That seems like a fairly good read of the situation, really. Rush is an entertainer, not a politician or someone who has to deal with political realities - and he's happily cooperated with Democrats to make himself a primary voice of the Republican party for his own benefit. Witness the series of Republican elected officials who have tried to distance themselves from him, then had to go crawling back to apologize within three days.
Also, the adjectival term is 'Democratic.' If you want to be taken seriously and not as a grammar-challenged Foxbot, it helps to use the grown-up words and not their petulant preschool deliberate "hey look I'm a Republican" error.
You have a very odd interpretation of socialism. Very few sensible people these days argue that, say, the socialist programs of the New Deal were not extraordinarily helpful in bringing the US economy out of the Great Depression. The existence of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid has been a net benefit to the economy because people no longer need to be regularly (as) worried about dying of starvation or easily-treatable medical conditions. The Eisenhower Interstate System was a major socialist program, albeit one with military application as well, and there are very few people who pine for the days when the only way to cross the country was by an interminable morass of town roads.
It's the Republicans who want government to do nothing. I want government to fix health care, re-regulate Wall Street, devise and implement a national energy plan, and otherwise do all of those useful things that individuals are not able to do on their own with any reliability. If Republicans want to reverse their death spiral, moron, then they need to rethink some of their ideology.
You need some remedial political science courses. Communism != socialism. USSR = Communist. Denmark, Sweden, England, pretty much the entire EU = socialist. For that matter, if you're being purist about it, USA = socialist too, considering Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security as programs that would have no place in a purely capitalist setting.
This is just silly. A clear win in Iraq in the first Desert Storm didn't lead to Republican control for a generation; it led to transitory high approval ratings right up until the economy tanked under Bush I. As for those socialist hellholes of Norway, Sweden, and Denmark, I think I'd take them over the libertarian wonderland of Somalia, myself. Again, this is a crazy right-winger projecting his own opinions onto Democrats. Republicans actively want American to fail when Democrats are in power. Democrats warn that Republican policies will lead to a failure they do not want.
Are you kidding? The stimulus bill itself required Specter to vote on a cloture motion - which means that yes, the Republicans were attempting to filibuster. They have outright declared that they will filibuster everything and demand a sixty-vote threshold on passing any remotely controversial bill. Simply because a filibuster is defeated does not mean that it was not attempted. The last session of Congress saw a record number of filibusters announced - and that's not even counting the threatened ones that didn't materialize because it became apparent there were enough votes to override it.
The right-wing extremism report was initiated by George W. Bush's White House, as a counterpoint to the left-wing extremism report issued earlier this year. The right-wing extremism report further did not identify conservatives as extremists; it identified two major groups within right-wing extremists, those being hate extremist groups like the Ku Klux Klan and single-issue extremist groups like abortion-clinic bombers. Agreeing with any of the issues does not mean that they called you an extremist, only that extremists have been known to share that issue.
Some squirrels are male and some squirrels are female. You are in all likelihood either male or female. This does not, however, mean that you are necessarily a squirrel. It's the same argument, except with 'squirrel' in place of 'extremist,' 'male' in place of 'hate groups,' and 'female' in place of 'single-issue groups.'
And the debunked point hits again! Republicans are the only ones who actually want anything to fail. Find any Democrat of any national significance who has actually made a statement about wanting a collapse, please.
Yes, please. Let's have Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins switch parties and make sure that Republicans aren't even close to a filibuster most of the time. And then if the economy does improve with Democrats in full command, and the public widely considering this the 'Bush Recession,' it will demonstrate quite clearly that Democrats are good for the economy; Republicans are only good for the top.1%. I'll root for America to succeed, you root for it to fail, and we'll see who wins in 2010 regardless of what happens.
Yeah, shutting down the government worked so amazingly well when Newt Gingrich tried it! It only gave Clinton a major boost in his public support and reminded people that yes, they do in fact like the services that government provides.
And given that record numbers of people today are reporting that they are satisfied that they are paying a fair level of taxation, the 'John Galt' crowd looks sillier and sillier by the day.
I think he's doing this the right way. Changing political parties ten minutes before the deadline to file is scummy. Getting re-elected and then promptly changing parties is scummy. Changing parties a year and a half before an election, four and a half years into the current term? That's a long enough time that the political winds can have genuinely changed - and leaves a long enough period to permit the accumulation of a contestable voting record, plus leaves time for a primary challenger to gear up. I'd agree if he'd just won in November 2008 and was switching, but that's not the situation here.
