ChrisWeigant.com

Please support ChrisWeigant.com this
holiday season!

Friday Talking Points [267] -- Congress Slinks Out Of Town

[ Posted Friday, August 2nd, 2013 – 17:36 PDT ]

It was a busy week in Washington, since all the congresscritters were eager to get out of town for their not-so-well-earned five weeks of vacation. It'll take awhile for the dust to settle, so let's take a look at some of what's been happening while it does.

The Republican Party is apparently going full-bore with what appears to be their campaign strategy of: "Government doesn't work -- elect us and we'll prove it!" The infighting among Republicans has been nothing short of spectacular this week, with Rand Paul and Chris Christie insulting each other regularly, Ted Cruz calling his own party the "surrender caucus," and a House bill that just proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that John Boehner has lost whatever remaining shreds of control over his caucus he previously clung to.

In normal years, by the August break the budget bills should have been passed by the House. This leaves September for haggling with the Senate, so they can agree on something by the time the new fiscal year starts in October. "The budget" is actually a two-stage process -- first, an overall "budget blueprint" is passed, early in the year, and then a dozen "appropriations" bills are passed which spell out all the nuts and bolts. Earlier this year, for the third time in a row, the House passed the "Ryan budget" as their blueprint. Now they're supposed to make the numbers work. There's only one problem: they don't work, politically. Oh, sure, it's fun for Republicans to vote on Ryan's plan -- because Ryan's plan doesn't actually specify where all the budget cuts will be made. But then when you've got to decide what gets cut -- surprise! -- the entire exercise becomes political poison. What are the choices, after all? Cut the military? Well, no, the Republicans want to restore all the sequester cuts to the military. Raise taxes? Bwah hah hah! Not bloody likely in Republicanland! So they're left with making deep, destructive cuts in programs that actual Republicans like.

This was all on display this week, as a budget bill was brought up for a vote in the House, but then quickly withdrawn when it became apparent that not enough Republicans would vote for it. It seems there are Republicans who still balk at Ryan's scorched-earth budget, at least when the mathematically-inescapable facts of what it will mean are presented. So Boehner's House can't even pass a Republican bill now.

Their excuse was "there wasn't enough time in a busy House floor schedule to continue debate." Which is abject nonsense, because they spent the rest of the week passing bills for purely political reasons (one notable example: the 40th vote to repeal Obamacare), so they have some red meat to toss during this year's town hall season.

Think I'm being too harsh? Here's the Republican Appropriations Committee chair, on his own party's incompetence:

With this action, the House has declined to proceed on the implementation of the very budget it adopted just three months ago. Thus I believe that the House has made its choice: sequestration -- and its unrealistic and ill-conceived discretionary cuts -- must be brought to an end. The House, Senate and White House must come together as soon as possible on a comprehensive compromise that repeals sequestration, takes the nation off this lurching path from fiscal crisis to fiscal crisis, reduces our deficits and debt, and provides a realistic topline discretionary spending level to fund the government in a responsible -- and attainable -- way.

I have to admit I'm pretty amused by all of this, since I spent a lot of time and effort during the 2012 campaign pointing out precisely this fact: the Ryan budget's numbers don't add up. Now it's obvious to all. When Congress returns from it's long vacation, there are only nine workdays scheduled in the House in September. Predictions: a 90% chance of budgetary chaos ahead.

Let's see, what else? Michael Moore had the best commentary of the week on the Bradley Manning verdict, which is well worth a read.

Barack Obama seems peeved that members of his own party aren't thrilled with the idea of Larry Summers for Fed chair. He even reportedly -- in a closed-door session with congressional Democrats -- said something along the lines of "don't believe everything you read in The Huffington Post," who has been airing quite a bit of anti-Summers feelings. My takeaway: Obama reads Huffington Post? Hmmm... maybe he's reading this right now! Heh.

Looks like Uruguay is going to become the first country in the world to fully legalize marijuana. Back here at home, Illinois became the 20th state to legalize medical marijuana. Gay marriage became legal in two states this week as well, bringing their total to 13 states. This has been our "arc of history" update....

In Virginia, a statewide Republican candidate has declared that you can't be a Democrat and be a Christian at the same time. Way to stay classy, Republicans!

And, finally, a rightwing group has hit upon the bright idea of having young folks "burn their Obamacare cards." Except for, you know, the fact that Obamacare cards do not actually exist. That's not stopping them, though! They faked one up you can print out, by using an old draft card and pasting the word "Obamacare" in where it said "Selective Service." This alone drew condemnations from those who remember real draft cards and what they meant.

