Both side are massively off the point on most of the town hall anger. That is not a comment an the substance, just how it is being handled. The thing I scream at the TV/radio/compu tubes the most is that we should be more civil. What the hell are we supposed to do when, at the very least, they distort the facts and most of the time out right lie. I have finally read someone who has it right.
"I agree with Krauthammer, more, but not fully. Public spectacle does have a bit of usefulness. But only a bit. In the end this is an attempt to persuade the persuadables, not preach to the choir, not try to top each other with how super-duper ragey-angry of a YouTube moment we can produce.
Where Krauthammer is wrong, though, is that if we're "perfectly civil," we basically allow these guys to stage-manage the events and offer tissue-thin platitudes instead of answering tough questions. It's only the jeering, and hooting, and yelling, and refusal to be fed pablum that results in the questions Krauthammer approves of being asked at all. Otherwise these jerkoffs would take our "civility" as a license to steamroll and ignore us."
Don't get me wrong either, I love Krauthammer, all ways has an insightful logical take. I however, was shocked at his comments on this issue.
Aside from that I am trying to give this blog stuff another go
"A political battle is brewing over control of the radio airwaves as Democrats consider pushing for the revival of the Fairness Doctrine, an FCC policy that requires broadcast stations to provide opposing views on controversial issues of public importance.
Democratic lawmakers who support the doctrine say it will help increase the number of liberal shows in a landscape dominated by conservative talk radio hosts like Rush Limbaugh."
Stabenow, Harkin and Bill Clinton are now both on board just for starters. From News Busters via Michelle Malkin:
"Former President Bill Clinton isn’t pleased that conservatives are allowed to express views counter to his on the airwaves, and wants a re-enactment of the Fairness Doctrine.
In a preview of an interview with liberal talker Mario Solis-Marich to be aired in its entirety Friday, Clinton complained about the money funding “right wing talk shows” like Rush Limbaugh, and believes we should have “more balance in the programs or have some opportunity for people to offer countervailing opinions.”'
It looks as if Obama is starting to cave as well. From Hot Air:
"It’s an easy question. Does this administration believe in free speech or government censorship? Their sudden inability to provide a clear answer, when they had no problem giving such assurances eight months ago, does not bode well for the answer."
'“Where they want it, [liberal radio] succeeds, and where they don’t, it doesn’t.” That seems clear enough to everyone except Press, who responds by naming a list of markets where people don’t support libtalkers. He complains twice about the death of libtalking Obama 1260 in DC without mentioning the fact that its ratings were so low it took a microscope to find its listeners."
Ever heard of a red herring? This is exactly what it is. Obama gets to replace at least one of the committee people in the FCC. In March? April? That is all he needs.
It will not be called the Fairness Doctrine. It has more to do with what those in the administration think is fair. If not through the FCC it will be passed in bill or regulated in in little pieces. In the budget? Bank bailouts? Through treasury measures? The next stimulus? This stimulus? We don''t know the effects of much of any of it.
I missed the lack of verification of workers not being included and the repeal of the E-verify out right.
That aside. You can not be fooled by this bill. It may work in the short term. I don't think it has much of a chance but may be. It will in the end require another stimulus bill. The US government becomes a massive consumer. When it stops spending the economy tanks again. Even if it doesn't completely tank and recovers some we have hyper inflation pressure that can't be avoided.
This bill may look like its working it will cause massively more harm than good. I not even including the massive spending on welfare programs that are now in the law. They would have to be repealed after the recovery. Is that Going to happen No.
"Far more plausibly, Democrats will take the stimulus increases and make them part of a new, higher baseline for future spending growth. Anyone who proposes to cut from that amount will be denounced as "heartless" and Draconian."
"We aren't deficit scolds, but these levels are uncharted territory, especially if any economic recovery is weak because the spending doesn't stimulate. The new spending means new federal debt in the trillions of dollars over the next few years, which will test the limits of America's credit-worthiness. To the extent that taxes rise to pay for it all, the U.S. will become less desirable as a destination for the world's capital. Perhaps the Federal Reserve will try to inflate away this growing debt, but the world's bond vigilantes will get a vote on that."
Deficit spending as a percentage of what we produce(GDP)? If its Over 100% we will literally spend more than the entire country makes.
Flipping through A discussion on Fox caught me. A rerun of Hannity. I avoid him, he make some good points but spins far far to much. Megyn Kelly said some thing to some effect that making work( bridges, roads, ect.) is not the same as making jobs. ( I looked for the vid, but I guess I am not that good)
That exactly sums up the problem of this stimulus. Perfect. A company gets hired to build a bridge. They hire a bunch of people. They have work. But if the company can't find more work they have to lay off those people. What are all the people hired going to do when all the "stimulus work" is gone. You have to bust business growth so people have jobs not just some work for a while.