The Republican front-runner is Pat Toomey, lately the president of the right-wing anti-tax extremist group, the Club for Growth. He's further right than Rick Santorum was. In trial polling thus far, Specter easily destroys Toomey among the general electorate; it's only with the Republican primary he had no chance.
As far as the Democratic primary goes, he will have opposition (at least one minor declared candidate says he will not withdraw), but Governor Ed Rendell has said he will work to support Specter in the primary - as have other prominent Democrats including President Obama. This may well come down to his vote on the Employee Free Choice Act, though. If he votes for cloture, then the PA labor unions will probably let him vote as he likes on the actual bill. If he votes against cloture, though, the politically-powerful PA labor unions will be mobilized strongly against him, and he may have trouble getting through the primary then.
Republicans can't gun for Specter in the primaries any longer. Specter will run in the Democratic primary instead, where Ed Rendell has promised to do everything he can to give Specter a clear field. Pat Toomey of the Club for Growth is now the clear front-runner for the Republican nomination, and he's well to the right of Rick Santorum, who the Pennsylvania electorate overwhelmingly rejected in 2006. A Toomey/Specter matchup is extremely heavily weighted to Specter's favor among the PA general electorate, even if it's weighted the other way among the PA Republican primary crowd.
Actually, that was a right-wing projection. Democrats never wanted us to lose the war, they wanted the U.S. to stop pursuing the policies that were failing. Republicans, in their typically hyperaggressive way, screamed themselves red in the face that this was wanting America to lose.
Put another way, Rush Limbaugh explicitly has said he wants President Obama to fail. Not his policies. Not his programs. His entire presidency. No Democrat of any significance actually made any statement calling for the war to be lost.
The synthesis will come when religion defines a probabilistic moral system, wherein violation the moral tenets will probably send you to hell. This will then be known as the sin-thesis.
... And, as I should have mentioned first, you can use optical scan machines to then read the ballots and get the immediate-results efficiency. In 2004, Nader paid for a recount in several New Hampshire counties, where they use these optical scan machines; the hand-count results were found to be *less* precise than the optical scanner, due to human errors in tabulation. And since there's a physical ballot, it becomes very clear if the scanner is doing anything improper.
Right, because 'outside influence' is limited to the big mean unions, and the fact that union organizers and supporters currently have a distressing tendency to be illegally fired before the election, or that management can force their entire workforce to attend multiple anti-union harangues on company time while limiting pro-union voices to break rooms and outside of work, well, that's just a tiny detail.
Put some teeth into the existing "No firing union organizers between certification and election" and subject management to the same restrictions on speech as the union organizers get, and then a secret ballot is a fair thing. As it is now, the secret ballot for unionization is only slightly less relevant than the secret ballot in North Korean elections. All the protections on the ballot itself are meaningless if the fundamental process is corrupt.
Heck, you could even get *really* creative and do something off-the-wall like having voters fill out bubbles on a paper ballot by hand. Keep a few electronic voting machines at hand for ease-of-access purposes (being able to read the candidates for a blind voter, for example), but all those machines do is fill in the bubbles for the voter.
Haven't they already done experiments in the past where electrodes implanted in the brain can be used to stimulate sensations? If so, then there was no need to get clever with the proteins - put the electrodes in place, and then trigger them when the mice enter the lighted room. That seems more straightforward than adding photoreactive proteins that may have other unknown side-effects. But, then, me != biologist.
Yeah. Having seen a few resumes, I can tell you that having a word spelled wrong or just a crappy formatting job is an immediate red flag. A cover letter makes a world of difference, too - it shows a little more structured writing and shows an actual effort. Well-written email correspondence helps tremendously, at least for that all-important first impression.
Okay, let's see any actual evidence to back up your claim. I submit the public record of votes, which show that the Democrats voted to enter into law a bar on the Fairness Doctrine. Please submit some form of evidence showing that efforts to the contrary are taking place, outside of the fevered imaginations of Rush's dittoheads. If not, then please remove your head from El Rushbo's pilonidal cyst in turn.
Slashdot Mirror
That seems like a fairly good read of the situation, really. Rush is an entertainer, not a politician or someone who has to deal with political realities - and he's happily cooperated with Democrats to make himself a primary voice of the Republican party for his own benefit. Witness the series of Republican elected officials who have tried to distance themselves from him, then had to go crawling back to apologize within three days.
