Thursday Open Thread
Of interest: Redstate editors try to figure out how they ended up with McCain. On the other side, Obama raised $7 million
since after the Feb 5th primaries.
What's happening today?
Hey, I just noticed that I can edit other people's diaries and front page stories, what's up? -- GoRight Sigh... dunno, Ender will have to look into it. Stinerman said he can too. --Brendan
Submitted by Brendan on Thu, 2008-02-07 10:01
Tags:
Comments :
Warren Buffet Sings Poetic Justice
Bank Woes are Poetic Justice
Dumb Money
It is the economy, stupid.
I don't understand how similar risk mortgages
aren't grouped together, rated and sold as a like group. It seems to me that by packaging multiple different levels of mortgages together has torpedoed all of them because of the associated risk.
Why is Wall Street insisting on continuing to try to package and sell stuff that previous buyers have been taken to the cleaners for, and now no one will buy because of what the pile's risks are that are not properly labeled.
They are reassessing
their risk strategies!
There is a big wig conferance trying to figure out the best way to regulate this situation, without stifling incentive.
But that still doesn't negate the serious problems that some owners are facing.
What is interesting is the glut of unsold houses.
No one wants to buy a home right now, because they think the value will drop.
I would love love love to see homes become more affordable. It would be a huge boost to American morale, and to the economy over-all.
It is the economy, stupid.
I feel bad for some of my friends who refinanced
at the market peak, but I have no sympathy for the speculators. The speculators are the ones who drove the market to artificially high prices. I honestly would like to see them get their credit ratings screwed.
White House refuses 85 nomination approvals because
the Senate won't allow them to recess appoint author of Illegal Wiretap & torture memo
.
Let's see, in negotiations with the White House in December, Reid said they would approve 85 nominations to various posts but the White House said they won't agree until the Senate approve Steven Bradbury as head of the Office of Legal Counsel, the crucial Justice Department office that has the power to issue "advance pardons". The Senate has said no 4 times so far. The White House says no one till Bradbury.
And apparently today the White House (calling Karl Rove) will be getting on a soap box and claiming it's the Senate who is holding up these 85 nominations.
Who is being partisan & who is being decietful here? That's my only problem with Obama's speil. It isn't Democrats who monkey wrenching the works of government. It's Republicans. Starting out with a "bi-partisan" approach to these bastards will only get Democrats screwed multiple more times. I mean, I'm already sick of Reid & Pelosi trying to go along to get along, and for what? So they can be made to be Poster Children of a Karl Rove media event?
Fight them. Fight them with everything you've got. That's how you "negotiate" with the current Republican leadership.
The Democrats.
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
Let's see how John Q Public takes it....
Congress has a right to say some candidates don't rate getting their appointmed positions.
Here we have an Executive Branch that's willing to sh-tcan 85 appointments to get one that has been rejected by both parties 4 times already, not just democrats.
Bush43 is treating it like a giant game of chicken. They're doing the same thing with the FISA stuff, stringing that out till just before the deadline to try and get everything they want.
I don't fault them for wanting to get as much as they can in negotiations. I fault them for being spoiled rotten kids in negotiations.
:)
I don't think John Q public cares much. I agree that this is unfortunate.
While I can understand your frustration, I don't happen to share it. This is just the way this appointment game is played. I am sure I can find equally bogus tactics used by the democrats at various times in the past.
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
What does that have to do with it?
Don't Republicans hold themselves to higher standards?
Newsflash: both parties use questionable tactics to gain or hold on to power. That is why I support neither.
I never broke the law; I am the law! --
George W. BushJudge DreddI'm listening to...
My friend is France emailed last night about McCain
He says the French are 90% certain that McCain will win. Mind you, the French election experts also stated Bush would win in 2004 even when it seemed unlikely over here.
I dunno. He bet me Bush would win in 2004 (even though he didn't want him to) and he was right.
oh la la....
I thought it was ...
ooo la la ...
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
Actually no
it's Oh la la.
The "OOO" is an Americanization.
I stand corrected ...
actually I am sort of gratitified that I didn't know this little Frenchie tidbit ...
(no offense to your French friend)
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
And if you want to be really technical,
it's "oh là là"
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
They're 90% certain
based on a gut feeling, or is there some deeper explanation there? :)
2004 was easy - Ze Amerikans ahr the doombest peepohl on ze pla'net - so zey weell voht foh ze dumbs*eet again.
What is it now? Racist vote?
Sic semper tyrannis
Um..ahem...
