|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Staring at the debt ceiling
|
Alfred E. Neuman
What? Me worry?
# 6855
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
The question is, "Who is a constituent?" If the majority of Americans can't be bothered to vote, and an even larger percentage of Americans never contribute to a political campaign, either in time or treasure, then the majority of Americans are not their constituents.
I'm sorry, I wasn't aware you lost your right to representative government by not voting. When did that come about?
[ 25. July 2011, 14:35: Message edited by: Alfred E. Neuman ]
Posts: 12954 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anyuta
Shipmate
# 14692
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alfred E. Neuman:
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
The question is, "Who is a constituent?" If the majority of Americans can't be bothered to vote, and an even larger percentage of Americans never contribute to a political campaign, either in time or treasure, then the majority of Americans are not their constituents.
I'm sorry, I wasn't aware you lost your right to representative government by not voting. When did that come about?
of course you don't.. but sadly politicians tend to feel pressure to represent those who are likely to vote and/or contribute to their campaign, rather than those who stay home on election day. it's not right, but it's reality.
Posts: 764 | From: USA | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alfred E. Neuman:
I'm sorry, I wasn't aware you lost your right to representative government by not voting. When did that come about?
What do you think "representation" means? Your representative is the proxy for those who elected him, not some generic ombudsman. A politician may find it in his interest to seek the good graces of those who have so far shown no interest in politics, in the hope that they may some day show some sign of civic life. But that is hardly the major point of politics.
--Tom Clune
[ 25. July 2011, 15:00: Message edited by: tclune ]
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
It's not just reality, it's the underlying presumption of representative democracy. The premise is that representatives will advance the will of the people, as expressed through the electoral process. Waiving participation in elections necessarily means that your opinions are not considered in electoral results.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alfred E. Neuman
What? Me worry?
# 6855
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
What do you think "representation" means? Your representative is the proxy for those who elected him, not some generic ombudsman...
Wrong. A representative, once elected, is responsible to ALL the people of his/her district - not just "those who elected him". At least, that's what I've always assumed. Lately, events have convinced me otherwise.
Posts: 12954 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alfred E. Neuman:
A representative, once elected, is responsible to ALL the people of his/her district - not just "those who elected him". At least, that's what I've always assumed. Lately, events have convinced me otherwise.
What a stunningly vapid notion! If all people are in agreement, then trivially your elective official represents them all. The point is, when people do not agree, he represents the people who elected him -- that's why there was an election.
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alfred E. Neuman
What? Me worry?
# 6855
|
Posted
So, you're saying that if I petition my representative for a redress of grievances and I didn't vote for him, he can tell me to stuff it? That's odd - I would think that our politicians weren't capable of tracking who voted for them.
--------------------
--Formerly: Gort--
Posts: 12954 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
quote:
Originally posted by Alfred E. Neuman:
A representative, once elected, is responsible to ALL the people of his/her district - not just "those who elected him". At least, that's what I've always assumed. Lately, events have convinced me otherwise.
What a stunningly vapid notion! If all people are in agreement, then trivially your elective official represents them all. The point is, when people do not agree, he represents the people who elected him -- that's why there was an election.
--Tom Clune
There's a lot more to representing your constituents than voting and speaking in whatever debating chamber you sit in. Constituents plead for help and intervention with all sorts of things, and if a repesentative wants to be re-elected his or her performance on these can make a huge difference. I don't know how things are with Senators and Representatives but for our Members of Parliament who are not cabinet ministers it's a priority.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
There's a lot more to representing your constituents than voting and speaking in whatever debating chamber you sit in. Constituents plead for help and intervention with all sorts of things, and if a repesentative wants to be re-elected his or her performance on these can make a huge difference. I don't know how things are with Senators and Representatives but for our Members of Parliament who are not cabinet ministers it's a priority.
Most representatives will still send out a card to granny's 100th birthday if asked. But the old-fashioned roll-up-your-sleeves advocacy for individuals in his district is pretty much an artifact of days gone by around here.
I have on occasion written to legislators on behalf of people who needed their help in dealing with the bureaucracy. I normally write every rep and senator applicable, and it is less than 50/50 that even one of them will actually look into the matter.
If the issue is big enough -- the battle between Washington state and Georgia (?) for airline contracts, for example, will bring out the politicians. But old-fashioned "retail" politics is pretty much gone on this side of the Atlantic. Some folks attribute that to the requirements of constant fund-raising in politics now, but I really don't know why.
