Hot Fudge Sunday

Dr. Rajiv Shah

As a regular Sunday feature, 538 Refugees is hosting a weekly discussion about what you liked, and what you hated, in this week’s Sunday news shows.

According to the Associated Press, this is the lineup for Sunday news shows today:

This Week (ABC): Sens. John Kerry, D-MA, and Richard Lugar, R-IN; Rajiv Shah, administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development.

Face the Nation (CBS): Sens. Carl Levin, D-MI; Lindsey Graham, R-SC; Jeff Sessions, R-AL; Amy Klobuchar, D-MN

Mark McKinnon

Meet the Press (NBC): Vice President Joe Biden; Mayor Cory Booker of Newark, N.J.; Republican strategist Mark McKinnon.

State of the Union (CNN): Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-KY; Fredric Rolando, president of the National Association of Letter Carriers; Zalmay Khalilzad, a former U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan; retired Adm. William Fallon, a former Commander of U.S. Central Command; retired Gen. Richard Myers, a former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Fox News Sunday: Sens. Dick Durbin, D-IL, and Jon Kyl, R-AZ; Gov. Bob McDonnell, R-VA


About Monotreme

Monotreme is an unabashedly liberal dog lover, writer, and former scientist who now teaches at a University in an almost-square state out West somewhere. http://www.logarchism.com | http://www.sevendeadlysynapses.com
This entry was posted in Hot Fudge Sunday. Bookmark the permalink.

54 Responses to Hot Fudge Sunday

  1. filistro says:

    Hey, this is a great thread! Does anybody else have a rigidly obsessive schedule for the Sunday shows? I watch MSNBC until 9:00, at which time I PVR “Reliable Sources” on CNN while watching Meet the Press. At 10:00 I watch State of the Union, and at 11 I either watch Fareed Zakaria or go back and pick up my recording of Reliable Sources.

    (All times MST)

    I’m looking forward to seeing Mark McKinnon on MTP… I’m really interested in this “No Labels” movement he’s trying to get going.

  2. filistro says:

    Watching MTP now… Biden did great, as usual. I love that guy 🙂

    No wonder Mark McKinnon has to go with No Labels. He can’t call himself “conservative” or “Republican” while wearing that cool trendy scarf.

    Republicans just don’t DO “cool”

  3. filistro says:

    Andrea Mitchell says “the dumbest thing the Republicans have ever done is voting down the DREAM Act.”

    I agree. How do they think they can win elections while constantly telling Hispanics… “you’re icky, you’re poopy, we don’t want any of you here, not even your soldiers or your valedictorians… GET OUT, and take your little dog with you…”

    Dumb, dumb, dumb.

  4. shiloh says:

    No longer watch the Sunday news shows and that indeed, is quite enjoyable! 😀

    Maybe it has something to do w/redundancy er ad nauseam political spin/misinformation er nothing new under the sun …

    If anybody says anything profound lol it’s on kos or HP immediately, which is a real time saver. Of course this process works well Mon thru Sat also. It also works well w/regular tv speaking of nothing new under the sun ~ thank god for sports, eh.

    Hey, they’re even running out of new ideas for reality tv, gasp! 😉

  5. dcpetterson says:

    @filistro

    Andrea Mitchell says “the dumbest thing the Republicans have ever done is voting down the DREAM Act.”

    But political scapegoats are so useful. They allow us to ignore the real problems while making us feel as if we’re doing something.

  6. filistro says:

    @shiloh… I LOVE the Sunday shows. They’re like chocolate for me. I especially enjoy the little off-the-cuff nuggets that give me something to think about all week.

    For instance I’ve now moved onto Reliable Sources (one of my favorites… I’m a total lightweight 😉 and Katrina Van den Heuvel just said.. “The real political divide in this country is not right-left. It’s top-down.

    Now, that’s the kind of thought I can muse over for hours.

  7. filistro says:

    Reliable Sources moves on to Palin and her bitter relationship with the press.

