Site Search:
 
Speak Korean Now!
Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Republicans Prepare Their Legal Machine Re: Mass. Election
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mises



Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired

PostPosted: Tue Jan 19, 2010 10:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cap and trade is dead too, I assume.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Street Magic



Joined: 23 Sep 2009

PostPosted: Tue Jan 19, 2010 10:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

bucheon bum wrote:
I also agree that Coakley was a horrific candidate (check out the Daily Show episode from Monday)


Actually, I thought the Daily Show coverage was pretty disappointingly weak. They didn't expose any of the horrible stuff she's done as a district attorney and they focused on trivial nonsense like her Yankees fan quote. I guess it could've been worse and they could've come out in support of her, but that was still pretty weak and they missed a good opportunity to subvert some of the sex offender hysteria that's been so popular in the US in the last few decades.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fox



Joined: 04 Mar 2009

PostPosted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mises wrote:
From ZH:

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/consequences-mass-election

Quote:

Consequences of the Mass. Election

-The days where the Fed and Mr. Bernanke get to establish broad economic policy without taking into consideration the mood of the public is over. This is not to suggest that the Fed is going to jack up rates anytime soon. But to me it means that the possibility of QE2 is done. There was a time when you might have said, �The American people don�t understand their monetary policy and have know idea how much debt has been created in their name�. Well that was then and this is now. Americans do understand how much debt there is. They are shocked, dismayed and angered. They�re a lot of everyday citizens who are well aware that the Fed printed 2 trillion in the last year or so. The vote in Natick Mass showed their dislike and distrust of Fed policy. While I don�t think this will result in Bernanke failing to get a second term in the upcoming vote, it just got a bit more uncertain. In many ways this election will tie Ben�s hands.

-There will be no second stimulus bill. Not in 2010 at least. There is no stomach for that any longer. There are many Congressmen and Senators who are up for reelection in ten months. They are not going to stick there neck out for something the White House wants and they know the people don�t. I doubt the administration will even ask for a stimulus bill after this shellacking.

..

-Tim Geithner�s ship went down in Massachusetts. I am convinced that he now must go. The Administration will have to make changes after this vote. They have to show that they are being responsive. The beating the WH took tonight was biblical. So will their response be. It will take a month, but changes and heads will roll.

...

-There will be no fix on Social Security this year. Mr. Goss who runs that shop has said that the issues facing SS have to take a back burner to finding a fix to health care. Well, we have not found that elusive solution. And now it is farther away then ever. Mr. Goss will have to wait at least another year. That will prove to be a devastating delay.

-There will be no significant steps to address the problems at the mortgage Agencies; Fannie, Freddie and FHA. The reason is simple. If you wanted to address the problems with these dogs you have to owe up to the fact that it is a $500 billion dollar sinkhole. Who would want to put that bad news on the table after getting your ass kicked in a crucial election? The answer to that is that no one in Washington would. And no one will. Having said that, I would not be at all surprised to see an effort to cut the outrageously rich compensation packages for the big shots at Fannie and Freddie. There may have been some belief that these two companies were in the private sector where salaries have no caps. But now there will be those in Congress that want/need an election edge. What could be a better edge than to beat up on a bunch of fat cat D.C. bankers?

-We have several states that are on the edge of a fiscal crisis. I thought that there would be some form of Federal assistance for them this year. That may still come, but it is now much less likely. You can�t just help NY and Cali. Those States will simply have to cut their deficits the old fashioned way, by cutting expenses. There is no way the folks in Texas are going to let Federal dollars be used to bail out TBTF States. And no one in Congress is going to stand up to that.

-If you were a TBTF institution you just hated this vote. This is bad for the Citi�s and BoA�s, but it just downright terrible for the likes of GS.
The more successful you are, the more crap that you will have to take. Washington knows that Americans hate their banks. Now Washington is going to take sides with the people and lean on the TBTFs even harder.

