The Democrat Thread

[HuskyCaucasian]

but it's a total contradiction coming from him. i suppose the evangelical neo-cons, compassionate conservatives, had to change their stripes to remain relevant. frankly, it's not a move a respect.

It's funny, I've tried to think this out as a life long, social conservative Christian who has more liberal tendencies when it comes to government. Jesus taught "love your neighbor as yourself". He taught to help the poor and lame. He taught parables about the rich who hoard their money. The bible says "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus." But all I hear from these so called evangelical neo-cons is that people with money (those who can afford healthcare worth having) deserve priority over those who have nothing.

 

I hate the argument that Universal Healthcare will create long lines and people will die while waiting for care. What they are saying, without saying it, is that people WITH good insurance deserve the care MORE than those who dont have it. If you cant afford insurance, then screw you, you're not worthy.

[bmags]

I wouldn't put Rand Paul in that category though. I mean he's stepped on his dick a couple of times, sure, but mostly he seems like he knows what he's talking about (not that I agree with most of his views but still).

 

maybe, but when you act like you can speak intelligently on the history of the united states and fail miserably it's pretty hard to take you seriously after that.

[bmags]

this was refreshing.

http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/pages-for-...t-bulls***.html

[Balta1701]

I found this piece thoroughly amusing.

"The top 2 or 3 percent" of all small businesses would see their taxes go up under the Obama plan, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) fumed this week. "That's 750,000 to 800,000 small businesses! That create most of the jobs in our society!"

 

The thing is, some of those businesses are not particularly small. In fact, they're quite large.

 

Among the firms Republicans want to protect from new taxes, according to research by House Democrats: The management team at Wall Street buyout firm Kohlberg, Kravis and Roberts (KKR), which recently reported more than $54 billion in assets managed by 14 offices around the world. Auditing firm PricewaterhouseCoopers, a household name with operations in more than 150 countries. And the Tribune Corp., which owns the Chicago Tribune, the Los Angeles Times and the Baltimore Sun.

 

KKR, PricewaterhouseCoopers and the Tribune, it turns out, are organized as "pass-through" entities - companies that typically avoid corporate taxes by reporting profits on the individual tax returns of their owners, managers or shareholders.

 

The vast majority of "pass-through" entities are, in fact, small businesses, often with one or two employees and very small profits. Next year, the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation predicts that taxpayers will report about $1 trillion in income from pass-through entities. Only about 3 percent of them - about 750,000 taxpayers - will earn more than $250,000, the threshold at which Obama would raise tax rates. Those returns will account for about half of all pass-through business income, the JCT reported, meaning the tax hikes would strike a large segment of such activity.

 

But not "all of the income is from entities that might be considered 'small,' " the JCT said in a report issued in July. "For example, in 2005, 12,862 S corporations and 6,658 partnerships had receipts of more than $50 million."

 

A separate analysis by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center found that only about 10 percent of business income above the threshold was reported by sole proprietorships, with the rest coming from partnerships and S corporations, which can be extremely large.

Of course...this will be the last time we hear anything about how the Republicans are calling the Tribune Company and Bechtel "Small Businesses" in the tax debate.

 

I think there's a joke about the Cubs to be made here somewhere...

[Rex Kickass]

Few polls came out today.

 

Zogby's trash internet poll shows the Dems up by one on the generic Congressional Ballot

Rasmussen (traditionally leaning GOP) had the Dems down 10.

Gallup has the Dems up by one again too. (Three weeks ago, the media went into a meltdown when Gallup showed the Dems down 10.)

 

PPP shows a more solid lead for Boxer in California, although word is that they are going to show a s***ty result for the Dems in Wisconsin tomorrow (Feingold down by double digits in Likely Voters, yet tied in Registered Voters)

 

The race is starting to tighten up.

[Balta1701]

The race is starting to tighten up.

?

 

I don't see that.

 

Then again...I'm not sure I see "The race" as opposed to "the hundreds of individual races".

[NorthSideSox72]

Even at the peak of GOP fervor, which was weeks ago, I didn't see the Senate really being in play. Best case is they get 48 seats. Now its probably less than that, thanks to these far-right candidates shooting themselves in the foot constantly. House will likely turn red, but not by a lot.

 

I'll go, as of now, Dems 53-47 in the Senate when all this is done. I think these fringey right wing candidates will not only destroy their own races, they will have a negative effect on other ones too.

