Weekend Open Thread

64
  by: Colorado Pols Sat July 14, 2012 at 3:04 PM MDT

“There are as many opinions as there are experts.”

–Franklin D. Roosevelt


Full story: Weekend Open Thread

64 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. PitaPita says:
    Sat July 14, 2012 at 3:42 PM MDT

    That’s my opinion and I’m sticking to it. :)

  2. DavidThi808DavidThi808 says:
    Sat July 14, 2012 at 4:38 PM MDT

    But we know it’s for this…

  3. allyncooper says:
    Sat July 14, 2012 at 4:46 PM MDT

    And a happy B-Day to Woody Guthrie who would be 100 years old today.

    Unfortunately I don’t feel that “this land is my land” anymore since corporations are now people and it seems to be their land.

  5. DavidThi808DavidThi808 says:
    Sat July 14, 2012 at 5:09 PM MDT

    That’s No Phone. That’s My Tracker.

    What’s the harm? The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, ruling about the use of tracking devices by the police, noted that GPS data can reveal whether a person “is a weekly church goer, a heavy drinker, a regular at the gym, an unfaithful husband, an outpatient receiving medical treatment, an associate of particular individuals or political groups – and not just one such fact about a person, but all such facts.” Even the most gregarious of sharers might not reveal all that on Facebook.

    • parsingreality says:
      Sat July 14, 2012 at 6:27 PM MDT

      Informative, sort of scary.  But in the suggestions of what to do, they missed the most obvious ones:  TURN OFF YOUR GPS AND WIFI!  (And your battery will thank you, too.) It is those services that permit that pinpoint location.  

      (I’m not sure how the wifi location works, but it does, and amazingly well.  It’s as if the broadband providers have a databank of every broadband modem location.  If I connect to a house across the bayou, about 200 feet – Shhhhhhh! – mapping sites “move me” to there!)

      That leaves just the cell towers for locating you, and that is much less accurate, especially in areas of sparse towers for your carrier.

      Even then the police can confirm that you – OK, your phone – was in a certain area when your spouse was murdered.  

  6. Libertad says:
    Sat July 14, 2012 at 6:27 PM MDT

    When RCP posts an article such as this, you know it’s not looking good for Barack Barry Soetoro Hussain Obama But can you blame them?


    Give the Obama Youth credit for this: At least they didn’t vote their self-interest.

    The cadres of college students and recent graduates who swooned and fainted for Barack Obama four years ago will long be remembered for one of the most ill-considered fliers in the annals of self-defeating enthusiasms. In the cold light of day, the youthful idealists, believers and activists of 2008 look like the lamentable saps, patsies and suckers of 2012.

    Rarely has a politician owed so much to a constituency he has served so poorly. The president promised young voters the moon, and all they got was their old childhood bedroom back in their parents’ house.

    He fired them with an inspirational vision that didn’t include struggling to find a job to begin to pay off their onerous student loans. He sold a new kind of politics and gave them more debt and more entitlement spending that they will labor to fund all their working lives.

    He talked of hope and change – and gave it to them good and hard.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.c…

    • parsingreality says:
      Sat July 14, 2012 at 6:30 PM MDT

      ‘Fess up, it’s been good for you too!

      • Libertad says:
        Sun July 15, 2012 at 5:07 PM MDT

        Likely voter intensity is dramatically down for the 18-29 year segment. As reported in the piece above Obama has fucked them …. He left them with massive unemployment and that matters.

        • DavidThi808DavidThi808 says:
          Sun July 15, 2012 at 5:16 PM MDT

          I’ll be one of the first to say that Obama’s handling of the economy has been piss-poor. But it was your Republican team that destroyed the economy. The worst you can say about Obama is that he has been very slow at undoing the damage your side inflicted on our country.

          I’m confident that young voters, when given the choice between minimal improvement (Obama) and making things much worse (Romney), they’ll go with minimal improvement.

          • Libertad says:
            Sun July 15, 2012 at 5:42 PM MDT

            His policy failures have led to massive unemployment and economic stagnation.

