A couple of thoughts

I have a couple of thoughts that have been running around in my head I just wanted to jot down. Not going to spend much time building the case.

First, in a way is a follow up form an earlier post regarding turning the corner. Reports are that apparel sales are up 10% sounds like a good sign, still you never know until everything is all wrapped and final numbers are released sometime next early next year. The other thing is that Obama has had a good 6 weeks since the election. His tax compromise is proving to be very popular and possibly helping chance the dynamic of the current President - Congress relations. There has been a food safety bill passed, DADT ended, START is going to pass, and the possible passage of the 9/11 first responders health bill. All these are successes for the President and a number of Republican Senators are looking like Deadenders on these matters, looking at you McCain.


The second thought ties in to the above. A number of these successes have been a result of help from a handful of moderate Senators. I have thought for several months now that Joe Lieberman, Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins could exercise real power over the Senate if they so choose. Now add into the mix Scott Brown, Lisa Murkowski, and Joe Manchin into the mix and you have 6 swing votes that could truly affect the work that gets done in the Senate.

Now keep in mind President Obama has played very nice with Snowe, Collins, and Brown. He voiced his opinion to keep Lieberman closer as opposed to throw him overboard. There was a long period where these actions were and are still extremely bewildering to many who have so stronly supported in the election. These actions haven't really seen any payoffs until these last few weeks. It was Collins and Lieberman that saved the DADT repeal. Brown has been instrumental in that vote as well as the START treaty passage. Murkowski seems to have sowed a bit of independence as a result of having to go the write in path to regain her Senate Seat. Manchin is a wildcard (I guess that is another word for chicken) we will have to watch to see if he continues to vote as a republican or provide the occasional Democratic vote in the Senate.l

The repeal of DADT has passed the cloture vote Update: Passes the Senate!

I suggested a couple of days that once it became obvious that DADT would fall more senators would get behind it. Well I was close, final vote was 43 - 33 (with 24 choosing not to go on the record) last vote was 57 - 43. Picking up 6 more votes.

Congratulations to Republican Senators Brown, Collins, Snowe, Kirk, Murkawski. Congratulations to (ahem, hard to say) Senator Lieberman for resurrecting the vote and to Majority Leader Reed.

It is a good day in America.


Final vote count on passage
65 - 31. That is a pretty large jump from the earlier 57 - 43 picking up 8 yes votes and losing 12 no votes.

Once again congratulations America.


PS: on a very umimportant side note. It was a thrill seeing Mr. McCain flailing in the wind. Yes Mr. McCain "That one" beat your ass once again, should be used to it by now I'd think.

Quotes of the Day No make the Week, or more like the Holiday Season

"It is impossible to do all of the things that the majority laid out...without disrespecting one of the two holiest of holidays for Christians and the families of all of the Senate, not just senators themselves but all of the staff,"

Republican Senator Jon Kyl said, according to MSNBC.

In response to the concept of working the week between Christmas and New Years as disprecting Christians and their families.

"It just goes to show the disconnect between those we elect to represent us and those who get out there to do the work. Because I'm here to say you won't find a single New York City fireman who considers it a sign of disrespect to work in a New York City Firehouse on Christmas Eve or Christmas Day."

New York City Fireman, First Responder, Cancer patient

What a difference a year makes - Joe Lieberman edition

I awake this morning with hopeful news that the repeal of DADT may finally be imminent. The hero of the day is none other than Senator Joe Lieberman. I am not going to formulate any opinions, simply will point out that it was just a year ago that Senator Lieberman was the thorniest of the thorns in the sides of Democrats. He essentially was a one man road block to the passage of the Public Option.

Today he is potentially being heralded as a civil rghts hero.

It appears that the Senate has 62 votes to pass the repeal of DADT. Senators Lieberman and Senator Collins have kept this issue alive long enough for the House to pass it and force the Senate to have to decide whether or not to proceed with a vote.

A summary: the President campaigned for the repeal and is asking for it, the Republican appointed Secretary of Defense is for it, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff is in favor, 70% of the troops state it would not be a problem, and the general public approve of the repeal by about 75%. We now have 38 Republican Senators from southern and rural states who may run out the clock on our Service Men and Women who have volunteered to serve us. If this happens, it will morally wrong and the grandest example of how broken the Senate is procedurally.

(a possibility to watch out for if it makes it for a vote, and it is destined to pass you may see a number of Senators who are currently on the wrong side of history decide to vote for the repeal. So history can show their support. I suspect if that happens we will see far more than 42 votes to pass the repeal.)

Daily Show does it again

Having issues embedding Daily Show content to the blog. Stewart and the gang rip the GOP and their unending hypocrisy re: 9/11. Nothing more for me to add. take a look.

Pragmatic Progressive (What does it all Mean)

David Kurtz over at TPM discusses today's press conference. I believe it would do disappointed liberals good to watch. It may not make them feel any better about the deal. I do think it will illustrate the origin of the deal from President Obama's perspective.

I wrote a few post back I wrote "Disconnect"

I believe he has a vision of the way he would like things to be and a vision of what is possible for things to be. He fights for what he thinks he can achieve instead of spending too much energy on reaching for the stretch goals. This particular aspect is infuriating to many on the left. I understand why and I would hope that many of those on the left would attempt to appreciate the reality we are in instead of the ideal we dream of.

David Kurtz says much the same following the press conference today:

Today, he very clearly and loudly said: that savior persona is not me. I am the pragmatist. And you know what, I don't have a whole lot of patience for the idealists. I share their ideals, but I don't share their approach and I'm not going to get bogged down in recriminations over not living up to some abstract ideal.

President Obama wrote that he was a blank canvass that many people would cast their ideals of what / who was upon and he would disappoint a number of people.  I believe this what is happening in large part.  I feel that this is about what I expected.

That does not make me like this deal any better.  I once wrote that I am a pragmatic progressive and I believe this is a test of philosophy.

Illinois is about to pass Civil Unions law. The following is a simple, honest, eloquent speech in favor of its passage.

My hometown of Bars and Churches

One of my favorite reading spots on the web is Daily Dish They discuss a number of various important political and social topics. In addition there are a number of diversionary discussions as well. Of late there has been an ongoing conversation regarding corner pubs in America or the lack there of. Andrew Sullivan asks in a nostalgic look back to his birth place of England. He doesn't find the corner pub or it's culture here in America.

I have to say I was a bit dumbfounded by such a thought. This definitely was not my experience. Just this morning a graphic was produced that explains the disconnect with Mr. Sullivan's US experience on the East coast and in DC compared my experience growing up in the Middle of Midwest. A close examination of this maps shows I grew up in an area with more bars than grocery stores. It actually seems insane to compare the two as it's not even close in Quincy. Take a moment a read a few of the comments they hold as true to Quincy as they are for Wisconsin.

