The Democrat Thread

[StrangeSox]

I don't know if this is the right spot to put this, but I don't want to get flamed in that other thread. George W. Bush's book is a trainwreck. I try to read Presidential memoirs or what have you when they come out, but I've never read such a simple book. Seriously, these are the least complex sentences of all-time. If he even had a hand in writing this, it makes me truly sad. It's like a junior high school kid wrote it and used a thesaurus to replace some words.

 

Also, I could punch him for the Stem Cell chapter and his reasoning behind decisions based on that.

 

FYI there's a thread on it:

 

http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=79880

[Balta1701]

I was talking about Gingrich's government shutdowns

Btw, if the Senate does not pass either a continuing resolution or the currently introduced omnibus spending bill (which Dem Claire McCaskill has said she'll join in the filibuster of), the government shutdown could actually start on Saturday.

[Steve9347]

FYI there's a thread on it:

 

http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=79880

Well that might be a good spot then!

[Cknolls]

Harry Reid, Senate Majority Leader, suggests that the Senate should come back to work after Christmas and work til Jan 4, the last actual day of the lame duck session, since there are so many things still on the agenda (because none of them can get 60 votes until millionaires avoid their tax increase). Here's Republican Senator from Arizona, Jon Kyl.

 

 

 

[StrangeSox]

This is why some Democrats are against the payroll tax deduction--just like the Bush tax cuts that were supposed to expire, there will be a fight to make them permanent.

[Balta1701]

Here's our annual study of how guns pouring across the Mexican border from Texas are fueling the violence in that country.

Drug cartels have aggressively turned to the United States because Mexico severely restricts gun ownership. Following gunrunning paths that have been in place for 50 years, firearms cross the border and end up in the hands of criminals as well as ordinary citizens.

 

"This is not a new phenomenon," Webb said.

 

What is different now, authorities say, is the number of high-powered rifles heading south — AR-15s, AK-47s, armor-piercing .50-caliber weapons — and the savagery of the violence.

 

Federal authorities say more than 60,000 U.S. guns of all types have been recovered in Mexico in the past four years, helping fuel the violence that has contributed to 30,000 deaths. Mexican President Felipe Calderón came to Washington in May and urged Congress and President Barack Obama to stop the flow of guns south.

[HuskyCaucasian]

Tom Harkin: 'Shot At Filibuster Reform Coming Jan. 5

Senate Democrats will make a dramatic effort to reform the rules of the chamber when the next Congress begins, one of the body's primary filibuster-reform advocates said Wednesday morning.

 

Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), who has championed a weakening of the procedural mechanism that allows the minority party to hold up legislation, predicted "fireworks" on Jan. 5, 2011 -- the day on which the Senate can, he argued, revamp its rules by a simple majority vote.

 

"There could be some fireworks. There could be some fireworks on January fifth," Harkin said at a pro-reform event sponsored by several like-minded organizations. "I'm going to be there. I'm armed. I'm armed with a lot of history, and I know the rules, and I know the procedures too, so we will see what happens on the fifth."

 

"[Former Sen.] Robert Byrd in 1975, the last time that last time that we changed the rules and [brought the filibuster threshold] from 67 [votes] down to 60, actually stated on the floor that a majority, 51 senators, could change the rules. And that's what we intend to do and that is what we are working on right now. We are coming on the fifth to basically send a motion to the vice president ... that will change the rules and there is a procedure to provide 51 votes to do that. Robert Byrd said that in 1975 and that's what we are going to try to do."

 

Essentially, that path to reform requires Vice President Joe Biden -- who supports weakening the filibuster -- to rule on the first day of the next session that the Senate has the authority to write its own rules. Republicans, presumably, would immediately move to object, but Democrats could then move to table the objection, setting up a key up-or-down vote. If 50 Democrats voted to table the objection, the Senate would then move to a vote on a new set of rules, which could be approved by a simple majority.

[Rex Kickass]

This is why some Democrats are against the payroll tax deduction--just like the Bush tax cuts that were supposed to expire, there will be a fight to make them permanent.

 

Apparently there's talk in the House of trying to change the payroll tax deduction into a one time tax refund check, which would have the same effect - but not actually have to worry about the fight over Social Security in a year's time. I think, if you're going to do this, this might be the best route to take.

 

I was at an event with my Congressman, Rush Holt (D-NJ), on Sunday. He's really concerned with this bill and he came at it from an angle I had never thought of before. His main problem isn't that we're cutting taxes in different ways than is traditional, or that the wealthiest among us will get an Obama tax cut in 2011, but rather that we're cutting taxes meant to fund Social Security. This is something that he feels shouldn't be done, because it sort of takes Social Security away from being a separate entity in the way that the program is managed and switching into something that the government is confident to play games with.

[Balta1701]

The Senate has accepted a motion to begin debate on the new START treaty. It passed with 66 votes in favor, 32 against. 9 Republicans voted to begin debate on the treaty.