I can see an argument that the stimulus work will help restart the cycle. But why not do it through more direct means like real tax rate cut, some stability in what Washington does and capital gains cut to move money off the side lines. Then spend on the roads and the thing we really need when things start coming back.
Giving work to the people in this amount is artificial. There is nothing to build new jobs on after the stimulus work is gone. Government can't create new jobs through spending just work. Except for those work in the government. Government can however get out of the way and let business create jobs.
"Another "stimulus" secret is that some $252 billion is for income-transfer payments -- that is, not investments that arguably help everyone, but cash or benefits to individuals for doing nothing at all. There's $81 billion for Medicaid, $36 billion for expanded unemployment benefits, $20 billion for food stamps, and $83 billion for the earned income credit for people who don't pay income tax. While some of that may be justified to help poorer Americans ride out the recession, they aren't job creators."
"Ultimately, "Atlas Shrugged" is a celebration of the entrepreneur, the risk taker and the cultivator of wealth through human intellect. Critics dismissed the novel as simple-minded, and even some of Rand's political admirers complained that she lacked compassion. Yet one pertinent warning resounds throughout the book: When profits and wealth and creativity are denigrated in society, they start to disappear -- leaving everyone the poorer."
Social engenering peice by bigger peice.
"The Democrats are being who they are. They're producing 32 new affirmative federal programs. That's part of what they do."
The trend to "hold your fire" on the incoming administration is starting to scare me. Fox reports some of the odd thing that are going on, but seems to lack the curiosity to ask questions. Obama sending emissaries to listen to the summit on the world economy? They say it is just to listen, but is it? What if that is not what is happening? How will what we know of him effect the out come? In general how bad can it get? There are some thing that need to be asked. Every one says Obama is a blank slate so shouldn't we be questioning even more.
(continued from a comment on another post)"That’s exactly right. I have inchoate fears right now, based on almost two years of watching Obama at work, and being quite worried about him, his agenda, his cohorts and his followers. But until something happens, that’s all those fears will be: inchoate.
Right now, I’m doing something I haven’t done too much in the last few years: I’m hunkering down in the real world, and trying to get a little emotional distance from the intellectual excitement of politics. "
Obama has done nothing yet. We are all tiered. Fine. However Obama, the people he is looking to put into the new administration and the leader in congress do have ideas and a philosophy. There is a danger in this. The Obama Administration and his acolytes are going to his the ground running with a mass of willing (some apparently ignorant of much) followers that will hear nothing else.
From Bookworm Room comments: Charles Martel
"What bothers me the most is the uncomprehending stares I get when I remind people that nothing is free, that A leads to B leads to C leads to D — that there really IS a slippery slope, and they just elected a guy super-equipped with rope cutters, hob-nailed boots for stomping knuckles and extra-viscuous oil for accelerating the slide."
There is a fundamental lack of curiosity, basic knowledge of history, opposing philosophies and logic and the ability to accept new ideas (even if just to take a good look and reject them latter).
This should be a time to teach. Start from scratch with your arguments. Spoon feed little bite size ideas. They will have to be small, but that is how things are built. Take advantage of the down time to restart the American curiosity. Teach that has been lost, the skills to think again for one's self. Do not lay the whole argument out. Just strengthen the knowledge and skills of the people, put the pieces on the table and let them put them together.
Those on the right have to stop reading the end of the book to the general public. Those that understand already know the end and those who don't find the end impossible at the very least. Stop preaching to the choir and start teaching the skill to join the choir if they want.
Congress is filled with brain damaged little children. They need to leave congress and get the help they need. Not all but most or almost all! They may have watered this down so much that it won't be perceived as acting fast enough to keep more banks from going under. If that is the case the credit markets won't get free up. And that's the game.
Pieces from all over:
"Rep. John A. Boehner, R-Ohio, the House minority leader, said he was urging "every member whose conscience will allow them to support this" to back it, but officials in both parties expected the vote to be a nail-biter." Lawmakers, White House Agree on Historic $700B Bailout - Fox
They still do not get it. They made it worse, so bad it may not work. And it still may not pass. Okay kids go over there and pass THE BILL!
"The plan would let Congress block half the money and force the president to jump through some hoops before using it all. The government could get at $250 billion immediately, $100 billion more if the president certified it was necessary, and the last $350 billion with a separate certification — and subject to a congressional resolution of disapproval."Lawmakers, White House Agree on Historic $700B Bailout - Fox
The certification on the last part includes a resolution of no confidence in the President and something about a 45 day response period. So they get half the money now and the rest 2 months from now. Put it that way and it might not work.