The red dots indicate areas with more Bars and the yellow dots areas with more grocery stores. compare.

David Brooks provides an assesment, seems reasonable

David Brooks is not beloved by the left.  However, he offered up this quick assessment in a discussion forum with GOP budget "wunderkind" Rep. Paul Ryan. 

Disconnect

I am sensing a disconnect between myself and the vast array of left leaning political observers.  I am talking about President Obama's announcement re: a two year pay freeze. 

The pay freeze is symbolic, no question about it.  It will have essentially no impact on the federal budget. I agree on this part with all the loud voices on the left.  Although, I suggest the symbolism is important.  I greatly suspect that the vast vast majority of Americans, especially those who do not consider themselves rabid partisans on either side of the spectrum to welcome this symbolism.

Many people have endured the Great Recession having to do with less.  Not just those who are un- and under-employed.  Even the employed have had to pay for higher health care premiums and deductibles, have had to go without raises or bonuses.  There has been sacrifice over the past two years.  The impression, rightly or wrongly, is that public empolyees have been exempted from this latest economic downturn.  Here in Columbia Mo the most recent election for County Commissioner was decided solely on the issue of County Commissioners getting paid too much.  It was a very effective campaign. (In truth the new commissioner has no ability what so ever to affect this, he kind of left this out of his ads).  It resonated very well.

I may be considered an Obama apologist.  Though, I have always considered Obama to be a reach across the aisle, practical liberal.  I believe he has a vision of the way he would like things to be and a vision of what is possible for things to be.  He fights for what he thinks he can achieve instead of spending too much energy on reaching for the stretch goals.   This particular aspect is infuriating to many on the left.  I understand why and I would hope that many of those on the left would attempt to appreciate the reality we are in instead of the ideal we dream of. 

All that being said, I can fully get behind President Obama's move to a temporary pay freeze on the following conditions (not that he cares), that he continue to fight for the expiration of the tax cuts on income over $250,000, as well continuing to fight for unemployment benefits, health care reform etc.  Many on the left see this move as a complete and utter cave to the Republican Party.  I see it as an honest assesment of a way forward in governing in manner that is truly best for America and not what is best for the Liberals of America. 

Liberals tend to be upset with this approach, in light of the way Bush governed for the previous 8 years.  I agree, it was the Bush agenda to ram rod their way through the political process for very partisan, personal and political reasons.  We must remember Obama did not run as the liberal version of Bush he ran on being the opposite of Bush.

"Keep it local Stupid"

Now that we have established everyone is going to spend boat loads of money.  The question is where to spend it.  Take a look at a little chart comparing spending at locally vs. non-locally owned business. Remember tomorrow is Small Business Saturday.

Turn the corner

I am just going to lay out a theory I have. 

Nov 2nd 2010 is when it all changed.

For the past couple of years people have been scared, divided, broke, unemployed, uncertain.  This has manifested itself in tea parties, econcomic contraction, partisan divide and gridlock.  We yelled at each other during the health care debate, yelled at each other during the campaign.  Then we voted.  It was a big cathartic convulsion. 

Compare it to a fever breaking, you build up to heavy sweats and then it's all gone.  Now, I don't suggest it is all gone, but I do believe people are ready to turn the corner. They are tired of being concerned, afraid, paranoid.  America for the most part wants to get on with it's life.  I think youl'll see the extremes settlle down, people will return to the malls, and the conversation return to more mundane items.  Two areas I think we can look at to see if this is correct are shopping figures for this Christmas and Obama's approval ratings.  I have learned you can't look at any one day of shopping to figure out how the season will go, you have to wait for the post mortem.  Regarding Obama's numbers, according to RealClearPolitics.com just before the election he had a 45 - 51 approval rating = -6  as of today he is 46 - 48 = -2 that is ok swing for 3 weeks, again we will have to wait to see how it plays out. 

All in all, I think people are just ready to have Happy Holiday season. 

Warren Buffett's two cents.

Mr. Buffet write's a thank you letter.

One of the things I find confounding about the Tea Party Movement is their hatred for the Bail Out.  I don't know if they were paying attention, if they forgot, or don't care.  The bail out was not a preferred action.  The bail out occurred under Bush.  The Bail out saved our asses.  Now there can be constant debate about the particulars, but Buffet takes us back to the big picture and reminds us of what happened. 

Nor was it just business that was in peril: 300 million Americans were in the domino line as well. Just days before, the jobs, income, 401(k)’s and money-market funds of these citizens had seemed secure. Then, virtually overnight, everything began to turn into pumpkins and mice. There was no hiding place. A destructive economic force unlike any seen for generations had been unleashed.

 Buffett continues

I don’t know precisely how you orchestrated these. But I did have a pretty good seat as events unfolded, and I would like to commend a few of your troops. In the darkest of days, Ben Bernanke, Hank Paulson, Tim Geithner and Sheila Bair grasped the gravity of the situation and acted with courage and dispatch. And though I never voted for George W. Bush, I give him great credit for leading, even as Congress postured and squabbled.

It is good to see there are still grown ups out there.  While I disagreed with the manner in which the Bush administration started the process, I never saw it as anything but necessary and I am happy with the manner in which the Obama administration did a course correction on some of the implementation.  The bail out's very success is what allows for people to criticize it.  The success is what minimized the catastrophic impacts. The lack of those catastrophic impacts is what many haters point to, in order to say the bail out was unnecessary. 

I knew her back when: Samantha Fish

Girls with guitars - "Bitch" from Lighthouse Pictures on Vimeo.

The President Responds.

President Obama is well known to operate on a very even keel. Slow and steady wins the race mode. This has served him extremely well. At times it can be confusing and confounding. The right way too often reads it for weakness and the left often doesn't have the patience for it. The video below may be considered another example. In response to a Fox "News" question President Obama gives a strong answer addressing the Islamic Community Center in New York City and the Quaran burning in Florida.

Many people have commented of all the flaws that they found in President Bush he had done a good job of holding the anti-islamic hatred in check by reminding America was at war with Terrorist and not Islam. President Obama had not clearly enunciated that sentiment forcefully until this press conference.   I think this answer below starting at 1:30 mark is as fine and powerful and passionate answer President Obama has given on this subject.  Will it matter, hard to tell.  I suspect that those who need to hear it the most aren't listening much to what President Obama has to say. But, it needs to said and repeated.

.