Also, the adjectival term is 'Democratic.' If you want to be taken seriously and not as a grammar-challenged Foxbot, it helps to use the grown-up words and not their petulant preschool deliberate "hey look I'm a Republican" error.
You have a very odd interpretation of socialism. Very few sensible people these days argue that, say, the socialist programs of the New Deal were not extraordinarily helpful in bringing the US economy out of the Great Depression. The existence of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid has been a net benefit to the economy because people no longer need to be regularly (as) worried about dying of starvation or easily-treatable medical conditions. The Eisenhower Interstate System was a major socialist program, albeit one with military application as well, and there are very few people who pine for the days when the only way to cross the country was by an interminable morass of town roads.
It's the Republicans who want government to do nothing. I want government to fix health care, re-regulate Wall Street, devise and implement a national energy plan, and otherwise do all of those useful things that individuals are not able to do on their own with any reliability. If Republicans want to reverse their death spiral, moron, then they need to rethink some of their ideology.
You need some remedial political science courses. Communism != socialism. USSR = Communist. Denmark, Sweden, England, pretty much the entire EU = socialist. For that matter, if you're being purist about it, USA = socialist too, considering Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security as programs that would have no place in a purely capitalist setting.
This is just silly. A clear win in Iraq in the first Desert Storm didn't lead to Republican control for a generation; it led to transitory high approval ratings right up until the economy tanked under Bush I. As for those socialist hellholes of Norway, Sweden, and Denmark, I think I'd take them over the libertarian wonderland of Somalia, myself. Again, this is a crazy right-winger projecting his own opinions onto Democrats. Republicans actively want American to fail when Democrats are in power. Democrats warn that Republican policies will lead to a failure they do not want.
Maybe in the South, but every other region of the country is behind Obama by about a three-to-one margin.
Are you kidding? The stimulus bill itself required Specter to vote on a cloture motion - which means that yes, the Republicans were attempting to filibuster. They have outright declared that they will filibuster everything and demand a sixty-vote threshold on passing any remotely controversial bill. Simply because a filibuster is defeated does not mean that it was not attempted. The last session of Congress saw a record number of filibusters announced - and that's not even counting the threatened ones that didn't materialize because it became apparent there were enough votes to override it.
FAIL.
The right-wing extremism report was initiated by George W. Bush's White House, as a counterpoint to the left-wing extremism report issued earlier this year. The right-wing extremism report further did not identify conservatives as extremists; it identified two major groups within right-wing extremists, those being hate extremist groups like the Ku Klux Klan and single-issue extremist groups like abortion-clinic bombers. Agreeing with any of the issues does not mean that they called you an extremist, only that extremists have been known to share that issue.
Some squirrels are male and some squirrels are female. You are in all likelihood either male or female. This does not, however, mean that you are necessarily a squirrel. It's the same argument, except with 'squirrel' in place of 'extremist,' 'male' in place of 'hate groups,' and 'female' in place of 'single-issue groups.'
And the debunked point hits again! Republicans are the only ones who actually want anything to fail. Find any Democrat of any national significance who has actually made a statement about wanting a collapse, please.
Yes, please. Let's have Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins switch parties and make sure that Republicans aren't even close to a filibuster most of the time. And then if the economy does improve with Democrats in full command, and the public widely considering this the 'Bush Recession,' it will demonstrate quite clearly that Democrats are good for the economy; Republicans are only good for the top .1%. I'll root for America to succeed, you root for it to fail, and we'll see who wins in 2010 regardless of what happens.
Yeah, shutting down the government worked so amazingly well when Newt Gingrich tried it! It only gave Clinton a major boost in his public support and reminded people that yes, they do in fact like the services that government provides. And given that record numbers of people today are reporting that they are satisfied that they are paying a fair level of taxation, the 'John Galt' crowd looks sillier and sillier by the day.
I think he's doing this the right way. Changing political parties ten minutes before the deadline to file is scummy. Getting re-elected and then promptly changing parties is scummy. Changing parties a year and a half before an election, four and a half years into the current term? That's a long enough time that the political winds can have genuinely changed - and leaves a long enough period to permit the accumulation of a contestable voting record, plus leaves time for a primary challenger to gear up. I'd agree if he'd just won in November 2008 and was switching, but that's not the situation here.