"The House plans to vote on the measure Monday, with the Senate likely to follow later in the week. Both parties have already started the process of pressuring and cajoling members to vote for the bill. Passage is seen as likely, despite the measure's unpopularity."Crisis Hits Europe's Banks As U.S. Seals Bailout Deal- WSJ
"House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said she hopes the House will take up the bill on Monday. Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said he believes the Senate can move on the legislation by Wednesday."Rescue bill unveiled - CNN
Wednesday, Freak' n WEDNESDAY, yes lets play with the economic nuclear weapon for a few more days.
"If it ends up with a net loss, however, the bill says the president must propose legislation to recoup money from the financial industry if the rescue plan results in net losses to taxpayers five years after the plan is enacted."Rescue bill unveiled - CNN
"The administration would be required to submit a plan to Congress "to recoup those losses from the entities that benefited from this program," according to a summary circulated among House Republicans."Crisis Hits Europe's Banks As U.S. Seals Bailout Deal- WSJ
WOW a great big uncertainty.No One KNOWS WHAT THIS CRAP IS WORTH! SO in the end the companies still pay an unknown loss? WTF This is a giant liability for the companies we are trying to get to lend money again and keep the pay checks coming.
"A congressional oversight panel would be charged with reviewing the state of financial markets, the regulatory system and the Treasury's use of its authority under the rescue plan. Sitting on the panel would be 5 outside experts appointed by House and Senate leaders."Rescue bill unveiled - CNN
Politicians in charge of a fix for something they largely cause or at lest let happen. This won't descend into partisan crap and wasteful stupid spending. Lets hope they can at least get the job done and not stop the whole thing in its tracks.
"Treasury must establish an insurance program - with risk-based premiums paid by the industry - to guarantee companies' troubled assets, including mortgage-backed securities, purchased before March 14, 2008."Rescue bill unveiled - CNN
Exactly what won't work. Are we going to help these companies at all?
"But Democrats surrendered other cherished goals: letting judges rewrite bankrupt homeowners' mortgages and steering any profits gained toward an affordable housing fund."Lawmakers, White House Agree on Historic $700B Bailout - Fox
Small favors i guess.
There are a number of other little stupid crap provisions in here. Golden parachute rules apply to new execs not the ones that run the companies now? But the Nail in The coffin :
"Mr. Paulson doesn't expect the funds to unclog the financial situation immediately. "I'm hoping that, in a very fragile system, this restores some confidence when it's announced. But it will take several weeks" before the asset purchases begin to work, he said." Crisis Hits Europe's Banks As U.S. Seals Bailout Deal- WSJ
See you in the bread line, and thank your congress person for me.!
Kate Perry has this nice little song I Kissed a Girl. Okay.
She's on top right now. Okay.
It's influencing young teens to do depraved things. Okay. What?!
They didn't put it that way on Fox, close enough for me. These people cover the news every day. they act as if they didn't see it at first. Really what little sheltered world do you live in. I will say that if your going to cover this as a news story and avoid sounding like a sheltered ass they did the best they could.
My biggest problem with the song is is it chap stick or chop stick? think chap but i was trying to figure out what sort of cherry chop stick was? i don't keep a close eye on slang.
Who else is on the charts? Lil Wayne & Chris Brown I don't know them well, wonder what they might be singing about. And Pussycat Dolls, Know them a little better. It's kind of repetitious but with the video i can listen a few times.
They made the point that she is a defunked christen singer. The best kind in my opinion. That also mean(chap stick no chop stick) she's probably kind of a poser. Pecked some girl on the lips when she was so wasted on that half a wine cooler. Oh crap she's not 16 or something. If she is it's kinda cute and i take back the poser comment if not, Poser. If this is all she's doing That's pretty well behaved.
They where mentioned how girls do this to attacked attention and boys don't. First can i shave a decade or so off my age, just for a month or so, Please? Boys don't! There's a news flash. I not going to go into males visual woman mental stuff but i hope we all get it. Bottom line, just a decade not to much to, if girls liked watching guys kissing it might be a different matter.
My point Fox tends to cover these things, just like the little boy and the homeless stuff on now. Its got a shelter gee-whiz feel from time to time. It's really irritating. It's nit picky crap and O'Reilly the king of this useless holier than arr, you know. he's right part of the time and out of touch part of the time, the rest i disagree with him. Most of it is useless whining dribble. I am sure shelter types that cringe ever time they hear god dam love his dribble. This stuff is why i watch Fox less and less.