The best comment, however, was from a reader of the story on the Washington Post website, who responded to the following quote from the FreedomWorks director of messaging: "Light it on fire and while it's burning say, 'I'm burning my Obamacare draft card because,' and then give a reason. The shorter it can be the better. I'm not saying it can't be long, but I don't want anyone to burn their fingers." The commenter responded: "Yeah, you don't want them to burn their fingers, because none of them have health insurance." Priceless.

 

Most Impressive Democrat of the Week

If we handed awards out to Republicans, House member Scott Rigell would certainly get one, for his call to cancel the five-week vacation the House is about to embark upon. It's rare that anyone in Congress ever addresses their pathetically light schedule, so we thought he deserved a nod, even if he doesn't qualify for any of our awards, being of the Republican persuasion.

Well-qualified for their Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week awards this week are Democratic Senators Richard Blumenthal, Ron Wyden, and Tom Udall, since their ideas to reform the F.I.S.A. court are so timely and relevant what with all the Snowden revelations. Their ideas don't go as far as the effort in the House to stop the N.S.A. data-gathering programs, but they are interesting proposals for reforming the way the F.I.S.A. court operates.

For proposing such reforms, in a very timely manner, all three are this week's MIDOTW winners. Read the story, and see if your own senators have signed onto the two bills (and then call them up and ask them why, if they're not listed as co-sponsors!).

[Congratulate Senator Richard Blumenthal on his Senate contact page, Senator Tom Udall on his Senate contact page, and Senator Ron Wyden on his Senate contact page, to let them know you appreciate their efforts.]

 

Most Disappointing Democrat of the Week

Let's see, Ralph Nader thinks all American politics really needs are more self-financed billionaire candidates. Kind of sad, really, to see to what depths Nader has fallen. "Ralph's nadir," perhaps?

Anthony Weiner wants us all to know that he is "100 percent not" currently in any online sexting relationship. But the real news of the week from the Weiner campaign was the profanity-laden rant one Weiner staffer launched at an ex-intern who was dishing the dirt to the tabloids. Barbara Morgan unleashed one of the foulest on-the-record comments I have ever seen in politics, where the term "slutbag" was one of the nicer things she called the intern, Olivia Nuzzi. This prompted an amusing look at which media outlets actually printed the term "slutbag" and which didn't, mostly because all the rest of the rant was so unprintable. For her breathtaking rage, Barbara Morgan deserves at least a (Dis-)Honorable Mention.

But our real winner of the Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week was none other than Max Baucus. I wrote about this earlier in the week in more detail (and although I did use the wore "whores" more than once, I refrained from using the term "slutbag," in my own defense). Baucus is assuring all senators that any of them who care to defend enormous corporate tax giveaways in the income tax code will be able to do so in secret, as the National Archives won't release any such suggestions to the public for fifty years.

I said it before, and I'll say it again: this is Exhibit A of why most of the public despises Washington.

[Contact Senator Max Baucus on his Senate contact page, to let him know what you think of his actions.]

 

Friday Talking Points

Volume 267 (8/2/13)

Republicans in the House are fractured right now. They are, bluntly, reaping the whirlwind they sowed by promising their constituents things they could not deliver. And they're about to hold a bunch of Town Hall meetings.

The good news is that progressives are attempting a full-court press, where people attend these town halls and skewer Republicans with embarrassing questions. This is a great idea, and everyone should either fully support it or even (should your location permit it) participate. So, this week, we're using our talking points section to suggest questions to ask Republicans, should you find yourself in a town hall meeting in the near future. These are just the ones off the top of my head, so feel free to suggest others in the comments.

 

1
   The definition of insanity

This one should appeal to common sense, across the political spectrum.

"I read that you voted for the fortieth time to repeal Obamacare. But you know what? It hasn't worked before and it ain't going to work now. Rather than spending so much time in an effort that is guaranteed to fail, why don't you propose a Republican fix to whatever problems Obamacare has? You used to talk about 'repeal and replace' -- well, repeal is a dead end. Isn't forty tries enough to teach you that? So why don't you attempt to replace it with your ideas instead?"

 

2
   What are you afraid of?

This one is just a plain schoolyard taunt, at heart.

