Originally Posted by James50

And right on cue, the liberal press plays its role once again. Read this evening's news flash about Tim Pawlenty and see if you can determine the political leanings of the one who wrote it. You will not have to think too long.

Yep, nothing but the facts. No agenda in that news flash. Just pure objectivity.

You can't make this stuff up.

James50

Press releases are not themselves neutral, objective news.

I suggest that the greater the potential for preparation by a reporter for a news item, the more likely it is that a reporter will add some unobjective analysis. When people leak such material through the Internet, then such is what one can expect. So it is with esthetic judgments such as "slick".

Reporters get such events as natural disasters right -- with the limitation that they might not have the best position. Responses to disasters? If the response is incompetent or futile, then such can bring out the 'human-interest' stories or an assessment of the quality of the response. But the response comes as a rule with some delay.

OK -- some things will offend almost anyone. If street thugs are stealing relief supplies at gunpoint and then selling them on the black market, then I can hardly imagine anyone being neutral.

Originally Posted by James50

And right on cue, the liberal press plays its role once again. Read this evening's news flash about Tim Pawlenty and see if you can determine the political leanings of the one who wrote it. You will not have to think too long.

Yep, nothing but the facts. No agenda in that news flash. Just pure objectivity.

You can't make this stuff up.

James50

I see no agenda in that, unless you think "slick" is an insult.

This ***hole ruined my state, I want him nowhere near the Oval Office.

Originally Posted by JustPassingThrough

People who are left wing go into fields where they think they can "change the world", i.e. influence society in a left wing direction. The media and education are the two biggest avenues, because they know that's how you influence the culture. And they have succeeded to the point where they have created a monoculture in those professions where anyone who thinks differently is driven out or never hired in the first place unless they remain silent.

Boomers are the ones who crossed the line in those professions, and completely abandoned objectivity (in journalism) and free inquiry (in academia) in favor of pure activism, propaganda and indoctrination. They have deliberately cleansed those fields of anything or anyone that contradicts their ideological agenda.

The Projection is strong with this one...

Originally Posted by James50

And right on cue, the liberal press plays its role once again. Read this evening's news flash about Tim Pawlenty and see if you can determine the political leanings of the one who wrote it. You will not have to think too long.

Yep, nothing but the facts. No agenda in that news flash. Just pure objectivity.

You can't make this stuff up.

James50

I'm with Odin here. What is not objective about that?

Originally Posted by Silifi

I'm with Odin here. What is not objective about that?

Personally I think the use of the term "slickly" here is used with a certain amount of contempt. Just as it was when conservatives led by Rush Limbaugh called President Clinton "Slick Willie." That was certainly not a compliment.

I thought the writer was using "slick" to mean "clever"

Originally Posted by Odin

The Projection is strong with this one...

LMAO! Thanks, that was a good one.

I still have a sense this is a long-shot; Obama, Kerry, Hilary all lost this district big time, but wow, the latest polling is looking good -

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/p...Y_05221118.pdf

Hochul leads Corwin by 6

On top of than Corwin's favorables really went South big time due to that video/screech dust up with the TP candidate.

This is the Kos polling firm but they are pretty darn honest and have been very accurate in other elections. They have a caveat on this polling had Obama's voters at 47-42 whereas the actual district went McCain 52% - however, that may be that Indys that went McCain in ''08 are now embarressed to admit that.

We'll see tomorrow!

Originally Posted by playwrite

however, that may be that Indys that went McCain in ''08 are now embarressed to admit that.

Or too embarrassed to admit that they voted for a ticket which included Sarah Palin.

Originally Posted by playwrite

LMAO! Thanks, that was a good one.

I said before that I don't put people on ignore. That's not entirely true. There is one exception. I've had Odin on ignore for months.

Originally Posted by Odin

The Projection is strong with this one...

Isn't it always?

I wonder if he has ever started to read the General Theory... and he calls me ignorant. It's not as if I suggested Das Kapital or What is to Be Done?.

It figures. At least I recognize my limitations. But if he wanted to criticize liberal economics, wouldn't it make more sense for him to use the works of Milton Friedman?

Originally Posted by JustPassingThrough

People who are left wing go into fields where they think they can "change the world", i.e. influence society in a left wing direction. The media and education are the two biggest avenues, because they know that's how you influence the culture. And they have succeeded to the point where they have created a monoculture in those professions where anyone who thinks differently is driven out or never hired in the first place unless they remain silent.

Wrong. They go where they can survive. How long does one survive in the hierarchies of many giant corporations if one is a liberal? If one is where everyone seems to cite Rush Limbaugh as a fount of wisdom or lauds FoX "News" as objective reality, wouldn't it be wise to keep any liberal tendencies in the closet? Liberals tend to go either where politics matter little (like production work, small business, teaching, scientific research, medicine, and creative areas). Consider the old Soviet Union: the liberal dissidents tended to be found in science, mathematics, and engineering. Even teaching was off limits for a comparative liberal because pedagogy in the USSR always had the objective of convincing kids of the merits of the Soviet system.