    Which makes me muse further… I know candidates can win primaries while being very adversarial with the press. (witness Sharron Angle et al) But has anybody ever won a GENERAL election while avoiding and badmouthing the press thr way Palin does? Can’t offhand think of any….

    Hey.. where is everybody? I know all the righties are in church, but what about the rest of you? Are all the lefties hungover and sleeping off a night of debauchery, or what? 😉

  8. fopplssiegeparty says:

    I have a hard time watching the news, political shows, etc., because it is an inefficient way to receive information. They just move way too slow.

  9. dcpetterson says:

    I usually have to play catch-up by reading about the Sunday morning shows afterwards, or watching clips.

    I”m thinking it may take a week or to two get readers hooked on this new feature. It’ll generate viewership for the Sunday shows, too.

  10. shiloh says:

    Used to watch The McLaughlin Group religiously, but stopped after the 2008 election as Monica Crowley is an acquired taste! Watch Keith and Rachel most of the time, unless sports interferes. The History/Discovery channels are quite good, especially MythBusters. Try not to miss NCIS and House.

    carry on

  11. Monotreme says:

    I really rue missing MTP but around here, they run it impossibly early so they can clear the morning for the LDS shows. The NBC affiliate is owned by the Church (literally) so 19th century theology takes precedence over current events.

  12. Monotreme says:

    I have a crush on Katrina Van den Heuvel, by the way. She’s so damn smart.

  13. filistro says:

    @shiloh… Used to watch The McLaughlin Group religiously, but stopped after the 2008 election as Monica Crowley is an acquired taste!

    Oh, me too!!

    McLaughlin Group was always one of my faves (despite Eleanor Clift annoyingly screaming to be heard above the cross-talk). I still watch every week, but Monica Crowley makes me want to yell unladylike things and toss stuff at the TV.

    When you look up “smug” in the dictionary, you find a picture of Monica Crowley.

    Though I’ve always had a soft spot for Pat Buchanan, that wily old paleocon. I can’t imagine why… I just like the guy. I think maybe he reminds me of my Dad.

  14. shiloh says:

    Liked Jack Germond ’cause he was always the smartest pundit and he would make fun of McLaughlin ~ McLaughlin was a Jesuit priest and I went to a Jesuit HS 😉 btw, how does one go from being a Jesuit priest to a speech writer for Nixon ?!?

    Through a friendship with Pat Buchanan, McLaughlin became a war supporter and a speech writer and adviser to U.S. President Richard Nixon. Because priests are not allowed to take on political jobs, he was ordered by his Jesuit superiors to return to Boston and, rather than obey, he left the Society of Jesus.

    Praise the Lord! 😀

    Re: Buchanan I’ll apply the Golden Rule! 🙂

  15. Bart DePalma says:

    filistro says: “Andrea Mitchell says “the dumbest thing the Republicans have ever done is voting down the DREAM Act.” I agree. How do they think they can win elections while constantly telling Hispanics… “you’re icky, you’re poopy, we don’t want any of you here, not even your soldiers or your valedictorians… GET OUT, and take your little dog with you…”

    1) Opposing illegal immigration does not equal thinking hispanics are poopy. The same folks who opposed illegal immigration think Marco Rubio is the best thing since sliced bread.

    2) Hispanic and more importantly hispanic voter does not automatically equal support for granting amnesty to illegal immigrants. 38% of hispanic voters in 2010 went GOP despite the party’s very open argument that the US needs to secure its borders before considering any path to citizenship for illegals.

    Hell, 25% of hispanic adults supported the Arizona statute to enforce federal immigration law. http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/07/27/rel10f1a.pdf Given that this CNN poll did not limit itself to American citizens, very likely the level of hispanic opposition to the law is heavily inflated by polled illegal aliens who would be the law’s targets.