"Why are House Republicans afraid to bring the Senate immigration bill up for a vote? There's no way it can pass unless Republicans join in a bipartisan effort with Democrats. Are you afraid that's exactly what will happen? You haven't managed to come up with any Republican bills on immigration yet, and you're obviously not going to any time in the near future. Democrats are going to raise the pressure to vote on the Senate bill -- so why not prove to them that it can't pass the House by holding a vote on it? Or can't Speaker Boehner hold his caucus together? What are you really afraid of?"

 

3
   Where's the farm bill?

This one is short and sweet.

"I see you've had time to vote on Obamacare forty times. Apparently this is more important to you than the farmers in your district. Where is the farm bill? Why have you not finished work on it? Maybe you need to reorder your priorities, Congressman."

 

4
   The House is not doing its job

Throw this one back in their faces.

"For years, I've heard you stand there and complain that the Democrats in the Senate weren't doing their job on the budget. You used to love to tell us how long it had been since the Senate passed a budget. Well, they've done so this year. So why can't Republicans in the House pass budget bills now? And why are Republicans refusing to even create a conference committee to get the job done between the two houses? You've made a lot of political hay about how Democrats weren't doing their constitutional job, but it seems to me like the shoe's on the other foot now. Why can't Republicans in the House pass budget bills?"

 

5
   Are you going to shut the government down?

Why not just ask them this, right to their face?

"I'd like to ask whether you are going to either let the government shut down by not passing a budget that Obama can sign, or whether you are going to destroy the credit rating of the United States of America by not passing a debt ceiling bill? Do you think that either of these things would really be helpful to Main Street America right now? Do you think either of these would help or hurt the economy as a whole? I am interested in your answers to those questions."

 

6
   God is not a Republican or Democrat

This point should be strongly made.

"I'd like to know whether you agree with the Republican candidate from Virginia, E. W. Jackson, when he stated that you can't be a Democrat and a Christian at the same time. Do you think that's true? I was taught that God is neither a Democrat nor a Republican, personally, and the whole idea is in fact offensive. Doesn't the Bible have something to say about a speck in your neighbor's eye versus the beam in your own?"

 

7
   Having a nice vacation?

This one'll get the crowd on your side, guaranteed.

"I have a two-part question. The first is to ask whether you're enjoying your five-week vacation while still drawing your taxpayer-footed salary? Having a nice vacation, are we? Please remind me exactly how many weeks you spend away from Congress in one year? And my second part is to ask whether you would support a bill which would make it mandatory for all employers to give their full-time workers three weeks of paid vacation per year. Please explain why you would or would not support guaranteeing hard-working Americans a small fraction of the vacation time that you enjoy at our expense. Thank you."

-- Chris Weigant

 

All-time award winners leaderboard, by rank
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

Cross-posted at: Democratic Underground
Cross-posted at: The Huffington Post

 

24 Comments on “Friday Talking Points [267] -- Congress Slinks Out Of Town”

  1. [1] 
    Michale wrote:

    "I'd like to know whether you agree with the Republican candidate from Virginia, E. W. Jackson, when he stated that you can't be a Democrat and a Christian at the same time.

    Think about it...

    Many of the planks of the Democratic Party are not compatible with Christian "values"... Abortion being the most obvious one..

    So, in effect, what that CongressCritter is saying is factual.

    But political/ideological faith is much like religious faith.. It's easy to overlook the inconsistencies and hypocrisy when one is devout...

    I'd like to ask whether you are going to either let the government shut down by not passing a budget that Obama can sign,

    Obama *can* sign ANY budget... The question is, will Obama sign a budget that, while being good for the country and the American people, is bad for the Democratic Party..

    THAT is the question that SHOULD be asked...

    Not saying that what the GOP is putting forth IS good for the country and the American people, mind you. I am simply postulating a scenario where the budget put forth by the GOP *IS* good for the country but bad for the Democratic Party..

    Would Obama sign it??

    Bet ya a million quatloos, he wouldn't..

    Because, if Obama has proven anything over the last 5+ years, he has proven that he is a Democrat first and an American a far distant second...

    Actually, the progression is,

    Emperor Barack first...

    Democrat, a close second....

    An American a distant, VERY distant third...

    Why can't Republicans in the House pass budget bills?"

    Why can't Democrats in the Senate???

    That's the fun thing about Talking Points. With very minor tweaking, the make perfect Talking Points for the Right against the Left.. :D

  2. [2] 
    Michale wrote:

    Please look to the heavens and give a bloodcurdling Klingon yell to let Sto'vo'Kor know that a Klingon warrior is approaching the gates.