 

1 Democrat failed to vote, Evan Bayh of Indiana. For the treaty to pass, it needs 67 votes; the current 66 + Bayh, with no losses amongst the Republicans who voted in favor of it. That would be by far the narrowest margin of passage of any of the START treaties, and probably by far the narrowest margin of any arms control treaty.

[bmags]

such nonsense

 

[Rex Kickass]

The Senate has accepted a motion to begin debate on the new START treaty. It passed with 66 votes in favor, 32 against. 9 Republicans voted to begin debate on the treaty.

 

1 Democrat failed to vote, Evan Bayh of Indiana. For the treaty to pass, it needs 67 votes; the current 66 + Bayh, with no losses amongst the Republicans who voted in favor of it. That would be by far the narrowest margin of passage of any of the START treaties, and probably by far the narrowest margin of any arms control treaty.

 

I am willing to bet that when START comes up for ratification vote, it will have far more than 67 votes.

[kapkomet]

Apparently there's talk in the House of trying to change the payroll tax deduction into a one time tax refund check, which would have the same effect - but not actually have to worry about the fight over Social Security in a year's time. I think, if you're going to do this, this might be the best route to take.

 

I was at an event with my Congressman, Rush Holt (D-NJ), on Sunday. He's really concerned with this bill and he came at it from an angle I had never thought of before. His main problem isn't that we're cutting taxes in different ways than is traditional, or that the wealthiest among us will get an Obama tax cut in 2011, but rather that we're cutting taxes meant to fund Social Security. This is something that he feels shouldn't be done, because it sort of takes Social Security away from being a separate entity in the way that the program is managed and switching into something that the government is confident to play games with.

I can't disagree with this from the concept of if you need to fund something that's bankrupt, taking away money isn't the way to go... but then you all are going to argue it's the same with traditional taxes, which it isn't.

[lostfan]

?

 

He didn't lose his leadership position until the affair came out during the impeachment December. It then quickly went to Livingston, I presume, who also immediately lost it because he was cheating on his wife. It then went to Tom Delay's handpicked guy, Hastert.

I really don't even remember what the hell I was talking about yesterday to be honest.

[Rex Kickass]

I can't disagree with this from the concept of if you need to fund something that's bankrupt, taking away money isn't the way to go... but then you all are going to argue it's the same with traditional taxes, which it isn't.

 

Except Social Security isn't bankrupt. Doing something like this makes bankruptcy a bigger possibility though.

[Balta1701]

Except Social Security isn't bankrupt. Doing something like this makes bankruptcy a bigger possibility though.

Really, no it doesn't.

[Balta1701]

Nobody cares about mass transit.

"There's so many things that were so great. The proximity from the city to the ball park, how easy it was to get from point A to point B. You have to think about traffic in a lot of cities, even in Dallas where we were staying, to get the ballpark was hard, for me. For him, the National League. He loves to hit. Being able to get on the train and going to other cities real fast. The kids and I took a train to New York during the World Series last year and it was a great experience. It was so easy. The good food. The food is really good. It's a fun city. It's easy to live here, easy to be here, easy to fly into."

[NorthSideSox72]

Tom Harkin: 'Shot At Filibuster Reform Coming Jan. 5

Probably doomed, but rooting for it to happen.

 

[Balta1701]

Hey, that $100 billion thing still doesn't work!

[Balta1701]

One more flashlight for the Dems to get annoyed at, this one from my personal file. The incoming Republicans in the house have set up a "Youcut!" page, which is supposed to give "everyday americans" a chance to voice their opinion on what things they want to gut from the budget.

 

Part of the stuff they've included are NSF grants. Specific, peer-reviewed, NSF grants. They come up with their own description of what the grant involves, and allow people to vote to cut them based on how funny their description of the grant sounds.

In a video on YouTube, Rep. Adrian Smith (R-Neb.) calls for Americans to search the NSF database and report "wasteful" grants, citing two such projects: One, a $750,000 NSF grant "to develop computer models to analyze the on-field contribution of soccer players." The second "questionable" grant is one in which scientists "received $1.2 million to model the sound of objects breaking for use by the video game and movie industries." Smith's video is part of a larger Republican initiative called "YouCut."

 

But the researchers behind these projects say Smith has misrepresented their work and the amount of money spent on the projects.

 

"This was not $750,000 given by NSF for us to develop an algorithm to look at the performance of soccer players," Northwestern University engineering professor Luis Amaral told LiveScience. Amaral, who was the lead investigator on the soccer study cited by Smith, called the congressman's portrayal of his work "not only incorrect, but misleading."

 

"This was $750,000 that was given to a larger team of researchers to study a very broad range of questions related to creating productive, efficient teams of researchers who innovate," Amaral said.

 

Cornell University computer scientist Doug James, the lead researcher of the sound-modeling study, had a similar reaction to Smith's characterization of his work.

 

"It is a gross misrepresentation of our activities and their intent," James wrote in an e-mail to LiveScience.

The NSF requested budget for 2011 is $7.424 billion, an 8-percent increase over the previous year. According to the American Association for the Advancement of Science, federal science funding has remained flat for most of the last decade, even as the overall federal budget climbs.