    3) Finally, how precisely will the Dems obtain a future electoral windfall and the GOP an electoral loss from opposing illegal immigration if these immigrants are not granted amnesty and do not gain the vote? Given that 70% of Americans who support Arizona’s attempt to enforce our immigration laws far, far outnumber the number of hispanics (many of whom cannot vote legally) who oppose that attempt, I would say that it is the GOP which holds both the moral, legal and electoral high ground on this issue.

  16. filistro says:

    @Bart.. I would say that it is the GOP which holds both the moral, legal and electoral high ground on this issue.

    Would you really?

    I’m not characterizing the GOP outlook, Bart. I’m just presenting the way it looks to Hispanics. You can try, with your usual magical thinking, to minimize the real and growing impact of this voting bloc… but that won’t make it go away.

    If you really think the GOP holds “the electoral high ground” on immigration… perhaps you might want to ask Sharron Angle “how’s that high-ground thingy workin’ out for ya?”

  17. Jean says:

    fili,

    re: filistro says: “Andrea Mitchell says “the dumbest thing the Republicans have ever done is voting down the DREAM Act.”

    FOX NEWS’ JUAN WILLIAMS: The one thing that I regret…is the defeat of the DREAM Act for the immigrants and the immigrant kids. I just think, again, Republicans play politics with real lives, real people, real aspirations and they leave the immigration issue on the table when that’s the real business of the American people.

    Bill Kristol complained to Williams that the real reason the GOP opposed the measure is because he claimed they didn’t know anything about it. “ Do you know how many hearings there were in either house, in the House or the Senate on the DREAM Act over the past two years? Zero,” he said. “You know it’s almost anti-American, Bill,” Williams said in response, adding, “and the reason they couldn’t discuss it was because the talk show hosts in America the right-wing talk show hosts would beat up any Republican who supported a realistic effort.”

    Republicans certainly recognize who their masters are. And incoming 2011 Teaper legislators will learn that same lesson.

    No wonder the Republicans were madder than a wet hen at having to vote on the DREAM act. The stand-alone DREAM Act vote exposed the hypocrites; they could no longer hide. You are either for or against.

  18. shiloh says:

    Bartles ~ I would say

    As you provide no evidence, as per usual, I would say you’re wrong.

    Again, Reps beat Dems generically by (5) million nationwide in 2010 as (29) million 2008 Obama voters stayed home.

    See ‘ya Nov. 2012 after boehner has been the face of the Rep party for (2) years ~ good luck w/that!

    take care

  19. filistro says:

    Bart… it might be instructive for you to look at this chart … and then ask yourself what the electoral college is going to look like in a few years if the Republicans continue to dump all over Latinos.

    It would have cost them nothing to vote for DREAM. A group of students who were brought here as babies, have been “Americans” all their lives, excel at school and are willing to either attend college or serve in the military. Solid, desirable citizens. And the “yes” vote would have bought the GOP a ton of goodwill.

    Their across-the-board resistance to any pro-Latino initiative is not just myopic, it’s viciously mean-spirited.

    And dumb, dumb, dumb.

  20. dcpetterson says:

    We make a big mistake if we think Hispanics are the only ones who care about the DREAM act. Many of us who are not Hispanic don’t buy into the right wing desire to find scapegoats and to turn America into a medieval walled city.

    The hatred and hypocrisy of the right wing will be on display for the next two years. Their refusal to humanely address the problem of immigration is of a piece with their arrogant passion for providing tax giveaways to the wealthy while opposing an extension of unemployment benefits for the people whom those same Republicans kicked out of work. Their opposition to repeal of DADT is the same sort of thing. So is the false outrage over the Islamic Community Center in lower Manhattan. So is their stance on same-sex marriage.

    We’re not blind to the ways this narrow minded hatred manifests. Any way they can, they slice off a segment of humanity and make it a despised “other.” Even those not directly targeted by these despicable divisive techniques should be concerned. Anyone who cares about the Constitution needs to oppose power grabs such as the Arizona pro-racism law. Anyone concerned with liberty and with the ideals of our Founders will recoil in horror at the ways the Republicans treat Hispanics and gays and those of minority religions.