First, these two situations are not equal. They both concern freedom of religion and speech. They both have to right to do it. That is where the similarity ends. The book burning is a deliberate publicity stunt of a "pastor" with 50 congregants. The stunt should be repulsive to anyone who passed high school history, watched Schindler's List, hell even if you watched "Hogan's Heroes" you have a pretty good idea about the message that book burning holds. Outside of Auschwitz video's of Nazi book burnings is probably the strongest link to a round them up and kill them all message one can send. The very fact that Gen. Patreaus and Defense Secretary Gates felt the need to get involved is pretty good sense of how serious the ramifications these actions would have had.

Second, I understand that there are a number of people who are genuinely hurt by what they hear about the "Ground Zero Mosque". That feeling is real. The problem is there a great number of people "leaders" who know the facts, mislead people to stir up the pains of the other (Palin, Gingrich, Beck) for their own agenda. Can you spell demogogue. 
Would the hurt have been so real had these people been told of an Islamic YMCA with a prayer room being built in a vacant Burlington Coat Factory near strip joint, Off Track Betting Parlor, and a number of Bars.  Somehow doesn't have the same impact. 

Credit where Credit is due...

Over the past 7 days two of America's most famous personalities had very good weeks. Just a week ago today liberal bloggers and talking head types were discussing and relishing the impending embarrasment that Sarah Palin was going to experience at the hands of Alaskan voters. I am speaking of the Republican Primary for Senate. Palin had endorsed and recorded robo-calls for Tea Party favorite Bill Miller against sitting Senator Lisa Murkowski. Miller was not given a chance and liberals were salivating to make hey out of Palin's demise as a political king maker. It wasn't to be Miller currently holds a 1500 vote lead over Murkowski and 10's of thousands of absentees to be counted. Regardless of the final count Palin can rightfully tout her influence on that election.

Secondly, Mr. Beck held his rally at the Lincoln Memorial over the weekend. I have never suggested that Mr. Beck is a stupid man regardless of the some of the completely stupid things he espouses. He is at heart an entertainer and is therefore not bound by any set of central fact or theme. That being said he held a "successful" event this weekend. The crowds were reported to larger than expected and impressive by most any measure. (although not near the size of Obama's inauguration. That only matters in that a number of supporters suggest that it was) It was by all accounts a peaceful rally less the offensive signage and propaganda that has at times been displayed at such gatherings. It appears that Beck made a smart tactical decision to turn this from a political rally to religious or spiritual rally. That allowed for a more peaceful and united theme.

Reason.tv an arm of Reason Magazine a truly libertarian publication was on the scene and filed what is a good thorough and even handed report of the events. Take a look.

Ask and you shall receive, Ron Paul Libertarian Icon speaks out

A few post back I called on Libertarians to speak out against the demogaugery from right regarding the Burlington Coat Factory Mosque.  Well Rep. Paul has issued a statement as such.

I was going to give you taste of the piece. I think it is better if you take a moment to read it.

PS I don't think Ron Paul issued this statement as a result of my request. Well maybe he did.

Triva Time:

Quick name the crazy radical who "blamed" the US for 9/11 with this quote.

When people said they hate us, well, did we deserve 9-11? No. But were we minding our business? No. Were we in bed with dictators and abandoned our values and principles? Yes. That causes problems

Move along nothing to see here, Next stop beware of the scarey....

Have you noticed it too?

It seems some force out there stirs up the country about how Obama is going to destroy America. Death Panels, Indoctrinate School Children, Obama's Katrina, Burlington Coat Factor Mosque. The news media and fox news followers get their emotions raised to a fevered pitch.

Then the truth comes to light and we move onto the next big scare whether it is a fake Acorn scare, or 2 black guys scaring away votes form a predominately black inner city voting location, or well we'll have to see what is next, but I am sure it is going to be scarey.

This brings me to one of the earliest scares and rallying cries "Government Motors". You know when mean ole Obama forced all the good people of GM to go into bankruptcy, just so he could socialize the auto industry and payback his union thug buddies.

The Economist provides a rare reconsideration of this as GM announces that they are preparing for an IPO.

Many people thought this bail-out (and a smaller one involving Chrysler, an even sicker firm) unwise. Governments have historically been lousy stewards of industry. Lovers of free markets (including The Economist) feared that Mr Obama might use GM as a political tool: perhaps favouring the unions who donate to Democrats or forcing the firm to build smaller, greener cars than consumers want to buy. The label “Government Motors” quickly stuck, evoking images of clunky committee-built cars that burned banknotes instead of petrol—all run by what Sarah Palin might call the socialist-in-chief.

I recall arguing at the time that President Obama's actions were a result of a very unique set of circumstances that he inherited.  (I will note that he didn't just happen into this job, he actively pursued it)  These actions have now had 18 months to play out.  No one is satisfied with where the economy is currently sitting one can make a very convincing argument that our economic situation could and would have been much much worse.  Like wise one could make an argument (not very convincing in my mind) that a do nothing approach would have been preferred.  What I think no can reasonably make is that Obama's goal is to reign as Socialist in Chief .  The Economist comes to a very similiar conclusion.

Socialists don’t privatise

That does not mean, however, that bail-outs are always or often justified. Straightforward bankruptcy is usually the most efficient way to allow floundering firms to restructure or fail. The state should step in only when a firm’s collapse poses a systemic risk. Propping up the financial system in 2008 clearly qualified. Saving GM was a harder call, but, with the benefit of hindsight, the right one. The lesson for governments is that for a bail-out to work, it must be brutal and temporary. The lesson for American voters is that their president, for all his flaws, has no desire to own the commanding heights of industry. A gambler, yes. An interventionist, yes. A socialist, no.

Enough is enough once again. Muslim bashing edition

I have not watched Countdown with Keith Olberman in quite a long time.  Mostly due to scheduling and partly to do with his overreaching and over the top approach.  That said, I think he has genuinely said what he feels and not simply acted as a College Football Cheerleader.  I was very pleased to see his most recent special comment toned down, but precise on facts.  For in this case the facts tell the story and the story needs no embellisment. This "controversy" reminds very much of the hoopla the fanatical right stirred up this time last year re: the President indoctrinating our school children.  Somehow, our children survived unscathed and maybe a few of them were inspired.  The right has moved on from that battle (never seem to bring it up anymore) to fresher concerns.  Like slicing and dicing the Constitution they so claim to love and telling a religious group where they can and can not learn to cook and play basketball.   Take a look.


I have often said that Libertarians generally have the purest form of political philosophy. I don't agree with it, but it easy to be consistent. Keep gov't out and honor private property. Libertarians and small c conservatives should be on the front lines of fighting back the xenophobia that is currently on display. "All muslims" are no more responsible for 9/11 than "all Catholics" are responsible for molesting little boys. We don't demand that churches be built more than 4 blocks from any playground.

Game Time is over let the Adults in.

