speaking, but he seems to have no mind of his own any more.”
Anne Johnson on Sep 5, 2010 at 14:03:19
“I think you're being a bit generous. I don't think McCain is good at public speaking at all.”
“To me, the simple and obvious way to remove the argument from climate change deniers is to approach the issue in the simple terms of pollution. "Pollution is bad. Let's stop doing it."
Suppose the deniers are right. Does that change the simple argument? Pollution is bad. Let's stop doing it. Suppose the deniers are half-right -- that climate change is occurring, but humans aren't the cause. Does that change the simple argument? Pollution is bad. Let's stop doing it. Suppose the scientists are right -- global climate change is real and is being caused or exacerbated by humans. Pollution is bad! Let's stop doing it! The "yes-it-is-no-it-isn't" argument is a red herring which keeps you occupied while the factory belches filth into the sky.”
SoCalHotOne on Jul 17, 2010 at 21:11:23
“Pollution bad. OK
But CO2 is not pollution. It a trace gas that is vital to all life on earth. The human contribution of CO2 in the atmosphere is a mere .002%.”
“The climate change deniers in this thread are spamming it to death! It's like every third comment is by somebody with something constructive to say. The rest seem to be relying on the tried-and-true "Nuh-uh!" platform. While it is possible to talk to a brick wall, there isn't much to be accomplished from it.”
“Gates said "We have far too many people talking to the media outside of channels" but
Wilson promised that "no 'Iron Curtain' would fall between the Pentagon and the news media."
So, the intent seems to be to restrict the access of the press but not to restrict the access of the press? To restrict what the press can hear and where the press can go, but without it really restricting the press? These restrictions are not for the major "news" outlets, but are intended to inhibit reporting from Rolling Stone, HuffPo, Salon.com, and other such outlets. The major news outlets are already good lapdogs, interesting primarily in the continued "access" they enjoy. The Rolling Stones, HuffPos, FDLs, and new media outlets are what Gates is afraid of.
It's not an Iron Curtain. It's Iron Gates. I'm not lovin' the new transparency.”
CoronaDischarge on Jul 3, 2010 at 21:51:01
“I think you misunderstand his intent, not that I agree with it mind you, but I think they don't want to restrict the press as long as they republish what they want published and at the same time expect that they will channel access away from things that detract from the mission. In other words, nothing's really changed, they just will be more careful about future access.”
“Perhaps the topic of clean water be approached in terms of savings. Cleaner water requires less treatment before being pumped into municipal systems. Cleaner water leads to fewer airborne and rainborne toxins, which means better crop yields. Phrasing the topic in terms of its economic benefits may help to balance the drum beat of opposition.”
“Can't this country PLEASE stop the political dynasties? Daddy finally steps down after X long years in office, only to have his son or daughter fill the seat. Or daddy doesn't step down, and his son or daughter fills a different seat...like daddy stays in the Senate, and son vies for the Governorship. I wonder if term limits could be extended to families?”
CTtransplant on Jun 27, 2010 at 12:44:32
“Both Reids are terrific public servants. It is not often to find one - let alone two - politicians who actually look out for the best interests of the people of their state. We are lucky to have both Harry and Rory!”
tangelan on Jun 27, 2010 at 12:41:36
“But what about our freedoms? Besides, wanting to be in public service used to be a good thing.”
“This article, and nearly all like it, refer to demonstrators as "anti-globalization forces". That is an inaccurate label. If the demonstrators are "lefties", as many would have us believe, then wouldn't they be in *favor of* globalization? After all, don't the "lefties" want one world order? It seems that globalization would be a means to that end, no?
No. The protests are not anti-globalization. They are anti-secret-backroom-deals-for-global-corporatism.
To me, the violence seems akin to a riot that comes after winning the big hockey match, and Canadians are fully versed in that. The mayor was shocked...BS. He was mugging for the camera. He and a few billion other people on this planet understand how demonstrations, victory celebrations, hell even wedding receptions, can turn into sad and destructive riots. And unfortunately, the riots are a bright shiny object to be waved in front of the camera while the backroom deals continue.”
