Skip to main content

Link to Frontline page here. The accompanying Hartford Courant article is entitled A Deeper Divide: The Gun Control Debate After Newtown. Everyone who has witnessed a disagreement between gun rights and gun control folks should take 20 minutes and watch this.

Greg Sargent:

Like a pair of aging crooners hoping to recapture past glory with a long-awaited reunion tour, Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson released a new version of their deficit reduction plan today. Ezra Klein ferrets out the real news in the plan: It asks for far less in new revenues, and more in spending cuts, than the previous Simpson-Bowles plan did.

Whereas the previous Simpson-Bowles plan contained a roughly even split of revenues and cuts, the new one reduces the revenue “ask” dramatically, with the result that the overall plan is lopsidedly tilted towards cuts. The reason for this pinpointed by Klein is particularly striking:

This isn’t meant to be an update to Simpson-Bowles 1.0. Rather, it’s meant to be an outline for a new grand bargain. To that end, Simpson and Bowles began with Obama and Boehner’s final offers from the fiscal cliff deal. That helps explain why their tax ask has fallen so far: Obama’s final tax ask was far lower than what was in the original Simpson-Bowles plan, while Boehner’s tilt towards spending cuts was far greater than what was in the original Simpson-Bowles.
In other words, the plan roughly represents the ideological midpoint between the Obama and Boehner fiscal cliff blueprints — which is why the plan is so heavily tilted towards cuts. As Kevin Drum notes, this is particularly odd, given that spending cuts have already been “75 percent of the deficit reduction we’ve done so far.” Drum adds: “this sure makes it hard to take Simpson-Bowles 2.0 seriously as a plan.”
Ezra follows with an interview:
EK: Why start where the two parties ended in the fiscal deal? The really valuable role, I thought, of the original Simpson-Bowles plan, and of Domenici-Rivlin, was that they created a kind of baseline of how people of good faith from both parties would try to solve our debt problems if they weren’t bound by some of the normal rules of politics. Why go from that to just trying to split the difference between the two parties?
EB: Because we weren’t trying to put out the ideal plan. We were trying to put out something that might be able to get done. If we had all the revenue in there that the president was looking for and the spending cuts Republicans might need in order to get a deal done, then perhaps we could make a material difference in the long-term outlook of the country....

EK: Speaking of health care, one argument right now is that health-care costs have slowed and we have all these experiments through Obamacare trying to figure out how to keep them low, and so the right move now is to wait a few years and see if health costs remain low and then reevaluate when we both know more about costs but also have more information on what works from Obamacare. But you move in the opposite direction here and increase your health-care savings. Why?
EB: I don’t claim to be an expert. But I do think it is critically important that we are confident that we’re going to control the rate of growth for health care. I don’t know if the current slowdown is structural or cyclical. I always felt when the better numbers came out during President Clinton’s time, I thought people were trying to make the numbers look better at a particular period of time. So I think we should err on the side of being more conservative and slowing the rate of growth. And we can always go back and add them back.

If you don't claim to be an expert, then don't make the suggestion. There's nothing worse than screwing seniors over something that might happen down the road as opposed to what is happening now. Ezra's point is key. Obamacare and a rising economy significantly change the equation of what's needed to bring things into balance. It's prudent and not rash to wait and see what happens before radically changing the status quo.

From NPR (listen here):

Gun Control An Emotional Issue For Citizens, Lawmakers In Colorado
See also Meteor Blades' piece from last night on this, and follow us below the fold for Ian Reifowitz, Kathleen Parker and more.

Ian Reifowitz writes on immigration:

We got some very good news recently about the twenty million adults in this country who were born here and are the children of immigrants. A comprehensive report from the Pew Research Center finds that this second generation is doing significantly better than today's first-generation immigrants in terms of education, home ownership rate, percentage living below the poverty line, and median income. Surprisingly, the second generation even matches the economic success of Americans overall, while graduating from college at higher rates than the U.S. average. (This reflects the high college graduation rate of Asian Americans, who make up a larger proportion of second-generation immigrants than the general population).
Even Kathleen Parker gets that Republicans are in trouble.
Sorry, guys. The sentiment behind no-labels is at the core of my very being, though I prefer Walker Percy’s more eloquent imperative that we should repent of labels. It is the essence of my Moi-ness: Stop fussing and fix it. But movements don’t begin with “No.” No-labels is a non without a sequitur. A yield without a merge. A . . . non-starter.

Thus, what has become glaringly clear is that RINOs need to stop being so normal and grant their better angels a sabbatical. Forget taking back the country. Start by taking back your party. Do it for your country.

RINOs: The Strong. The Proud. The Many.

But it's fair to say it's easier to diagnose the problem than come up with an acceptable solution (see Republicans agree they've lost their way ... but not on what to do.)

NY Times editorial:

In a deeply worrisome move, the Supreme Court on Tuesday agreed to hear a new campaign finance lawsuit that challenges long-established federal caps on the total amount an individual can contribute to federal campaigns in a two-year cycle. In a ruling last year, a special court in Washington correctly upheld those limits, which in some form have been included in federal law since 1974.

If the justices were to overturn that decision, it would be the first time that the court has struck down a contribution limit as unconstitutional. That would eliminate an essential tool in combating the corrupting effects of money in politics.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  I'm happy to reply to comments on my article (26+ / 0-)

    Thanks, Greg, for including me in the roundup. I will be leaving momentarily to head to the office, but I'll read and reply at some point later this morning for sure.

  •  Posted an update on my wife late last night (14+ / 0-)

    Today was the first day of chemo will bring you up to date

    peace

    "We didn't set out to save the world; we set out to wonder how other people are doing and to reflect on how our actions affect other people's hearts." - Pema Chodron

    by teacherken on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 04:54:01 AM PST

    •  thank you!! (6+ / 0-)

      we're all hoping for the very best.