 

But the wild card is still, what does the economy doe between now and 2 months from now.

 

 

[Rex Kickass]

?

 

I don't see that.

 

Then again...I'm not sure I see "The race" as opposed to "the hundreds of individual races".

 

I don't think balance of the Senate is in question. I could see a 53 or 54 seat majority for the Dems in January, smaller - but 59 is pretty high historically anyway.

 

The house is the big question, and theres enough question marks without reliable polling right now to give a strong indicator. A lot of places where Dems should be vulnerable in a year like this year, they don't appear to be. What looked to be strong challenges in NJ seem to be fizzling out (NJ-3, 6, 12) as an example, although no means assured.

 

The question is whether or not the Dems can execute a great ground game. The tea partiers are energized, but the truth is - I don't know that many other Republicans are right now realistically.

[StrangeSox]

I found this piece thoroughly amusing.

Of course...this will be the last time we hear anything about how the Republicans are calling the Tribune Company and Bechtel "Small Businesses" in the tax debate.

 

I think there's a joke about the Cubs to be made here somewhere...

 

Well, to be fair, the article doesn't detail how many of those small businesses actually have high revenues. Bechtel might be an extreme outliar in that sample. It cites less than 20,000 out of 750,000 being partnerships or s-corps with receipts above $50M.

[NorthSideSox72]

I don't think balance of the Senate is in question. I could see a 53 or 54 seat majority for the Dems in January, smaller - but 59 is pretty high historically anyway.

 

The house is the big question, and theres enough question marks without reliable polling right now to give a strong indicator. A lot of places where Dems should be vulnerable in a year like this year, they don't appear to be. What looked to be strong challenges in NJ seem to be fizzling out (NJ-3, 6, 12) as an example, although no means assured.

 

The question is whether or not the Dems can execute a great ground game. The tea partiers are energized, but the truth is - I don't know that many other Republicans are right now realistically.

Energized isn't the problem on the right - organized is the problem. The Dems are like a bowl of soup, they have no cohesion to break. The GOP has been for a while, a block of ice. Solid as hell, until it fractures, like it is right now.

 

I have said for the last few years the GOP would split like this, though I admit I was wrong in how it would happen. I thought the old school, small government conservatives would break from the social conservatives - and I think the Tea Party was originally just that. But now, its kind of all over the place, and has become just a group of people really far to the right, even by GOP standards, on nearly everything. I honestly do not think that's how it was intended to go, but, that's what its been co-opted to be.

[Rex Kickass]

Democrat energy tends to peak later in the election season.

 

But, if you wanna talk about a house effect. Pollster has a great tool that lets you look at aggregate polling numbers and filter out certain pollsters. Rasmussen has dominated the cycle with news, because it polls more often than anyone else. If you take a look at the numbers for this election, you can see why it suddenly seems like control of Congress might not be as much in question as currently advertised.

 

Generic Congress Question

(all phone based pollsters with Rasmussen included)

Republicans 46.4, Democrats 41.7

(all phone based pollsters excluding Rasmussen)

Democrats, 43.8, Republicans 43.8

[Balta1701]

Well, to be fair, the article doesn't detail how many of those small businesses actually have high revenues. Bechtel might be an extreme outliar in that sample. It cites less than 20,000 out of 750,000 being partnerships or s-corps with receipts above $50M.

But it does note that only 3% of "Small businesses" hit the $250k mark, while 50% of the total income in the small business group is recorded from businesses that earn above 250k...suggesting that it's very highly concentrated.

 

FWIW, Barack Hussein Obama is also considered a small business...as an author.

[Balta1701]

Democrat energy tends to peak later in the election season.

 

But, if you wanna talk about a house effect. Pollster has a great tool that lets you look at aggregate polling numbers and filter out certain pollsters. Rasmussen has dominated the cycle with news, because it polls more often than anyone else. If you take a look at the numbers for this election, you can see why it suddenly seems like control of Congress might not be as much in question as currently advertised.

 

Generic Congress Question

(all phone based pollsters with Rasmussen included)

Republicans 46.4, Democrats 41.7

(all phone based pollsters excluding Rasmussen)

Democrats, 43.8, Republicans 43.8

The biggest problem with taking the numbers as you have here and saying that it's all just Ras is...what was the Democratic generic advantage in 2006/2008? It was huge.