-The bailout mentality is over. If GM needed a handout today, they would not get it. If a company runs into difficulty in the future they will just go down. There is no will left for the bailout thinking. If you are a legislator and you support a bailout, you will lose you right to vote in Washington. The voters will take you out back and shoot you on Election Day.


Jumpin Jesus. This reads like Xmas morning for me. Ok Kuros, now you tell me why all the above is untrue and I return to my 2% "high interest" savings strategy.


I hope you were only referring to the texts you bolded? I agree those are positive things. However, there are things in the text you quoted that none of us should be happy about.

1) Holding off on addressing Social Security doesn't help anyone. The system is in need of revision, and the sooner it is successfully and effectively revised, the better. No matter what you think the solution is, just letting it be isn't the answer.

2) The same goes for Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac. These are things that need to be fixed, and the sooner the better (and I'm not just talking about executive compensation here). Honestly I'd like to see the government stop involving itself with housing loans entirely, outside of enforcing anti-discrimination laws perhaps. If people can't afford houses, then we'll just have fewer houses. Honestly suburban housing is incredibly wasteful from a number of standpoints (land usage, material usage, energy consumption, transportation). Less of it would not be a bad thing.

If these two things came on Christmas morning, they'd be coal in a stocking.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SeoulMan99



Joined: 02 Aug 2009
Location: Seoul

PostPosted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I absolutely hate Keith Olbermann. What I would give to have one solid punch on him.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ya-ta Boy



Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994

PostPosted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 1:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's outcomes like this that are what make politics so much fun to watch.

There's at least an even chance that the far left will declare the reason Coakley lost is because Obama wasn't liberal enough and try to pull the party to the left--purge the Blue Dogs!...a mirror image of what the GOP has been doing all year.

Pelosi has said we'll get health reform no matter what--possibly that the House will just pass the Senate version. That seems to be what is called ping ponging a bill.

We've known for more than a month that Obama was going to call for a jobs program and fiscal restraint in his State of the Union (next Wednesday?). I don't see that changing. It'll be interesting to see if the Republicans argue against a jobs program.

I'm really curious to see if Obama still seeks bipartisanship. It hasn't worked for a year, but maybe now that the GOP has a filibuster safe majority of their own, they may be more willing to negotiate. I'm not holding my breath, but...

I might just be being pessimistic, but it looks to me right now that any real reform is done for at least until the Nov mid-term election and probably until after the 2012 presidential election.

PS: Pluto, please don't take my words out of context just so you can damn me. It isn't nice.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gopher



Joined: 04 Jun 2005

PostPosted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 1:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It would seem, to paraphrase one of your favorites, Ya-ta Boy, that reports of the Republicans' demise have been greatly exagerrated. Wink

And in Massachussetts, no less.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fox



Joined: 04 Mar 2009

PostPosted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 3:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have to say, though, I think Senator Frank's reaction to the election results is more or less perfect.

Quote:
I have two reactions to the election in Massachusetts. One, I am disappointed. Two, I feel strongly that the Democratic majority in Congress must respect the process and make no effort to bypass the electoral results.
If Martha Coakley had won, I believe we could have worked out a reasonable compromise between the House and Senate healthcare bills. But since Scott Brown has won and the Republicans now have 41 votes in the Senate, that approach is no longer appropriate.

I am hopeful that some Republican senators will be willing to discuss a revised version of healthcare reform because I do not think that the country would be well-served by the healthcare status quo. But our respect for democratic procedures must rule out any effort to pass a healthcare bill as if the Massachusetts election had not happened.

Going forward, I hope there will be a serious effort to change the Senate rule which means that 59 votes are not enough to pass major legislation, but those are the rules by which the healthcare bill was considered, and it would be wrong to change them in the middle of this process.


In light of these election results, the Democrats really have three avenues open to them:

1) Try to rush something new through fast (this should really be considered an option they "had" rather than "have", as the window has more or less passed; if they had something they could push through in the tiny amount of time technically remaining to them, they'd have done it all ready).

