The tea party movement is a large, fractious confederation of Americans who are defined by what they are against. They are against the concentrated power of the educated class. They believe big government, big business, big media and the affluent professionals are merging to form self-serving oligarchy — with bloated government, unsustainable deficits, high taxes and intrusive regulation. |
| Every single idea associated with the educated class has grown more unpopular over the past year. |
| I would like to reach across to the right of the aisle and join hands with Frank Luntz to say that it’s really, really “not a battle between big government and small government, it’s a battle for effective government. It’s a battle for accountability, responsibility and oversight.” I’m reaching over here because I want to pick his pocket. That bit of messaging looks way too reflective of Democratic Party principles, and I want it back.Read more at www.knoxviews.com |
What is the social utility of creating a society whose rules generate a doubling of output per person but provide those at the top with 37 times the gain of the vast majority? | polarized, fragmented and lurching into an uncertain future in which a long-established global order is un-raveling. |
| The first half of the 20th century witnessed a fractured, polarized America make significant [although imperfect and contested at every step] progress toward creating a more just society based on legal rights and raised living standards only to see the second half largely dedicated to dismantling the policies and ideals that made that progress possible. |
| Grounded in the ideology of tax cuts and de-regulation, the modern conservative movement has arisen and achieved dominance over the last 40 years built on a narrative of dismantling the government policies that made the golden age possible, and the results of that ‘Great Moderation’ have been profound. |
The human capacity for self-delusion never ceases to amaze me, so it shouldn’t surprise me that so many Republicans seem to genuinely believe that they are the party of fiscal responsibility. Perhaps at one time they were, but those days are long gone. |
| fact became blindingly obvious to me six years ago this month when a Republican president and a Republican Congress enacted the Medicare drug benefit, which former U.S. Comptroller General David Walker has called “the most fiscally irresponsible piece of legislation since the 1960s.” |
It’s important to remember that the congressional budget resolution capped the projected cost of the drug benefit at $400 billion over 10 years. If there had been an official estimate from Medicare’s chief actuary putting the cost at well more than that, then the legislation could have been killed by a single member in either the House or Senate by raising a point of order. Then-Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, R-Miss., later said he regretted not doing so. Read more at www.forbes.com |
Spending will be out of control and taxes will be too high until we shape the systems that take the bulk of our tax dollars into systems that provide us better returns on our investments of those tax dollars. I am aware of that. I am also aware of James Madison’s notion that federal spending is only permitted when it advances one of Congress’ other powers enumerated by the Constitution. I am also aware that Madison’s viewpoint did not reflect the consensus of our country’s founding generation, and that most advancements of last century would not have been possible had we followed Madison’s interpretation of the taxing and spending clause. |
| We could choose not to govern the incentives of that system and allow the current corporate structure beholden to shareholders to take an increasing percentage of our tax dollars, or we could come to a consensus about how to make the governance of our health system responsible for healthy citizens. |
| It is fashionable in Tennessee to be a Republican, to quote James Madison and to cheer the bandwagon of states in which legislation has been or is planned to be introduced to fight federal health care reforms as unconstitutional, but who is that really helping?Read more at www.knoxviews.com |
It started before the bill even came out. �Chicken Littles of all shapes and sizes trying to tell us that this was a “government takeover”, or that the public option was too wimpy, or that we were all going to be sent to jail if we didn’t buy insurance. |
There is, as I speak, a rec list diary from a respected activist and NN-scholarship-winning blogger who is telling us that the Opt-Out provision is “bad”. �I’ve read the opt-out provision, and while I agree that there are some risks, I think the opt-out is so well-written that it doesn’t allow much wiggle room for the states. |
So, in the spirit of our reality-based community, I propose: |
The “Read the Bill” Challenge
|