Boomers are the ones who crossed the line in those professions, and completely abandoned objectivity (in journalism) and free inquiry (in academia) in favor of pure activism, propaganda and indoctrination. They have deliberately cleansed those fields of anything or anyone that contradicts their ideological agenda.

There are conservatives in academia and journalism. It is possible to teach such claptrap as "creation science" or claim that America was founded as a Christian state, even in college -- if one teaches at the 'right' college. That college surely isn't Harvard, MIT, or the University of Illinois. But there are third-rate colleges and universities run or founded by some hack preacher -- colleges in which most students have little use for objective science or history but plenty for confirmation of their right-wing Christianity. As for right-wing journalism -- just watch FoX Newspeak Channel.

Originally Posted by JustPassingThrough

I said before that I don't put people on ignore. That's not entirely true. There is one exception. I've had Odin on ignore for months.

I congratulate Odin for so offending your precious sensibilities.

some big guns going out to the sticks in the Empire State -

http://dailycaller.com/2011/05/23/bi...in-ny-26-race/

Bill Clinton and Chris Christie endorse in NY-26 race

- obviously some see this as extremely high stakes.

Originally Posted by JustPassingThrough

OK, I see what you're saying. I think I missed it because I was expecting an explanation for why revenues as a percentage of GDP have stayed essentially the same even with drastic changes in the top federal tax rate.

As I already explained, they have not. The graph you presented was an optical illusion. (Not a factual lie as I originally asserted, but still highly misleading.) When revenues almost never exceed 20% of GDP, and have not dropped below 15% since 1940, a 5-point spread is all we should be considering. Putting that 5-point spread against a 1-100 measuring stick to make it look small when it is really quite large, is deceptive. Revenues per GDP have indeed fluctuated with tax rates, they have not remained essentially the same.

Oh, I understand it well enough. In your mind, 25+ years of strong economic growth, low unemployment and low inflation can be nullified by the fact that we had a big economic downturn in the last few years

No, they can be nullified by putting them against the entire history of the U.S. industrial economy from about the turn of the 20th century until the present, which is what I have done.

From 1900 to 1940, we followed essentially supply-side principles, although it wasn't called that. The main difference between then and what happened post-Reagan is that government spending was lower and the budget more nearly balanced.

From 1940 to 1980, we followed demand-side principles: high taxes on the rich, strong government support for labor rights, commitment to narrowing income gaps.

From 1980 to the present, we have followed supply-side principles again.

Per capita economic growth from 1940 to 1980 outperformed either of the other two periods by more than two to one.

The current downturn may be dismissed for one reason or another, or could if it were an isolated event and not very much in character with the financial panics that occurred like clockwork in the pre-New Deal days roughly every 20 years. Data like that cannot honestly be dismissed at all.

Oh-oh, this is not looking good for Corwin when this stuff starts -

Cantor on NY-26: Not a Referendum

May 23, 2011 2:17 P.M. By Andrew Stiles
A special election for the vacant seat in New York’s 26th congressional district is not a referendum on Medicare reform, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R., Va.) told reporters Monday.

“Not at all,” he said. “This race is about the fact that it’s a three-way race.” The inclusion of “Tea Party” candidate Jack Davis had made the race “a lot closer than anyone had thought,” he said.

Cantor, who along with other high profile Republicans has recently visited the district, praised the Republican Jane Corwin and the same issues that propelled the GOP to victory in 2010 — jobs, spending and the economy — would similarly be the driving force behind the NY-26 election.

“I do not think it can be seen as a signal as to the role of the budget reforms that we have proposed, including that in Medicare,” he said. “I know this own loves to take signals from individual races. I think the best signal you can take it the 63 seats that we picked up in November.”

This gloating is a bit premature and hopefully doesn't jinx the eventual outcome, but it is a fun read for us progressives -

http://www.balloon-juice.com/2011/05...one-changed-6/

Things Done Changed
by John Cole

Remember how it was the beltway conventional wisdom that the Ryan plan was “serious” and “adult” and that it was up to the Democrats to offer a counter and yadda, yadda, yadda. Things sure have changed in a few months, haven’t they? We’ve now got the Democrat leading in a Republican district, Republicans are publishing weepy op-eds about how they just can’t support the Ryan plan, and the Politico is charging forward with a new conventional wisdom for us all:
-
-
-
No one could have predicted that 4 trillion in tax cuts for the rich while gutting Medicare and doing nothing to balance the budget would have been unpopuar with the public. It’s a mystery!

DougJ is right. Thank you, Bobo! Thank you, Joe Klein! Thank you, Sully! Thank each and every one of the innumerate villager class who fluffed the Ryan plan and goaded the Republicans into believing their own bullshit

and a follow-up

http://www.eschatonblog.com/2011/05/...t-pundits.html

Suppose we can thank them for encouraging Republicans to double down on their stupidity.