TrixieCDN on Jun 27, 2010 at 10:33:38
“You've nailed Mayor Miller. He may be the worst Mayor in my 50 yrs as a Torontonian. I am sorry I voted for him and glad he is leaving. I am not surprised that he didn't adequately protect Queen St. He may mean well but really just is very, very bad at his job.”
okim5150 on Jun 27, 2010 at 10:28:33
“It's the oligarchs that want globalization. If they can convince the right that it's the left that wants it and convince the left that the right wants it, they can keep the light off of themselves. And recently it was the right that was accusing the president of a shake down when he got money from a multinational corporation to help clean up the mess that they had made.”
mrsmdressup on Jun 27, 2010 at 10:22:56
“Nothing like this has ever happened in this city. NOTHING. The citizens of Toronto are just as outraged as Mayor Miller.”
“What I need to know for this game is: Where can I watch it? I certainly hope it will be on ext basic cable in the US! I *think* it will be on ESPN, but their web site wasn't clear about it. I couldn't tell if they were selling it as a kind of pay-per-view, or if it would be on as regular programming! Clicking on the TV schedule brought up a nice, pretty empty box about one inch tall.”
“From the article: "Judson Phillips, founder of another national organization, Tea Party Nation, said some activists are starting to act like mainstream politicians."
I saw that right away with Rand Paul...his comments before and after the election smacked of a typical politician. To me, it seems like he thought he could get on the inside track by using the baggers as a way to appear as an outsider -- and that indeed is what typical politicians do. They get on the inside by acting like they are outsiders. In Rand Paul's case, he isn't good at it - liberals saw through his B.S. immediately, and sane conservatives saw through it once the baggers started idolizing him. Now, it looks like the baggers are figuring out that he's a poser too. Happy day! I sincerely hope the baggers fight amongst themselves so much that they are unable to elect a single one of their whackdoodle crazies!”
“Exactly! This is a case where it is better to let Barbour blather on. Mississippians can easily look at the beach for themselves, and even Barbour can delude them out of what they see with their own eyes. Letting Barbour discredit himself with such statements will open the door for a right-wing political fight in his state, and that's good for the Democrats.
The oil might not be in Mississippi in massive sticky globs right now, but it will be. Simply too much has been spilled, even if you accept the minimalist numbers coming from BP. Next week, when Mississippi beaches are five inches deep in the nasty muck, I expect the right-wing infighting to begin.”
“Sadly, I think the US will veto any condemnations. The US has been in bed with Israel for too long and is unable/unwilling to change positions now. I fear the US's blind alliance with Israel will not be reevaluated even if Israel engages in acts more disreputable than this.”
“dingdingdingding! You hit the nail on the head with that. They were indeed trying to wait it out. If the repubs do take control of Congress in November, expect this amendment to be repealed. If the repubs do not take control but still make some gains this November, expect this amendment to be retroactively watered down with new legislation as the spineless Democratic leadership sells out in the name of bipartisanship.”
“Didn't you know? This perk is available to all the whackadoodles. Talk as much smack as you can as fast as possible, stop for a quick "I'm Sorry!" once in a while, and then go right back to the trash talk.”
“I take your point...but kinda sorta begrudgingly. I still wish O had nominated somebody who is an unabashed progressive. I wish he had gone ahead and picked that fight right now.
There is another aspect to your point that I had not thought of before. It may be somewhat insignificant, but I'll throw it out here anyway.
Most progressives, and I count myself among them, feel that O's picks for the bench were too centrist or were even right-of-center. Assuming O's picks were indeed centrist or right-of-center, that could be seen as a reassuring gesture to the truly far-right justices who may entertain thoughts of retirement during O's time in office.
Image if Scalia decided to retire next year. I would be thrilled to have someone like Kagan replace someone like Scalia, and I wouldn't complain one peep about her being too centrist for me.
Pie in the sky, I know. Too many individuals on the right seem more intent on screaming "no" than of considering just how right, left, or centrist, the President's nominations have actually been.”