How about, before we start attacking the bill, we actually read it together? (h/t McJoan for the easy link) |
My proposal is relatively simple, and not unlike what you’d do with a law school or med school group project. |
“Focusing on outcomes, not motives, can thus build a wide and rapid consensus.” 1. Whatever your politics, your opinion of climate science shouldn’t change what you do about energy. Whether you care most about national security, or jobs and prosperity, or climate and environment, exactly the same energy actions make sense and make money regardless. Focusing on outcomes, not motives, can thus build a wide and rapid consensus. |
| 2. Protecting the climate is not costly, but profitable |
| 3. Since 1975, America has doubled the productivity of using oil and energy and tripled the productivity of directly using natural gas |
| 4. Oil dependence is a problem we needn’t have, and it’s cheaper not to |
| 5. Coal dependence is also unnecessary and uneconomic. |
| 6. Nuclear power’s commercial collapse continues |
| 7. Exploring with utility partners the emergent distributed and renewable electricity future |
| 7. Exploring with utility partners the emergent distributed and renewable electricity future, |
One: in a truly historic move not seen since Truman fired MacArthur, Obama told the entire military establishment to “#$%* off, go back to the drawing boards, and get us the hell out of Afghanistan someday, starting NOW.” The scenario culminating in yesterday’s historic decision is portrayed in the 1964 motion picture Seven Days In May. |
Two: “Mr. Craig (White House Counsel) - get lost. You’re toast. Go home, and I don’t care if you did save Clinton’s butt. You’ve played games with the central Constitutional issues of Guantanamo and elsewhere. Bye-bye.” |
Three: “Mr. Holder (Attorney General) - now that Craig is gone, let’s roll! The chicken public will scream, but we’re going to try terrorists in serious courtrooms and using serious Constitutional procedures.” Read more at www.knoxviews.com |
“It would improve our cultural and educational image and cement Knoxville’s status as the capital of the Southern Appalachians.” Damn straight, Rikki. The Development Corporation has a few hundred acres of land in eastern Knox County burning an $11 million hole in its pocket. TDC bought the land on speculation, thinking they could ram zoning and sector-plan changes through County Commission and build a business park there, but residents of the Thorngrove community stopped them. As it is currently zoned, the land is not worth what TDC has invested in it, so they are trying again to turn the agricultural and residential land toward commercial and industrial uses. |
So the development politburo has an asset they need to put to use. I think they should build the Museum of Appalachian Natural History on their land. |
| It would improve our cultural and educational image and cement Knoxville’s status as the capital |
| It would improve our cultural and educational image and cement Knoxville’s status as the capital of the Southern Appalachians.Read more at www.metropulse.com |
TPMDC has learned that 24.7 percent of the donations made online to OFA are new donors - people who didn’t give during the campaign. That’s a pretty striking figure give that a record 3 million people donated during 2007 and 2008. |
Organizationally, the boots-on-the-ground, Washington outsider vibe has translated into real results as well. Saturday morning, an OFA volunteer in Louisiana flagged for the team that Rep. Joseph Cao (R-LA) might end up supporting health care. |
The administration had been talking to Cao behind the scenes, but it was the volunteer who emailed OFA staffers to report that the Republican’s office wasn’t saying he was against the bill which opened the floodgates. OFA volunteers made 550 calls to the district office on Saturday in the hours before he became the lone Republican to back the bill. |
| The long table had two chairs at the head with enough space for the five of us to talk comfortably with the senators. So far so good. |
Within the next 20 minutes, the seven-person meeting doubled, then almost tripled in numbers. Affable aides and assistants chatted about all things Southern, including Mule Day in Columbia. |
And then came the six little words that summed up our growing suspicion: “C’mon, everybody, let’s take some photos.” This was not a meeting, this was an “Okeedoke.” |
The doctor never got to tell the senators about her practice or her patient who died almost two weeks ago now; the man who may be forced to close his family business didn’t get to talk, either. |
For those in D.C. threatening to filibuster, obstruct and vote along party lines against real change, you will be remembered and rewarded in the next election And when you wonder why you weren’t re-elected, just remember you work for us. Okeedoke? Read more at www.knoxviews.com |
|