Still what's infuriating about our Villagers as that they truly think they speak for the great unwashed, the True Americans in the Heartland who don't know what arugula is and have never heard of green tea. Yet it doesn't occur to them that destroying Medicare (and, yes, getting rid of Medicare and replacing it with Magic Ponies called Medicare is destroying Medicare) would be, you know, unpopular.

David Brooks are ya listening?

According to recent polls, the Davis campaign, which was running pretty close to Corwin and Hochul before, has tanked, but Hochul more than Corwin has been the beneficiary. What this says to me is that the Republicans have made the same mistake that some posters here have made, with much greater political consequences: they have taken last year's election for a mandate. They proceeded on the assumption that people who voted for Obama and the Democrats in '08 changed their minds and moved to the GOP column in reaction to Democratic overreach, instead of recognizing what actually happened: that voters who put Obama in office stayed home in reaction to Democratic under-reach and broken or failed campaign promises.

As a result, the Republicans have grossly overreached themselves. They won not by consensus but by default -- and are doing their best to give progressives something to vote against, even if Obama and the Democrats aren't doing a good job of giving us something to vote for.

What touching the 3rd rail looks like -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGnE8...layer_embedded

Spoiler alert

- must be a magic pony down at the base of that cliff.

What touching the 3rd rail sounds like -

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0..._n_865206.html

MCCONNELL: What I'm willing to say is that we're going to have to change Medicare and it's going to happen soon.

Bbbzzzttt!

http://content.usatoday.com/communit...dicare-vote-/1

Seizing on a political opportunity, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told USA TODAY Wednesday he plans to push a Senate vote next week on a Republican budget-cutting plan that would dramatically revamp Medicare, the health-care plan for senior citizens.

"It's a horrible, horrible piece of legislation, and what it does to Medicare -- changing it permanently -- is really unfair to the poor and middle class," Reid, D-Nev., said in an interview about the 2012 budget blueprint crafted by House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis.

Ryan's budget plan, which passed the GOP-led House last month, would convert Medicare into vouchers, starting in 2022. Democrats have accused Republicans of seeking to privatize Medicare and have launched an all-out offensive to tie GOP lawmakers to the plan in advance of congressional elections.

"I think we will see that not all Republicans will vote for it," Reid said. "If I were running for re-election, Democrat or Republican, I would want to stay as far from that Ryan budget as possible."

But what will the faithful have to say about any Senator that doesn't support the end of Medicare?

Ask this happy guy -




Bbbzzzdddd!!!

Originally Posted by James50

And right on cue, the liberal press plays its role once again. Read this evening's news flash about Tim Pawlenty and see if you can determine the political leanings of the one who wrote it. You will not have to think too long.

Yep, nothing but the facts. No agenda in that news flash. Just pure objectivity.

You can't make this stuff up.

James50

I'm with Silifi and Odin here. The only problematic word here is "slick." Which could be used to describe any successful political strategy or tactic.

Originally Posted by Child of Socrates

I'm with Silifi and Odin here. The only problematic word here is "slick." Which could be used to describe any successful political strategy or tactic.

I really can't see slick, in this context, as a bad thing. Plenty of people would describe Obama's marketing to be "slick." It just means well-produced as far as I can tell.

Originally Posted by James50

And right on cue, the liberal press plays its role once again. Read this evening's news flash about Tim Pawlenty and see if you can determine the political leanings of the one who wrote it. You will not have to think too long.

Yep, nothing but the facts. No agenda in that news flash. Just pure objectivity.

You can't make this stuff up.

James50

Try a news release from a newspaper that isn't the bastion of liberal journalism. I'm sure the conservative version (The WSJ) had a very different spin.

Here's a bit of information that, in my opinion, shows that we are definitely in a 4T mindset now.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/0...ide&via=blog_1

Key phrase (from the poll article itself, quoted in the blog entry: "Despite having a common opinion that the United States is in worse shape than it was four years ago, 57 percent of Americans widely believe that President Barack Obama will be re-elected in 2012." The same poll shows 55% approval, 50% who believe he should be reelected, and 59% who say they are at least somewhat likely to vote for him.

In the 3T, the idea that people could simultaneously believe that the country was in worse shape than four years ago, and that the president ought to be reelected, was nonsense. In fact, those old enough will recall that in the last 2T election and the first 3T election, Ronald Reagan made the question, "Are you better off than you were four years ago?" his campaign slogan. (Note that individual "you" rather than the collective "we" -- another 3T sign. Despite being the last 2T president, Reagan was in some ways the quintessential leader of the Unraveling, although in other ways Clinton also fills the role.)

We seem to have moved into a collective awareness that we are in truly deep shit here, and that expecting our problems to be solved in a single four-year term is unrealistic. This has a bearing on the idea that Obama will be reelected only if the economy substantially improves by next year. I would say that's not the case. It would be if we were still 3T. We're not.