      "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

      by Greg Dworkin on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 04:57:49 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I think of you and your wife often. Hope you (0+ / 0-)

      are able to keep your spirits up through these very hard times. Thanks for letting us know about your diary -- that's my next stop.
      BTW, wondering if you saw the column in WaPo today by Courtland Milloy "Needed: More black men in schools.
      If at sometime you're not too exhausted from what's happening today, I would love to get your take on it.  (The guy featured in the column is an assistant principal at my youngest daughter's school).

      While Democrats work to get more people to vote, Republicans work to ensure those votes won't count.

      by Tamar on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 07:35:59 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Best wishes to you both, Ken (0+ / 0-)

      Hugs from one cancer survivor to Leaves on the Current.

      We will never be free from fear as long as we fear the NRA.

      by captainlaser on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 05:05:44 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I am in a state of shock; a SC legislator has (7+ / 0-)

    introduced a bill where the state LE would share its list of people adjudged mentally incompetent with the federal agencies.
    Caveat: This guy is a lifelong NRA member and not sympathetic to gun control.  NRA may be retrenching.
    ITMT: I am concerned about this bill as it appears once you are on the list, you will never be removed from the list.  This presupposes that no one is ever cured and also could discourage people from seeking needed assistance  

    •  veterans with PTSD for example.... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Amber6541, annieli

      people seeking lots of assistance with mental health issues.

      Most would consider only those who have been committed to be eligible for such a list.

      You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you mad. Aldous Huxley

      by murrayewv on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 05:10:01 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  supposedly this would apply only to people (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Amber6541, annieli

        judged to be a danger by a judge.  He claims PTSD vets would be excluded.  However there is no word on whom the judge would rely upon to reach this determination.

        Not to be a cynic but a little cash can go a long way with many psychologists

    •  People will hate the suggestion BUT (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DRo, Amber6541

      an SSDI-type arrangement in which a person genuinely suffering from mental illness is on the list but can petition to be removed at a later date if he/she meets criteria including an MD signoff.

      If we can find a way to make this cost too much and funnel profits to the GOP, we can probably make it work.

      The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

      by xxdr zombiexx on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 05:18:48 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Would that be like expungement of juvie records (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Amber6541, annieli

        here it seems juvie records are not expunged and show up on background checks.  To have it expunged would cost about $20,000, I am told.
        Why set up a system that would ensure the indigent mentally disabled are restricted in gun ownership where wealthy people with "issues" or "eccentricities" bounce on and off the list at will?

    •  Don't track the guns (5+ / 0-)

      because guns, of course, don't kill people, and you don't want to infringe the freedom of law-abiding gun owners.

      Track the people with diagnosed mental illness, because of course only people with diagnosed mental illness use guns to kill people. And besides, they gave up all their freedoms when they got sick.

      Or something like that...

      When the union's inspiration /Through the workers' blood shall run /There can be no power greater /Anywhere beneath the sun /Solidarity Forever!

      by litho on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 05:49:14 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Republican (un)reality (3+ / 0-)

    We had an election, and elections have consequences. This is something conservatives in the GOP have yet to grasp since the President won a second term. Republicans remain quagmired in the status quo of the Tea Party and kitchen-sink campaigning. They aren't interested in cooperating. Mitch McConnell's new goal is to prevent a Democratic victory in 2016, now that his other first priority of destroying Obama failed so miserably. Conservatives are still operating in a land of unskewed polls and Dick Morris pep talks about a Romney landslide. The rest of the country is rapidly leaving these intractable partisans behind.  -  progressive

    •  Elections have consequences and TP/GOP won (6+ / 0-)

      the state office elections between presidential elections. As a consequence they controlled state legislatures during reapportionment and thus ensured the 2012 election had the consequence of a TP/GOP house with power to stonewall any of this president's program. Every damned election has consequences—some delayed and diluting subsequent election results. We are watching the consequence of 2009/2010 elections in action.

      When I hear people on this site hyping "elections have consequences" as if that should mean everyone in political office should bow and recognize the wonder of Obama's programs I think of kids and Santa Claus or Tooth Fairies. The only consequence  that makes a politician, particularly and ideologue whose being is about power, recognize the other side's beautiful arguments is direct consequence and actual loss of office. All this chatter that those damn fools should recognize elections have consequences is akin to wishing your cat were a vegetarian.

      One swallow does not a summer make
      One election does not a reform make—even a major one. We cannot expect real change unless "our side" can get its act together in every election over several presidential terms.

      The only foes that threaten America are the enemies at home, and those are ignorance, superstition, and incompetence. [Elbert Hubbard]

      by pelagicray on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 05:41:34 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  obvious political pressure w/o loss can do it (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        skohayes

        see L Graham scramble to his right.

        "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

        by Greg Dworkin on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 05:48:43 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes, but that is pretty meaningless for our side (0+ / 0-)

          because we don't control those party caucus and primary results those on their side fear.

          That is the peculiar problem in states in which white≠Democratic voter and the majority is white. It was the problem for Republicans in the older South where the Democratic primary was the election. As LBJ predicted, that old "solid South" has just switched party labels and, when stripped of all excuses of the "new South" puts us right in the shoes of the old "Party of Lincoln."

          I'm old enough to remember being upbraided by old codgers sitting around spitting juice into the spittoon when just discussing the possibility Republican candidates were better than some very corrupt state Democrats. It was "You gonna vote for one of those people?  That's the party that sent Sherman here!" I kid you not, that is the gist. That bunch got air brushed to remove the worst of the racism, but just switched sides and thus Graham only has to respect pressure from his right for now.