As said by the estimable Jon Stewart, "I think they're confusing tyranny with losing." It makes them look unhinged.
The Republican front-runner is Pat Toomey, lately the president of the right-wing anti-tax extremist group, the Club for Growth. He's further right than Rick Santorum was. In trial polling thus far, Specter easily destroys Toomey among the general electorate; it's only with the Republican primary he had no chance. As far as the Democratic primary goes, he will have opposition (at least one minor declared candidate says he will not withdraw), but Governor Ed Rendell has said he will work to support Specter in the primary - as have other prominent Democrats including President Obama. This may well come down to his vote on the Employee Free Choice Act, though. If he votes for cloture, then the PA labor unions will probably let him vote as he likes on the actual bill. If he votes against cloture, though, the politically-powerful PA labor unions will be mobilized strongly against him, and he may have trouble getting through the primary then.
Republicans can't gun for Specter in the primaries any longer. Specter will run in the Democratic primary instead, where Ed Rendell has promised to do everything he can to give Specter a clear field. Pat Toomey of the Club for Growth is now the clear front-runner for the Republican nomination, and he's well to the right of Rick Santorum, who the Pennsylvania electorate overwhelmingly rejected in 2006. A Toomey/Specter matchup is extremely heavily weighted to Specter's favor among the PA general electorate, even if it's weighted the other way among the PA Republican primary crowd.
Actually, that was a right-wing projection. Democrats never wanted us to lose the war, they wanted the U.S. to stop pursuing the policies that were failing. Republicans, in their typically hyperaggressive way, screamed themselves red in the face that this was wanting America to lose. Put another way, Rush Limbaugh explicitly has said he wants President Obama to fail. Not his policies. Not his programs. His entire presidency. No Democrat of any significance actually made any statement calling for the war to be lost.
The synthesis will come when religion defines a probabilistic moral system, wherein violation the moral tenets will probably send you to hell. This will then be known as the sin-thesis.
This is SPARTAAAAA!
... Sorry, the meme arose and had to be passed on before it would leave me be.
... And, as I should have mentioned first, you can use optical scan machines to then read the ballots and get the immediate-results efficiency. In 2004, Nader paid for a recount in several New Hampshire counties, where they use these optical scan machines; the hand-count results were found to be *less* precise than the optical scanner, due to human errors in tabulation. And since there's a physical ballot, it becomes very clear if the scanner is doing anything improper.
Right, because 'outside influence' is limited to the big mean unions, and the fact that union organizers and supporters currently have a distressing tendency to be illegally fired before the election, or that management can force their entire workforce to attend multiple anti-union harangues on company time while limiting pro-union voices to break rooms and outside of work, well, that's just a tiny detail. Put some teeth into the existing "No firing union organizers between certification and election" and subject management to the same restrictions on speech as the union organizers get, and then a secret ballot is a fair thing. As it is now, the secret ballot for unionization is only slightly less relevant than the secret ballot in North Korean elections. All the protections on the ballot itself are meaningless if the fundamental process is corrupt.
Heck, you could even get *really* creative and do something off-the-wall like having voters fill out bubbles on a paper ballot by hand. Keep a few electronic voting machines at hand for ease-of-access purposes (being able to read the candidates for a blind voter, for example), but all those machines do is fill in the bubbles for the voter.
Hey now! I can't believe an error like this would be posted on Slashdot without immediate outcry. It's 'Judge Dredd.'
Haven't they already done experiments in the past where electrodes implanted in the brain can be used to stimulate sensations? If so, then there was no need to get clever with the proteins - put the electrodes in place, and then trigger them when the mice enter the lighted room. That seems more straightforward than adding photoreactive proteins that may have other unknown side-effects. But, then, me != biologist.
Yeah. Having seen a few resumes, I can tell you that having a word spelled wrong or just a crappy formatting job is an immediate red flag. A cover letter makes a world of difference, too - it shows a little more structured writing and shows an actual effort. Well-written email correspondence helps tremendously, at least for that all-important first impression.
Okay, let's see any actual evidence to back up your claim. I submit the public record of votes, which show that the Democrats voted to enter into law a bar on the Fairness Doctrine. Please submit some form of evidence showing that efforts to the contrary are taking place, outside of the fevered imaginations of Rush's dittoheads. If not, then please remove your head from El Rushbo's pilonidal cyst in turn.