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anyuta
Shipmate
# 14692
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
There's a lot more to representing your constituents than voting and speaking in whatever debating chamber you sit in. Constituents plead for help and intervention with all sorts of things, and if a repesentative wants to be re-elected his or her performance on these can make a huge difference. I don't know how things are with Senators and Representatives but for our Members of Parliament who are not cabinet ministers it's a priority.
Most representatives will still send out a card to granny's 100th birthday if asked. But the old-fashioned roll-up-your-sleeves advocacy for individuals in his district is pretty much an artifact of days gone by around here.
I have on occasion written to legislators on behalf of people who needed their help in dealing with the bureaucracy. I normally write every rep and senator applicable, and it is less than 50/50 that even one of them will actually look into the matter.
If the issue is big enough -- the battle between Washington state and Georgia (?) for airline contracts, for example, will bring out the politicians. But old-fashioned "retail" politics is pretty much gone on this side of the Atlantic. Some folks attribute that to the requirements of constant fund-raising in politics now, but I really don't know why.
--Tom Clune
well, I don't know waht precentage of such issues actually get looked into, but I do know that we in my Agency are very, very frequently sent letters from Congress asking us to look into this or that complaint by a constituent. I don't know what precentage of the total that represents, but it's definitely a LOT of letters. and most are about trivial matters or matters that would have been more easily dealt with by calling the appropriate Office in the Agency directly. But it IS true that those Congressional letters get attention (there is a formal process for tracking them, and a short timeline for response).
I think it's fairly obvious that a representative is meant to represent his entire constituency, as a whole, as well as individuals within it, regardless of whether they voted. For one thing, he or she needs not only to think of the peple that voted form the last time, but also people who may or may not vote for them next time.. piss off a non voter enough and he/she may well feel motivated to vote against you next time.
Posts: 764 | From: USA | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
Of course. In theory a representative represents the whole district that sent them to Congress or Parliament. That's why they are called "representatives" and not "delegates".
In practice, at least in Britain, most MPs and local councillors will offer what assistance they can to people who are not supporters of their party and did not vote for them. It goes with the job. Some aare better than others. Some let it take over their lives, others do it reluctantly and occsaionally, but I think they pretty much all do it.
They won't change their vote because someone asked them - though even in America, I would imagine, a Representative might try to support legislation that favoured local businesses in their district - if only because they want to win more votes?
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
On the one hand: yes, a representative is supposed to represent the interests of his or her constituency whether or not they voted for him or her.
On the other hand, he or she has announced how they intend to do so in their prospectus. If you think your personal interests, or indeed the interests of the constituency as a whole, won't be met in that way I don't think you really have any procedural grounds for complaint. (Unless their plans are illegal in their own right.)
[ 25. July 2011, 18:31: Message edited by: Dafyd ]
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
quote:
Originally posted by Alfred E. Neuman:
A representative, once elected, is responsible to ALL the people of his/her district - not just "those who elected him". At least, that's what I've always assumed. Lately, events have convinced me otherwise.
What a stunningly vapid notion! If all people are in agreement, then trivially your elective official represents them all. The point is, when people do not agree, he represents the people who elected him -- that's why there was an election.
Uh, no. The elected official is supposed to represent all their constituents, no matter who they voted for or if they voted at all It's a requirement of the job.
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
Amid dueling debt plans, Obama to address nation. (Reuters, via Yahoo.)
Looks like it's tonight: 9 pm Eastern, 6 pm Pacific.
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
"Super Congress" proposed to break deadlock.
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alfred E. Neuman
What? Me worry?
# 6855
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
... If you think your personal interests, or indeed the interests of the constituency as a whole, won't be met in that way I don't think you really have any procedural grounds for complaint. (Unless their plans are illegal in their own right.)
There is little media coverage of the recent Wisconsin Senate debacle (with looming federal debt crisis demanding attention) but it's a clear example of politicians with an agenda that wasn't revealed during their campaigns. They passed legislation ending workers' collective bargaining rights and now six Republican Senators are facing recall elections initiated by outraged citizens' petitions.
Posts: 12954 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
"Super Congress" proposed to break deadlock.
Perfect. Then we can spend from passage of whatever they enact until next election watching the legal challenges to the proposal.
![[Mad]](angryfire.gif) ![[Projectile]](graemlins/puke2.gif) ![[Waterworks]](graemlins/bawling.gif)
--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!
Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
After the President's address, John Boner remains as intransigent as ever. His server is flooded at present, but I urge all Americans reading this to e-mail him as soon as the website will allow and tell him that he is an ineffectual leader of a seditious rabble that will make themselves unelectable in 2012 (suits me fine, of course). Message: future Republican wear will be tar and feathers.