          The only foes that threaten America are the enemies at home, and those are ignorance, superstition, and incompetence. [Elbert Hubbard]

          by pelagicray on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 06:03:04 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  I'm starting to rethink the 2010 GOP victories (5+ / 0-)

        because as atrocious as they were for our side, I wonder if they didn't actually contain the seeds of the current profound crisis on the Republican side. kos wrote yesterday about the GOP's emerging "permanent" minority status, due in no small part to the increasingly fierce and bitter internal battles within the party.  For his part, Josh Marshall, in discussing the party's inability to come up a viable immigration plan, attributed the problem to the fact

        that the gap between the political needs of establishment Republicans (to better position the national party, to cue up presidential ambitions) and the policy views of the base of the party is just too wide.
        In his must-read The New New Deal, Michael Grunwald documents how the GOP threw reality to the wind in order to portray the 2009 stimulus bill as the act of a socialist determined to subvert American society.  In that way, they were able to win the 2010 mid-terms, but at the cost of energizing a restive base around a fundamentally false vision of reality.

        In the aftermath of the 2012 presidential election, the limits of that base's power have been clearly demonstrated, and it is no longer useful to the GOP elite.  They can't put the genie back into the bottle, however, and the party appears condemned to long-term minority status, or perhaps even collapse.

        The devil's bargain in 2010, I think, will rightly be viewed by future historians as a critical step towards the demise of the GOP.

        When the union's inspiration /Through the workers' blood shall run /There can be no power greater /Anywhere beneath the sun /Solidarity Forever!

        by litho on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 06:06:52 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Longer term I think you have a point. Unless the (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          litho

          likely economic hit of the sequester doesn't turn into the usual "punish the party in power" 2014 TP/GOP pick up the short term is going to be miserable as we wait for that idiocy to collapse in enough states to have national consequence.

          The more progressive national agenda just cannot win as long as we win only the big ones and a majority of states still have Republicans willing and able to fight a bitter rear guard action both in the national legislature and in the states themselves. We have to turn out our "national voters" for every election or face dancing long term that one step forward three-quarter steps back tempo.

          The only foes that threaten America are the enemies at home, and those are ignorance, superstition, and incompetence. [Elbert Hubbard]

          by pelagicray on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 06:26:04 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Taking back the states is key (3+ / 0-)

            and not just for undoing their post-2010 gerrymanders.  I just got off the plane in WI, where I grew up, and the state political environment is basically unrecognizable.  Yeah, we had Republicans here, and they often held statewide elective office.  But this was a progressive state, with progressive legislation on a whole host of social issues.  Today, under the influence of Scott Walker, it is becoming a conservative bastion.

            So, yeah, the progressive transformation of the US that the president has initiated faces major obstacles in states like WI.  And there's lots of states like this one, MI, OH, IN, ME, even MO.

            Taking back the states is key.

            When the union's inspiration /Through the workers' blood shall run /There can be no power greater /Anywhere beneath the sun /Solidarity Forever!

            by litho on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 06:42:17 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I have been puzzled by what you describe. The (0+ / 0-)

              turn from bastion of progressive to this is something I do not have much of a clue about since I'm in one of the more "new progressive" areas where maybe the direction is different.

              The only foes that threaten America are the enemies at home, and those are ignorance, superstition, and incompetence. [Elbert Hubbard]

              by pelagicray on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 07:08:17 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

      •  Primaries Have Consquences (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Heart of the Rockies

        Until Democrats clean their house with primaries to get better Democrats the way Teabaggers have to get worse Republicans, the consequences of not changing anything will be more of the same.

        "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

        by DocGonzo on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 06:22:35 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  That is too often an excuse and phantom because, (0+ / 0-)

          most unfortunately, in the states we most need to change "better" from our perspective than what is doable is likely a non-starter. It then fits "the best is the enemy of the good" principle. It is inexcusable when used as an excuse, as many did in Virginia in 2009, to sit out an election.

          Politics and particularly social change is a long and hard process taking years and decades of often incremental progress. Pipe dreams of suddenly finding lots of winning "better Democrats" in deep red states is counterproductive. That is not to say someone with certain much better features, particularly on economic issues, cannot be found to win. The problem is too often our voters focus on one "worse" feature, usually a social issue fault, sit out and allow an overall worse to attain office.

          The only foes that threaten America are the enemies at home, and those are ignorance, superstition, and incompetence. [Elbert Hubbard]

          by pelagicray on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 06:57:00 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  more on SB from Timothy Noah (12+ / 0-)
    All this would lead you to think that Simpson and Bowles, nonpartisan truth-tellers that they’re purported to be, would make Step Three enactment of Obama’s $250,000 threshold (or, even better, my $100,000 threshold). I mean, they want to lower the deficit, right? But instead, Step Three is entitlement reforms (mostly Medicare and Medicaid) and … whaa? … lowering income-tax rates in exchange for eliminating or scaling back “most” tax expenditures. Step Four is to keep future spending in line. (Sure, whatever.)

    Lowering income-tax rates while eliminating tax breaks would, Simpson and Bowles say, achieve some unspecified quantity of deficit savings. But if your aim is to reduce the deficit, why not get rid of as many tax expenditures as you can while leaving tax rates constant—or, better yet, raising them a bit? Simpson and Bowles would likely say they’re just being realistic about politics. Republicans won’t eliminate loopholes unless they can lower rates, too.

    But as long as we’re being realistic, why not be realistic about the likelihood that a lower-rates-for-fewer-loopholes swap will reduce the deficit? Which is about zero. Simpson and Bowles’s insistence on clinging to the tax-reform fantasy demonstrates that their agenda is not limited to deficit reduction. They also want to lower tax rates. Why? They just want to, is all.

    http://www.newrepublic.com/...