Both the 2000 and the 2004 Presidential elections were not won fair and square...they were stolen. The French predicted that the American electorate at large would be stupid enough to let that happen, both times...and it did. The United States became a laughing-stock for the rest of the world, and the French, especially, laughed their heads off at the United States.
I can't confirm 2004
I worked as a recount observer in 2004. I can say without a doubt that the ballots that were cast were counted properly in the counties I observed (Greene, Clark, Shelby).
Blackwell's corrupt tactics of putting more polling stations in Republican precincts and using every trick in the book to depress the minority and student vote might have been enough to swing Ohio to Bush. Having a partisan oversee the vote counting is what happens in banana republics. We can do better.
I never broke the law; I am the law! --
George W. BushJudge DreddI'm listening to...
Good on you stinerman
for stepping up to the observation plate.
I am impressed with your willingness to participate, and your good common sense on policy!
(Hope the new job is working out okay so far.)
It is the economy, stupid.
No-brainer
At the time I was on break between quarters at college, so it was a no-brainer. Most everyone who was there with me were just partisan Democrats who didn't really care much about the integrity of the vote, but more about overturning results.
At the training I recall a woman asking our trainer point-blank what we had to do to get Kerry elected. He was a Kerry supporter, but he wanted Kerry to win by the ballots, not by coup.
Partisanship = bad.
The job is ... a job. It'll have to do. Thanks for asking.
I never broke the law; I am the law! --
George W. BushJudge DreddI'm listening to...
Where can I make a contribution?
To the Obama campaign? :)
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
Go......
here
Warning: I recommend putting on your sunglasses first since your eyes are acclimated to living on the dark side. The light might seem unduly bright.
It is the economy, stupid.
More Naomi Klein Stuff
Good article with lotsa links if your interested
.
Romney preparing to drop out?
Rumor says they are considering
whether there is a "path to victory" and how to withdraw gracefully.
He speaks at CPAC
today, which should clear things up.
If he drops and Huckabee stays, is there a chance the race might not be over? Would enough of Romney's support go to Huckabee, even if chiefly to oppose McCain?
Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
CNN confirms Romney to suspend campaign
Says he will announce
at CPAC today, based on campaign sources.
Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
Now we get to see
if Huckabee drops out to get the Veep slot or if McCain shanks him (or I suppose if he tries to shank McCain).
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
What a classless speech
Mitt says he's dropping out so the terrorists won't win. What a pompous lying sack of excrement. I'm just sorry he didn't win the nomination because we'd beat him like an ugly dog in November.
I guess this means two things:
1. Mike Huckabee and Ron Paul are terrorist sympathizers because they stay in the race.
2. Mitt's military-age sons are now free to join the fight that Mitt says is so important he has to suspend his campaign for it.
qui tacet consentire
Classless, but impressive.
Who'd have thought someone could tie in terrorism in a more ludicrous way than Giuliani? Mitt gets a gold star!
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
F7 stop Hillbama day a rousing success, or not.
Rightroots has declared today, feb 7th to be "F7 the day to stop Hillary" or "F7 the day to stop Obama" (the banner alternates). Said banner is displayed prominently at the top of Redstate's main page. COnveninetly, for mocking purposes, the banner includes a running total.
So far? 9 donors. $735 dollars.
Yeah. I'll keep an eye on the total.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
Liberals can counter that by donating 2 cents via paypal,
paypal will still charge them 50 cents for the transaction.
Do they accept Iraqi dinars?
qui tacet consentire
LOL.
I forgot about betoniraq.com
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
I don't think that really works. -nt.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
Well, I'm campaigning for Obama now! :)
19 donors. *Almost* two grand! -nt.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
They're melting down over there,
although in a smaller and less visually impressive way than dkos. GBCWs and indignation!
It's primary fever: you shift your focus from your opponents to yourselves, and you find your own party seriously wanting. Without a unified target (the guy or gal on the other side of the aisle) you start devouring each other instead. Their front page post trying to make the best of a McCain candidacy won't look too different than the front page of dkos if Clinton wins the nomination. Albeit with a lot more users.
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
28 donors. Not quite $2500.
Obama and Hillary must be srsly afeared.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
By way of comparison
in 2007, an off political year, ActBlue (which is what Rightroots is supposed to be for the right) took in an average $46,000 a day. Meanwhile in a special money bomb the Rightroots hasn't broken 3 grand.
ActBlue averaged 463 contributors a day in 2007. Rightroots can't get 50.