2) Have the House simply accept the Senate bill as is. If they did this, it could be signed into law without the Senate doing anything further.

3) Give up on reform, at least for the time being.

Frank seems to be going for option 3, and I think it's the best one, both for the country and for the Democrats. Signing the Senate bill into law as-is would not be a good thing.

Honestly, I wonder if the results aren't almost a relief to some Democrats. I'm sure at least some of them must have realized what this reform bill was turning into, but felt strong armed into going with it. This lets the bill die without any of them actually having to kill it. They can say they did their best and it just didn't work out. They can pretend this vote was somehow a strike against health care when really it probably had more to do with what a pathetically bad candidate the Democrats were running.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ya-ta Boy



Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994

PostPosted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 4:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

There is a 4th option: use reconciliation to pass an expansion of Medicare to people 55 and over. Not perfect, but simple, easily understandable and leaves the door open to do it again and again.

Goph:

One election does not a tsunami make. Ask Ron Paul.
Wink

IS there a Republican Party left--one that would be recognizable to the Republicans I grew up with? In my opinion, that party is long gone--the party of Eisenhower, Everett Dirkson, John Lindsey, Nelson Rockefellar... Yes, Palin, Rush, etc use the same name, but are they the same party, or is it now the party of Robertson/Falwell, O'Reilly and Hannity, Michelle and Michelle and Glenn and Rick Perry-secession-is-A-OK-with-me, etc? I wouldn't mind hearing a policy proposal from that crowd. Mind you, I said 'proposal', not a whine and not a screed, but an actual proposal on how to address the issues confronting the nation.

I've been curious these last months. I remember a couple of years ago when you declared you were switching parties because of the deplorable treatment that your boy Joe Liebermann got at the hands of the Democrats of the Great and Sovereign State of Connecticutt, how you feel about his behavior since.

Be that as it may...for happier thoughts:

We're only 1/4 of the way through Obama's term. If I remember correctly, and I do, Clinton lost on health care reform at the beginning of his first term and still ended up in his EIGHTH year at 60+% popularity. Is popularity everything? Maybe not, but it's a darn sight better than unpopularity, and that's what Bush and his wretched policies ended up with.

The biggest mistake Obama has made was to expect Republicans to be concerned more about the country than their own political future. I've never said Republicans aren't better cynics. I've never said Republicans aren't willing to use the politics of fear, and be more successful with it. Rove is a genius, I'll give you that. I have said it's hard to respect that position except in a stunned, aghast kind of way. I still think, in the end, Americans will respond more favorably to politicians who appeal to the better angels of our nature by offering solutions to our problems.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fox



Joined: 04 Mar 2009

PostPosted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 5:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ya-ta Boy wrote:
There is a 4th option: use reconciliation to pass an expansion of Medicare to people 55 and over. Not perfect, but simple, easily understandable and leaves the door open to do it again and again.


Medicare, popular as it is, is not financially sound. It substantially underpays hospitals, and is also very inefficient and unreliable in how it pays them, which actually does drive up the cost of health care for the rest of the population. Expanding Medicare is not a long term solution. If you put the entire nation on Medicare as it currently stands, the health care industry would fall apart in short order. Putting a large chunk of additional people on Medicare would simply push the prices up that much more for the rest of the population without actually doing anything to help the rest of the population.

But yes, I suppose it's an option. I just hope they don't do it. Medicare is a model of what to avoid in crafting a national health care system.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ya-ta Boy



Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994

PostPosted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 5:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here's an angle that hasn't gotten enough attention:

The Angry White Guy Factor http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/01/the-sexism-factor.html#more

"She's a lawyer and a female DA, so doubly emasculating in their eyes. She didn't help herself after the primary by only relying on the old Hillary base, which is other ball-buster female lawyers. That's a strong enough group to win a four-way primary but no way big enough for the general election.