    "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

    by Greg Dworkin on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 04:58:44 AM PST

  •  Redstate commenter gives some sequester context... (12+ / 0-)

    'Obama proposed sequestration as a way to ensure the supercommitee would make tough choices and come to a deal. The GOP made a political calculation that Obama was very vulnerable and there would be a Republican administration. They voted strongly for sequestration. Then the establishment GOP bungled the election and that's where we are today. To pretend otherwise is silly and helps the left to paint conservatives as less than adult in dealing with the problems of governing the country. This is not a winning strategy -- as a party conservatives have to prove they want to govern and have practical policy alternatives to offer.

    So sequestration looks like it is going to happen. As a fiscal conservative I welcome the fact it will result in some much needed cuts in the military budget and elsewhere, but the choices of what to cut will be far from optimal. It is, as everybody in Washington says, bad policy. But where is the willingness to embrace the hard debate that needs to happen? By the way, there is little doubt sequestration (if implemented for at least a month) will throw the economy into another recession. Probably mild, but many people will lose their jobs. Guess who will take the blame.

    This is obviously stupid. Why are we doing this? 2014 is not far off. Trashing the economy in 2013 is not smart.'

    •  why are they doing it? (14+ / 0-)

      because in their minds, if it doesn't happen, Obama wins and that's unacceptable.

      "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

      by Greg Dworkin on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 05:01:10 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  GOP The psychology of a suicide bomber. yikes! nt (9+ / 0-)

        I want 1 less Tiny Coffin, Why Don't You? Support The President's Gun Violence Plan.

        by JML9999 on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 05:05:43 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Makes you wonder (9+ / 0-)

        just how long the GOP is going to run against Obama.  The president can't run again, but that doesn't seem to figure into their calculations.  Do they think obstruction simply based on their ability to thwart the president will help them in the mid-terms?  Even the Republicans I know are getting tired of moving from one deadline crisis to another and would rather see things actually get done.  Outrage and the energy necessary to sustain constant arguing and stalemate is exhausting.

        "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H. L. Mencken

        by SueDe on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 05:26:16 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  They think they can blame Obama/Dems (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        pelagicray, Heart of the Rockies

        Boehner has been playing that violin for weeks now, calling it the "Obamaquester," even though he led the charge.

        Unfortunately this is how it will play in many parts of the country, unless the White House does some very astute counter-branding.

        •  doubt it (3+ / 0-)

          Everyone hates congress. Everyone.

          That dog won't hunt.

          see approval ratings graph below.

          "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

          by Greg Dworkin on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 05:52:52 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yes, we can hope. To expand on your graph the (2+ / 0-)

            quote take of that piece, with my emphasis, is:

            Because the sequester is (and is likely to continue to be) very ill-defined in the minds of most Americans, the politics of it will devolve into a popularity contest between the major players. Which gets us to the fact that Obama is at (or close to) his high-water mark in terms of job approval while Congress sits in political reporter/used car salesman territory.
            and
            Republicans in Congress are operating under the assumption that the blame game on the sequester — the subject actually hasn’t been polled all that much to date — will shift once people begin to pay closer attention. But that assumes that people will deeply engage on sequestration, a complicated topic whose impact outside the Capital Beltway may not be strongly felt immediately.

            If they don’t — and you usually can’t go wrong betting on the side of the American public not paying all that much attention to the policy fights in Washington — then sequestration will turn into something approximating a high school popularity contest, and that’s not a game Republicans are positioned to win at the moment.

            The threat is longer term and a likely newly damaged economy late this year and just in time for low information voters to blame the party in power for hardships in 2014 mid terms.

            That is why the famed Obama campaign machine and we need to fire up now for 2014 and to put the blame squarely on the shoulders of a bunch of reactionaries in the House playing political terrorist games with the national well being.

            The only foes that threaten America are the enemies at home, and those are ignorance, superstition, and incompetence. [Elbert Hubbard]

            by pelagicray on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 06:16:28 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  Come on people. Repubs are trashing the economy (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      LordMike, DocGonzo, wintergreen8694

      because this IS their agenda.

      Crash the economy, hobble the government so it can't enforce regulations on corporations.

      It's their entire agenda, aside from returning America to a white man's version of sharia law.

      Please stop acting surprised when they try to crash the economy.

      Instead, send hate mail to Harry Reid for being a spineless weenie and sellout.

      The ONLY thing that really lets repubs get away with this shit is the panoramic weakness of democrats. And their insistence on not hobbling the GOP when they have an opportunity.
      (Kabuki)

      The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

      by xxdr zombiexx on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 05:14:48 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Why? Why do Republicans insist on (4+ / 0-)

        crashing the economy?  What do they hope to gain by costing jobs and allowing our infrastructure to continue crumbling?  If it's to gain political support, this tactic is a grade-A, #1 FAIL.  I agree that trashing the economy is at the top of the GOP agenda.  But why is that?

        "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H. L. Mencken

        by SueDe on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 06:11:39 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  It's how they prove (3+ / 0-)

          that government doesn't work.
          And when it does work, they say it costs too much.

          “We are not a nation that says ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ We are a nation that says ‘out of many, we are one.’” -Barack Obama

          by skohayes on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 06:22:27 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Power Monopoly (0+ / 0-)

          The richest have gotten only richer as the economy has crashed every time. They get even richer when everyone's growing. But when they're the only ones getting richer, they grab even more power. That power monopoly lets them decide when and how to crash the economy.

          Smaller growth for the rich during crashes is their investment in the even faster growth in power. They are beginning to monopolize it, after all the cycles since Kennedy/Johnson.