Last week's apology by Rep. Joe Barton to BP about made my head explode.  Once my gut reaction subsided slightly, I attempted to think it through as objectively as possible.  I was still completely dumbfounded on this one.  Nearly a week later the Republicans are still figuring out how to respond.  The truth of the matter is there were a number of them spouting the same BS leading up to this moment.  Barton simply did it from the seat of a US House of Representatives Committee seat.  It is one thing for a politician to go all wacky.  When they do it with the air of officialdom that is a whole new ball game. 

Now the leadership has absolutely no choice but to put the hammer down and fast on Barton.  This can't be a Republican story for them, they need a scapegoat to protect them.  Barton is the one.  Don't be surprised if there is not more news about him losing seniority, chairmanship etc.  One has to ask what about the rest who got out in front of Barton with these similar statements.  Bachman, Pence, etc. 

I enjoy when a conservative thinker calls BS on "conservative" politicians. I came across this posting from The American Conservative Magazine takes an objective look at this situation.  It is well worth the read.

Impact of Deepwater

Pollster takes a look at Deepwater and Obama from a polling and political impact.  It is nice to read a poliltical article that is not simply one side cheering or booing the other side.

I'm sorry you can't sit there!

If you haven't heard the story yet, just wait for it.  You should probably hear about it soon enough.

Rand Paul GOP nominee for the Kentucky Senate Seat was on The Rachel Maddow Show last night.

Rachel attempted to pin Dr. Paul on his position in regards to the 1964 Civil Rights Act.  The nugget is "does the federal government have the authority to outlaw the practice of discrimination in private businesses"

I have read a number of pieces on the interview and Mr. Paul and I found the piece below by Andrew Sullivan to especially good and I recommend it.  I have often called myself an pragmatic progressive.  There are many issues that I would be considered far left on, however, I accept certain political realities and I am prepared to calculate those realities into my political formulation. One might consider Andrew Sullivan as a pragmatic libertarian.

Andrew Sullivan on Rand Paul on Rachel Maddow

A comment that I came across from a blogger known as Atrios put this way.

Government regulates – and, of course, provides the necessary conditions for the existence of – private business in all kinds of ways. So when people have a particular concern about, say, the Civil Rights Act, as opposed to, say, parking requirements, it’s reasonable to wonder why.

I am not going to suggest Dr. Paul is a racist, he made the point several times that he is not.  I think in this matter it probably is not important if he is personally a racist.  As Sullivan points out what is more important is what the effect of the position is.

Really? ( you want to go back to the "good" ole days. )

A picture is worth a $1,000

A graphical recap of the economy over the past year.

President takes on America's poll obsessed punditry

Been a little too obsessed to post lately.

I love this.
I truly believe America wakes up this morning a little better, fairer place to live.

Who is responsible for this?

Take a quick look at Health Care Reform's popularity since the beginning of the year.

Have you no Sense of decency!!!!

The "Al-Qaeda 7" is a smear campaign going on right now that I have been watching over the interwebs. It has gotten coverage but not what it deserves. A group of right wing necons. Liz Cheney and Bill Kristol are smearing Department of Justice lawyers who have been assigned to act as defense attorney's for detainees in Gitmo.

This is a situation in which I will simply ask you to read what Eugene Robinson has to say on this matter as he does a much better job than I could attempt.

"The word "McCarthyism" is overused, but in this case it's mild. Liz Cheney, the former vice president's ambitious daughter, has in her hand a list of Justice Department lawyers whose "values" she has the gall to question. She ought to spend the time examining her own principles, if she can find them."

No Good Lazy Bums.

This graph dovetailed with a thought process I had when I was out running. It is a simplification of Conservative dogma. Essentially a free market based system is most effective and better because it rewards the hardest working smartest people. The government should not waste money and effort on the poor. They are poor because they don't offer the market anything.

This graph is kind of a visualization of my thought. Best get richer and more powerful. First they outperform and drain the resources of the "lazy" and weak. After that has been drained they set their targets on the middle class. A person could be the hardest working mechanic in the world but does he stand a chance against a Wall Street Banker, A Corporate Executive. If the free market is to be allowed to allocate the resources to best and brightest (now the biggest) are we not destined to world with a handful of Billionaires.




All I can tell you is that we have had seriously lazy middle class over the last 20 years according to the graph above.

A pictures is worth a Billion Dollars

Budgetary impact of two Bush Tax Cuts, and Proposed Health Care Reform. Note Tax cuts were passed via Reconciliation HCR passed 99% through Supermajority (slight fixes proposed via Reconciliation).(Thanks Rachel)

What a good discussion on HCR sounds like

Ezra Klein of the Washington Post has been the best pro reform analyst reporting on the whole process. While he is in favor of Health Care Reform he deals in honest analyst. He had a conversation with Representative Paul Ryan. Rep Ryan has come out of this as probably the most knowledgeable Republican in this debate. The two have a good conversation, while they might not agree they have a seemingly honest and honorable conversation. It is worth a read. It is a little detailed but well worth it.

And Go!

Be careful who you pick a fight with

@maddow (Rachel Maddow) ran me down on her show last night over my views on health care reform. Wonderful badge of honor. #utpol #utgop
about 5 hours ago via web

Dear @OrrinHatch: http://is.gd/9CnhP I didn't actually address your views, sir, just your misrepresentation of the facts.
about 1 hours ago via web

something to sleep on

Funny or Die's Presidential Reunion from Will Ferrell

Hillary Scott of Lady Antebellum / Stops by my Wife's store

I got to say it's hot when she says "Kurt"

Hey look the Dems are coming around too.

Remember down below when I talked about using reconciliation to pass fixes and not to pass Health Care Reform. Well you know what it is catching on. Here are a couple of examples

New York Times

As for the legislative strategy, the Democrats are not trying to pass an entirely new bill under the reconciliation process.

Instead, a reconciliation measure would include only provisions to change the Senate-passed bill in ways reflecting compromises with the House and the White House. Then, in a legislative two-step, the House would adopt the original Senate bill, the House and the Senate would approve the package of changes, and Mr. Obama would sign both into law.

Even Conservative Democrat Kent Conrad Chairman of the Senate Budget Committee is talking the the talk when speaking with Ezra Klein.

So I never thought reconciliation would work for a comprehensive bill. But we don’t need to use reconciliation for the comprehensive bill. That bill passed with the supermajority, with 60 votes, not using reconciliation.

If the House passes that legislation as well, it can go straight to the president. But there’s a potential role for reconciliation in what we call a sidecar. It’s there to improve or perfect the package, and it only will include items that score for budgetary purposes.

Speaking of that Coffee Party thing

A release of liberal activism

Shorty story, Arkansas Senator Blanche Lincoln who has been hiding behind the bipartisan rock all year on Health Care has just received a Primary opponent. (I don't say that lightly, reminder she is the one who appealed to the President to basically push back against those in the Democratic party on Health Care Reform and spend more time and effort working with the Republicans?)

