There will be blood by canttakesky

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

There will be blood

POSTED BY: CANTTAKESKY
UPDATED: Tuesday, November 23, 2010 16:54
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1460
PAGE 1 of 1

Monday, November 22, 2010 3:17 AM

Interesting op-ed in the NYT today:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/22/opinion/22krugman.html?_r=2&src=twt&
twt=NytimesKrugman

Quote:
Former Senator Alan Simpson is a Very Serious Person. He must be — after all, President Obama appointed him as co-chairman of a special commission on deficit reduction.

So here’s what the very serious Mr. Simpson said on Friday: “I can’t wait for the blood bath in April. ... When debt limit time comes, they’re going to look around and say, ‘What in the hell do we do now? We’ve got guys who will not approve the debt limit extension unless we give ’em a piece of meat, real meat,’ ” meaning spending cuts. “And boy, the blood bath will be extraordinary,” he continued.

Think of Mr. Simpson’s blood lust as one more piece of evidence that our nation is in much worse shape, much closer to a political breakdown, than most people realize.

I understand checks and balances. I do. I understand that diversity of political views both strengthens and moderates the political process. I do.

But this sounds like sabotage.

This made me sad. Self-sabotage makes me sad. Not seeing sabotage of the other political party in office as sabotaging ourselves makes me sad.

I'm not saying this wasn't done when Bush was in office as well. It is just sad that we are warring against ourselves.

How do we stop this?

--Can't Take (my gorram) Sky

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 22, 2010 4:05 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

There was an episode of West Wing about this. I can't recall everything about it, but the gist was the same. One party used the debt ceiling as a tool to hold the president and the other party hostage.

As you might imagine, the American people were not exactly overjoyed at the shenanigans.

There is a limit to how much of an obstructionist you can afford to be before an election cycle.

I am not overly concerned, nor do I see this as a change of any sort. It's a shame we all don't get along and work together for our common benefit... but the political waters of the capitol have always been home to sharks. If they didn't have to work together to achieve their own ends, they'd never work together at all. I often think they are most likely to work as a team when they are busy devouring the rest of us.

--Anthony

Assured by friends that the signal-to-noise ratio has improved on this forum, I have disabled web filtering.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 22, 2010 4:05 AM

BLUEHANDEDMENACE

There is simply only one answer that can have any effect in the short term, and that is to abolish the electoral college.

The two party system was never the intent of our founding fathers. The college was devised as a method of protecting the elite from the masses.

The system was designed so that candidates would not be able to achieve the majority necessary for victory, ensuring the presidential elections would be decided in the Senate.

The unintended consequence of the electoral college is the two party system we all know and love, since that is the only system which will allow a winner of the electoral college.

Until we get rid of this antiquated vessel, we will never be free of this divisiveness

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 22, 2010 4:17 AM

CANTTAKESKY

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
I often think they are most likely to work as a team when they are busy devouring the rest of us.

I often think so too.

BHM, I have often considered eliminating the electoral college as well. It doesn't make much sense to me either, in terms of cost vs. benefit.

But I think the two party system is entrenched more deeply than by the electoral college alone. State laws for getting on the ballot make it extremely hard to compete fairly for votes.

--Can't Take (my gorram) Sky

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 22, 2010 4:24 AM

BLUEHANDEDMENACE

I agree that the two parties are somewhat way of life now, and that the elimination wouldn't fix the problems on its own.

I see it kind of like an infection that spreads in the body...you can treat what u see of the problem, but until the infection is gone the patient cant get any better.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 22, 2010 5:00 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

By that same allegory, there is no point in treating the infection if the source of the malady is still present. The infection would merely return.

--Anthony

Assured by friends that the signal-to-noise ratio has improved on this forum, I have disabled web filtering.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 22, 2010 5:31 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Well, shoulda went with my plan.

Barroom rules - finish the guy on the floor good and proper when you got him down, and THEN move onto the next...

When we finally burnt the Bush, we shoulda DESTROYED the GOP, tore it up root and branch and wrecked it beyond every the hope of sliming it's way out from under a rock and repeating this stupid ass cycle, but nooo, everyone wanted to be merciful.

See what it gets ya ?

Cause had we done that, had we STOPPED LETTING THEM SLIME AWAY, which we been doin ever since Nixon, soon enough there *would* rise into the vaccuum something to replace them as opposition to the Democrats, who most of us, even those technically on their "side" ain't too goddamn fond of either - and it'd be our responsibility to make it better instead of worse.

And then when the Dems went off a cliff thinking no one would stand up to even their most gutless, ridiculous games, we coulda pushed THEM right off the cliff after the GOP... but then, what do I know, I only been right about this sorta thing too fekkin many times to count... *shrug*.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 22, 2010 8:35 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Anthony, being a SERIOUS fan of West Wing, I remember that episode clearly. In the end, the President went to the Republicans; they kept him waiting, thinking they could show their power by doing so. Eventually he left, and by the time they came out, he was walking out the door with the media on his tail. I think pushing things in the name of power or achieving your agenda, and holding the American people hostage to do so, is reprehensible. Closing down the government does just that. It is incumbent upon our legislators to work TOGETHER, and I see Republicans flat-out claiming they are the party of no states clearly that they have no interest in the good of the people, merely exercising their own power to stop the government, period, whether what it is trying to do is good or bad.