          Maybe when they have the monopoly there will be no more crashes, as anyone not actually rich will be simply poor and powerless, stable. But I expect the rich will continue to crash the economy to strip power from each other, accumulating it to whoever best exploits the crisis. Until there's just a power and wealth monopoly among a small kernel which has its own ways of grabbing from each other, without sacrificing overall growth their group monopolizes.

          That is how monarchies, tribal dictatorships, work. The effects on everyone else is incidental. Nearly all of history is full of this model.

          "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

          by DocGonzo on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 06:29:14 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  And 2014 is part of the reason. Low information (2+ / 0-)

      and knee jerk voters tend to punish the party in power for hardships so a crashed economy in 2013/2014 may well help the bastards. We are watching a form of political terrorism.

      The only foes that threaten America are the enemies at home, and those are ignorance, superstition, and incompetence. [Elbert Hubbard]

      by pelagicray on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 05:45:50 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I don't think that's true right now, (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        pelagicray, Heart of the Rockies

        that the party in power always gets the blame for bad outcomes.  The president is making speeches and subjecting himself to interviews all over the country, begging the Republicans to work on a balanced way forward to cut the deficit, and people are paying attention.  It's only the die-hard Obama haters who will continue blaming the president and Democrats for the stalemate.  Apparently congressional Republicans have deluded themselves into really believing the majority of the country is with them.

        "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H. L. Mencken

        by SueDe on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 06:25:21 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  That is why I made the comment (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          BlueStateRedhead
          That is why the famed Obama campaign machine and we need to fire up now for 2014 and to put the blame squarely on the shoulders of a bunch of reactionaries in the House playing political terrorist games with the national well being.
          Up above.

          To turn that old trend back, as done in Senate elections last year, the full smart campaign needs to begin now. Since Obama is apparently working that I think there is hope. Everybody needs to work it in personal relationships and elsewhere.

          The only foes that threaten America are the enemies at home, and those are ignorance, superstition, and incompetence. [Elbert Hubbard]

          by pelagicray on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 07:03:12 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Wonder why they don't get it? (4+ / 0-)
    This is obviously stupid. Why are we doing this? 2014 is not far off. Trashing the economy in 2013 is not smart.'
    Thanks for this, skillet.

    "Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon

    by Diana in NoVa on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 05:04:39 AM PST

  •  Bowles-Simpson still working to fuck us all blind. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JML9999, Egalitare, skohayes

    Absolutely nothing less.

    We have been robbed for over a decade now and 'austerity' is the part were we are held hostage in a freezer and threatened with death if we try to escape.

    No... really. The rich robbed us. We all know it.

    They don't want to pay the money back: only morons cannot figure this out.

    Repubs and the Dems that love them are working together to lock us in the freezer, largely because they can.

    Who will stop them?

    The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

    by xxdr zombiexx on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 05:08:56 AM PST

    •  They're being funded by a Hedge funder (8+ / 0-)

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

      Fix The Debt Campaign's Bipartisan Veneer Masks Conservative Backing

      -----------------------snip---------------------

      But the bipartisanship is only skin deep, according to campaign finance records and non-profit tax filings reviewed by The Huffington Post, which reveal that Fix The Debt's biggest backers and partners are Republicans and Republican-allied.

      HuffPost previously reported that members of the campaign's Fiscal Leadership Council currently calling for cuts to Social Security and Medicare have benefited from billions of dollars in war contracts, bailout funds and tax subsidies. But the CEOs haven't just been taking -- they've been giving, too, in the form of political donations to many of the lawmakers who keep the spending spigots turned on.

      Of the 86 CEOs on the council, all but 10 donated to political candidates in 2012, for a total of more than $3.2 million through Oct. 17. Of that, 79 percent, or $2.5 million, was donated in support of Republicans, while only 21 percent aided Democrats.

      I want 1 less Tiny Coffin, Why Don't You? Support The President's Gun Violence Plan.

      by JML9999 on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 05:13:31 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  WH and Congress blame each other for (11+ / 0-)

    sequester. Who wins?

    "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

    by Greg Dworkin on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 05:11:00 AM PST

  •  Forget Bowles Simpson - The Zombie Plan (0+ / 0-)

    The Top 1% of the nation can contol the top 1% of income.

    The next 19% controls the next 19% of the money and wealth.

    The bottom 80% controls 80% of the wealth.

    The super-duper specialness of the filthy rich is maintained by calling them the top.

    We will all still call them filthy rich, or 'capitalist pigs' or "those rich bastages" but we all will have more money to live on.

    Who needs a steenkin' economist anyway? WTF have they done for us lately?

    Vote Zombie!

    The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

    by xxdr zombiexx on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 05:22:13 AM PST

  •  As Ezra points out, Bowles Simpson II... (5+ / 0-)

    ...is simply moving the goalpost. While I find fault in many of the tactics, POTUS and his team have managed to stabilize the Economy with minimal negative impact to the Social Safety net.

    Bowles and Simpson are both sadistic Malthusians who will settle for nothing less than widespread premature deaths of anyone who is economically disadvataged to save the profit expectations of people who have already hoarded too much. They pretend to be "Patriots." They are in fact mass murder conspirators.

    When you are right you cannot be too radical; when you are wrong, you cannot be too conservative. --Martin Luther King Jr.

    by Egalitare on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 05:22:20 AM PST

  •  anyone watch Frontline? (5+ / 0-)

    or the posted video?

    "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

    by Greg Dworkin on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 05:26:14 AM PST

    •  'Silent Majority' wakes up. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      hulibow
    •  The rural urban divide was amazingly evident (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Greg Dworkin, hulibow, captainlaser

      on Frontline and deserves a lot more sociological analysis.
      Rural america is dying and you get these weird manifestations. When I do talk to conservatives there is almost always a rural component in it.