The announcement came this morning. A sudden rush of of excitement burst forward from the Left. This can easily witnessed by the Act Blue page for her opponent.

Act Blue is a web site set up to accept donations for Democratic politicians. Take a look at his haul in just a few short hours. Bill Halter.

For comparison sake, note that he was at $63,000 as of 1:00 pm central time.

Add that to the story of Coffee Party Movement. A lady started a webpage in response to the uncivil hyper negative energy of the Tea Party. The Movement was featured in the Washington Post last Friday and the number of people that signed on was explosive. Look at the Facebook page to see the current number last count was 34,000.

The Traditional media is catching up (Will the Democrats)

Not that anyone is really paying attention to this blog (that's ok), EJ Dionne of the Washington Post got around to commenting on something I pointed out a couple of post back. This is in regard to Chuck Todd's point regarding reconciliation.

Here is an excerpt form my post:

"Here is the reality the Senate has passed health care reform with the requisite 60 votes. If the house were to simply pass the exact same bill this is all for nothing game over. What is being considered under Reconciliation is a very small portion of the bill. Honestly, most of the stuff that they are considering items that they truthfully against."

The major point and it is a genuine point, is that the Senate is not looking to pass Health Care Reform through Reconciliation they are looking to fix the reform they have already passed (with 60 votes no less).

And again a big chunk of the things they want to fix are things pretty much everyone including republicans agree with. They are taking out the special deals that everyone found so distasteful. John McCain pointed out one such problem. The special treatment that Florida seniors receive in the Senate bill. He as a Senator from Arizone (with it's own sizable senior population) is upset about it. You know what, there are a lot of Democrats that are upset about that as well. President Obama agreed with McCain to McCain's amazement. The President and the Senate Dems are talking about fixing those deals along with a number of other tweeks.

The bottom line, the Republicans are taking their stand not based on the fact they think the Cornhusker kickback and the special deal for Florida is good policy. They are staking out there position to either 1) kill any thing from passing or 2) forcing the Democrats to pass the bill exactly as it is. The second option would allow them to campaign against the dirty back room deals. The deals that Democrats are attempting to exorcise in the Reconciliation package.

So if Republicans vote against the reconciliation fixes they are actually voting to keep these sweetheart deals in the legislation hoping they can turn around say how terrible they sweetheart deals are.

More to the point EJ Dionne gives kudos to Chuck Todd for catching this very important truth where the rest of the media (and democrat stragetist) have failed. EJ is hoping the rest of the media wakes up to the reality the Senate vote will be merely to pass fixes not pass Health Care Reform.

"Kudos to Todd for stating a truth that just about all of us have missed"

It will be interesting to see if the Democrats sharpen their focus with this more accurate description going forward. I think one reason so many in the press and escpecially on the Democrats side was they were expecting the Republicans to simply fight against reconciliation itself. Therefore, the press and the Dems were more focused on the counter argument to that position.

Score one for objectivity (sort of)

When is aid not welfare?

This is a phenomenon that doesn't speak only to conservatives, but a wide swath of the American public. You can see in the myriad of proposals to "drug test welfare recipients". Often this expresses itself state houses and facebook polls etc.

The concept always tend to be received very positively. Andrew Sullivan comes across a chart that show an interesting dichotomy. Conservatives are highly in favoring of cutting welfare but not nearly as much in favor of cutting "Aid to the poor".

My answer to this dilemma is the same as Sullivans.

"Er: Welfare means aid to the black poor, surely? And aid to the poor means white, right? Not that hard to figure it out."

A sliver

Chuck Todd was the first talking head I have heard to make this important point.

The Republicans can't argue against Reconciliation in good faith once the facts are clear.

They have to grease with their argument with, "it has never been done on a scale of this size" (nevermind the fact that the tax cuts I believe were Considerably larger) and approved via Reconciliation.

Here is the reality the Senate has passed health care reform with the requisite 60 votes. If the house were to simply pass the exact same bill this is all for nothing game over. What is being considered under Reconciliation is a very small portion of the bill. Honestly, most of the stuff that they are considering items that they truthfully against.

Keep in Mind

It would probably be accurate to state that this is a talking point that Democrats are pushing regarding the usage of Reconciliation (the novel idea of a majority vote). That doesn't make it invalid.

Elsewhere, political scientist Joshua Tucker found a Congressional Research Service report (pdf) listing every time reconciliation was used between 1981 and 2005, and he built a rough model testing which party used the process more frequently. During that period, there were 19 reconciliation bills, 11 of which were signed by Republican presidents, five of which were signed by Democratic presidents, three of which were vetoed by Democratic presidents, and none of which were vetoed by Republican presidents. "By my admittedly simple classification scheme," Tucker concludes, "this would suggest that 14 of the 19 times reconciliation was used between FY1981 - FY2005, it was used to advance Republican interests."

It's On!!!! ........................CSPAN

The mushy middle / waiting to rise again?

I have often said that America needs at least a third party if not 4th or 5th. However, I have always envisioned that a constructive third party would center on fiscal responsibility and socially liberal or libertarian.

Goverment involvement in certain areas is not intrinsicly bad, but one does have to be vigilant about it's execution. Likewise, the government really doesn't have any business in the bedroom or the doctors office. I just read a piece by Michael Smerconish. He is based in the Philly area he would be considered a moderate republican, he is a talk show host, and he was open to Obama as President.

He relates his decision to switch is party affiliation from Republican to Independant. He points out that currently there are more self identified independents than either Democrats or Republicans. So maybe that third party is forming itself.

Even closer to home

Missouri preserves sales tax exemptions on yachts, no such luck no bassboats, rowboats etc. Oh by the way we are going to need to cut funding for education, thank you.

McClatchy News

A little closer to Home

Somehow ths article came to my attention. It was posted on Biggovernment.com a website of Breitbart who was an apprentice of Matt Drudge. None the less it does shine a light on the questionable dealings of local governments. Keep this in mind when you are told that local governments do things much better than State or Federal Government.

Here is the link.

The story tells about how all dems and reps voted payment of a management fee to a political contributor. Mind you both dems and reps voted for this deal. what I find particularly interesting was the first comment in the comment sections of this story.

"I am concerned that the manner in which the federal government is operating is eerily like how the Krupps munitions factory was still billing the Nazi’s - after Hitler committed suicide."

What? So small town officials questionable ethics = Obama is hitler. Still guessing on this one.

Speaking (again) of Hypocrisy: Schwarzenegger style

Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger calls out fellow republicans for their hypocrisy on the stimulus.