            Obama is a socialist focused Democrat and he’s expanded greatly our national nightmare …. Tax receipts falling short of mandatory spending requirements on Social Security, Medicaid/Medicare, and interest on the debt.

            That aside, back to the facts, the 18-29 year segment of likely voters face massive unemployment or under employment. This matters.

    • AristotleAristotle says:
      Sat July 14, 2012 at 6:40 PM MDT

      and you’ll be much closer to the truth. Not perfectly, but a hell of a lot closer than you are here. Not that that matters to you, but it needs to be stated.

      • Libertad says:
        Sun July 15, 2012 at 5:53 PM MDT

        Getting America back to a sustainable path will take sacrifices from all Americans.

        Since the Progressive Era and WWII we have over promised ourselves, as a nation, too many entitlements. We are over levered and not on a sustainable path. pubs and Demoncrats have led and participated in this effort since the turn of the century.

        Throw in 6-23 million aborted citizens since 1973 and you have a working:retirement that has 2.1 workers funding every drawer of social security.

        Obama’s policy failures and his failure to lead Americans in a full national discourse should not be rewarded with another go at it.

        • AristotleAristotle says:
          Sun July 15, 2012 at 6:49 PM MDT

          Slashing taxes on the wealthy and corporations was the problem. Somehow, think the GOP will fight any sacrifice that’s to be asked of them.

          You’re full of shit on every point, as is normal.

          Also, you HAVE to do better than say “Obama failed.” Even if true, that in no way is a qualification for electing Willard “Mitt” Romney.

          Should Obama be re-elected, the number one reason is going to be that Romney has no compelling qualification. It’s not good enough to be an alternative; he has to show why he would be better. While hardcore ‘pubs will vote for anyone with an R in parentheses after his name, the rest of the country isn’t so sure.

          The economy sucks but it’s been growing for a long time now. It’s NOT in recession and the Dems can take credit for that. It would be better if the GOP was a loyal, not disloyal, opposition. But they’re pure ideologues, voting more than 30 times to repeal ACA and ZERO times on the jobs bill. They can’t even bear to bring it to the floor where their lockstep loyalty (to party, not country) ensures they’ll kill it.

          Face fact, lib. You do not have a guy the public would rather have in the White House than Obama.

        • parsingreality says:
          Sun July 15, 2012 at 8:42 PM MDT

          So howz that sacrifice thing going for Rmoney and the 1%’ers?

          Waiting….waiting…

          ANSWER: Only the little people sacrifice.  

    • Duke Coxdukeco1 says:
      Sat July 14, 2012 at 7:25 PM MDT

      If you’re worried about Obama felonies don’t …. Statute of limitations has expired I believe

      Now let’s open up all the sealed records….

      You posted this yesterday. I asked you to elaborate and you chose to run away instead of answer my question…WTF are you talking about?

    • raymond1 says:
      Sun July 15, 2012 at 2:26 AM MDT

      Just want to be clear that you’re full of shit when you falsely imply this is an objective news article (“When RCP posts an article such as this, you know it’s not looking good …”)

    • rocco says:
      Sun July 15, 2012 at 5:37 AM MDT

      A quote from a hack at National Review, and you dress it up as legit?

      And with the “f” bombs too, even.

      You truly are a tool.

      By the way, check out the tax rate the Congressional Budget Office is reporting American taxpayers are at under this President.

      I know it doesn’t pertain to you, but FYI, it’s 7.2.

      Lowest in 34 years.  

      • Libertad says:
        Sun July 15, 2012 at 6:12 PM MDT

        Thats nothing to be proud of, now get out of the road and stop playing in traffic.

        • Lurker19 says:
          Sun July 15, 2012 at 6:27 PM MDT

          in our mama’s basement, you whining, sniveling little. . . . oh, never mind.

        • rocco says:
          Sun July 15, 2012 at 11:01 PM MDT

          Please explain the red filibuster of the Democratic SB, extension of the middle class tax cut.

          And why, with the economy even worse under Bush, the rate was higher, with no red legislation other than a tax cut for the top 1% considered.

          Do it now, skeezix. Do not post again until you’ve completed your assignment.