[Balta1701]

In the process of re-building Beirut yet again, in 2008, renovations began and have now been completed on the Maghden Abraham Synagogue located in the middle of newly renovated downtown Beirut in an area known as the “Solidere" which has become the focal point and showcase of Lebanon’s rebirth.

 

This isn’t some hole in the wall, nondescript, “excuse me” synagogue hidden out of view so as to not “offend” Lebanese non-Jews—this is an elaborate, ornate, beautifully designed, cathedral-style house of worship built for a Lebanese Jewish population that totals less than 500 in a country of more than 4,000,000 (in stark contrast to the eight million American Muslims living in the United States).

 

And wait until you hear Hezbollah’s response to the building of this Ground Zero Synagogue.

 

...

 

Courtesy of Hassan Nasrallah himself: "We respect Judaism, just as we respect Christianity. Our only problem is with Israel."

Link (don't endorse every opinion offered at page...just thought this was a provocative point)

[CrimsonWeltall]

Glen Urquart now challenging Christine O'Donnell for craziest candidate in Delaware: "Separation of Church and State" isn't Jefferson; it's Hitler!

 

 

[GoSox05]

Do they want a Theocracy? Totally not cool. See Iran.

[HuskyCaucasian]

@HuffingtonPost - GOP Senators have filibustered bill to repeal military ban on openly gay soldiers

 

TMP - Senate Blocks DADT Repeal

The Senate today blocked the start of debate on the National Defense Authorization Act, with Republicans objecting to a provision that would repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell. The vote was 56 to 43, with 60 votes needed to break the filibuster.

 

DADT was one of several sticking points of the defense authorization bill, which must pass in order to fund the military.

 

Republican senators, including Sens. John McCain (AZ) and Susan Collins (ME), argued that passing repeal now would undermine the Defense Department's review of the policy, which won't be completed until December.

 

The language in the bill provides that DADT wouldn't be repealed until 60 days after the review is complete and the plan for repeal is signed off on by the president, defense secretary and joint chiefs of staff.

 

The White House said today it supports the repeal language.

 

"Such an approach recognizes the critical need to allow our military and their families the full opportunity to inform and shape the implementation process through a thorough understanding of their concerns, insights and suggestions," the statement reads.

 

After the vote, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters, "I don't think this is the end" of DADT repeal.

 

Some senators said they would vote to block the bill because Majority Leader Harry Reid didn't allowing enough amendments to the bill. There were also objections to the DREAM Act, which would give young immigrants a path to citizenship.

 

Lady Gaga made political headlines this week after speaking out in favor of repeal. She traveled to Portland, Maine, yesterday, to hold a rally urging Sens. Collins and Olympia Snowe (R-ME) to vote for repeal.

 

Both Snowe and Collins voted against beginning debate.

Edited September 21, 2010 by Athomeboy_2000

[Balta1701]

I'm sure that everyone will have as much of a problem with the Republicans voting against funding our troops as they did every time a Democrat would do it from 2003-2008.

[southsider2k5]

I can't believe Obama is nominating a guy to head the Marine Corps who is on TV saying how this could hurt the military in Afghanistan.

[Balta1701]

I can't believe Obama is nominating a guy to head the Marine Corps who is on TV saying how this could hurt the military in Afghanistan.

Do you genuinely believe that it's not possible to make a case that it can and has hurt us in these wars, or do you just believe he should not be speaking out publicly on this matter?

[southsider2k5]

Do you genuinely believe that it's not possible to make a case that it can and has hurt us in these wars, or do you just believe he should not be speaking out publicly on this matter?

 

I love that Obama is nominating guys that undermine his policies publicly. I wish he would do it more.

[BigSqwert]

Punchable face of the day...

 

[NorthSideSox72]

I love that Obama is nominating guys that undermine his policies publicly. I wish he would do it more.

This is one thing ObamaCo has done well from day 1 - he nominates people he actually thinks will perform well, instead of just cronies, or even people who agree with him on policy. I've liked that all along. In this way, he's the anti-W.

 

[Rex Kickass]

Republicans block debate on eliminating discrimination on employment within the military. A gay blogger posts on it. Followed by a reader comment of "All f**gots Must Die."

 

Blogger tracks the IP of the comment, traces it to one of two Senator's offices. Either Saxby Chambliss or Johnny Isakson (both Senators from Georgia) who have offices that are not far apart. And by not far, they mean in the same building.

 

http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2010/09/all-f...s-must-die.html

 

 

[bmags]

no way, i don't believe that.