    Kang, dies at 91
    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-207_162-57596876/michael-ansara-star-trek-s-kang-dies-at-91/

    Michael Ansara's portrayal of the Klingon, KANG in the TOS episode DAY OF THE DOVE was awesome..

    Seeing him reprise that role in DEEP SPACE NINE and VOYAGER was the stuff of legends...

    Another great warrior is felled....

  3. [3] 
    Michale wrote:

    Please look to the heavens and give a bloodcurdling Klingon yell to let Sto'vo'Kor know that a Klingon warrior is approaching the gates.

    If anyone needs instruction on how to properly perform the Klingon Death Ritual...

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5wNL29kdek

  4. [4] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Michale -

    First off -- surely you jest. This is like someone setting up a bowling pin, and then handing you a ball the size of a beachball to knock it down.

    All that stuff Jesus said about "you will be judged by the way you treat the poor"??? Really? You want to get into a political/theological debate on that subject? Because it would really, really be easy.

    How about the "give to Ceasar what is due Ceasar" answer about taxes? Jesus' main point: riches in this world are illusory, and any coin on it was the property of the state, and therefore could be taxed. Real, spiritual riches would be reaped in the next world. Also, that whole camel/needle's eye parable...

    I mean, you make this too easy. If Democrats and Republicans' platforms were held up on Judgment Day, I know which one I'd be the farm on making it into the Pearly Gates. Consider: how much did Jesus talk about abortion versus how much did he talk about helping the poor?

    Slam dunk, my friend, sorry about that.

    Democrats have passed a budget in the Senate, by the way. Republicans are blocking the conference committee, because they are scared of the possible compromises it might agree to. Look it up.

    Republicans are chicken. BOK bok bok BOK!!! CHICKEN, I tells ya! They can't even trust their own conference committee members, because they are scared what might come out of intelligent, reasonable debate with Democrats. It's pretty easy to see which side is fudging their drawers on this one, actually. And it ain't the Dems, sorry.

    :-)

    -CW

  5. [5] 
    Michale wrote:

    Really? You want to get into a political/theological debate on that subject?

    Actually, I don't... :D

    You know my feelings on religion..

    But you simply cannot reconcile the Left's stance on Abortion and homosexuality with Christian "values"..

    It's simply not possible...

    Democrats have passed a budget in the Senate, by the way.

    Once... In how many years??

    They can't even trust their own conference committee members, because they are scared what might come out of intelligent, reasonable debate with Democrats. It's pretty easy to see which side is fudging their drawers on this one, actually. And it ain't the Dems, sorry.

    I can name a half dozen issues where it's Democrats that are "Bok Bok Bok" (nice impression, by the by.. :D) over up or down votes..

    Need I remind you of Reid's ooodles and ooodles (It's an industry term.. :D) MDDOTW awards.. :D

    Yea, in THIS case, the GOP is down and the Dems are up.. MAYBE...

    But wait a day or so and it will be the Dems "fudging their drawers" on this or some other issue. :D So it is with politics...

    One side is no better than the other...

  6. [6] 
    Michale wrote:

    I mean, you make this too easy. If Democrats and Republicans' platforms were held up on Judgment Day, I know which one I'd be the farm on making it into the Pearly Gates.

    Remember, we're not talking about individual actions or the alleged ACTIONS of said Party.

    We're talking about Party Platforms. What the Party STANDS for..

    And many of the "planks" of the Democratic Party platform are simply inconsistent with Christian values..

    It's a fact...

    Now, if you WANT to talk about the actual actions of the two Partys.....

    Let's take this absurd "WAR ON WOMEN" that the Left is always harping about..

    Does the Party of Weiner, Filner, Spitzer and CLINTON really want to talk about a "War On Women"?? :D

    Regardless, for anyone who watches SUPERNATURAL, it seems like heaven is just as political as down here.. There was one scene where Castiel was meeting with Raphael in Kenneth Lay's "heaven"..


    Castiel: Whose Heaven is this?
    Raphael: Ken Lay's. I'm borrowing it.
    Castiel: I still question his admittance here.
    Rapahel: He's devout. Trumps everything.

    Just like Party loyalty..

  7. [7] 
    akadjian wrote:

    But you simply cannot reconcile the Left's stance on Abortion and homosexuality with Christian "values"..

    Perhaps, but the Ayn Randian selfish idiocy of today's Republican Party is almost the complete opposite of Christian selflessness.