Since they are determined to bring down the whole world economy with them, don't be shy about writing if you are from elsewhere in the Angloshere!
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
But please, if you're writing from another country, be up front about that.
You might remember when some European folks tried to interfere in...Dubya's re-election, I think, by writing pleading letters to average Americans, asking them not to vote for Bush. AIUI, it backfired.
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Grammatica
Shipmate
# 13248
|
Posted
Speaker Boehner's website is back up; I just e-mailed him here.
(PS: Croesus, I think you won that argument!)
Posts: 1058 | From: where the lemon trees blosson | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alfred E. Neuman:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
... If you think your personal interests, or indeed the interests of the constituency as a whole, won't be met in that way I don't think you really have any procedural grounds for complaint. (Unless their plans are illegal in their own right.)
There is little media coverage of the recent Wisconsin Senate debacle (with looming federal debt crisis demanding attention) but it's a clear example of politicians with an agenda that wasn't revealed during their campaigns. They passed legislation ending workers' collective bargaining rights and now six Republican Senators are facing recall elections initiated by outraged citizens' petitions.
I love it when the proles fight back.
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Luigi
Shipmate
# 4031
|
Posted
I found this an interesting contribution to this debate...
Posts: 752 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
The BBC's Mark Mardell describes it as a rather nasty game of "chicken". Mexican stand-off? Who will blink first?
Sometimes I wish negotiating skills and tactics had never become so professionalised. It's obviously far too serious for games. But statements like that have simply become grist to the "chicken" mill.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
Yes, its a game of chicken, but the Republicans seem to be intending to cut their own legs off as part of the dare.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
New Yorker
Shipmate
# 9898
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
After the President's address, John Boner remains as intransigent as ever.
Well, LSK, I hope you are not too surprised to learn that you and I disagree!
Our President is the who is as intransigent as ever. He is still insisting on tax increases, which are a bad idea in general but especially in a recession. The GOP has compromised. They've agreed to raise the debt ceiling something that is against the grain of many Republicans in the House.
The House passed a bipartisan bill that Mr. Reid would not even consider. Now Harry has come to agree with the GOP that we need to raise the debt ceiling and decrease spending but we do not need to raise taxes.
The two current proposals from yesterday are the Speaker's and the Senate Majority leaders. Neither contain tax increases. But the President went on television last night to blame the "rich" for not doing "their share." He still wants higher taxes.
We have two similar plans in Congress. Neither raise taxes. If the crisis is so bad, why didn't Obama say "send me one of those bills?" If one of those bills makes it to his desk, will he veto it?
This is why Boehner said negotiating with the White House was like negotiating with jello. You think you're making progress and then Obama moves the goal post. Congress has made progress and that does not include tax increases. Now Obama is wiggling around in the jello mould trying to undercut both the Republican and the Democratic plans.
Posts: 3193 | From: New York City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405
|
Posted
New Yorker, out of curiosity, what's your definition of "increase?"
The wealthiest members of US society got a temporary tax decrease under Bush. The current proposal, if I understand it, is to allow this tax cut to expire, allowing the tax rate on this subset of Americans to be restored to pre-Bush levels.
How is this a tax increase?
--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!
Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
The GOP has compromised. They've agreed to raise the debt ceiling something that is against the grain of many Republicans in the House.
NY, this is either cosmically ignorant or breathtakingly dishonest. Raising the debt limit means paying for what you've already bought. In what universe is doing that a "compromise?" In what universe is refusing to pay for what you chose to buy an honest bargaining position?
There isn't a shred of integrity in anything these folks are doing. It is anti-democratic and a threat to the economic fabric of the entire world, in the interest of getting yet another tax cut for the super rich. When the society's big winners turn into terrorists, there is little hope for us at all AFAICS.
--Tom Clune
[ 26. July 2011, 12:09: Message edited by: tclune ]
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
It's hard to believe the congressional republicans are so hell-bent on electoral suicide. They are truly stupid.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
sharkshooter
Not your average shark
# 1589
|
Posted
I would have thought a good leader would work with the parties to find a solution. I wonder how the speech last night helped.
--------------------
Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer. [Psalm 19:14]
Posts: 7772 | From: Canada; Washington DC; Phoenix; it's complicated | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
New Yorker
I see you don't see the chicken game, you just see a chicken! There are reasons why our mileage varies. It's important to read and look at news outlets whose political stance isn't the same as our own.