    The Republicans are making grave errors by overreaching on these issues, so nakedly displaying their arrogance and intolerance and racism and greed. There is nothing American in these attitudes, nothing pro-family or even pro-human. The GOteaPers will be called to account.

  21. Jean says:

    Want to help push Sarah Palin as the “preferred pick for the GOP President candidate? There’s a poll at:

    http://www.redstate.com/erick/2010/12/19/2012-asked-another-way-2/

    And you can vote multiple times if your computer has a dynamic IP address rather than a static IP address.

  22. dcpetterson says:

    Another factor that needs to be part of the discussion about “illegal immigrants”, something that I’ve never seen mentioned.

    “Illegal immigrants” dos not describe some inherent class of being. People are only “illegal immigrants” because we say they are. The concept was created by an act of Congress. It can be altered the same way.

    “Granting amnesty” (as the narrow right likes to call it) is really just a matter of changing the legal definition. People will no longer be “illegal immigrants” if Congress says they aren’t.

    Just as DADT was repealed by an act of Congress — because the law was also created by an act of Congress — so too can the artificial category of “illegal immigrant” be altered or eliminated by something no more complex than an act of Congress. Then POOF! one more artificially-created right-wing scapegoat goes away. They’d have to change their rhetoric, and admit the racist undertones.

    This is a big reason the arrogant Right opposes the DREAM act. It takes away something for them to hate.

  23. filistro says:

    BREAKING NEWS… in late night surprise move, Senate passes food safety bill by unanimous consent.

    Additional surprise… Freepers are ABSOLUTELY LIVID.

    Apparently the GOP are also opposed to food safety. I assume anti-food-safety is the “moral, legal and electoral high ground.”

  24. dcpetterson says:

    @filistro

    Hot damn!

    Harry Reid is doing a great job of completing as much of the nation’s business as he can. The 111th Congress has been incredibly productive, despite continual Republican obstructionism. The number of major and historic pieces of legislation that have been shepherded through is truly amazing. I think when we look back on these past two years, with the benefit of some perspective, we’ll be very pleased.

    And I think it will be a marked contrast to the next two years, when I expect America’s business to languish under the gridlock caused by Republican Teaperism.

  25. dcpetterson says:

    ONe of the best quotes from Freeperville:

    Does anybody know what’s in it? I can’t help believe that it’s another abomination.

    They oppose the food safety law on general principle, without making the effort even to find out what it’s about. Amazing.

  26. Jean says:

    Despite Bart’s magical thinking that overturning DADT was not even a blip on the right wing’s radar screen, the religious right of his party disagrees:

    A few weeks ago, dozens of Religious Right leaders signed on to a letter calling for any effort to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell to be put off until next year (when Republican gains in Congress would allow them to kill any such effort).

    And prior to Saturday’s vote on DADT, a memo written by Freedom Federation founder Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel was distributed to his Religious Right allies laying out the ten senators they intended to target. Senators need to know that they will be held accountable for how they vote on this issue.

    Within the next 48 hours be sure to communicate with your constituencies that the following ten Senators in the following states must be contacted, urging them to vote against overturning DADT:

    Ben Nelson – Nebraska
    Jon Tester – Montana
    Kent Conrad – North Dakota
    Joe Manchin – West Virginia
    Jim Webb – Virginia
    Claire McCaskill – Missouri
    Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe – Maine
    Scott Brown – Massachusetts
    Lisa Murkowski – Alaska

    These ten Senators need to get the clear message that each of them will have to choose which set of supporters they want in 2012 when they run for reelection. We need to make the choice very clear.

    http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/frc-endorse-and-fund-primary-challenges-any-senator-supports-dadt-repeal

    And just in case this didn’t work, there were also the usual alerts to pray that the “evil plans … to foist ungodly laws upon our nation” will be thwarted.

    http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/frc-losing-it-over-dadt

  27. Monotreme says:

    My father-in-law was an illegal immigrant.