In that context, all Scott Brown had to do was show up and 1) be white 2) be male and 3) come off as anything other than an elite. Hence the truck and hunting shirts, a brilliant touch on his campaign's part, and one that will probably win him the election."

I do think there's a lot to that view. There is probably nothing sadder, more frustrated, more self-pitying and therefore angrier, than the Angry White Guy. (Think Trent Lott looking back nostalgically at what could have been at Strom Thurmond's 100th birthday party.) When you add that segment to the electorate that wasn't concerned about health care because 97% of Massachusetts already has better health care coverage than what Congress is offering (and a wretched candidate), you get the results we got today.

But I still think the decisive factor was that people have had the bejezus scared out of them because of the GOP's economic policies that ran the economy into the ditch last year and so far, Obama hasn't captured that fear and disgust. It may not be nice and it may not be civilized, but as I've said all along, a few banker sorts strung up on lamp posts on Wall Street would go a long way toward lancing that boil. There is a Canadian I can think of who would serve as a decent blood sacrifice. [/quote]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ya-ta Boy



Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994

PostPosted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 5:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

A question I find interesting: What will happen to Joe Lieberman, Blanche Lincoln, Ben Nelson et al once they are no longer the 60th vote?

What happens to Scott Brown once he has to start voting since he isn't as far right as the tea baggers? He's up for re-election in '12. Will he be Scozzafavaed if he doesn't walk in lock-step with the rest of his party?

LOTS of entertainment ahead.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fox



Joined: 04 Mar 2009

PostPosted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 6:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ya-ta Boy wrote:
Here's an angle that hasn't gotten enough attention:

The Angry White Guy Factor http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/01/the-sexism-factor.html#more

"She's a lawyer and a female DA, so doubly emasculating in their eyes. She didn't help herself after the primary by only relying on the old Hillary base, which is other ball-buster female lawyers. That's a strong enough group to win a four-way primary but no way big enough for the general election.

In that context, all Scott Brown had to do was show up and 1) be white 2) be male and 3) come off as anything other than an elite. Hence the truck and hunting shirts, a brilliant touch on his campaign's part, and one that will probably win him the election."

I do think there's a lot to that view. There is probably nothing sadder, more frustrated, more self-pitying and therefore angrier, than the Angry White Guy. (Think Trent Lott looking back nostalgically at what could have been at Strom Thurmond's 100th birthday party.) When you add that segment to the electorate that wasn't concerned about health care because 97% of Massachusetts already has better health care coverage than what Congress is offering (and a wretched candidate), you get the results we got today.

But I still think the decisive factor was that people have had the bejezus scared out of them because of the GOP's economic policies that ran the economy into the ditch last year and so far, Obama hasn't captured that fear and disgust. It may not be nice and it may not be civilized, but as I've said all along, a few banker sorts strung up on lamp posts on Wall Street would go a long way toward lancing that boil. There is a Canadian I can think of who would serve as a decent blood sacrifice.


This would be a lot easier to accept if Clinton hadn't won the Democratic primary in Massachusetts; the people of Massachusetts clearly have no problem voting for a tough female if they think the tough female is worth their vote. Croakley just managed to combine campaign incompetence with a sufficiently scandalous history to turn off voters.

Sexism didn't enter into this at any meaningful level. It's time to stop blaming female failures on sexism and it's time to stop demonizing white males in this fashion.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kuros



Joined: 27 Apr 2004

PostPosted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 6:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ya-ta Boy wrote:
Here's an angle that hasn't gotten enough attention:

The Angry White Guy Factor http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/01/the-sexism-factor.html#more

"She's a lawyer and a female DA, so doubly emasculating in their eyes. She didn't help herself after the primary by only relying on the old Hillary base, which is other ball-buster female lawyers. That's a strong enough group to win a four-way primary but no way big enough for the general election.