I say: Bartlet for President!!

I fully agree about the electoral college, Blue.

I love your idea, Frem, but I don’t think it’s workable in reality...unfortunately!

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 22, 2010 9:31 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Wanna do some serious spending cuts? Let's call them on it. Start with government pensions, benefits and healthcare. Hey, when GM went into bankruptcy, pensions and healthcare took serious cuts (as did wages); we were told that everyone employed by the company needed to feel it.

So let's start by taking away all the perks and pensions of all former senators and representatives. I'm sure Mr. Simpson will be on board - after all, he loves a bloodbath! Let's make sure some of the blood is his.

This Space For Rent!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 22, 2010 9:59 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

I'm a fan of the West Wing as well

Pres Obama has to do two things: be smart, and be right. He should propose painful cuts that will significantly help reduce the debt. The repubs will demand much more, at which point Obama should dig his heels in, 'for the sake of the american people'. To win any stand off Obama must make sure he occupies the centre ground - and the republicans aren't interested in it, so it should be his for the taking.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 22, 2010 11:33 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

I agree with both of you.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 22, 2010 12:46 PM

KWICKO

Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
I'm a fan of the West Wing as well

Pres Obama has to do two things: be smart, and be right. He should propose painful cuts that will significantly help reduce the debt. The repubs will demand much more, at which point Obama should dig his heels in, 'for the sake of the american people'. To win any stand off Obama must make sure he occupies the centre ground - and the republicans aren't interested in it, so it should be his for the taking.

It's not personal. It's just war.

Heck, I bought all seven seasons on DVD back in the day... Still love that show.

They really should have spun Sam Seaborn's character off into his own show (The California 47th was my idea for the title) after he won the Orange County seat...

And I'd love to have them start the show up again, with President Santos.

Not likely to ever happen, though.

This Space For Rent!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 22, 2010 2:42 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

I loved the West Wing, even when I disagreed strongly with something they were pushing. They always tried to be thoughtful, I think, despite providing weak arguments for the opposition point-of-view at times.

Two incidents really stand out in my mind as places where they dropped the ball in terms of representing the opposition well.

One time was when the president was shot, and the propaganda secretary (I forget her name just now) used the incident to illustrate the futility of the 'guns protect people' position. The folks who claim to need guns for protection were misguided, she said. After all, the President was surrounded by the best trained armed men in the business, and they couldn't protect him from violence. Clearly, the net result of having guns was more danger, not more safety. So the citezens should stop clamoring for the right to have guns for protection.

This argument was self-evidently weak.

Another time was when Christian Slater was defending the Navy's decision to spend a lot of money on silly things like ashtrays. He demonstrated the reason for these expenditures by taking his ashtray and breaking it on a desktop. It broke into three blunt and safe pieces: A well-researched safety feature to protect the seamen, and not a foolish expenditure.

This argument was also weak for reasons which are self-evident.

Most of the time, though, I really appreciated and enjoyed the show.

--Anthony

Assured by friends that the signal-to-noise ratio has improved on this forum, I have disabled web filtering.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 23, 2010 9:08 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Wanna do some serious spending cuts? Let's call them on it. Start with government pensions, benefits and healthcare.

Government pensions? You mean Social Security and TSP, (The government's 401k plan)? That's what Federal employees get. The remaining folks on the old CSRS system paid quite a bit more than Social Security contributions for their pensions, as well as contributing to a TSP account if they wanted and could afford it.

Benefits? Federal holidays off and pretty good vacation time if you hang around long enough. Time-and-a-half for overtime. Woop.

Healthcare? There's the benefits many private employees get. Employer pays three-quarters and negotiates with insurers for good rates and services. At 65 it goes to Medicare.

If you're talking about benefits for politicians, that's a whole different thing from the big majority of Federal employees.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 23, 2010 9:19 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Yeah, I got all the seasons as soon as I could afford 'em, and Jim and I rewatch it still.

I don't think they could go on with it; obviously the writing was weakening; as with every series, it had a lifespan, I think they recognized that and got out before it died on its own.

They did what they did with the "Seaborn" character for a reason. What's-his-face (can't remember the actor) was initially supposed to be the centerpiece of the show when it was created. He ended up being such a white-bread character (I don't think you could make him anything else...there is, in my opinion, limited talent there). Notice it STARTED OUT with him as the central protaganist in the very first episode. He was pissed the way it turned out.

His character was quickly overshadowed by the more interesting, stronger characters/actors and he ended up getting less and less of a part. He rebelled and they got rid of the character.

Ergo, starting up another series with him as central figure wouldn't have worked and they knew it. With another actor and some damned good writers, I agree, it would have been COOL. Especially during this last time period. Although, so would West Wing itself, come to think of that. The correlation between a Hispanic President and a Black one would work in all the same ways...Smits' character could easily have been molded into Obama; he was as weak a sort of personality with good intentions (again, in my opinion, limited talent), and all the things from today's reality would have folded in nicely.