I'm beginning to see why the right has been *&^%ing themselves about the left's monopoly of the net.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
Hmmm, in rough numbers I guess this must mean ...
that left-wing dupes are 16 times as numerous and 11% more stupid than their right-wing counterparts. That is scary, but it also seems roughly accurate at the same time.
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
Dupes
Did you just imply that Rightroots are a bunch of swindlers? How candid of you!
We are the environment. There is no distinction. What we do to the earth we do to ourselves. —David Suzuki
And ActBlue too!
But to be fair, it is more like pouring your money down the drain than being swindled.
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
That how
putting money where their mouths are look to you? I guess you don't take desperation into account. Once the Dems entrench themselves and start oppressing the right wingers again with their political correctness, feminazism, gay rights, etc. the trend might reverse.
Sic semper tyrannis
That's your best?
"Thousands," huh?
Yeah. As of 6PM Pacific time your grand total of 28 contributors falls just 1972 people sort of "thousands."
I guess we know how many readers this guy can boast of.
Patrick Ruffini's "whiz"-hood appears questionable. Was this really "as much money as possible in one day"? Why don't the dems nominate Kucinich?
I could keep going, but I think you get the picture. This was their best online effort and it sank like a rock. It showed up on over 3000 google hits, which means it almost made $1 for each rightard who talked about it. Way to advertise how lame and crippled you are, guys.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
An as we near the end...
32 donors, $2646. It's almost 10pm here on the west coast. meaning feb 7th has come and gone on the east coast.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
Saudi Cops Grab U.S. Woman In Starbucks
Is the healine.
The article says:
"The 37-year-old businesswoman works for a finance company in Riyadh. Her problem began when her office lost electricity. She and her male colleagues then went to a nearby Starbucks to use the coffee shop's Internet connection.
She sat with a male colleague in the Starbucks' family area, the only place women are allowed to sit with men.
“Some men came up to us with very long beards and white dresses. They asked 'Why are you here together?' I explained about the power being out in our office. They got very angry and told me what I was doing was a great sin,” she told the Times.
Following her arrest and interrogation, the woman was hauled before a judge.
“He said 'You are sinful and you are going to burn in hell.'
And these are the US's primary agents in the moslem world? These are our "friends"? Let's not forget that it was the Saudi's who were responsible for 9/11 and it is the Saudi's that are bankrolling the Madrasses & Talibahn in Pakistan & Afghanistan.
Maybe we need some different freinds. Saddam's Iraq wouldn't have bothered the woman, but I can't say that bush43's Iraq wouldn't. What have we done to ourselves?
Screw the Saudis
One of the most repressive regimes on the planet.
If they put this woman on trial we should recall our ambassador and expel theirs.
qui tacet consentire
Why?
This was a non-citizen arrested for no good reason. The government can do the same thing in this country. We don't even have to put them on trial!
We are the environment. There is no distinction. What we do to the earth we do to ourselves. —David Suzuki
In that respect I guess we can be glad they didn't send her
off to Guantanamo Bay, the Resort for those who don't qualify for judges.....
(Treasure of the Sierra Madre moment:) Judges? Judges!!! We Don't Need No Stinking Judges!!!!
Wow
the Saudis are so kind and forgiving.
They could have stoned her to death, cut her head off, put it on a spike at the market and feed the corps to the dogs - and they didn't!
You've got a problem with it, damn infidels?
Sic semper tyrannis
Who does the Health Care industry support with their dollars....
Who are the idiots
Who donated to Gravel and Keyes?
qui tacet consentire
cheap idiots.
The return for the Romney donations just went into the toilet.
What does this mean?
If my niece, a registered nurse, donates 5 bucks to Dennis Kucinich, is that money coming from "the Health Care industry?"
If yes, this chart is meaningless. If no, then what qualifies and what doesn't?
We are the environment. There is no distinction. What we do to the earth we do to ourselves. —David Suzuki
PACs and individuals giving > $200....
METHODOLOGY: The totals on these charts are calculated from PAC contributions and contributions from individuals giving more than $200, as reported to the Federal Election Commission. Individual contributions are generally categorized based on the donor's occupation/employer, although individuals may be classified instead as ideological donors if they've given more than $200 to an ideological PAC.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/sectors.asp?sec=H
Probably a bigger surprise is insurance...