          Remember, you’re on your mom’s insurance, thanks to the ACA. And………your mom’s able to afford to feed you because of the low tax rate this President has presided over

          This is TOO easy.

  8. DavidThi808DavidThi808 says:
    Sun July 15, 2012 at 5:11 PM MDT

    Iowa GOP State Senate Candidate Joins ‘Alternative’ U.S. Government

    The group claims the “United States Corporation” unlawfully formed in 1871 without the American people’s consent.

    If someone thinks that we should return to articles of confederation, knock yourself out. Campaign for it, run for office on it.

    But to claim that it was not lawfully replace with the constitution – the states voted for it. It’s called Democracy. The fact that you don’t like the result does not invalidate the result of the vote.

  9. DavidThi808DavidThi808 says:
    Sun July 15, 2012 at 5:39 PM MDT

    Wikipedia went black for one day and SOPA was dead. At the end of 1 day that bill did not have a single friend.

    Why is it in 3 years President Obama has not been able to accomplish something similar, even once? Voters are even more concerned about jobs and the economy.

    Yes there’s a lot of differences between the two pieces of legislation and the source of the opposition. But there’s a lot of similarities too. And Hollywood knows even better than politicians how to sell something to the public.

    • AristotleAristotle says:
      Sun July 15, 2012 at 6:52 PM MDT

      so the question isn’t valid.

      SOPA is something everyone who isn’t an entertainment executive can hate. The economy is nowhere near as black and white.

      I don’t know what you expect. Obama proposed a jobs bill, and the GOP-controlled house has completely blocked it.

      You seem certain that Obama could do something about that. Okay, fine – tell us what that is, and – this is crucial – tell us how Obama should manage the GOP pushback and propaganda. Leave past presidents out of it because they didn’t have a disloyal opposition to deal with.

      • DavidThi808DavidThi808 says:
        Sun July 15, 2012 at 7:22 PM MDT

        A booming economy is something everybody loves, even the top 0.001%.

        I think Obama didn’t get the people charged up to have them lobby Congress. When the voters get on-board with proposed legislation, that brings a lot of votes in Congress. FDR & Reagan both excelled at this.

        You can also call the Republican’s bluff as Clinton did. When Gingrich shut down the government Clinton came out of that in a much stronger position and got his legislation passed.

        Also, while Obama has to fight an obstructionist Republican party in Congress, Truman & LBJ faced very hostile opposition on civil rights from their own party (every Southerner) as well as many Republicans. They didn’t get everything they wanted but they did win substantial victories.

        • AristotleAristotle says:
          Sun July 15, 2012 at 7:49 PM MDT

          Single, simple issue really has no difference with major, extremely complicated issue. The world according to David Thielen, folks.

          You are correct in that Obama hasn’t been good as selling his vision, and should do better. But, as a moderate he unsurprisingly took a moderate approach – one that might have worked with a loyal opposition. That is a crucial distinction.

          LBJ had been a powerful senator less than three years before taking office. He is perhaps the only president who still had the personal clout within Congress to call in favors, twist arms, and basically get what he wanted out of Congress. No president lacking in that clout can compare favorably to that. Therefore, the comparison is unfair.

          FDR and Reagan were both further from the center, more assured of their visions, and perhaps more experienced executives. Obama was never a governor of a large state like those men. It was the greatest drawback on Obama’s resume. Not an excuse, but an explanation. Personally, I think he’s been a quick study and predict a stronger second term should he win.

          Dave, you’re eventually going to have to ask what it is you’re willing to do to have Obama re-elected. I don’t see these posts doing a damn thing to achieve that end, but maybe I’m wrong and you can explain how they’re helping.

          • DavidThi808DavidThi808 says:
            Sun July 15, 2012 at 10:43 PM MDT

            Dave, you’re eventually going to have to ask what it is you’re willing to do to have Obama re-elected.

            First off, I don’t think comments here will have any impact on the election. The people who visit Pols have already made up their mind.

            But with that said, Obama basically ignored the economy until it came to the election. So now that he finally is paying attention to it, I think this is the one time we Dems can effectively try to exert pressure for him to move from talking about it to twisting arms to get effective legislation passed.