In that context, all Scott Brown had to do was show up and 1) be white 2) be male and 3) come off as anything other than an elite. Hence the truck and hunting shirts, a brilliant touch on his campaign's part, and one that will probably win him the election."

I do think there's a lot to that view. There is probably nothing sadder, more frustrated, more self-pitying and therefore angrier, than the Angry White Guy. (Think Trent Lott looking back nostalgically at what could have been at Strom Thurmond's 100th birthday party.) When you add that segment to the electorate that wasn't concerned about health care because 97% of Massachusetts already has better health care coverage than what Congress is offering (and a wretched candidate), you get the results we got today.

But I still think the decisive factor was that people have had the bejezus scared out of them because of the GOP's economic policies that ran the economy into the ditch last year and so far, Obama hasn't captured that fear and disgust. It may not be nice and it may not be civilized, but as I've said all along, a few banker sorts strung up on lamp posts on Wall Street would go a long way toward lancing that boil. There is a Canadian I can think of who would serve as a decent blood sacrifice.
[/quote]

No, this theory is asinine. Coakley was a lazy candidate with easily questionable judgment.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
bacasper



Joined: 26 Mar 2007

PostPosted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 7:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Street Magic wrote:
Then you have your Martha Coakley's who not only tar innocent folks with sex offender labels and send them away to prison for as long as she can get away with, but also go that extra step further and petition against clemency in spite of the unanimous 5-0 decision to commute from what has been arguably the most conservative pardons and paroles board in the nation...

Martha Coakley is a vindictive pro-prosecution McCarthyist who will fight to the death to keep her targets suffering so as to satisfy her angry soccer mom supporters that all the bad Grinch people like sex offenders and drug users are getting theirs.

If that is the case then I am glad she lost. Perhaps it is a sign that people are becoming aware of the insanity and witchhunt nature of America's unjust sex laws. Let's hope that was a deciding factor.

bucheon bum wrote:
If the Dems had any guts (which they don't), they'd say f it and finally ditch the filibuster. What does it take to get rid of it? Enough is enough.

No, not that!

Anything which keeps them from passing even more laws is a GOOD thing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mises



Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired

PostPosted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 8:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ya-ta Boy wrote:
Here's an angle that hasn't gotten enough attention:

The Angry White Guy Factor http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/01/the-sexism-factor.html#more

"She's a lawyer and a female DA, so doubly emasculating in their eyes. She didn't help herself after the primary by only relying on the old Hillary base, which is other ball-buster female lawyers. That's a strong enough group to win a four-way primary but no way big enough for the general election.

In that context, all Scott Brown had to do was show up and 1) be white 2) be male and 3) come off as anything other than an elite. Hence the truck and hunting shirts, a brilliant touch on his campaign's part, and one that will probably win him the election."

I do think there's a lot to that view. There is probably nothing sadder, more frustrated, more self-pitying and therefore angrier, than the Angry White Guy. (Think Trent Lott looking back nostalgically at what could have been at Strom Thurmond's 100th birthday party.) When you add that segment to the electorate that wasn't concerned about health care because 97% of Massachusetts already has better health care coverage than what Congress is offering (and a wretched candidate), you get the results we got today.

But I still think the decisive factor was that people have had the bejezus scared out of them because of the GOP's economic policies that ran the economy into the ditch last year and so far, Obama hasn't captured that fear and disgust. It may not be nice and it may not be civilized, but as I've said all along, a few banker sorts strung up on lamp posts on Wall Street would go a long way toward lancing that boil. There is a Canadian I can think of who would serve as a decent blood sacrifice.
[/quote]

The only angry white male I've seen is Olbermann. And Ed too.

I guess this is the only drum the establishment left has left? That's why they keep using it? Hey, we're going to force poor people to buy a defective product and exempt unions from taxes and if you disagree you're a sad, frustrated, self-pitying, angrier, Angry White Guy.

Doesn't seem to be working.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 4 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International