    He was born in Sweden to a German mother who had fled her family. His mother took him to America when he was one year old, in 1900. He lied and claimed his birthplace was Craig, Colorado when he enlisted in the Army in World War I. He was among the last of the farriers, serving in the actual cavalry when it still had horses. He worked hard all his life as a truck driver in New York City and I was fortunate enough to marry his only child, a daughter, who became my wife.

    His ashes are interred in the Sepulveda VA Cemetery in Los Angeles. He has a military marker honoring his service.

    If you object to any of this, Bart, just let me know. I will disinter his ashes, disrespecting his distinguished service to this country, and stuff them down your ignorant gullet.

    As Juan Williams said, real people with real lives and real stories.

  28. dcpetterson says:

    @Jean,

    Some followers of Teaperism hold a belief in the Divine Omnipotence of Teapers. If the Teapers want something, it happens. If they don’t, it doesn’t. If something happens, then the Teapers either must have wanted it, or didn’t care about stopping it.

    When the thing you worship is all-powerful, there can be no other explanation.

  29. drfunguy says:

    Congress, Republican or Democrat, has a history of using bill with names like Food Safety and Modernization Act to reward industrial agriculture and smooth the path that paves over small scale local ag. For example because of regulations in the name of food safety you have a very hard time finding meat that isn’t from a huge, confined animal operation. Ironically this makes your food less safe. When I hear ‘modernization” I think GMO…
    I haven’t read the bill but it is possible that Freepers are right.
    Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

  30. drfunguy says:

    Food regulations include several instances where Canada is less progressive (? at least more restrictive) than the US. One being that raw milk is banned nationwide. Another is that small abatoires are more strictly regulated north of the border as I understand it.

  31. mclever says:

    @dcpetterson

    “Granting amnesty” (as the narrow right likes to call it) is really just a matter of changing the legal definition. People will no longer be “illegal immigrants” if Congress says they aren’t.

    What an astute observation.

    It seems self-evident that any illegal behavior governed by law becomes legal if the law is changed, but that point is so rarely made. Law isn’t immutable, it changes as the needs of the land and society change. There are plenty of examples of things that were formerly illegal but have become legal when the law was repealed or changed.

    Obviously changing laws is possible, because there are are even rules about “grandfathering” people for prior behavior. For example, if I understand the way things work, Congress can’t pass a law to retroactively make something illegal, but they can make something retroactively legal. So therefore, they would be well within their powers to retroactively declare certain immigrants legal.

  32. Monotreme says:

    DC is correct.

    Another aspect is the use of the word “amnesty”. When I get a speeding ticket, and I pay a fine in lieu of a court appearance, we don’t call it “amnesty”.

    “Amnesty”, by definition, is the forgiveness of a crime. What has been proposed in almost all legislation I’ve seen is some way of compensating government for a crime which has been committed, for example, by serving in the military or paying a fine. This is “conditional amnesty”, which doesn’t have the same rhetorical zing to it.

    The disingenuous abuse of the English language bothers me almost as much as the small-mindedness of the anti-immigrant lobby.

  33. GROG says:

    The DREAM act is about one thing and one thing only. As fili admitted above, it’s about currying the favor of an entire voting block. It has nothing to do with the moral high ground.

  34. filistro says:

    @GROG… . As fili admitted above, it’s about currying the favor of an entire voting block

    GROG, when people at this site attack you just for being a Republican, and I defend you because I think that in your case, they’re not being fair to you…. I’m not trying to “curry the favor” of all other Republicans.

    I’m just trying to do the right thing.

  35. Monotreme says:

    @GROG,

    Two things.