Total to these candidates: $73,738,640 (Dems 53.3% and Repubs 46.7%)
Finance/Insur/RealEst
Clinton, Hillary
Giuliani, Rudy
Romney, Mitt
Obama, Barack
McCain, John
Dodd, Chris
Richardson, Bill
Edwards, John
Thompson, Fred
Biden, Joe
Paul, Ron
Huckabee, Mike
Brownback, Sam
Vilsack, Tom
Thompson, Tommy
Hunter, Duncan
Tancredo, Tom
Gilmore, Jim
Kucinich, Dennis
Gravel, Mike
Keyes, Alan
nevermind, you answered.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
Cheney at CPAC: You're damned right I'd attack Iraq again!
The President has made the right decisions for the right reasons and he always reflected the values of the American people," Cheney declared, "Would I support those same decisions today? You're damn right I would."
I'm more or less a non-violent guy....but with each day of this Adminstrations receeding term, I'm thinking how lucky I am that I'm not around these idiots while armed.
No, I don't want to kill anyone, including our Vice Fuhrer, but even more so, I don't want to live out the rest of my life in prison.
And I'd support them all over again too! :)
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
Why? Why would you attack Iraq again?
Those troops and those dollars could have been used much better in Afghanistan. Now when we need them (in the place that actually DID attack us) we don't have the manpower, we don't have the money, we don't have the support of the rest of the world.
Honestly, the 4,000 dead GI's from Iraq so Darth could throw Halliburton into a new oil patch is the most ludicrice and abominable thing yet. Blood for Oil Dick and his lap puppet dubya.
And why? Because Iraq is more target rich Rummy said. So I ask you GoRight, knowing what we do now about Saddam not being part of 9/11, not having any WMD, not threatening us as a nation, how could you justify attacking and occupying Iraq? It's only been Osama's best recruitment tool ever.
All the same reasons...nothing has changed.
Nobody ever said he was. That's liberal lies.
We know he had WMD. UNMOVIC said so and he never accounted for what happened to them. They are still out there for all we know.
The WMDs were and remain a threat to us if they fall into the hands of terrorists. The Iraq war has made that less likely.
As well as the overwhelming death sentence for thousands upon thousands of terrorists. The flypaper worked.
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
Buddy, put the crack pipe down. It ain't helping you.
Must we?
It's not much of a counterargument even to a ridiculously wrong post...
Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
Not crack
It's confirmation bias and good, healthy cognitive dissonance. Thank Darwin or YHWH that it exists.
All partisans engage in it. Some more than others.
I never broke the law; I am the law! --
George W. BushJudge DreddI'm listening to...
Cognitive dissonance?
Which part of what I stated is untrue and why?
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
All of it
All of it, and I can't convince you of why.
My roommate is more of a threat to me than Osama bin Laden as the former could steal my stuff. Bin Laden might end up planning a mission that might kill my friend's 3rd cousin's stepsister's grandma's dog's first owner.
Don't be afraid GR; that is what they're banking on. Fear is much more their tool than RPGs or suicide vests.
I never broke the law; I am the law! --
George W. BushJudge DreddI'm listening to...
I'm not afraid.
The difference between us, apparantly, is that I care what happens to your "friend's 3rd cousin's stepsister's grandma's dog's first owner" whereas you, again apparantly based on this statement, do not.
This, of course, is a total cop out. Take my points one by one and make your case for how they are untrue. Whether I am convinced by your argument or not is irrelevant. At least back up your statement with something.
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
schizophrenia
Somewhat reasonable on (most) domestic policy, SO wacky on foreign policy.
Ah, conservatism.
I sort of like when we boil things down to these one liners.
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
no offense ;)
But if I were prez and there were a spot for you in my cabinet, it wouldnt be sec. of state or defense....
=}
LOL, fair enough. :)
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
bunk
"Nobody ever said he was. That's liberal lies."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10164478
Sic semper tyrannis
We've been over this a bazzilion times.
Saying that Iraq had a relationaship with Al Qaeda is not the same thing as saying the Iraq was "part of" the attacks on 9/11. Find me an actual quote where Bush or Cheney, in their own words, claimed that Iraq was part of (i.e. participated in the planning or execution of) the 9/11 attacks and I'll admit you are right. Otherwise trying to twist these statements into being a statement that Iraq attacked us on 9/11 is just a lie.
I have posted on many occasions direct quotes from Bush where he explicitly denies that Iraq was part of the 9/11 attacks. I have yet to have a direct quote presented from your side where he states the opposite.
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
I really wanted to stay out of this
but I was just wondering if you are aware of this study
?
What you have is speculation and spin, while we are dealing with what we actually know to be the truth as it stands right now.
So, should I believe an independent group that investigated the matter which found Bush and Co. lied almost a thousand times or partisan GoRight (aka GhostOfGoRight)? Hmm, let me think . . .