"Well, you know, to me I find it interesting that you have a lot of the Republicans running around and pushing back on the stimulus money and saying this doesn't create any new jobs, and then they go out and they do the photo ops and they are posing with the big check and they say, isn't this great?" he said. "Look what the kind of -- the kind of money I provide here for the state, and this is great money to create jobs, and this has created 10,000 new jobs and this has created 20,000 new jobs. And all of these kind of things. It doesn't match up."

Republicans have been attempting to fire back at Democrats for not returning the tax cuts many received under Bush. Here is the difference and it is a big one. The Republicans argument is that the Stimulus does not create jobs at best and hurts job creation in all probability. They then turn around and solicit funds for and brag to their constituents about all the jobs they have help create and save through these very same funds (that don't create jobs and probably hurts job creation.) This pretty much has to be the definition of hypocrisy.

I often say it is more difficult being a liberal, due to the fact that often liberal answers don't often fit on a bumper sticker. In reality issues are complex and often times the answer is complicated. Republicans have settled on lower taxes, small government fits well sounds great, but in reality it doesn't mean shit when they are in control See the 8 years under Bush. That being said the issues of Repulicans performing their doublespeak on the stimulus might be one the Democrats feel they can take advantage of. Hypocrit fits very well on a bumper sticker. It is something everyone can understand and many Republicans were kind enough to provide thier own little visual aids with those big checks in hand. Democrats have every right to take those big checks and beat the republicans over the head with them as matter of fact they have a responsibility to do so. They also need to continue to focus and doing what is necessary in order to make sure the recovery works it's way down the workers of the country and not just the boards.

Taking a stand for the Good Ole' Boys (Toyota that is)

In case you haven't heard it yet, you will soon. The Toyota Recall situation is... Wait for it.... Drum roll please.... Obama's fault.

Yes, that's right you heard it The Obama Administration is behind all of Toyota's current problems. Let me give you a quick rundown. Obama forced GM to sell to the Union and to the Gov't. Obama has too make sure GM survives, you know he owes the Unions and now the Unions own GM. So in order to make sure GM thrives so the Union can increase it's power and money Obama is scaring Americans away from buying Toyota's.

I am guessing I don't need to spell the complete ignorance of this. But I do find amusing is that people spouting this kind of talk are the same people who are flag flying, don't talk bad about our President in time of war, buy USA (shop Walmart) crowd. These are probably the same people that would come into the Electronics store I used to work at and complain because all we had were Hitachis, Toshibas, Sharp etc.

Although this does provide a reason to take a look at somehting that has occurred over the past 20 years. The number of plants / dealerships etc that foreign automakers have put in the USA. Additionally these automakers located in the parts of the country that have had low wages and little unionization mainly the south. Some twenty years later the foreign auto makers have developed a large network of influence through their economic investment in the south. So we have a interesting (if not hypocritical) irony development. Much of the southern population and the specifically many southern politicians are more and more willing to side with Foreign automakers over the US automakers. Those of you who can think back 20 years. Can you imagine a Southern politician standing up and defending a Japanese auto maker back in the 80's.

There is an article over at TPM that goes into detail about the roots that Toyota has developed in the USA and how that might aid them during this rough spot. (Full disclosure I drive a Toyota RAV4, a Honda Accord, and the previous car was a Mazda Protege. As you can see I have nothing against foreign autos.

The last note regarding the conspiracy theory mentioned above. It is my thought if there was a customer in the car market who was considering a Toyota but are concerned would first consider a Honda and then turn their attention to Ford. Ford seems to hitting their stride as of late. Their decision not to partake in the government assistance and their recent string of cars puts them in a much better position to take advantage of the current Toyota problems.

While we are on the hypocrit thingy

Feet off the furniture

Can't quite figure out that Hypocrit thing

Critical Mass

Many of those that are left me are renewing the push to pass a public option in the Senate (it has already passed in the house). While I am in total agreement that a public option is vital to comprehensive health care reform, I am uncertain of the reality of it passing. This renewed push received a boost with a letter written and signed by 4 Senate Democrats asking Senate leader Reid to pursue a vote on the Senate floor.

Huffington Post: Public Option Support Surging In Senate

Daily Kos: New: Public Option Through Reconciliation Scoreboard: 16 Signers + 3 Supporters = 19

Reid's response was that he was personally in favor of a public option but someone had to show him the votes for passage. Upon on that word many activist have renewed their calls to their Senators to push for a sign of support. The number has climbed to 19 who have either directly signed onto the letter or expressed their support for passing a public option through reconciliation (simple majority, as opposed to a 60 vote super majority).

There are a lot of people and organizers on the left whipping up people's excitement about this possible resurgence. Is it misplaced? Well, of course it is too early to tell. Let's look at the significance of the last few days. Essentially we have 19 Democratic Senators who have basically stated what their position has always been. I don't believe there truly has been an surprise endorsements for this idea. That being said momentum does seem to play a big part in passing legislation.

20 or 25 supporters doesn't change the game, it basically reaffirms it. Now if the number climbs into the high 30's / low 40's of Senators "going on the record" that would be nearing the necessary critical mass. There 57 Democrats plus 1 independent to draw from. Therefore the Dems can only lose 8 votes. Evan Bayh's announced resignation is hard to read. Instead of feeling free to vote with the party he will feel free to vote against it.

At this time I am not getting my hopes up. I will continue to watch as various members of the left whip up the activist and see how this plays out. One other way to look at this is a bargaining position. President Obama is set to host the Health Care Summit next week. It probably makes a lot of sense for the Democrats asking for more than they will probably get in order call the final bill a compromise. In a nutshell the President can say ok Dems want Public Option Reps want tort reform and selling across state lines here is where we meet in the middle. Which is pretty much where the the current Senate bill is right now.

Is this the work of Plouffe?

Here's another look

Pollster.com discusses the graph comparing job losses between Bush's and Obama's tenure. I found it interesting and is good for reference. Although I don't the second graph negates the first, nor do I think he intends to.

Have a look for yourself.

The invisible hand speaks - so says George

George Will is a conservative columnist I will link to occasionally. Today he discusses the shortsightedness of the idea of Sarah Palin as leader of a political party.

Conservatives, who rightly respect markets as generally reliable gauges of consumer preferences, should notice that the political market is speaking clearly: The more attention Palin receives, the fewer Americans consider her presidential timber

I love maps: Gov't trust = Economic Growth

The graph shows as peoples disposable income goes up so does their trust in government and vice versa.

1.6 - 1.8 Million jobs

The New York Tmes is reporting that a consensus of outside economist are stating the stimulus pacakage has saved or created between 1.6 - 1.8 million jobs over the past year.

The Chart above gives a decent picture of that.

Just wondering out loud.

Sarah the Queen of the Tea haters is on a rampage about the politically correct manner in which to discuss special needs people in America. I don't think it is a bad thing.