I look at Fox News. Don't like it, don't like it at all. But I check it out from time to time. Occasionally, I pick up something genuine and useful. Mostly I don't.
When news outlets tell different stories, I tend to turn to the BBC. After 60 years, that habit is pretty hard to break. The Beeb is by no means perfect, but it has an international reputation for its constitutional commitment to objective and balanced reporting. Fox News doesn't.
Here's Mark Mardell's opinion. It's hardly in favour of either Obama or Boehner.
There have been emergency times in the UK when we've had governments of national unity. I'm not sure the USA has either the political means or the political will to do that. There's a danger in all of this of fiddling (i.e in this case playing political "chicken") while "Rome" (i.e. what's left of global economic stability) burns. This isn't just a US problem. "When the US sneezes, the rest of the world catches cold?" It's a lot more serious than that for the global economy.
In that context, New Yorker, political partisanship in the US looks a pretty dangerous game, no matter who's playing it. Time for everyone to grow up.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
New Yorker
Shipmate
# 9898
|
Posted
quote:
In that context, New Yorker, political partisanship in the US looks a pretty dangerous game, no matter who's playing it. Time for everyone to grow up.
I whole-heartedly agree. This is no time for partianship. Yet, Obama sticks to his demand for tax increases when the bi-partisan trend in the Congress (which makes law) is for there to be no tax increases. Who is being partisan? Who is acting like a spoiled child?
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
The Beeb is by no means perfect, but it has an international reputation for its constitutional commitment to objective and balanced reporting. Fox News doesn't.
(Pardon me while I try to get the Two if by Tea out of the computer. I just spewed it out of my mouth reading the above.)
(There. That's better.)
All I can think of is the song the British army played as it marched out of Yorktown to surrender: The World's Turned Upside Down. For me the BBC is outrageously biased. Think of all it's anti-Israel stands. And were they not recently critized by their own ombundsman for being biased? I seem to recall that.
Fox News, while it has faults, is, in its news outlets not necessarily in its opinion outlets, fair and balanced. So, my friend, it looks like our world view is so different we may not be able to agree - sort of like Boehner and Obama.
Posts: 3193 | From: New York City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
quote:
In that context, New Yorker, political partisanship in the US looks a pretty dangerous game, no matter who's playing it. Time for everyone to grow up.
I whole-heartedly agree. This is no time for partianship. Yet, Obama sticks to his demand for tax increases when the bi-partisan trend in the Congress (which makes law) is for there to be no tax increases. Who is being partisan? Who is acting like a spoiled child?
Got that?
Tying the debt ceiling to increasing revenues = naked partisanship
Tying the debt ceiling to cruel spending cuts = fair and evenhanded
A "clean" bill raising the debt ceiling without changes to either taxes or spending would be signed by Obama in a cold minute. Why are House Republicans opposed to such a thing?
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
The Beeb is by no means perfect, but it has an international reputation for its constitutional commitment to objective and balanced reporting. Fox News doesn't.
For me the BBC is outrageously biased. Think of all it's anti-Israel stands. And were they not recently critized by their own ombundsman for being biased? I seem to recall that.
Fox News, while it has faults, is, in its news outlets not necessarily in its opinion outlets, fair and balanced.
Indeed. Fox News has never been criticized by its ombudsman since it's so "fair and balanced" it doesn't even have one!
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
For me the BBC is outrageously biased. Think of all it's anti-Israel stands.
What anti-Israel stands? The BBC is consistently biased in favour of Israel. It would be difficult to be more pro-Israel without making stuff up or leaving stuff out.
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
This is no time for partianship. Yet, Obama sticks to his demand for tax increases when the bi-partisan trend in the Congress (which makes law) is for there to be no tax increases. Who is being partisan? Who is acting like a spoiled child?
Those who expect there to be no tax increases in times of economic hardship are acting like spoiled children.
I think Greece has had the same problem. Middle/Upper classes who think they need not have tax increases.
Crazy.
I am grateful to pay high taxes - it means I have high wages.
No doubt a compromise will be found at the last minute - but it should not have come to this.
I feel for Obama - his hands are tied ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
<tangent>
Test case 1, New Yorker. What was wrong with Mardell's comments?
Test Case 2, New Yorker. Have you seen this survey? Contact Erdos and Morgan for survey details.
Test Case 3, New Yorker. Here is the BBC's governance and accountabilities framework. There is an Accountability protocol within that. Show me an equivalent series of checks and balances for Fox News, please.