            • AristotleAristotle says:
              Mon July 16, 2012 at 5:16 AM MDT

              You can’t tell me ALL of those people – mostly unregistered lurkers – had their minds made up.

              And… BULL. SHIT. What the hell was the stimulus? Swiss cheese? “Ignored the economy,” my ass.

              So answer the other part of the question, please. What good are you doing with these questions? Our answers don’t seem to be getting through – you bring up SOPA again, as if it were perfectly valid to compare it.

              Hell, I’ll just ask you – How on earth do you think SOPA and the economy are alike enough to compare?

              • DavidThi808DavidThi808 says:
                Tue July 17, 2012 at 7:06 AM MDT

                And that does raise an interesting question of do we pretend our team is doing perfect to try and sway them. And if so, what if Obama & the other Dems in D.C. then go back to ignoring the economy after the election is over? Was that a good trade-off?

                On the stimulus, yes we had an original bill. At a time when Obama could have gotten almost anything passed, he asked for much less than was needed. Big mistake due to a combination of incompetence and leaving it in a few hands – and the wrong hands.

                My point on SOPA, and the student loan issue, is that taking an issue to the people can change votes in Congress. That is true about any legislation. Some is easier to get the people motivated about, but it’s a universal that that can be an effective avenue.

                And people care more about the economy than SOPA, student loans, or pretty much anything else. Would it have been enough? Don’t know. But it could have been. It definitely would be worth trying.

                ps – Sorry for the delay in replying – work was very busy this weekend and today.

                • AristotleAristotle says:
                  Tue July 17, 2012 at 4:38 PM MDT

                  And that does raise an interesting question of do we pretend our team is doing perfect to try and sway them.

                  Can I take this rather stark interpretation of my view as your acknowledgement that you’re engaging in the opposite – that is, that “our team” is a complete wreck?

                  See, here you are AGAIN saying that Obama and the Dems have “ignored the economy.” IT’S NOT TRUE.

                  You’re saying Obama could have gotten “anything” passed. NOT TRUE. Three words for that – Blue Dog Democrats.

                  “That is true about any legislation.” No, it’s not. Not with today’s powerful right wing media it isn’t. It works ONLY with the simple issues EVERYONE can understand. Everyone hated SOPA. Everyone understands why student loan interest rates shouldn’t automatically double. But few understand why stimulus programs are necessary in economic recessions. Sure, they care more, but it’s a hell of a lot more abstract and complex, and anything Obama says to explain it will be manipulated, parsed, and distorted.

                  You’re comparing apples to bowling balls.

                  • DavidThi808DavidThi808 says:
                    Tue July 17, 2012 at 5:54 PM MDT

                    And I don’t think either is going to convince the other. I do think on the economy the Obama administration was incompetent. In other areas I think they’ve done well and in some superb.

                    As to could Obama have gotten more through if he put on a full court press. We’ll never know because he didn’t try. And that leaves us with opinions – and I doubt the two of us will agree on that.

                    • sxp151 says:
                      Tue July 17, 2012 at 8:29 PM MDT

                      He increased the (useless) tax cuts in order to get the votes of people like Olympia Snowe and Arlen Specter, because Republicans were filibustering. Republicans strongly opposed every Obama measure right out of the gate in the reality the rest of us humans live in.

                      What world do you live in where Obama could have gotten anything he wanted? Even the stimulus required compromise and arm-twisting. You could try looking this up, it’s almost as easy as making it up based on a dream Dave had one night.

                    • Diogenesdemar says:
                      Tue July 17, 2012 at 10:36 PM MDT

                      next time when David instructs someone on politics as the “art of compromise.”

                    • AristotleAristotle says:
                      Tue July 17, 2012 at 10:30 PM MDT

                      “As to could Obama have gotten more through if he put on a full court press. We’ll never know because he didn’t try.”

                      So what do you gain by not giving him the benefit of the doubt? Does he or does he not deserve that in light of the unique obstacles he is facing? Obstacles which were not faced by FDR or LBJ?

                    • DavidThi808DavidThi808 says:
                      Wed July 18, 2012 at 2:08 AM MDT

                      His obstacles are different from what LBJ & FDR faced, but not any larger. LBJ passed the first civil rights bills in 80+ years – talk about obstacles.