    1. It was the norm, throughout most of the 20th century in America, for soldiers to enjoy an expedited path to citizenship. My father-in-law’s story, above, is an example of this. See, for example, http://www.footnote.com/page/1486_index_to_naturalizations_of_world_war_i/

    2. Immigrants were given an expedited path to citizenship according to a 2002 Executive Order:
    http://www.migrationinformation.org/feature/display.cfm?ID=683
    http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/stories/112806dnteximmigmilitary.331e2bd.html

    Executive Orders are signed by Presidents. Who was President in 2002? Was he simply trying to “curry favor” in a particular demographic?

  36. dcpetterson says:

    What follows below is absolutely the last word on the topic of immigration. Anything else is superfluous.

    The New Colossus
    Emma Lazarus

    Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
    With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
    Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
    A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
    Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
    Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
    Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
    The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
    “Keep ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she
    With silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor,
    Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
    The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
    Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
    I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

  37. GROG says:

    @fili and treme,

    Perhaps I made a bit of an overstatement, but I can’t help to smell a bit of political posturing here. The Republicans would be smart to embrace the bill as well, but should they do it because they believe in it or so they can garner more latino support in coming elections?

  38. filistro says:

    @GROG… The Republicans would be smart to embrace the bill as well, but should they do it because they believe in it or so they can garner more latino support in coming elections?

    No, they should do it because it’s the right thing to do.

  39. mclever says:

    GROG,

    I think what those who point out the rising Latino demographic are trying to say is that not only is it WRONG to oppose compassionate and positive legislation like the DREAM act, but it’s self-destructive in the long-term because of the way opposition to this (and other similar legislation) appears to that rising demographic.

    It’s one of those things that puzzles long-term thinkers, because the short-term gains of winning an election or two based on vilification and appeals to hate don’t seem to be worth it.

  40. filistro says:

    What mclever said.

    Yes.

    Precisely.

  41. shiloh says:

    Actually again the obvious re: grog/Reps/attack

    The final vote total was 55-41 — well above what would be needed for the bill to pass in a normal vote. Many previously undecided Democrats voted in support of the bill, as did Republican Sens. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Bob Bennett (R-Utah).

    But others voted mostly along party-lines. Six Democrats voted against the bill: Sens. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), Mark Pryor (D-Ark.), Jon Tester (D-Mt.), Max Baucus (D-Mt.) and Kay Hagan (D-N.C.), who switched her vote to a “no” at the last minute.

    Soooo Lugar, Murkowski and Bennett did the right thing for whatever reason and should be praised!

    Whereas Nelson, Pryor, Tester, Baucus, Hagan are spineless schmucks and should be condemned. btw, somebody doesn’t know how to count.

    >

    and grog, to continue to post at 538 after saying …

    I haven’t commented much lately as I’ve decided this site seems to be better suited to a leftwing echo chamber audience. I don’t want to be a troll. Best of luck.

    Makes you look like an idiot. Your continued ad nauseam hyperbole and nonsensical deflections notwithstanding.

    take care

  42. filistro says:

    Here’s another little gem from that secular, small government, “we’re not really into all that religious stuff ” Tea Party.

    It’s a church fight!

    Judson Phillips, founder of Tea Party Nation, puts up a blog post advocating the destruction of the Methodist Church.

    Why? Well duh… because they support the Dream Act. And they allow Hillary Clinton to be a member.

    Clearly they have no right to exist and breathe the same pure, sanctified, God-anointed air required by True Teapers.

    Inquisition, roll on! Off with their heads!

  43. mclever says:

    @filistro

    I’m sure my Tea Party parents who are long-time members of the United Methodist Church will be shocked–shocked!–to learn that the Tea Party hates their church.

    Moreso than most denominations, Methodists have a very “open” philosophy, where part of their founding principles includes an acknowledgment that not every member will agree with everything in their quadrennially updated official church doctrine. (Of course, someone must actually read everything in the doctrinal statements to notice, perhaps.) Some congregations are downright fundamentalist, and others are so liberal they’re almost Unitarian.

    That’s how Hillary Clinton and George W. Bush can both be Methodists!