My belief in the BBC's generally high standards of objective reporting has reasons and evidence as well as experience. And I know it is not perfect as well, despite the checks and balances.
[If this tangent proves to have legs, I'll start a new thread to avoid a detour.]
</tangent>
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amanda B. Reckondwythe
Dressed for Church
# 5521
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Those who expect there to be no tax increases in times of economic hardship are acting like spoiled children.
Remember the marvelous little DH Lawrence short story, The Rocking Horse Winner
"There must be more money. There must be more money. There must be more money."
--------------------
"I take prayer too seriously to use it as an excuse for avoiding work and responsibility." -- The Revd Martin Luther King Jr.
Posts: 10542 | From: The Great Southwest | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Those who expect there to be no tax increases in times of economic hardship are acting like spoiled children.
Remember the marvelous little DH Lawrence short story, The Rocking Horse Winner
"There must be more money. There must be more money. There must be more money."
*aside*: that strange, sad story could be the story of my paternal grandmother & my father.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
For me the BBC is outrageously biased. Think of all it's anti-Israel stands.
What anti-Israel stands? The BBC is consistently biased in favour of Israel. It would be difficult to be more pro-Israel without making stuff up or leaving stuff out.
It just isn't pro-Israel enough (to be honest, parts of the Beeb are pro-Israel, others are merely opposed to using 70 ton main battle tanks as police vehicles).
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
sharkshooter
Not your average shark
# 1589
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
...
I feel for Obama - his hands are tied
Actually, he has entrenched himself as much as anyone else in his own ideology. All that is left is to see who blinks first, and when.
--------------------
Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer. [Psalm 19:14]
Posts: 7772 | From: Canada; Washington DC; Phoenix; it's complicated | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Timothy the Obscure
Mostly Friendly
# 292
|
Posted
Once again, Paul Krugman gets it exactly right.
quote:
I don’t mean the fanaticism of the right. Well, OK, that too. But my feeling about those people is that they are what they are; you might as well denounce wolves for being carnivores. Crazy is what they do and what they are.
No, the cult that I see as reflecting a true moral failure is the cult of balance, of centrism.
Think about what’s happening right now. We have a crisis in which the right is making insane demands, while the president and Democrats in Congress are bending over backward to be accommodating — offering plans that are all spending cuts and no taxes, plans that are far to the right of public opinion.
So what do most news reports say? They portray it as a situation in which both sides are equally partisan, equally intransigent....
And yes, I think this is a moral issue. The “both sides are at fault” people have to know better; if they refuse to say it, it’s out of some combination of fear and ego, of being unwilling to sacrifice their treasured pose of being above the fray.
The so-called moderates who refuse to call the idiotic lunacy of the Tea Party what it is, and who won't acknowledge that what the Republicans in the House are doing is legislative terrorism, are as much to blame as Cantor and his acolytes.
--------------------
When you think of the long and gloomy history of man, you will find more hideous crimes have been committed in the name of obedience than have ever been committed in the name of rebellion.
- C. P. Snow
Posts: 6114 | From: PDX | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Josephine
Orthodox Belle
# 3899
|
Posted
I know one of the major Tea Party crazies rather better than any sane person would want to know any of them. And I know that he views any sort of accommodation or compromise as a weakness, and a clear indication to demand more.
You can't reason with him, and you can't negotiate with him, and you can't compromise with him. It's not possible. And that seems to be the case with the rest of the Tea Party and their associates as well. The Dems gave them everything they asked for, and they respond, not by accepting the deal, but by demanding more, and by blaming the Dems for intransigence.
I recognize that bargaining style. And it scares me, because if people like that are actually controlling the negotiations, there's nothing that any sane person can do.
--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!
Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
Some food for thought:
-- From Alternet: "Plutocracy: If Corporations and the Rich Paid 1960s-Level Taxes, the Debt Would Vanish
By feeding the rich and their corporations one massive tax break after another, lawmakers have thrown a monstrous monkey wrench into our national finances."
--HuffPost's Robert Borosage on how he thinks the Democrats have caved in.
-- Transcript of Chris Matthews' "Hardball" show from yesterday (before the president's speech". Among other things, he compares the behavior of the Republicans to whites during apartheid (and he lived in South Africa for two years); and IMHO tore a Tea Party senator to shreds.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Timothy the Obscure:
Once again, Paul Krugman gets it exactly right.
quote:
I don’t mean the fanaticism of the right. Well, OK, that too. But my feeling about those people is that they are what they are; you might as well denounce wolves for being carnivores. Crazy is what they do and what they are.