    •  Currently at work (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ratcityreprobate, annieli, hulibow

      Will have to wait until tonight.
      I read the article you linked to and noticed a problem that I'verun into when debating with gun owners:

      Other opponents – more than 100 in all – said they had fought in wars for the freedom to shoot and that the ordinance, which would have required outdoor ranges to be inspected and approved by the police chief, violated their constitutional rights.

      “The response was overwhelmingly against it,” said Faxon, who was stunned by the depth and magnitude of the objections. “People were brought in from all over the place to come and proclaim their Second Amendment rights were being violated.”

      Faxon, a lawyer, said he found that particularly perplexing.

      The Second Amendment has nothing to do with shooting ranges. It doesn’t say the right to have a shooting range shall not be infringed,” he said, “It says you can bear arms. It doesn’t say that you can indiscriminately shoot or blow things up wherever you want. It’s scary to me that people actually think that.”

      Everything related to guns, when it comes to background checks, inspections, etc. seems to violate someone's 2nd Amendment rights.
      How can you have a serious discussion when the other side starts out with such a stupid argument?

      “We are not a nation that says ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ We are a nation that says ‘out of many, we are one.’” -Barack Obama

      by skohayes on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 06:28:40 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yes... it was too fair and balanced with regard to (0+ / 0-)

      the "history & tradition" of gun ownership in America. Frontline is miles ahead of network news, but PBS is always looking over its shoulder at Republican budget-cutters.

      The best take-away is that the Governor who signed strong gun control into law in California was... Ronald Reagan!

      The second hour on Adam Lanza was very good. The kid had a serious sensory-integration problem that his mother tried hard to deal with. She got help from the school system, but I'd say she didn't get the participation and emotional support from her husband she needed to sustain the effort.

      She was not a monster... far from it. But she was a fool to take that boy shooting. The power and "kick" of discharging a rifle can be like a narcotic to a kid with his neurological condition.

      Tragic. Tragic. Tragic.

      Have you noticed?
      Politicians who promise LESS government
      only deliver BAD government.

      by jjohnjj on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 08:03:52 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  the pre-Frontline program (American Experience) (0+ / 0-)

      and Frontline was moving in terms of emotional appeals although compressing the US gun history in less than an hour really loses many details, and the Newtown discussion is problematic in terms of demonizing NSSF because of its address rather than getting at the ideology of the NRA and speaking of journalistic integrity, what is that "personal gun range" segment about except a strawman example of exurban NIMBY to be juxtaposed against the real disaster. (Note of course that I agree with constraining that idiot considering the stupidity of those defending his right to endanger everyone else in the name of 2A ideology). In the following Frontline segment, hopefully there would have been more attention to the differences of the "Two Connecticuts" - the diversity differences and sprawl among townships versus the gun violence in the cities. Ultimately in Connecticut, this paragraph is a more accurate assessment rather than pairing extreme narrative examples as a putative form of journalistic "balance":

      Paul Barrett, a columnist for Bloomberg Businessweek magazine and an expert on the gun industry, says that shift away from reform may say more about representative democracy than it does about the maneuverings of the gun lobby. "If you're a Republican and you want to get re-elected, it's not because the NRA has tricked you into following their agenda," Barrett said. "It's because the NRA is more-or-less popular with your constituents."
      This paragraph is symptomatic of a false dichotomy:
      Guns are a fault line in the American experience, cleaving the nation into camps with fundamentally different world views. One sees firearms – particularly aggressively designed rifles that look like military weapons – as killing machines that should not permitted, much less revered, in a civilized society. The other sees guns as the ultimate symbol of the frontier ideals of defiance, individualism and freedom.
    •  Just semi watched/mostly (0+ / 0-)

      listened to the video. Thanks for posting. The division is far and wide and I hope the voices of some sort of gun control coming from a reasonable position can be louder than the (what I consider to be extreme) absolute any gun for anyone 2nd Amendment folks. It said Part Two, will look for P1 tonight when I am not supposed to be getting work done.

      Organizing is what you do before you do something, so that when you do it, it is not all mixed up. A. A. Milne

      by hulibow on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 08:35:17 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yes, I watched the two docs on Frontline (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Greg Dworkin

      Sadly, I didn't learn much about Adam Lanza from the first documentary other than his mother sure as hell had her hands full.   Who can say they would have done better with this kid.

      The second documentary is scarier.  That even in a town with a disaster, opinions can still be widely split.   I lived in the country where we had a gun/archery range behind my house.  I regularly would take a bullet in the house.  I had an arrow sticking out of my satellite dish.   The guy behind was the animal control officer and he would turn dogs and cats loose and then ride around on ATV's and shoot them.

      We got our cat that way as she was smart enough to hide and come to our house.

      The guy had a gun shop on his property.  He scared everybody.

      We said nothing so that we wouldn't get a shotgun blast through a window at night.

      That was Canada.  

      We were the yuppies who moved to the country.  He was there first.  He hated newcomers.  Sound familiar?

      We will never be free from fear as long as we fear the NRA.

      by captainlaser on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 05:13:27 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  What California teaches on RINOs and Blue Dogs (4+ / 0-)

    People used to recognize that California set trends for the nation.  It still does, but the political trends it has been setting run counter to the Village narrative.  So what's been happening here in the Golden State is ignored.

    First ignored phenomenon -- what happened to Gray Davis.  Gray Davis tried to out-Republican the Republicans on crime, on fealty to business, screwing unions (except prison guards).  And he got recalled.  Not like Scott Walker, but actually voted out of office.  