    And not all Christians have a hard line stance against abortion &/or homosexuality.

    -David

  8. [8] 
    Michale wrote:

    And not all Christians have a hard line stance against abortion &/or homosexuality.

    True...

    As I said, it's easy to overlook the inconsistencies and hypocrisy when one is devout...

    Which is why I have such a beef with organized religion. It's a scam...

    "I did everything in the bible! Even the stuff that contradicted all the other stuff!"
    -Ned Flanders

    One can take the text of any organized religion and find justification for ANY immoral or abhorrent thing one would want to do...

  9. [9] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    A fantastic piece [medium.com] on the current NSA scandal by Bruce Sterling, one of my favorite authors...

  10. [10] 
    Michale wrote:

    A fantastic piece [medium.com] on the current NSA scandal by Bruce Sterling, one of my favorite authors...

    Why is it so "fantastic"??

    It's the same old whining and complaining that lacks the hysterical name-calling that would have accompanied it if it had happened under a GOP Administration...

    The problem I have with "fantastic" pieces like this is that it only points fingers when there is GOP'er to point the finger it. It makes lackluster accusations about general "government" that lacks the specificity that there would be if GOP targets were available.

    In short, nothing more than than partisanship snipping looking for a target..

    Now, if it would have actually held the Obama Administration accountable for these actions, THAT would have been a "fantastic" piece...

    As it is, it's simply the same old same old non-committal, "Oh this stuff is bad but we can't upset Emperor Barack the First"....

    That's my 2 cents anyways...

  11. [11] 
    Michale wrote:

    As it is, it's simply the same old same old non-committal, "Oh this stuff is bad but we can't upset Emperor Barack the First"....

    That's my 2 cents anyways...

    And, if you want to drag this favorite author of yours in here, I'll tell him the same thing.. :D

  12. [12] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Hilarious.

    Michale, ya know there are much shorter ways to say you did not read the piece but instead skimmed a couple of paragraphs and assumed the rest...

  13. [13] 
    Michale wrote:

    Michale, ya know there are much shorter ways to say you did not read the piece but instead skimmed a couple of paragraphs and assumed the rest...

    Honestly? I read more than half..

    But yer right, I did get bored with all the incessant whining and the Koom Bye Ya/Perfect World stuff... Every time I read a milquetoast "condemnation" of the programs, I would ask myself what the author would be saying if it had been a BUSH POTUS instead of an OBAMA POTUS..

    But I tell ya what. If you promise me it gets better, that there is actually some HONESTY in it rather than nothing more than partisan cheerleading/traffic cop on valium type stuff, I'll hold my nose and read the whole thing..

    In short, if it actually lays some blame where blame should be laid and does so w/o ANY regard to the '-x' after the persons name, I'll read the whole thing and report back..

  14. [14] 
    Michale wrote:

    On another note...

    Senior U.S. Official: Intercepted Al Qaeda Communications Indicate Planned Attack ‘Big,’ ‘Strategically Significant’
    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/08/senior-u-s-official-intercepted-al-qaeda-communications-indicate-planned-attack-big-strategically-significant/

    That's weird..

    Obama TOLD us that "Al Qaeda was on the ropes" and "Al Qaeda was decimated"....

    Could the Obama Administration have LIED to us?? I mean, wasn't the Leftist Mantra "Bush Lied And People Died" all the big rage during the Bush Administration???

    So, NOW the Left is silent when Obama lies??

    What's up with THAT!???

  15. [15] 
    Michale wrote:

    To be fair...

    Reading over some public (and not so public) reports of the intel gathered, it IS possible that what we are seeing are the death spasms of a dying Al Qaeda...

    I would be remiss in my "fair and balanced" :D duties if I did not acknowledge the possibility...

    If we ARE seeing the death lurchings of Al Qaeda this will be evidenced by a broad series of attacks against soft targets across a broad spectrum of targets all over the world. Basically, AQ sending out it's minions in one grand mass orgy of suicide attacks...

    This type of attack would likely herald the end of Al Qaeda as a viable threat.

    On the other hand, if we see a focused strategic attack with one pin-point target, or series of targets in a localized area (think 9-11), then that would indicate that Al Qaeda is alive and well and it's operational status has been unaffected by recent drone based attack successes.

    Time will tell whether this is the beginning of the end of Al Qaeda as a terrorist threat or the beginning of a new and stronger Al Qaeda..

    Remember, you heard it here first...