No, the cult that I see as reflecting a true moral failure is the cult of balance, of centrism.
Think about what’s happening right now. We have a crisis in which the right is making insane demands, while the president and Democrats in Congress are bending over backward to be accommodating — offering plans that are all spending cuts and no taxes, plans that are far to the right of public opinion.
So what do most news reports say? They portray it as a situation in which both sides are equally partisan, equally intransigent....
And yes, I think this is a moral issue. The “both sides are at fault” people have to know better; if they refuse to say it, it’s out of some combination of fear and ego, of being unwilling to sacrifice their treasured pose of being above the fray.
The so-called moderates who refuse to call the idiotic lunacy of the Tea Party what it is, and who won't acknowledge that what the Republicans in the House are doing is legislative terrorism, are as much to blame as Cantor and his acolytes.
Yes, but ....
What can the President actually enforce under the US Constitution? If in the end, he doesn't need to negotiate with the legislative terrorists, if he has the power to impose and say, effectively "so impeach me if you want to try" then he can confront by Presidential order, enforce it by the power of the office and get the job done the way he believes will work. Can he do that? Never mind whether he has the will, does he have the constitutional means?
For if he does not, haven't the US electoral system and the voters delivered him into the hands of the legislative terrorists. Collectively you voted in a blocking Congress. And don't the "legislative terrorists" know that?
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
You know, when I started writing (in the early 2000's) about a future America that was so far to the right that bat-shit crazy stuff like this could happen, I thought I was just in a long line of dystopian storytellers...
When I used that same USA as a backdrop to my latest books, I thought I was going to get flayed by American readers for being really quite virulently anti-American (and remembering this is fiction, too).
Now, I've had some interesting conversations with people, saying I've misjudged your average patriotic right-wing Christian conservative, and maybe I have (still remembering this is fiction). But I don't think it's 'average' conservatives driving this madness. Having foreseen the Tea Party movement by nearly a decade, I'd just like to say it doesn't end well...
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
Doc Tor--
I haven't read your books. But have you read Starhawk's "The Fifth Sacred Thing"? Deals with similar issues.
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Doc Tor--
I haven't read your books. But have you read Starhawk's "The Fifth Sacred Thing"? Deals with similar issues.
I'll add it to my wish-list.
Like I said above, I'm not alone in positing a fictional hyper-capitalist, hyper-patriotic, right-wing fundamentalist USA (American writers do this all the time, so it's not just a European thing - or maybe it is, and it's the 'liberal' Americans who write this stuff). It's just odd to see it played out in real life.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moth
Shipmate
# 2589
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
Now, I've had some interesting conversations with people, saying I've misjudged your average patriotic right-wing Christian conservative, and maybe I have (still remembering this is fiction). But I don't think it's 'average' conservatives driving this madness. Having foreseen the Tea Party movement by nearly a decade, I'd just like to say it doesn't end well...
The Republic of Gilead, maybe?
--------------------
"There are governments that burn books, and then there are those that sell the libraries and shut the universities to anyone who can't pay for a key." Laurie Penny.
Posts: 3446 | From: England | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anyuta
Shipmate
# 14692
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moth:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
Now, I've had some interesting conversations with people, saying I've misjudged your average patriotic right-wing Christian conservative, and maybe I have (still remembering this is fiction). But I don't think it's 'average' conservatives driving this madness. Having foreseen the Tea Party movement by nearly a decade, I'd just like to say it doesn't end well...
The Republic of Gilead, maybe?
Exactly. Handmaid's tale has been looking less and less fictional lately. While I'm not ready yet to bolt and am very tied down, I'm also looking at options. I mean, I still hope that sanity will ultimately prevail, but then so did my grandparents in 1917. and then they were stuck.
Posts: 764 | From: USA | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
You can't reason with him, and you can't negotiate with him, and you can't compromise with him. It's not possible. And that seems to be the case with the rest of the Tea Party and their associates as well. The Dems gave them everything they asked for, and they respond, not by accepting the deal, but by demanding more, and by blaming the Dems for intransigence.
The legislative way out of that is for some moderate Republican representatives - and there are some - to break ranks and say they will vote as Independents and support the compromise on this, if their fellow party-members don't pull their heaads out of their arseholes. (even if they spell it differently) They could even threaten to put some Democrats into committee chairs (& no doubt get some quid prop quo off the Dems for soing so)
The trouble is it would require about 25 of them voting against their own party to break the majority, and that seems unlikely
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif)