                    • AristotleAristotle says:
                      Wed July 18, 2012 at 7:34 AM MDT

                      So you think the climate in 1964 was essentially the same as it was in the 1930s, or the 1890s?

                      Um, no. There’s a reason why that passed in 1964. LBJ would not have gotten it done if he were president prior to that.

                      So, no. The Civil Rights obstacle in 1964 was not that large.

                      Was it as large, or larger, than the economy? That’s hard to say, but before we could even begin to discuss it, you have to understand how big the others were.

                      And you have to understand how dug in the opposition was, and how much power they wielded.

                      The parties who opposed LBJ and FDR were not united like the GOP is today. That matters because that party discipline gums up the works of government the way no cross-party coalition can.

                      Anyway, all you’re doing is Monday Morning Quarterbacking. I ask again… what do you gain from this, and from stubbornly not acknowledging that you don’t know so well what the right thing to do was?

                      Answer that question, please.

          • DavidThi808DavidThi808 says:
            Sun July 15, 2012 at 10:48 PM MDT

            That Obama did not have the experience of running large state or the Senate and that hurt him big time. It’s almost like he believes what we’re taught in civics class about how the system works. That you talk with the legislators and craft a compromise.

            Maybe he will do better in his second term. I sure hope so. But it’s been brutal for this country that this first term has been a learning experience with the economy left to muddle along in 1st gear.

          • sxp151 says:
            Sun July 15, 2012 at 10:58 PM MDT

            LBJ would not have been nearly as successful. He was a cynical person who used a tragedy to pass what he called JFK’s agenda. Good for him, but what kind of tragedy would similarly shut Republicans up? And is it really worth it? Remember, JFK was not very successful at all with Congress.

        • Diogenesdemar says:
          Sun July 15, 2012 at 8:14 PM MDT

          be more wrong.  That line of thinking is justo thing but neo-trickle-down crap religious dogma.

          The top .001% don’t give a rats wrinkley about a booming US economy. They can always increase their wealth Much more easily by other means elsewhere on this planet. In fact, a booming US economy would inflate their hard-inherited wealth; making finding cheap pool boys more difficult and generally create situations where they might have to spend time working and managing productive investments.

          Why the hell do you think we now have a gilded-age level of income inequity if the wealthy didn’t actually prefer, and benefit, from it being that way.  There got there’s, and it’d be a GD shame now if they actually had to spend any if it.  Trickle down someone else’s leg . . .  

        • sxp151 says:
          Sun July 15, 2012 at 10:54 PM MDT

          so why are there scientists still working on unrelated subjects?

          There are means to achieve these things, and people don’t agree on the means. A lot of Democrats believe government-funded infrastructure projects will create jobs and boost demand and restore the economy. Most rich people disagree. How are you going to get around that?

          • DavidThi808DavidThi808 says:
            Tue July 17, 2012 at 7:01 AM MDT

            It worked on SOPA. It worked on student loans. Why not try it on a significant stimulus bill for the economy?

            • sxp151 says:
              Tue July 17, 2012 at 8:24 PM MDT

              On SOPA, there were giant corporations who were strongly against the bill, and they beat the other giant corporations who were for the bill. On student loans there was a broad consensus already, with a little temper-tantruming over what would get attached.

              http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-50…

              The bill passed Congress overwhelmingly last week after a contentious fight in Congress. Republicans eventually gave up their push for the bill to require approval of the Keystone XL oil pipeline, the Associated Press reported, while Democrats agreed not to include certain environmental protections and biking and safety programs.

              But the system is too fundamentally broken for calls and letters to make much difference on issues such as tax cuts for the rich or substantial spending on infrastructure stimulus. It only works if the parties are close and powerful interests are on both sides, and then maybe you can claim it tipped the balance. If all the rich people are on one side, and all the regular people are on the other, the rich people always win. I’m pretty sure you know that.

    • Libertad 2.0 says:
      Sun July 15, 2012 at 7:22 PM MDT

      Headline that surprises no one.

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account


You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.