    Very little attention was paid outside of California to the teaching moment of the Davis recall -- the political peril for Democrats in scorning the Democratic base and taking it for granted.

    Second ignored phenomenon -- the inability of the Republican Party to ever regain the votes of a significant number of Latinos and the subsequent (permanent) relegation of minority statues.  

    Back in the late-Nineties, the leading lights of the California Republican Party realized the damage Pete Wilson's anti-immigrant Proposition 187 had done the Party.  They resolved to win Latinos back.  This was a come-to-Jesus moment similar to what national Republican leaders are going through now.  

    Except it happened fifteen years ago.

    How did that work out?  In the last election for governor, the two Republican candidates went after each other mercilessly -- spending millions on advertising each -- each casting him or herself as tougher on immigrants and accusing the other as being soft on immigrants.  

    All the millions the Republican candidate Meg Whitman spent on ads in the Spanish language media gained her nothing.  Republicans cannot win primaries without demonizing immigrants.

    California Democrats now control every statewide office and super majorities in both houses of the Legislature.  

    What California has conclusively demonstrated both on screwing the Democratic base and on the futility of Republican attempts to recast themselves as a non-neo-Confederate party are inconvenient truths for the Village media.  

    Just as the Village media pretended right up till election night that Mitt Romney could still win the election, that same media pretends that these questions still remain questions.  They don't and California has proven it.

    This aggression will not stand, man.

    by kaleidescope on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 05:26:59 AM PST

    •  Wasn't the recall of Davis (0+ / 0-)

      led by Republicans? And you ended up with Arnold Schwarzenegger?

      The effort to recall Gray Davis began with Republicans Ted Costa, Mark Abernathy, and Howard Kaloogian, who filed their petition with the California Secretary of State and started gathering signatures. The effort was not taken seriously, until Rep. Darrell Issa, who hoped to run as a replacement candidate for governor, donated $2 million towards the effort. This infusion of money allowed Costa and Kaloogian to step up their efforts. Eventually, proponents gathered about 1.6 million signatures, of which 1,356,408 were certified as valid.[8]
      http://en.wikipedia.org/...

      So how does the Democratic base fit in here, except by maybe contributing signatures to have your Democratic governor replaced with a Republican one?
      That didn't work out so well, at least for Democrats.

      “We are not a nation that says ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ We are a nation that says ‘out of many, we are one.’” -Barack Obama

      by skohayes on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 06:33:24 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Gray Davis and the Democratic Base (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        skohayes

        After he was elected in 1998, Gray Davis made a point of running over and insulting virtually every  part of the Democratic base.  His strategy was that they had nowhere else to go, so he was going to try to appeal to Republicans.

        Then the electricity crisis hit.  Enron manipulated the electricity markets and there were rolling brown outs.  PG&E -- the largest privately owned utility in the country -- went bankrupt.  The price of electricity spiked massively, affecting everyone.

        Instead of coming out swinging at the corporate criminals who had done this to us, Davis tried to muddle through.  Davis wouldn't say, "shit" if a corporation had stuffed his mouth full of it.  Every part of the Democratic base thought that Davis, basically, sucked, even people like Dianne Feinstein and the sitting Lieutenant Governor, Cruz Bustamonte.

        So when the Rove-Issa recall started up, nobody was really willing to go to the mat for Davis.  Not the unions, not Democrats in the Legislature, not the grass roots.  Nobody lifted a finger.  Depress the enthusiasm of the Democratic base and they don't turn out for you.

        And that's how der Gropenfuhrer became our governor.

        This aggression will not stand, man.

        by kaleidescope on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 09:09:35 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Well, then I can see your point (0+ / 0-)

          I would have signed the recall too. :)
          I remember the Enron scandal very clearly, as I had just moved here to Kansas and they were very big out here in the oil and gas industry.

          “We are not a nation that says ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ We are a nation that says ‘out of many, we are one.’” -Barack Obama

          by skohayes on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 02:44:55 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Your last paragraph sums it up (2+ / 0-)
      ust as the Village media pretended right up till election night that Mitt Romney could still win the election, that same media pretends that these questions still remain questions.
      This sums up perfectly why I'm beginning to utterly despise Chuck Todd.  He's still hell-bent on blaming Democrats and Republicans equally for the state of our politics and rationalizing every crazy Republican act.

      "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H. L. Mencken

      by SueDe on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 06:41:30 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  That says it all. (6+ / 0-)

    EB: I don’t claim to be an expert.

    "Michael Moore, who was filming a movie about corporate welfare called 'Capitalism: A Love Story,' sought and received incentives."

    by Bush Bites on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 05:42:14 AM PST

  •  Waiting to see what happens might be prudent.... (4+ / 0-)
    Obamacare and a rising economy significantly change the equation of what's needed to bring things into balance. It's prudent and not rash to wait and see what happens before radically changing the status quo.
    .....but it's not going to command the big speaking fees Frick and Frack are getting.

    "Michael Moore, who was filming a movie about corporate welfare called 'Capitalism: A Love Story,' sought and received incentives."

    by Bush Bites on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 05:44:19 AM PST

  •  Just a second! The very essence of her being (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SueDe, gchaucer2

    is the rejection of labels, so Parker proudly adopts RINO as a call to arms?

    No, I'm not going to read the whole thing.  She's an idiot.

    Nuff said.