  44. filistro says:

    @mclever… Some congregations are downright fundamentalist, and others are so liberal they’re almost Unitarian

    That’s odd, you’d think the Tea Party would welcome that kind of independent thinking.

    Because the Tea Party is “libertarian”, you know. Just ask Bart.

  45. mclever says:

    @filistro,

    Perhaps because I was raised as a Methodist, open-mindedness about doctrinal issues has always been part of my faith makeup. Like many, I don’t necessarily agree with every doctrinal point in the United Methodist Articles of Religion or Book of Discipline, but I appreciate that one of the key principles is an acknowledgment of my entitlement to have a different opinion. As the founder John Wesley said,”Though we may not think alike, may we not all love alike?” and “In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity.”

    I don’t really consider myself a Methodist these days. I’ve attended too many other churches as I’ve moved around the country. To my way of thinking, it’s not the name above the door that matters, but the message that’s taught inside. In accordance with the advice in I John 4, I listen to what is said and test it against the balance of what I know is right from scripture and experience. If it’s a message of division or hate, then I look for my spiritual nourishment elsewhere.

    I’d issue the same advice to those “purity test patriots” in the Tea Party. Listen to the message you’re preaching. If it’s one of division or hate, then it’s not of a spirit that will sustain itself.

  46. filistro says:

    mclever… everything you say, no matter what the subject may be, shines with intelligence, humour, good sense and decency. We’re lucky to have you here.

    (And besides, you’re just such a peach 🙂 🙂 🙂

  47. shiloh says:

    CWCID ~ Joe Manchin, WV was the other spineless schmuck, but in a category all his own ’cause he didn’t vote on Sat. as he had a Xmas party to go to which was more important than the nation’s business he was elected to serve.

    You can say many negative things about Sen. Byrd, but he would never miss an important senatorial vote because of a family party …

  48. filistro says:

    CNN released a new poll today.

    Some nuggets:

    Obama’s approval rating has improved among moderates – from 55 percent in November to 60 percent now. …

    The poll also indicates that 55 percent of the public thinks Obama’s policies will move the country in the right direction, with just over four in ten saying the president’s policies will move the nation in the wrong direction. Obama’s 55 percent is 11 points higher than the 44 percent who say the policies of congressional Republican leaders will move the country in the right direction.

    Fifty-one percent say that the GOP’s policies will move the country in the wrong direction.

    According to the poll, 56 percent of the public say that the tax bill does too much for wealthy Americans and six in ten don’t like extending the tax cuts for families making more than $250,000 or the changes in the estate tax. And less than one in four believe that their personal situation will improve as a result of the tax bill. Only four in ten favor an increase in the federal deficit to pay for tax cut compromise.

    But despite those figures, three-quarters of all Americans approve of the tax bill overall, including the extension of jobless benefits for the long term unemployed.

  49. filistro says:

    Didn’t Bart say just last week that Obama has lost the moderates and he’ll never get them back?

    And that’s all just 6 weeks after the election. Wait till we’ve had two years of do-nothing Republicans, cloying Palin-worship and Teapers sucking up to their corporate masters while voting against things like health care for 9/11 heroes, the DREAM Act and securing loose nukes.

    We might just see a REAL electoral realignment, and not the pretend one Bart was so excited about.

    SURF’S UP!!! 😉

  50. filistro says:

    LOL… Olbermann’s show (hosted today by Chris Hayes) has a screen graphic in the corner that reads “LAME DUCK KICKS ELEPHANT BUTT”

    Don’t you just love it? 😎

  51. Max aka Birdpilot says:

    LOL, fili.

    I just posted that same poll on the Science Marches On blog!

  52. filistro says:

    Great minds, Max 😉

    It’s such a lovely poll, it deserves to be in two threads.

    These next two years are going to be SO enjoyable….

  53. dcpetterson says:

    I was going to link to this poll — but a third time would be both redundant and repetitive.

  54. dcpetterson says:

    Oh and please everyone, hold on to a link to this poll for the next time we hear bartings about the Will of the People.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s