Hold on just one damn minute...

[MrRain422]

Also, I was under the impression that they still hadn't fully vetted Bill Clinton yet. A lot of foreign leaders and businessmen have donated to the Clinton Foundation and to the Clinton Presidential Library, and I think there was some concern that that could lead to some sort of conflict of interest.

[mountain bed]

No worries, man. Carville says it's ok. And if you can't trust James who can you trust?

[Guest Jules]

Word is that Clinton will accept the SoS offer. Not a surprise, obviously, but what does she want out of it?

a blow job?

[MrRain422]

The Senate Democrats are truly a bunch of spineless losers. I give up.

[Edie]

I assume you are talking about the Lieberman thing. Liebs himself said that it was the intervention of Obama that kept his job for him.

 

Like the Clinton appointment, this signals the effective tactic of keeping your friends close and your enemies closer. Seems like Liebs owes O a favor, doesn't it?

[bjorn_skurj]

It is a nice gesture of post-partisanship.

[mountain bed]

I actually thought about starting a poll on The Leeb: keep him, or kick him to the curb?

 

Let's look at it this way: the Dems need to take Alaska (likely), Georgia (not likely) and Minnesota (truly a toss-up, who the fuck knows?) to get to 60. I don't see it happenin'. So if they only get 58 or 59, what the hell? I say give Leeb the boot.

[MrRain422]

Aside from the fact that he campaigned against Democrats in this last election, he's also done a pretty poor job with that chairmanship in the time he's had it. Shouldn't someone who is going to do a good job get the important chairmanships? Wouldn't awarding the most important and prestigious jobs to the most capable Senators be truly post-partisan?

[bjorn_skurj]

My take on it is that Lieberman's fate is not worth damaging the still-fragile we're-all-in-this-together feeling. Pick your battles.

[MrRain422]

Lieberman has undermined a lot of the most important battles though.

[mountain bed]

My take on it is that Lieberman's fate is not worth damaging the still-fragile we're-all-in-this-together feeling. Pick your battles.

I understand your point, but (imo) Leeb has always been in it for himself. When Harry was talking about stripping Leeb of the chairmanship he went and started having lunch/talks with McConnell (who really has nothing to offer him but a spot in their caucus).

[Spawn's dad]

Leeb the Heeb.

[John Smith]

So Fredo keeps his job? I can see both siides of the story, my gut instinct tells me that Fredo Lieberman should be eviscerated and sent packing. But the thinking side of me sees the good this can do since it is all too obvious that Obama saved his worthless ass.

 

Yeah. Chuck Hagel's name is always mentioned for Obama's administration, and I can easily imagine Dick Lugar and Arlen specter (if his health is ok) as well.

 

Hagel gave the republican party and their media rabble rousers waht for today. Good stuff.

 

Hagel takes aim at Limbaugh, Senate colleagues

Posted: 03:13 PM ET

 

Hagel had sharp words for Rush Limbaugh Tuesday.

(CNN)

[bjorn_skurj]

Part of the post-partisan era will have to be an improvement in journalism. The "get two opposing party hacks to talk at each other" thing really must stop, now. Journalistic outlets, especially broadcast, must do a better job of getting people who actually know what they're talking about on the air and turn the punditry way the fuck down.

[mfwahl]

Part of the post-partisan era will have to be an improvement in journalism. The "get two opposing party hacks to talk at each other" thing really must stop, now. Journalistic outlets, especially broadcast, must do a better job of getting people who actually know what they're talking about on the air and turn the punditry way the fuck down.

Word.

[MrRain422]

Eric Holder will be Obama's attorney general.

[LouieB]

Leeb the Heeb.

You a member of the tribe?? I sure hope so...

 

LouieB

[MattZ]

I am willing to cut Obama's administration some slack on the Leeb decision but I am not happy about it.

[MattZ]

Hopefully, Obama won't do like FDR and prolong the recession for 10-15 years.

 

Dear ikol (and anyone else interested):

 

Counterpoint:

 

http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2008/11/lessons-from-th.html

 

[Edie]

You a member of the tribe?? I sure hope so...

 

LouieB

 

Spawn's dad = gershon = gsteinb = gary steinb = lansman.

 

And I had a friend Julie Lieberman (no relation I don't think) who we all called Leibs.

[ikol]

Dear ikol (and anyone else interested):

 

Counterpoint:

 

http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2008/11/lessons-from-th.html

 

 

Whereas unemployment stayed high until WWII.

[Spawn's dad]

Spawn's dad = gershon = gsteinb = gary steinb = lansman.

 

why don't you post my address and phone # while you're at it

[M. (hristine]

I was waiting for her to cut to the chase.

[MattZ]

Whereas unemployment stayed high until WWII.

 

Come on. When you said that FDR's policies extended the recession/depression 10-15 years, I know it was a bit of hyperbole, but still. This graph proves that the new deal didn't stifle private investment. The crux of "your" argument is that the New Deal caused business investment to fall off a cliff as entrepeneurs feared the socialist in office. The graph shows that this just simply isn't the case. All a president can do is institute policies to get people to invest in business and balance budgets with the hopes that the market turns around. Are you really blaming FDR for high unemployment? What was he supposed to do? Hire them himself?

 

EDIT: In other words, the argument against the New Deal policies is that they stifled investment and therefore stifled business and kept unemployment high. They didnt stifle investment, they didn't stifle business. So how can the policies be blamed for high unemployment? Is it your position that doing nothing at all would have gotten business moving faster? And unemployment lower? Please show your work. Partial credit will be awarded.

[jakobnicholas]

The following is an email that's circulating.....fear-mongering at it's worst, but interesting nonetheless:

 

 

 

 

Who am I? Do you know?

 

I was raised in one country but my father was born in another. I was not his only child. He fathered several children with a number of women.

 

I became very close to my mother because my father showed little interest in me. Then my mother died at an early age from cancer. Later in life, questions arose over my real name. My birth records were sketchy and no one was able to produce a reliable birth certificate.

 

I grew up practicing one faith, but converted to Christianity because this was widely accepted in my country. But I practiced non-traditional beliefs and did not follow mainstream Christianity.

 

I worked and lived among lower-class people as a young adult before I decided it was time to get serious about my life and I embarked on a new career, organizing people.

 

I wrote a book about my struggles growing up. It was clear to those who read my that I had difficulties accepting that my father abandoned me as a child.

 

I became active in local politics when I was in my 30s and then burst onto the scene as a candidate for national office when I was in my 40s. I had a virtually non-existent resume, very little work history, and no experience in leading a single organization. Yet I was a powerful speaker who managed to draw incredibly large crowds during my public appearances.

 

At first, my political campaign focused on my country's foreign policy. I was critical of my country in war. But what launched my rise to national prominence were my views on the country's economy. I had a plan on how we could do better. I knew which group was responsible for getting us into this mess.

 

Mine was a peoples campaign. I was the surprise candidate because I emerged from outside the traditional path of politics and was able to gain widespread popular support. I offered the people the hope that together we could change our country and the world.

 

I spoke on behalf of the downtrodden including persecuted minorities such as Jews, but my actual views were not widely known until after I became my nations leader. However, anyone could have easily learned what I really believed if they had simply read my writings and examined those people I associated with. But they did not.

 

Then I became the most powerful man in the world. And the world learned the truth.

 

 

Who am I?

 

 

 

 

 

Adolf Hitler