I wonder how is this not the same political correctness that so many people on the right fight against. Is it ok because she is so closely affected by a special needs person. Couldn't that be said about everyone?

I report the good news, I report the bad news, I report just the way you are

CNN POll

52% say President Obama doesn't deserve re-election
44% say he does.

I won't comment too much, except to say this means nothing until you put an opponent in their against him.

None the less something to be aware of. One last thing. I am sure those numbers are very directly related to people's sense of the economy.

A break for some happy pictures

Flip through the pictures of Carnival worldwide from the Boston Globe.

Good is not enough, but it is still good

In years past Conservative Politicians may tend to look at economic trends and measurements and assess that the economy is improving our job / concern is done here. It is the basis of a Progressive to view those same signs and measurements through the prism of people. This is why the unemployment number should always be front and center on the radar.

That being said, there is good news out there to consider. Take a look at the following Forbes article regarding the recovery.

One piece I find very interesting if not necessarily the most important

And even with troubles at Toyota ( TM - news - people ) and a hangover from the cash-for-clunkers program, January auto sales are up 11% versus June, just before the clunkers program got started.

I wonder how many quotes I could pull about how the government couldn't run cash for clunkers, how all it will do is cannibalize all the sales into a short period of time.




This article was published prior to today's good news from the NY Fed regarding the growth in US manufacturing for the month of February.

Something has changed

I have been sensing for a few weeks now. I have thought about blogging about it. The main thougth process has continually come back to David Plouffe. It appears he has returned to a closer more involved position with the White House.

The news broke around January 23rd. This was just after the Scott Brown victory in Mass. If you compare that date to the linked graph you will see it corresponds to an even approval / disapproval rating before a slight and steady improvement.

It would be unwise to use the tracking polls to be the only measure of the effect in this change. We have had a bit of a bump with a half step back and now slight uptick. Looking at a graph the impression one gets is that the President may have hit bottom and maybe starting a course correction.



Some of things that one can point to are the State of the Union address, the face off with the Republican House Caucus, Biden on Meet the Press, and the impending Health Care Summit. The utilization of OFA (organizing for America) seems to have become a little more focuses as well.

In addition I was just reading some quotes regarding the "White House" stating that they allowed Congress too much latitude in the messaging on Health Care. That President Obama with adjust and focus the messaging.

I am not convinced of the results. However, it feels better for whatever that is worth. Candidate Obama frequented talked about the rope a dope on the campaign. It feels like he has decided to come off the ropes and start counter punching. Only time will tell if he took too much of a beating over the last 12 rounds (months) and can he be effective. Fingers are crossed.

I love maps: 2009 Federal Budget edition

This should be madatory reading for anyone out there yelling about balancing the budget. I am not suggesting balancing the budget is wrong, but one should know what they are talking about.


The pie chart is courtesy of Wikipedia. The summary below was lifted from 538.com.

Welfare for seniors, 34 percent: Social Security and Medicare wedges.


Defense, 22 percent (Defense and Homeland Security).


Welfare for everyone else, 20 percent ( Medicaid, Unemployment Insurance and Health & Human Services.)


Interest, 9 percent (Interest).

85% of the full budget is included in the above areas.

A break for some sad news

Fans of Discovery's The Deadliest Catch will be saddened to learn that Captian Phil Harris of the Cornelia Marie has died from complications from a stroke.

Give em Hell

A little help please

Someone correct me if I am wrong in my understanding and this is highly simplified.


We had a decade of watered down regulation and wall street risk taking. The financial system reaches the edge of collapse. The Bush administration reacts (in a way that would not have been their preference, however, they had little choice) Obama comes into power and administers the TARP programs of the Bush Administration. Wall Street continues to make stupid decisions regarding compensation.

Tea partiers get pissed. They want to punish Obama for? What exactly?



When I ask for someone to explain to me, I really mean it. I am truly trying to figure this out. When I attempt to wrap my head around this I keep hitting a road block.

I understand historically there tends to be great amount of anger during times of economic distress and change. I looked up the current unemployment numbers for insight.

by race

Blacks 16.5%
Hispanics 12.5%

Whites 8.7%

By age

Adult Men 10.%
Adult Women 7.9%

Teens 26.4%

According to the numbers above their is pain across the board but the hardest hit by far are young people of color. Neither of those groups seems to be represented by the Tea hater movement.

The other shoe is change. The very thing that Obama campaigned on. Could it be these people are really scared of or pissed about things changing and they can not control it anymore. I keep coming back to this. While I keep hearing it's not just the democrats it's both parties. However, this is then usually followed by a litany of right wing talking points. I really don't want to believe that what we are witnessing is simply a bunch of scared and angry old people resisting change and trying to fight for the "good ole" days finding an easy target in the first black President. I have to admit, when I was younger I didn't expect to see a black President this young in my life.

I don't want to water it down to simple transference of anger to the first black President. However, the more the tea haters talk the fewer options are left.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Hostage situation doesn't survive sunlight.

A couple post below is a story about Senator Richard Shelby placing a hold on 70 pending Obama nominees. He was concerned that the administration wasn't honoring his "earmarked" projects for his state fast enough. "Earmarks" where have I heard that dirty word before? His answer was to hold up the pending nominees until he got what he wanted. Kind of reminds me of "I'm taking my ball and going home".

Well. Somehow the story got out to the public and today Senator Shelby has lifted his hold. Of course he has lame ass excuse how he got what he wanted to save face. This is total BS. Even if that were true what would that say. Hey look at me I can totally screw with the federal government to make sure my state gets the money that I earmarked in the budget. If the Teabaggers were true to what they say their convictions are, if fox news was truly fair and balanced and believed in a fiscally Conservative government this should be front and center blasted from coast to coast as the type of government they are fed up with.

What are the chances that the fact Senator Shelby is an old, white, southern, "conservative", republican will allow for this to disappear from the rights radar. It kind of reminds me of Sarah Palin's calling for Rahm's firing for saying f****** retard and saying it was OK for Rush to say "calling those retards, retard". You know it was satire. To steal a line from Stephen Colbert what a "f****** retard" hey that was satire.

Tools

Follow this link to the New York Times for an interactive tool to help understand the US Budget.

Tonedeaf?

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/02/report-shelby-blocks-all-obama-nominations-in-the-senate-over-al-earmarks.php

I sense this an example of a Senator who has lost touch with the current political dynamic. Republicans had garnered an opening against President Obama and the Dems. Actions like this are going to play tight into the Presidents narrative. We'll see if he can capitalize on it. Shelby's saving grace here may be this is the Friday before the Superbowl.


It will be interredting to see this play out.