 

In 2010, the total general budget was $3.55 trillion. In March, the Congressional Budget Office projected a 2011 deficit at $1.3 trillion. The NSF's $7 billion budget would equal approximately half a percent of that deficit.

 

The process of winning a grant through the NSF is "very rigorous," said NSF spokeswoman Maria Zacharias. Each year, the agency receives over 45,000 competitive grant proposals, and funds about 11,500, she said.

 

"Each proposal is evaluated in terms of not only its intellectual merit, but also its broader impacts," Zacharias told LiveScience. "The panels that are convened for peer-review are experts in the area of the proposal."

 

Both Amaral and James said they welcome more transparency — and public interest — in their work.

 

"It would be great if people actually read NSF project summaries, since there are some really fascinating things in there!" James said. "On the other hand, as implemented, it seems more like a politically motivated, anti-science witch hunt."

 

"It needs to be done in a sensible way," Amaral said, adding that he hoped the YouCut project would encourage people to learn more about academic research instead of jumping to conclusions.

 

"If I can be perfectly honest," Amaral said, "it is a case in which had the congressman sort of done his homework and tried to learn about the situation in a little more depth instead of just making kind of inflammatory statements, maybe it would have been better."

Link.

[StrangeSox]

Republicans lying about science? Say it isn't so!

 

Even Fox Chicago had a "ridiculous pork projects!" segment on the news the other night. "LOL! $200,000 to study fruit?!?!"

[NorthSideSox72]

So, there are these polls posted regularly that talk about Obama vs Palin in 2012, with Obama leading even in the doldrums of the economy. Not really all that telling though, its so far out right now.

 

But I did think this poll was a little more interesting, as it showed me in a more meaningful way that not only is Palin not electable, but that Obama is going to have a very hard time as well: 59% of potential voters say they "wouldn't even consider" voting for Palin. Only 8% said they would vote for her, the other 32% or so would consider it. That's almost 6 in 10 would have already decided in an apparently dead-set manner to not vote for her. Obama's number though, wasn't much better, at 43%. Poll results.

 

[Jenksismyhero]

One more flashlight for the Dems to get annoyed at, this one from my personal file. The incoming Republicans in the house have set up a "Youcut!" page, which is supposed to give "everyday americans" a chance to voice their opinion on what things they want to gut from the budget.

 

Part of the stuff they've included are NSF grants. Specific, peer-reviewed, NSF grants. They come up with their own description of what the grant involves, and allow people to vote to cut them based on how funny their description of the grant sounds.

 

Link.

 

I'd much rather live in a society that questions government spending, even with an unreasonable eye, than one in which spending is NEVER questioned and is ALWAYS worthwhile.

[StrangeSox]

I'd much rather live in a society that questions government spending, even with an unreasonable eye, than one in which spending is NEVER questioned and is ALWAYS worthwhile.

 

Ok, who's proposing this false dichotomy? NSF funding isn't that great and the grant process isn't unquestioning.

 

Misleading statements, outright lies and ignorance to score political points is never a good thing.

[Jenksismyhero]

Ok, who's proposing this false dichotomy? NSF funding isn't that great and the grant process isn't unquestioning.

 

Misleading statements, outright lies and ignorance to score political points is never a good thing.

 

Oh GMAFB. Gee, someone reacts negatively to someone who's calling their project a waste of money. SHOCKER. He didn't even specifically address any mistatement, he gave some broad answer.

 

But the researchers behind these projects say Smith has misrepresented their work and the amount of money spent on the projects.

 

"This was not $750,000 given by NSF for us to develop an algorithm to look at the performance of soccer players," Northwestern University engineering professor Luis Amaral told LiveScience. Amaral, who was the lead investigator on the soccer study cited by Smith, called the congressman's portrayal of his work "not only incorrect, but misleading."

 

"This was $750,000 that was given to a larger team of researchers to study a very broad range of questions related to creating productive, efficient teams of researchers who innovate," Amaral said.

 

Cornell University computer scientist Doug James, the lead researcher of the sound-modeling study, had a similar reaction to Smith's characterization of his work.

 

"It is a gross misrepresentation of our activities and their intent," James wrote in an e-mail to LiveScience.

 

As if that really clarifies anything.

[StrangeSox]

Oh GMAFB. Gee, someone reacts negatively to someone who's calling their project a waste of money. SHOCKER. He didn't even specifically address any mistatement, he gave some broad answer.

 

 

 

As if that really clarifies anything.

 

 

Hmm, sounds substantially different from "One, a $750,000 NSF grant "to develop computer models to analyze the on-field contribution of soccer players."" Kinda like Bobby Jindahl's "volcano monitoring", and Sarah Palin's "fruit flies", and pretty much every GOP member attacking science funding that sounds funny to them and plays well with an ignorant base.

 

Why are you making excuses for characterizing the research in the most negative, asinine way possible instead of honestly, if you really want citizen input? Why not have links to the grant proposal or a summary of the research?

 

edit: not links from you, but on the "Youcut" website.

 

edit2:here's the paper

Edited December 17, 2010 by StrangeSox