  16. [16] 
    akadjian wrote:

    A fantastic piece [medium.com] on the current NSA scandal by Bruce Sterling, one of my favorite authors.

    Bashi-

    I had the pleasure to meet Richard Stallman quite a ways back and it still amazes me that he anticipated so much about the Internet- the political implications, the fights for ownership, and the inevitable crackdown in an attempt to control information.

    He's a bit out there to be sure, but tremendously interesting.

    -David

  17. [17] 
    Michale wrote:

    He's a bit out there to be sure, but tremendously interesting.

    Yea... So is Rush Limbaugh.... :D

  18. [18] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    But yer right, I did get bored with all the incessant whining and the Koom Bye Ya/Perfect World stuff... Every time I read a milquetoast "condemnation" of the programs, I would ask myself what the author would be saying if it had been a BUSH POTUS instead of an OBAMA POTUS..

    Are you sure you read any of it? I did not notice any whining. Quite the opposite, he finds the whole situation hilarious. But Bruce Sterling is a well known scifi author who has been writing since the 70's and an expert on early hacker culture. You should be able to find his opinions on similar situations for any of the previous four presidents if he has any. From what I have read beyond his fiction, he is pretty politically independent/agnostic. More so than you. Though he tends a bit left, not anywhere close to how far you lean right. His take on the NSA is not left/right but more from a tech/hacker perspective.

    Yea... So is Rush Limbaugh.... :D

    Do you not know who Stallman is or are you just trolling? I would say a better comparison would be Ron Paul. But I would think you would be all over Stallman. Aren't you always looking for someone from the left to take Obama to task? Well there's your poster child in spades...

  19. [19] 
    Michale wrote:

    Had I actually read the article to completion, I would have known how Stallman fitted into the picture.. I didn't so that's on me..

    Regardless, I see nothing that changes my opinion that Sterling's piece is nothing more than a milquetoast "condemnation" of vital intelligence tools and procedures, necessary to the survival of this country.. Such condemnation where pointing fingers at the culprits is noticeably missing..

    I WOULD be interested to see an article on this subject from the Bush years and compare/contrast the tone to what he wrote today.

    I WOULD be interested.... but not interested enough to search it out myself...

    Do you not know who Stallman is or are you just trolling?

    Are you seriously wanting to know?? Or are you just trolling? :D

  20. [20] 
    akadjian wrote:

    I would say a better comparison would be Ron Paul.

    How about Milton Friedman, Bashi?

    -David

  21. [21] 
    Michale wrote:

    How about Milton Friedman, Bashi?

    Wasn't he that stunt pilot that got stranded on Gilligan's Island??

    Oh wait, that was Wrong-Way Feldman..

    My bust.... :D

  22. [22] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    How about Milton Friedman, Bashi?

    Though of similar brilliance and academic achievement, I don't think Friedman was wacky enough. Stallman, like Paul are principled to a fault and both have some pretty out there ideas. I mainly read of Stallman on tech blogs. I think his absolute, my way or the high way, dedication to open source is not doing the open source movement any favors. I also think it's ironic that all his information privacy ideas, many of which I do myself, are completely trumped by who he is. He is so famous and followed by a cross section of the most wired people on the planet that regardless of his privacy settings and practices, the subconscious internet knows where he is and what he is doing at all times.

    I find nothing interesting with Rush Limbaugh nor is he "out there" in any way. Ron Paul is out there. Though I disagree with most of his ideas some of them are quite interesting. I definitely have a soft spot for his idea of issuing letters of marque again...

  23. [23] 
    akadjian wrote:

    Stallman, like Paul are principled to a fault and both have some pretty out there ideas.

    Yeah, Stallman insists on owning a computer where all of the code is open. Including the BIOS. His entire focus is on freedom of code so this is the extreme he takes things too.

    But dang I used to love EMACS :)

    Friedman's a bit religious when it comes to his own work too though. Probably not to Stallman extremes though.

    -David

  24. [24] 
    Michale wrote:

    Here's another perfect example:

    “They’re athletes, they’re there to compete. And if Russia wants to uphold the Olympic spirit, then every judgment should be made on the track, or in the swimming pool, or on the balance beam, and people’s sexual orientation shouldn’t have anything to do with it.”
    -President Barack Obama, referencing the upcoming Winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia...

    If Bush had made such a bone-headed comment, it would light up the MSM for days....

    But, from the MSM under Obama???

    {{chiirrrrppp}} {chiiiirrrrpppp}

Comments for this article are closed.