Keep the conversation going

President Obama continued his dialogue from last Friday afternoon when he addressed and ansered the Democratic Senators today.
What appears to be a truly cross idealogical movement to keep the conversation going has hit the web.
Using one of my favorite web tools demandquestiontime.com has generate an online petition to "demand question time" between the President and the minority party.
Have a look.
http://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?formkey=dHkyOUtmajQ1M3dzU21jc2RBQ3ZfTmc6MA

The American Taliban (for real?)

The American Taliban is a book being researched and written by Kos. In support of the book Dailykos has conducted a poll with self-identified Republicans and the findings are down right scary. At the same time a friend sent me a chart laying out the beliefs of the religious in the American broken down by state.

Some of the more worrisome findings.

QUESTION: Should Barack Obama be impeached, or not?
YES NO
39 32

QUESTION: Do you believe Barack Obama wants the terrorists to win?
YES NO
24 43

QUESTION: Do you believe Barack Obama is a racist who hates White people?
YES NO
31 36

QUESTION: Should contraceptive use be outlawed?
YES NO
31 56

I completely respect a person's different approach to governing even when I disagree. That is a theme I try to return to. However, the handful beliefs listed above go far beyond a disagreement over the best approach to lead. Impeach? for what? Contraception outlawed? Obama is racist who hates white people? Obama wants terrorist to win?

This is down right frightening!

This link from 538.com shows the difference between a pro and a novice. It is definately worth looking at. It breaks down the individual questions along the crosstabs. The point of the article is the uniformity of all groups. This is true with also the consistent theme that the south and males are even more "republican" than the republicans.



The corelation is striking.

Click on the chart below for a bigger view. A general finding the more religious a state the lower the iq, the more people in poverty, higher the crime rate, and less content and less healthy.






Take one part Dailykos poll above, one part Nate Silver's analysis, and one part the chart to the left and you get my wonderful blog posting. That and you also get Andrew Sullivans take

This, to my mind, is a function of ideology and religion, rather than ideas and politics, being the core elements of a party. It's also a function of Fox News creating a national ideology through a national propaganda arm of the RNC.

Bump and Trend

There is no reason (yet) to believe this is anything but a short term bump. It is fun to look at none the less. The graph depicts the two national tracking polls of President Obama's approval rating. The dates are Tuesday the 26 the day before the Sate of the Union address through today.

The initial reports were that he got only a modest bump of 1 point from the State of the Union. However, couple that with the events from Friday through Monday and it is possibly the beginning of a trend. Without having looked at the internal numbers too carefully, my instinct tells me many a number of dissatisfied supporters have been impressed over the last week and currently are back in the fold.

I also suspect that there might be some modest movement at the margins from independents. It is fun to watch. That is until it reverses.


Click here if the graph doesn't work

Okay if the graph doesn't show up, this is what it says

Jan 26 51% disprove 47% approve = -4% approval rating
Feb 2 43% disprove 51% approve = 8% approval rating

Totaling a 12 point swing in less than a week. Again the samples are small and the time frame is short, but definately worth watching.

Act II

This afternoon President Obama holds a Q&A with America via YouTube. Which you can watch here at 1:45 Eastern.

One of the things I so enjoyed about Fridays Q&A is that it wasn't poll tested, it wasn't message oriented, or tv posturing. The truth in normal debates today both candidates are over coached and so very focused on poll tested themes that even the person you prefer is not fully realized.

Last Friday President Obama was not merely posturing, he wasn't attempting to stay on message, or simply trying to avoid mistakes as so often is the purpose of debates that result in the candidates talking past each other.

Hopefully we get more of that today. Hopefully we get more of that same kind of dialogue that began again on Friday.

This is one of the great assets this President possesses. The ability to carry on an adult conversation with the American people. This is not easy in the fast paced multiple challenge world in which Obama is the President. The American people are just as busy with just as many challenges (if not on the same scope). That may have one of President Obama's greatest failings over the last half of last year.

If I remember correctly Obama was out in front of the American people frequently in the first half of the year. To the point there were concerns of overexposure. I think the importance of this is that most people genuinely like President Obama when they see him and hear him. Except for the committed right wingers, most people like and trust him even when they do not agree with him. There is a sincerity and mutual respect that he exudes. We saw that Friday, while he was feisty at times he was always respectful, mature, sincere, and thoughtful.

Professor President

Below is the link for the Q&A session President Obama had with the House Republican caucus on Friday. I lamented that I wish it had been televised in Prime Time. Well. Ask you shall receive.

Speaking of Televised. It turns out that both CNN and MSNBC specially televised the event on Friday evening during primetime.

It appears CNN edited it for time and provided it free of commentary while MSNBC also edited it and provided the talking head commentary from the Usual Suspects.

Fox News, not so much. Not only did they not rerun it Friday night. They cut away from it on Friday as it was happening live. Roger Ailes was asked about that decision on Sunday and his answer was: Fox is the most trusted news network. HMMMM.

I wish this would have been televised on Prime Time.

President Obama meets with House Republican Caucus. Not only great viewing but a rare format that broke past simple sound bites and allowed for reasoned discussion. Unfortunately for the Republicans it wasn't a fair fight.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

President Calls Out Republicans on Filibuster

A picture is worth a thousand votes

If you couple this with the fact the 41 Republican Senators represent only 37 percent of the American people compared to the 63 percent that Democratic Senators represent. It is easy to see the absurdity of the tyranny of the minority is.

As a result in this Representative Democracy it takes a 65 percent supermajority of the will of the people to accomplish anything. This could well be why so many independants are so frustrated.

Copied from a post I posted in a Facebook discussion.

One of the difficulties in today's world is many people expect simple one sentence answers to very complicated issues. The reality is that many of our problems are complex and the result from many years of decisions and actions and in action.

The fact that we have a President that wants to have an adult dialogue with the American people is a ... See Moregood thing. The fact that too many people tune out instead of engage says more about them than it does our President.

Look at this post. It was a simple question are you watching the SOTU. How many engaged in conversation vs. How engaged in name calling.

Too many people, especially on the right feel that they blindly spit out garbage about President Obama, Democrats, and Liberals. For many years I have ignored them This last go around I have become more vocal about answering their idiotic unsubstantiated rants with logic (hopefully), facts and dialogue. The above passage was I added to a discussion that simply started with someone asking who was watching the SOTU.

I tried, but got sick of hearing, I , I , I , I....not we the people
He does seem quite self centered.
all talk, no show


I have a question...Michelle Obama keeps coming on and talking about Haiti and how it's so bad and all this and how we can donate to the red cross. I'm curious home much the Obamas how donated out of their own pockets to Haiti

This was just some of the babble going on.

Have these people simply lived in a bubble where everyone agrees? Have others been too intimidated to answer them? Do they simply not care?