    When the union's inspiration /Through the workers' blood shall run /There can be no power greater /Anywhere beneath the sun /Solidarity Forever!

    by litho on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 05:45:55 AM PST

  •  I work with a guy whose parents came from Mexico. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    litho
    Additionally, the Pew survey found that, compared to immigrants, second-generation Americans have much higher percentages that are proficient in English (including nine-tenths of both Hispanic and Asian Americans), are more likely to have friends and marry outside the boundaries of their ancestral group, to believe that relations between their group and other Americans are good, and to consider themselves a "typical American."
    His fiance's brothers get a hoot out of asking him to speak Spanish because, even though he looks very Hispanic and has the family background, he only knows English. It's kind of a running joke between them.

    "Michael Moore, who was filming a movie about corporate welfare called 'Capitalism: A Love Story,' sought and received incentives."

    by Bush Bites on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 05:55:46 AM PST

  •  There may not be enough RINOs to save the GOP (0+ / 0-)

    but it wouldn't suck if maybe thirty of them existed in the House and openly caucused with the Democrats on repealing the sequester and adopted President Obama's already watered down compromises.

    Then Boehner could rant and rave and go scream at the Sunday talk show hosts, Cantor could chew on a turd so he smiles like Greta Van Sustern, Bachmann and the other loons could go be consoled by Fox and CNN, and the rest of the country could move the fuck on.

    Once in a while you get shown the light, in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

    by darthstar on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 06:04:44 AM PST

    •  If the RINOs turned against (3+ / 0-)

      the lunatic base of the GOP, John Boehner would do a blindingly quick turnaround in his appeasement of the base.  The man is more committed to his own power than any system of belief.

      "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H. L. Mencken

      by SueDe on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 06:45:44 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Sounds like Nancy Lanza hated Clinton... (0+ / 0-)

    ....judging by her e-mails.

    "Michael Moore, who was filming a movie about corporate welfare called 'Capitalism: A Love Story,' sought and received incentives."

    by Bush Bites on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 06:10:29 AM PST

  •  Simpson Bowles Just More Overton Trollery (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wintergreen8694, Stude Dude
    In other words, the plan roughly represents the ideological midpoint between the Obama and Boehner fiscal cliff blueprints — which is why the plan is so heavily tilted towards cuts.

    That's not "odd". That's absolutely the way that the government has been run for decades now. So I'm not surprised two old hacks like Simpson and Bowles are doing it.

    The Republican "negotiating" tactic on everything - everything - is always to set up some gang of extremists loudly demandinf the most ludicrous version of what Republicans want. When Democrats ask for what they want, whether reasonable or just less crazy, "mainstream" Republicans just ask to "split the difference", or "meet me halfway", or "just give me 98% of what I want". The Republican extreme is "balanced" against the Democratic position (itself usually what moderate Republicans wanted a generation ago), and so Republicans get most of what they want, in the "compromise".

    That is how you work the "Overton Window": set up a crazy troll who drags the limited range of publicly acceptable positions more towards your side. It makes you appear "centrist" in the new range, and tends to exclude your opponent at the other end. Then the compromise (that can come only within the window) is biased towards your position.

    It's idiotically simple. And Democrats have accepted it every time, for decades. Simpson and Bowles are just the ones hacking their way towards the Republican position by finding the "middle ground" between adequate and unacceptable, drawn towards apocalyptic by what lies beyond Boehner's position.

    If only we had actual "leftists", "communists", "kenyyan marxist muslims" or some other straw man to drag the window back. If only elected Democrats were interested in busting this scam and governing for the majority that elects them.

    Instead we have Overton Trollery, and grind around the spiral to the doorstep of Republican utopia.

    "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

    by DocGonzo on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 06:21:13 AM PST

    •  We have no one but ourselves to blame (0+ / 0-)

      for the Democrats we currently have in Congress.
      Dean's 50 state strategy brought us a majority, along with "blue dog" and "social conservative (anti-abortion, anti-equality)" Democrats out of red states. We got tired of blue dogs and lost that House majority after 4 years.
      People don't like Harry Reid, but he keeps getting reelected.
      I hear people complain about Dianne Feinstein, she keeps getting reelected.
      It's easier to get the incumbent reelected (and much cheaper),  doesn't give a lot of room for complaints.

      “We are not a nation that says ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ We are a nation that says ‘out of many, we are one.’” -Barack Obama

      by skohayes on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 06:43:13 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Who Is "Ourselves"? (0+ / 0-)

        Teabaggers don't really have themselves to blame for the establishment Republicans in Congress.

        Democrats don't even have a Tea Party backed by rich, connected activist Democrats to insurge against establishment Democrats.

        Independents by definition have virtually no organization.

        The lost Blue Dogs didn't make the difference between Democratic majority and minority. Meanwhile they voted with Republicans.

        Reid was barely reelected in Nevada, even without a Democratic challenger. He keeps getting reelected by Senate Democrats, who are a core of the problem.

        I voted for Feinstein in California, though I hated her. There were no primaries in which to choose someone else.

        And when someone like Lamont beats someone like Lieberman in the 2006 Democratic primary, both Clintons and the Democratic Party back Lieberman against Lamont, defeating him in the general.

        It's the lack of Democratic primaries that leave Democrats with little choice. Which is clearly the policy of the Democratic Party, despite its effect on turnout among Democrats that lose Democrats majorities in most elections.

        "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

        by DocGonzo on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 04:36:24 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •   E. Bowles and A. Simpson : "Let's (0+ / 0-)

    jerk off halfway, America!"

    You can't make this stuff up.

    by David54 on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 10:10:16 AM PST

  •  What would the public say if Obama said (0+ / 0-)
    Ok, the sequester amounts to 22 working days in most agencies.   I am shutting the government for the month of August.   Plan for it.  Save enough money to pay your rent and buy food.  If you are planning a holiday, you better plan on driving.

    We will never be free from fear as long as we fear the NRA.

    by captainlaser on Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 05:18:53 PM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site