Hey, calling CJ "propaganda minister" only shows your bias, not the truth. SHE was one of the main reasons--Ah, yes, Rob Lowe's--character got lost. She wasn't just a "propaganda minister" by far, and the situations they put her in were excellently written. I miss her so...along with so many others. It makes me sick Dule Hill ended up on "Psych", and Janey is doing Kaiser commercials. I'm happy at least they're getting paychecks, but it's such a waste of talent!

I don't watch network TV except for Castle and Chuck (for obvious reasons!)--recently a couple of times I've gone "down there" into the network channels and caught that a few actors I like from deceased shows are in others now, typical Hollywood tactic. But it must be such a joy for an actor to get a show like West Wing (just like Firefly), and it must hurt like hell to end up in a dump like "Psych".

My love (aside from Janey, who I've got a huge crush on) was John Spencer. I've been following him since Hill Street Blues (got that whole series, too, but I taped it myself), and I just adore him. Actually, that's another example of a strong cast and excellent writing. When you put a great, talented ensemble cast together and give them good material, gawd it flies to the heavens. Just like Firefly! I'd hazard a bet the cast from West Wing feels much the same about that show, working on it, knowing it was their best work, missing it, their fellow cast members, as the Firefly crew does. (Except they never got the fantastic fan base Firefly did

).

Do you get the feeling I'm deeply in love with West Wing? It taught me SO much about the workings of our government...and to think they told Sorkinin the beginning that nobody'd be interested in a show about the government! Shows how little they know about the THINKING portion of the population...and that we're not as small as they think! It doesn't surprise me many of you here appreciated it, in the slightest!

You pointed out a couple of scenes; I'll counter with what started this threadjack--the "shut down" of the government, and that magnificent run they did on the ultra-right-wing bunch and their prejudices...AND power. The lines Sheen got about the bible will stay with me always!

I love so many of those actors; their casting was fantastic, and the writing let them be at their best. Edward James Olmos was FANTASTIC; Whitford was perfect for the part (they DID try a spinoff with him and someone else; it bombed); Martin Sheen found the best niche he ever did; Maloney, Stockard Channing (who I've had a crush on since Grease); Tomlin (tho' I liked the character before her better); Busfield; Parker (I don't care for her, but she was perfect for the part); Mary Matlin (remember "Children of a Lesser God"? To utilize her was a marvelous idea!).

A heavy-hitter cast like that can only be drawn by good material most of he time, and they did a spectacular job of choosing the right person for the right character, then molding them together. It was like Law & Order in dealing with real issues, and doing it well!

Sorry...pet subject. I'll quit now.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 23, 2010 9:19 AM

KWICKO

I'm talking about both politicians and federal employees, Geezer. After all, the politicians like John Boehner are the ones who keep telling us the federal government is too big and is draining our budget. So let's start by shrinking the pay and benefits of every employee of that "big gubmint". Heck, let's tie federal pay to the median income of the nation as a whole - no federal employee can get paid more than the median average. I'm assured that this will work, because after all, federal employees are in it because they care about service to the nation, and they aren't there to get rich. Right?

Surely every Congressman and Senator will join me in this endeavor. Let's make it so that nobody who makes a living off the taxpayers gets one single perk that the average Joe or Jane doesn't get.

Hey, if we're going to get SERIOUS about debts and deficits, we're all going to have to tighten our belts, right?

This Space For Rent!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 23, 2010 10:14 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

"Hey, calling CJ "propaganda minister" only shows your bias, not the truth."

Hello,

That's how I think of every Press Secretary, and has no bearing on CJ or the show. I liked her character very much. But it was her job, and the job of every single Press Secretary, to mold, spin, and angle information in such a way as to make the President and his positions look good and/or reduce any negative impact.

The Press Secretary is not a member of the Press. Their job is not to expose the truth of goings on. They don't volunteer negative information unless they have to. Even then, they cast the best possible light on it. Their job is to make the President, the President's men, and the United States look good. They are spin doctors. I don't think there's any other lens with which they can be viewed. Propaganda and information control is their job.

--Anthony

Assured by friends that the signal-to-noise ratio has improved on this forum, I have disabled web filtering.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 23, 2010 1:23 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Let's make it so that nobody who makes a living off the taxpayers gets one single perk that the average Joe or Jane doesn't get.

Hey, if we're going to get SERIOUS about debts and deficits, we're all going to have to tighten our belts, right?

So you're a Teabagger now?

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 23, 2010 4:52 PM

KWICKO

Hardly. I'm just trying to hold you teabaggers to your promises.

Of course I realize you really have no intention of taking any responsibility for the profligate spending you've all been a part of, and of course you want no part of any cost-cutting measures.

This Space For Rent!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 23, 2010 4:54 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

I think if you paint in strokes that are too broad, you'll miss part of the canvas.

All Liberals and All Conservatives and All Tea Partiers have only one singular thing in common.

They don't exist.

--Anthony

Edited to remove the word Teabaggers, which has apparently infected my subconscious.

Assured by friends that the signal-to-noise ratio has improved on this forum, I have disabled web filtering.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE