A Better Open Thread Than Traveller's

It's newer, cleaner, faster and sexier than anything Traveller has to offer.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Why did Republicans retain the House?

(#296149)

more than half-a-million more Americans voted for Democratic House candidates than for Republican House candidates. There was no split-decision. The Democrats won both the presidential election and the House election. But the Republicans won 55 percent of the seats in the House. ... How could this be?

 

It was by engaging in "partisan gerrymandering" that the Republican Party was able to turn a Republican defeat in terms of the national popular vote for members of the House into a significant Republican "victory" in terms of the number of Republicans elected. In Pennsylvania, for example, although citizens cast almost 100,000 more votes for Democratic than Republican candidates for the House, partisan gerrymandering enabled Republicans to 12 of the 18 seats in the House of Representatives.

Boooooo! Boooooo! Hisssssss Boooooooo!

(#296150)

They SOB's are everywhere and with 435 to choose from not a single example.  I'm commenting on the shiddiness of the article, not necessarily the phenomenon.  But seriously, with an argument this iron-clad can you guys please explain to me what you find wrong with religion?

In the medical community, death is known as Chuck Norris Syndrome. 

There's no voting in religion nt

(#296151)
HankP's picture

.

I blame it all on the Internet

There's voting in religion

(#296153)

My main personal problem with it is there's not enough sex, fun or sex.

You've been hanging around the wrong temples. -nt-

(#296175)

.

M Aurelius was probably right.

Of course there is

(#296173)
stinerman's picture

The cardinals vote and then you obey.  That's how it works.

The Constitution does not vest in Congress the authority to protect society from every bad act that might befall it. -- Clarence Thomas

Thank God

(#296152)

I thought you were booing my open thread to show your loyalty to Traveller, who's been coasting on our good graces around here for some time.

So that's how long the respect for veterans lasts nt

(#296155)
HankP's picture

.

I blame it all on the Internet

Don't Mess With the Cranyon Shooter, I Shoot Plenty Straight!

(#296156)

Caryons

Traveller

Occupy Wall Street is buying up distressed debt

(#296154)

for pennies on the dollar and forgiving it.

 

I hate these smelly a$$holes.

It's A Step Up From Peeing And Burning On Things

(#296161)
M Scott Eiland's picture

It's been a long time since I took economics, but isn't that just going to make the remaining distressed defaulted loans more attractive to other buyers (who will sell it for the same markup, costing the remaining debtors more)? Still, better than rioting, peeing, and burning, so have at it!

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

Yes, I remember months of nothing but

(#296164)

rioting, pissing arsonists in the Occupy movement. 

 

Don't forget all the raping, MScott.

Hey, uh, Catchy and MSE can we holdup on the

(#296258)

peeing and burning talk?  Last thing we need here is penicillin spam.

In the medical community, death is known as Chuck Norris Syndrome. 

I don't think so

(#296165)
HankP's picture

First, they'd have to buy an awful lot of bonds to change the entire market. Second, bond prices move inversely to interest rates, so if they did affect the market it would have the effect of lowering interest rates on the bonds, which would also help the debtors.

I blame it all on the Internet

This strikes me as something similar to Christian groups

(#296198)

who'd buy up slaves taken by Sudanese slavers in the civil war and then release them. Helpful to the individual slaves, but doesn't help the underlying structures and can create some perverse incentives in the long run.

 

But yes, much, much better than black bloc idiots putting bricks through store fronts and fighting with cops.

Doesn't directly address the underlying structures

(#296216)

but by publicizing this into a show with a lottery etc. they're obviously trying to call attention to the issue so as to get society to address the underlying structures.

anyone ever mosey over to theforvmbuffalo?

(#296162)

They gots awesome stuff there.

You left out the NSFW tag

(#296194)

Thanks.  I'll let you know how the disciplinary hearing turns out.

Judged that one wrong...

(#296248)

In TX,  "Entertainment Complex" is a euphemism for a very particular type of entertainment, and the first picture in the scroll bar looked nightclubbish,  so I closed it down before reading more. My apologies to you and the people of Buffalo.

You need to apologize to Buffalo in person

(#296256)

that's your punishment.

Look like utterly charming

(#296238)

Look like utterly charming establishments.

I've been to Buffalo

(#296244)
HankP's picture

for that area they are.

 

I blame it all on the Internet

Willie And Mickey--The 2012 Edition

(#296170)
M Scott Eiland's picture

Mike Trout and Bryce Harper win the AL & NL Rookie of the Year awards, respectively.

Actually, Gil McDougald--most famous for hitting the line drive that derailed Herb Score's career--won the 1951 AL Rookie of the Year Award, not Mickey Mantle. Mickey didn't OPS over 1.000 in the last month of the season to lead his team to the pennant. Harper--to the extent possible under 2012 rules--did. Still, this could be the start of a two decade rivalry that reminds the old timers of Willie and Mickey.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

Northern Allies of Southern Secession

(#296174)
stinerman's picture

We're back.

 

I'm over it at this point.  I want to make this a reality.  Have a plebiscite and anyone who wants to leave the US may do so.  Any US citizens who wish to move back to the US may do so at any time.  They've got to pay us the going rate for any federal lands that might be within the state.  As soon as the check clears, we're out of their lives forever. 

 

I could only imagine how much richer we'd be as a country without having to send money to the old confederacy.  Of course, they'll come crawling back in a generation or two.  I'd be surprised if they still have running water and electricity by 2050.  When the operations manual for the nuclear reactors is the King James Bible, I think there will be a problem.

The Constitution does not vest in Congress the authority to protect society from every bad act that might befall it. -- Clarence Thomas

*cough cough Jesusland cough cough*

(#296187)
M Scott Eiland's picture

Losing makes a lot of people crazy.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

Jesusland was different

(#296254)
stinerman's picture

A good deal of the country consists of people who are delusional, not withstanding the part of the DSM-IV-TR manual that states that religious beliefs are explicitly excepted from being considered as such.

 

I'll let the incomparable Bill Hicks speak for me on the validity of my hypothesis.

That's a judgment call and I'm makin' it. But it happens to be true and that gives it the force, that extra oomph.

The Constitution does not vest in Congress the authority to protect society from every bad act that might befall it. -- Clarence Thomas

Indeed

(#296259)
M Scott Eiland's picture

For one thing, there seem to be a bunch of union clowns who think that Obama is going to bail them out by removing the SS earnings cap. Any non-Forvmite who seriously believes that is *deeply* delusional.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

Now wait a minute

(#296195)

Why should we pay for the federal lands?  It's not they all belong exclusively to Ohio.  In fact, you should compensate us for our share of the federal lands up in snow-monkey land.  Tell you what,  you keep our senators Cruz and Cornyn in DC and we'll call it square.

 

 

Yep

(#296196)
M Scott Eiland's picture

Shared property rights go both ways.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

No deal

(#296255)
stinerman's picture

They don't belong to Ohio.  They belong to the United States of America.  If Texas wishes to no longer be a part of the United States of America, she can keep the federal lands, once she pays her rightful owner for them.

 

And what the H would I do with Cornyn and Cruz?  We've got enough Senators that ought to be institutionalized.

The Constitution does not vest in Congress the authority to protect society from every bad act that might befall it. -- Clarence Thomas

And Washington Can Write A Check. . .

(#296261)
M Scott Eiland's picture

. . .for the departing states share of the value of the federal lands in the rest of the United States. Community property goes both ways.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

There's no such thing as a no-fault secession

(#296283)
stinerman's picture

If they want out, they need to buy out their share.

The Constitution does not vest in Congress the authority to protect society from every bad act that might befall it. -- Clarence Thomas

Says Who?

(#296284)
M Scott Eiland's picture

In your hypothetical, the US seems to be anxious to have them go--let them pay for that privilege and get *nothing* for any federal lands, since they aren't willing to negotiate in good faith and adjust any payments to reflect their share of all federal lands controlled by the US.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

This is the wrong problem.

(#296372)

The right problem is: who keeps the nukes?

 

As for land, in most cases it's a wash. The exceptions are those where the Federal government paid to acquire the entire state from another country. I know of three. Louisiana Purchase (which covers a lot more than Louisiana), Alaska, and a bit of southern Arizona. if those states want to secede, they need to pay that money back, with interest, or their portion thereof.

I am not a pessimist. I am an incompetent optimist.

Military In General, Yes

(#296373)
M Scott Eiland's picture

Which is why the subject of secession is silly--what sane state or states would intentionally make themselves a (by world standards) a fantastically rich version of Costa Rica who just alienated the superpower next door? That goes for the "Jesusland" idiots from eight years ago, too.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

How about paying their share of the national debt?

(#296379)
HankP's picture

That would kill the idea immediately.

 

I blame it all on the Internet

Yiou guys are going about it all wrong.

(#296393)

I remember talking to a young and very beautiful Slovak about their split with Czechia. She described it as "one morning we woke up to find that they'd snuck out in the night and taken the currency, the national anthem, the army and pretty much everything else with them"

They buried the lede

(#296206)

Derrick Belcher, a 45 year-old topless carwash owner, is behind the Alabama petition, according to AL.com. He supported Ron Paul in 2012 and told the site he’s serious about creating a new union of states that did not vote for Obama’s reelection.

 

They couldn't hit an elephant at this dist...
-- General John B. Sedgwick, 1864

What a great idea to open a carwash

(#296207)

for convertibles.

M Aurelius was probably right.

It's

(#296208)

odd to restrict your business to only 45 year old vehicles, though.

No, the owner is topless

(#296210)
HankP's picture

he must work out.

I blame it all on the Internet

Guys, it's the topless carwash

(#296212)

that's 45 years old. Really makes you miss the sixties, don't it?

M Aurelius was probably right.

Husted smacked down, yet again, by courts

(#296237)

Just a few choice quotes from the decision (emphasis mine):

At oral argument, the Secretary could point to no statute or other authority which relieved, or purported to relieve, poll workers of their duty to record the type of identification presented by a provisional voter.

 

First, having created the equal protection issue by issuing a directive that violates both state law and a voluntarily entered Consent Decree, the Secretary cannot benefit from his illegal act by using it to escape his obligations under the Consent Decree.

 

Counsel for the Secretary unambiguously assured this Court that the Secretary understood the recording of “identifying information” to be a duty “imposed upon the poll worker” and that the failure to do so would not “invalidate ballots.” The Court relied on this statement to the Plaintiffs’ detriment. Nine days after making that representation to the Court,the Secretary ordered that no provisional ballots be counted if the identification information was improperly recorded

 

The Court also notes, with grave misgivings, that the Secretary changed an election rule on a Friday evening for an election scheduled for the following Tuesday, after repeatedly asserting, to both this Court and the Sixth Circuit, that he could not comply with injunctive relief ordered by this Court because he lacked sufficient time prior to the election. The surreptitious manner in which the Secretary went about implementing this last minute change to the election rules casts serious doubt on his protestations of good faith.

Of course, the judge was Clinton-appointed, so clearly this is outrageous judicial activism. 

Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson

Possibly the best restaurant review ever

(#296272)

 

Guy's American Kitchen & Bar in Times Square. 

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/14/dining/reviews/restaurant-review-guys-...

 

"And when we hear the words Donkey Sauce, which part of the donkey are we supposed to think about?"

 

They couldn't hit an elephant at this dist...
-- General John B. Sedgwick, 1864

What part of a donkey do you think of when you hear

(#296281)

Donkey kong?

Will Obama look like Hollande?

(#296273)

6 months into his presidency, Hollande's approval ratings are starting to dip below 40%.

 

He's pursued a deficit reduction instead of pro-growth strategy, and though he's asked the wealthy to pay down the lion's share of the deficit, he's now pushing for significant spending cuts as well.

 

France's economy has ground to a near halt and no one knows how low Hollande's #s will sink.

 

Will Obama look like Hollande in 6 months time?

Fascinating article on reaching the brain damaged

(#296274)

After more than 10 yrs. of no communication:

 

A crash victim thought to have been in a vegetative state for more than a decade has used the power of thought to tell scientists he is not in pain...

 

Prof Owen's team uses functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) brain scans to detect hidden awareness in patients and open up channels of communication. The scans produce images of "active" regions of the brain by tracking the flow of oxygen-rich blood. Patients are asked to imagine playing tennis or walking around their home – two thought processes that produce distinct patterns of activity in different parts of the brain.

 

 

By monitoring the activity on an fMRI scanner, the researchers can ask yes or no questions. One type of brain activity is taken as a "yes" and the other as a "no".

 

...Prof Owen has previously shown that nearly one in five vegetative patients may in fact be conscious.

Wolf Larson

(#296278)

I thought it was mean of Jack London to do that to Capt Larson, but at least it was fiction.

Shivver.

I find it hard to imagine being permanently stuck in a bed

(#296280)

without being able to blog.

Woman drives on sidewalk to avoid school bus, judge orders her

(#296287)

reuters decline watch

(#296291)

A piece on the bankruptcy of San Bernadino is mostly just anti-union propaganda

And That's The Coup De Grace For Christie

(#296301)
M Scott Eiland's picture

Noted Obama donor and professional scumbag Bill Maher thinks that Chris Christie is his kind of Republican. Short of being french-kissed by Barney Frank on live TV, I can't think of much more that could go south for him as a possible Republican nominee in 2016.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

Why in the world

(#296302)
HankP's picture

would you base your opinion on what other people think?

 

I blame it all on the Internet

By Itself, It Wouldn't Matter So Much

(#296303)
M Scott Eiland's picture

But for Republicans deciding on whether to give him the benefit of the doubt over his behavior, it's pretty much the kiss of death.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

Evading the question

(#296310)
HankP's picture

this is groupthink taken to an extreme.

 

I blame it all on the Internet

Nope

(#296317)
M Scott Eiland's picture

As Democratic response to the McCain hugging GWB photo demonstrated, it's pretty much a standard reaction to this sort of thing.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

The old switcheroo

(#296329)
HankP's picture

first you were talking about hugging someone from a different party, now you're talking about hugging someone from the same party. No, I don't think it hurt Obama to hug Clinton and I don't think it will hurt the 2016 nominee to hug Obama.

 

But man, these litmus tests are hard to keep up with.

 

I blame it all on the Internet

The Fact That Your Comment. . .

(#296331)
M Scott Eiland's picture

. . .is not compatible with logic a five year old (or a normal adult) would not have trouble understanding is not my problem.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

You're going to have to explain

(#296335)
HankP's picture

how an R governor hugging a D president is comparable to an R presidential candidate hugging an R president, because that's the path you took in this argument. Unless the rule is "don't hug icky people", but it couldn't be that childish, could it?

 

I blame it all on the Internet

I Have. Repeatedly

(#296340)
M Scott Eiland's picture

Thus the reference to "logic that a five year old wouldn't have trouble following." The fact that your comments can't do likewise at this point is, again, not my problem. To paraphrase Neil Gaiman, my time is not your comments' b***h.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

No, you just proved my point

(#296342)
HankP's picture

which is that Republicans engage in groupthink and go by what other people think about Christie rather than making up their minds on their own. If an enemy of the people likes Christie, he must be bad!

 

I blame it all on the Internet

His behavior?

(#296353)

Have you seen what Sandy did to New Jersey?

 

Christie put the interests of the state of New Jersey over those of the GOP. If Republicans consider that to be high treason, then I hope they are prepared to enjoy a long, long exile from political relelvancy.

"I've been on food stamps and welfare.  Anybody help me out?  No!" Craig T. Nelson (6/2/2009)

MSE, I disagree

(#296355)

In all honesty, I don't see the big deal here.  A governor hugged POTUS while his state was in a state of emergency.  I don't doubt it will be used against him, I just don't think it will be effective.  I'm drinking and I don't wager, but if I did wager I wouldn't do it while drinking but here's what I'll think aloud.  If Christie doesn't lose 100 lbs or so he doesn't have a shot.  I think his appearance is that detrimental, moreso than the hug.  If he loses 150 lbs then he has a hell of a chance at being the next POTUS if he wants it.

In the medical community, death is known as Chuck Norris Syndrome. 

Yes, MSE's Position on Christie is Odd...I Myself Would Give Him

(#296357)

 

...a long and serious look at being PONTUS.

 

The weight doesn't bother me that much, and, I do like his wife.

 

Best Wishes, Traveller

Trav, the weight might not bother you

(#296358)

but imagine the 1st debate where he has a love handle hanging out on either side of the podium.  Answering the first question all 'puff, puff' and sweaty from waddling out onto the stage.  He'll never have sex appeal but cutting some serious pounds will appeal to a lot of folks regardless of his policies.

In the medical community, death is known as Chuck Norris Syndrome. 

My Offer Remains Open

(#296374)
M Scott Eiland's picture

Bet with the stakes of groveling admission the other was right on this matter. I'll even sweeten it by saying that Christie won't even be one of the two finalists--but I get double credit if Christie actually runs for the *Democratic* nomination and is among the final three finishers.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

I Don't Object To Disagreement About The Impact

(#296376)
M Scott Eiland's picture

I do consider comments that indicate an inability to understand the point I am making to be ineptly constructed bull***t, though.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

That's because the point is incorrect

(#296378)
HankP's picture

and severely cognitively impaired.

 

John Boehner is politically dead, because he hugged (and KISSED!) Nancy Pelosi! and you know who else Republicans hate? John McCain because he hugged Hillary Clinton! And George W. Bush because he hugged Barack Obama! And they really hate Anne Romney for hugging Michelle Obama! 

 

Except of course, they don't. Or at least the ones with any brains. They may use pictures like that to prime the two minute hate for people they don't like anyway, but the hug itself isn't the problem.

 

I blame it all on the Internet

I understand your point:

(#296405)

You've been making it since primary season:

 

Any Republican who believes in science or global climate change is evil and impure, unfit for the nomination.

 

Any Republican who dares to say anything at all complimentary about a Democrat, especially if the Democrat is Barack Obama, is evil and unfit for the nomination, no matter what the circumstances are.

 

As a Democrat who enjoyed winning on 6 November, I heartily encourage such thinking amongst Republicans for the foreseeable future.

"I've been on food stamps and welfare.  Anybody help me out?  No!" Craig T. Nelson (6/2/2009)

Christie is my kind, too

(#296305)
stinerman's picture

He's outspoken and isn't afraid to fight the idiots in his party.

 

Maher supported Dole in '96.  He's become less libertarian and more liberal since then, but yeah.  That doesn't bode well for Christie in a Republican primary.

The Constitution does not vest in Congress the authority to protect society from every bad act that might befall it. -- Clarence Thomas

To be the Republican nominee

(#296307)

means that one is either bat$hit insane or a pathological liar. So Christie never really stood a chance anyway.

Neither Would A Democrat Who Had Hugged GWB. . .

(#296309)
M Scott Eiland's picture

. . .just before the 2004 election. It has nothing to do with crazy and everything to do with not liking people who undermine their party's presidential nominee without good reason (and no, Christie had no good reason. . .unless you're suggesting that Obama somehow blackmailed Christie into that hug to keep his state from being denied disaster aid*, and that would be a conspiracy theory, wouldn't it?)

*--which, given the state of the post-Sandy recovery, makes one wonder what intentionally f***ing up the disaster aid would look like.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

You're missing the relevant point

(#296311)

A democratic candidate who is sane and honest (at least for a politician) stands a chance of winning the parties nomination. That's not the case for the Republicans which I think should have been obvious after seeing the freakshow lineup of candidates from the last cycle. Romney and Huntsman were the only two sane ones in the bunch but Huntsman wasn't willing to lie enough to be acceptable to the base. Romney has no problem with lying so he got the gig.

You're wrong, of course.

(#296312)

Democrats don't play identity politics with near the fervor that Republicans do. Now, Democrats that hug Republican *policies* tend to have a pretty bad time.

M Aurelius was probably right.

Nope

(#296316)
M Scott Eiland's picture

Democrats went into hysterical outrage over a photo of *McCain* hugging GWB--are you seriously trying to claim that a Democratic candidate wouldn't fare even worse, that his or her Democratic opponents would somehow decline to use it as a blunt instrument in the primaries? Bull***t.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

Nope

(#296321)

The photo merely crystallized the fact that McCain was an exact duplicate of Bush on foreign & domestic policy. 

 

Again it's the policy, not the personality.

M Aurelius was probably right.

Uh Huh

(#296322)
M Scott Eiland's picture

So Democrats who shank each other over any number of trivial causes wouldn't use such a photo against a Democratic opponent--only against a Republican.

Let me elaborate. Sniper grandma bull***t.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

Point to a real-world example.

(#296323)

I can think of a dozen examples of a circular Democratic firing squad where the party tore itself apart, ripped up its own candidates over (often fairly trivial) policy differences. The Judean People's Front vs. The People's Front of Judea, etc.

 

But merely expressing human gratitude & appreciation for a member of the opposing team? That's all you guys.

M Aurelius was probably right.

Actually. . .

(#296325)
M Scott Eiland's picture

. . .since you are making the assertion that Democrats would behave differently than Republicans--and be less hysterical than they were about a Republican re GWB--you produce the evidence of how Democrats reacted in a similar situation.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

That's funny, I'm not the one making wild gesticulating

(#296362)

equivalences.

M Aurelius was probably right.

"Democrats that hug Republican *policies* ... "

(#296359)

I don't even think that's true. I regularly have conversations with Democrats who say that Obama is right to incorporate conservative proposals, even if it's entirely optional. 

 

E.g., I got this email just today from a guy who's a big time donor to Democrats.

 

How do you write off 48+% of the society, [catchy]? How do you rule effectively by ignoring their existence?  It is because Obama believes you cannot that he allowed 300 some amendments to the ACA even though he garnered not a vote from the Right.  One of the first lessons in Political Science 101 is that ... to rule effectively, all the society has to feel it is being heard; they have to at the least buy into the social contract which allows one faction to lead another, and they won't do that if they think they are being ignored/disrespected.

 

Sigh. Democrats are in general such compromising, reasonable folk who get chewed up by their nasty political opposition and spit out nearly every day, often twice on Tuesdays. 

Uh, Obama doesn't look too chewed up to me

(#296360)
HankP's picture

despite a sluggish recovery, high unemployment, etc. etc. he got re-elected pretty handily. And the Senate is now +2 D compared to before the election. So maybe your friend is on to something.

 

I blame it all on the Internet

Catchy, not for nuthin'

(#296361)

but you might want write that fella back and let him know that to 'rule effectively' you might not want to use the term 'rule'.  That is, unless he's used to being called 'm'lord'.

In the medical community, death is known as Chuck Norris Syndrome. 

Maybe he wants to be re-elected in a blue state

(#296482)

Rather than run for Prez. Christie has previously perfected the tongue-kissing Dems shtick... Just ask Cory Booker. It's great for him in Jersey... Besides, he's smart enough to know that he's never going to get the nod for Prez, not with a pro-choice position.

"I don't want us to descend into a nation of bloggers." - Steve Jobs

He's not pro-choice

(#296488)
HankP's picture

he just knows he'd never get elected to anything in NJ if he pushed an anti-choice position.

 

I blame it all on the Internet

Romney explains his loss: revenge of the moochers!

(#296319)

In a conference call with some highly disappointed billionaires, Romney explained his loss to Obama thusly.

Obama, Romney argued, had been “very generous” to blacks, Hispanics and young voters. He cited as motivating factors to young voters the administration’s plan for partial forgiveness of college loan interest and the extension of health coverage for students on their parents’ insurance plans well into their 20s. Free contraception coverage under Obama’s healthcare plan, he added, gave an extra incentive to college-age women to back the president.

 

Romney argued that Obama’s healthcare plan’s promise of coverage “in perpetuity” was “highly motivational” to those voters making $25,000 to $35,000 who might not have been covered, as well as to African American and Hispanic voters. Pivoting to immigration, Romney said the Obama campaign’s efforts to paint him as “anti-immigrant” had been effective and that the administration’s promise to offer what he called “amnesty” to the children of illegal immigrants had helped turn out Hispanic voters in record numbers.

 

“The president’s campaign,” he said, “focused on giving targeted groups a big gift — so he made a big effort on small things. Those small things, by the way, add up to trillions of dollars.”

Basically, Obama voters are greedy urban minorities and college sluts. That's classic Romney. Remember how Romney repudiated his own remarks in the infamous 47% video, saying "that's just wrong"? Well apparently the etch has a brand new sketch, because Obama managed to increase that 47% to 51%!

 

Meanwhile this experienced and highly successful businessman apparently doesn't understand that when your competitor offers a superior product, more people are going to buy it. 

M Aurelius was probably right.

He is an Ugly Spirited Man, Vile...We are So Fortunated to Beat

(#296324)

 

...him into the ground, then spit and urinate on him.

 

He has shown his true face.

 

And Ugly it is.

 

Best Wishes, Traveller

I'm disgusted too

(#296327)

I thought Paul Ryan's comments on how Obama doesn't have a mandate coz he was mostly supported by "urban" voters would be the worst of it, but nope.

 

I hate seeing Obama spend his political capital on deficit reduction, but these guys ain't makin me regret my vote any. 

Wow

(#296332)
M Scott Eiland's picture

It looks like "construe everything Republicans say about Obama as racist to give him political cover" is the order of business *after* the election, too. It's going to be a long four years. . .

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

The guy said "blacks & latinos voted for Obama because

(#296338)

he paid them," and you think we're construing the remarks as racist? 

M Aurelius was probably right.

As if Ryan doesn't know that's a plausible interpretation

(#296341)

of his remarks.

 

But suppose we stick solely with the literal read - it's still a divisive insult. He's being a dick at best, racist at worst.

 

Funny thing is, if anyone elected has no legitimacy it's Ryan and his colleagues in the House. They gerrymandered their way into keeping their seats even though they decisively lost the popular vote. 

 

Our liberal media somehow systematically misses that context.

Well, that's it, Jindal's out too

(#296369)
HankP's picture

can't have a candidate that doesn't respect the base. Maybe Scott will start calling him "Piyush Mulligatawny Chutney the Third".

 

I blame it all on the Internet

Jindal's Making A More Subtle Point. . .

(#296375)
M Scott Eiland's picture

. . .but yes, if he doesn't watch it he won't make a serious run at the nomination (to the extent he already might have).

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

"Subtle" meaning he skirted around actually saying

(#296385)

Romney's claim that black and hispanic voters can be bought is a bunch of racist tripe? Because he stepped carefully around pointing out that the suggestion that Obamacare appeals to college sluts might be deeply insulting to young single women?

 

I'm interested in hearing more about this subtlety.

M Aurelius was probably right.

But it's after the election

(#296388)

isn't this just viewed as one way in which party members are trying to change in order to win?

 

And btw, I get your point that CHristie was problematically cozy to Obama, especially since so many conservatives thought the election was closer than it was. I found the Air Force One call to Springsteen and cold shoulder to Romney surprising. 

 

CAn the guy use a "my state was half under water from a hurricane at the time" get-out-of-jail free card though? He had a strong record of cirticizing Obama/Biden up until then, and he has several years to make those couple of weeks look like an aberration. 

I don't want to put words in your mouth,

(#296406)

so please don't construe this as a personal criticism.

 

You seem to be saying that criticizing the white/fundamentalist/nativist/male base of the party is a sure way to lose the GOP nomination for office.

 

Again, I don't know if that mirrors your preferences/ideology or not, or if you're just observing the current state of the party, but if that's the case, then the GOP will soon cease to be a viable political party. There are too many generational and demographic changes afoot to continue to indulge the Pat Robertson wing of the party any longer.

"I've been on food stamps and welfare.  Anybody help me out?  No!" Craig T. Nelson (6/2/2009)

Hallelujah! Pass me a snake to handle...Glory Be!...nt

(#296409)

Traveller

Bobby Jindal unleashes more subtlety at Romney.

(#296432)

“This is not where the Republican party needs to go,” he said. “Look, If you want voters to like you, the first thing you’ve got to do is to like them first. And it’s certainly not helpful to tell voters that you think their votes were bought.”

Nice, subtle point, Governor Jindal! I can't help agreeing that voters in general don't like to be told that their votes have been bought. But you know what voters like even less? Being called out specifically as a bunch of no-account bribe-taking sellouts. Saying Obama bought votes is one thing. Saying Obama bought black people with handouts, and latinos with amnesty, and slutty college girls with free jimmyhats, well, you're digging yourself a much deeper hole. 

M Aurelius was probably right.

Ah, but you forget

(#296433)
HankP's picture

the sizable Santorum led "jimmyhats are bad!" coalition:

 

One of the things I will talk about that no President has talked about before is I think the dangers of contraception in this country, the whole sexual libertine idea. Many in the Christian faith have said, “Well, that’s okay. Contraception’s okay.”

 

It’s not okay because it’s a license to do things in the sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be. They’re supposed to be within marriage, they are supposed to be for purposes that are, yes, conjugal, but also [inaudible], but also procreative. That’s the perfect way that a sexual union should happen. We take any part of that out, we diminish the act. And if you can take one part out that’s not for purposes of procreation, that’s not one of the reasons, then you diminish this very special bond between men and women, so why can’t you take other parts of that out? And all of a sudden, it becomes deconstructed to the point where it’s simply pleasure. And that’s certainly a part of it—and it’s an important part of it, don’t get me wrong—but there’s a lot of things we do for pleasure, and this is special, and it needs to be seen as special.

 

Again, I know most Presidents don’t talk about those things, and maybe people don’t want us to talk about those things, but I think it’s important that you are who you are. I’m not running for preacher. I’m not running for pastor, but these are important public policy issues. These how profound impact on the health of our society.

now that's freedom from government intrusion right there!

 

I blame it all on the Internet

Hank, it's the government's job to make sure

(#296434)

nobody ruins the specialness of things that are very special.

M Aurelius was probably right.

Santorum hasn't been reading his Clarence Thomas

(#296440)
stinerman's picture

 

The Constitution does not vest in Congress the authority to protect society from every bad act that might befall it. -- Clarence Thomas

The funny thing

(#296330)
HankP's picture

is that going by raw numbers, Obama was "very generous" to white poor and working class voters far more than any minority. Which explains why he made so much of a gain with white voters outside the South (draw your own conclusions about why that is).

 

I blame it all on the Internet

I think this line of attack is funny

(#296343)

I first came across something similar down in Venezuela when people accused Chavez of "bribing" a majority of the population into voting for him with literacy programs, healthcare clinics, more educational opportunities, etc. 

 

I get the argument that some programs aren't sustainable, but that's not the argument these trenchant critics like Romney are making. They're bothered by the very idea that a majority in a country would benefit from a leader's policies. Coz that would involve too much "bribing".

Romney's 47% video makes it clear that this is how he really

(#296387)

thinks about the electoral process. He understood the tax cuts he was offering as bribes for rich Americans too. Apparently politics is very simple for Mr. Romney: I find ways of getting the government to give you money, and you give me your vote! 

 

It's a simple business transaction. Unfortunately, there are large numbers of people Romney couldn't bribe without alienating the much smaller group of people he was trying to bribe.

M Aurelius was probably right.

Romney's video

(#296389)

made it clear what he believes rich Republican donors want to hear.

 

The fact that he's reiterating this after an election he lost, and knows it to be a losing political message, is more indicative of what he thinks IMHO.

Well...exactly. In unguarded moments, this is the kind of

(#296390)

bigoted crap that comes out of his mouth. I assume it's what he really believes.

M Aurelius was probably right.

A President We Can Love, A President to Follow and Emulate!

(#296365)

 

Seriously, his picture, home and whatnot at the full BBC Story...ex-rebel, shot 6 times and 14 years in jail, now the President of Uruguay...but asking the question, How should we live?

 

Text below, BBC here:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20243493

 

It's a common grumble that politicians' lifestyles are far removed from those of their electorate. Not so in Uruguay. Meet the president - who lives on a ramshackle farm and gives away most of his pay.

Laundry is strung outside the house. The water comes from a well in a yard, overgrown with weeds. Only two police officers and Manuela, a three-legged dog, keep watch outside.

This is the residence of the president of Uruguay, Jose Mujica, whose lifestyle clearly differs sharply from that of most other world leaders.

President Mujica has shunned the luxurious house that the Uruguayan state provides for its leaders and opted to stay at his wife's farmhouse, off a dirt road outside the capital, Montevideo.

The president and his wife work the land themselves, growing flowers.

This austere lifestyle - and the fact that Mujica donates about 90% of his monthly salary, equivalent to $12,000 (£7,500), to charity - has led him to be labelled the poorest president in the world.

"I've lived like this most of my life," he says, sitting on an old chair in his garden, using a cushion favoured by Manuela the dog.

"I can live well with what I have."

His charitable donations - which benefit poor people and small entrepreneurs - mean his salary is roughly in line with the average Uruguayan income of $775 (£485) a month.

In 2010, his annual personal wealth declaration - mandatory for officials in Uruguay - was $1,800 (£1,100), the value of his 1987 Volkswagen Beetle.

This year, he added half of his wife's assets - land, tractors and a house - reaching $215,000 (£135,000).

That's still only about two-thirds of Vice-President Danilo Astori's declared wealth, and a third of the figure declared by Mujica's predecessor as president, Tabare Vasquez.

Elected in 2009, Mujica spent the 1960s and 1970s as part of the Uruguayan guerrilla Tupamaros, a leftist armed group inspired by the Cuban revolution.

He was shot six times and spent 14 years in jail. Most of his detention was spent in harsh conditions and isolation, until he was freed in 1985 when Uruguay returned to democracy.

Those years in jail, Mujica says, helped shape his outlook on life.

"I'm called 'the poorest president', but I don't feel poor. Poor people are those who only work to try to keep an expensive lifestyle, and always want more and more," he says.

"This is a matter of freedom. If you don't have many possessions then you don't need to work all your life like a slave to sustain them, and therefore you have more time for yourself," he says.

"I may seem a mad and eccentric old man. But this is a free choice."

The Uruguayan leader made a similar point when he addressed the Rio+20 summit in June this year: "We've been talking all afternoon about sustainable development. To get the masses out of poverty.

"But what are we thinking? Do we want the model of development and consumption of the rich countries? I ask you now: what would happen to this planet if Indians would have the same proportion of cars per household than Germans? How much oxygen would we have left?

"Does this planet have enough resources so seven or eight billion can have the same level of consumption and waste that today is seen in rich societies? It is this level of hyper-consumption that is harming our planet."

Mujica accuses most world leaders of having a "blind obsession to achieve growth with consumption, as if the contrary would mean the end of the world".

But however large the gulf between the vegetarian Mujica and these other leaders, he is no more immune than they are to the ups and downs of political life.

"Many sympathise with President Mujica because of how he lives. But this does not stop him for being criticised for how the government is doing," says Ignacio Zuasnabar, a Uruguayan pollster.

The Uruguayan opposition says the country's recent economic prosperity has not resulted in better public services in health and education, and for the first time since Mujica's election in 2009 his popularity has fallen below 50%.

This year he has also been under fire because of two controversial moves. Uruguay's Congress recently passed a bill which legalised abortions for pregnancies up to 12 weeks. Unlike his predecessor, Mujica did not veto it.

He is also supporting a debate on the legalisation of the consumption of cannabis, in a bill that would also give the state the monopoly over its trade.

"Consumption of cannabis is not the most worrying thing, drug-dealing is the real problem," he says.

However, he doesn't have to worry too much about his popularity rating - Uruguayan law means he is not allowed to seek re-election in 2014. Also, at 77, he is likely to retire from politics altogether before long.

When he does, he will be eligible for a state pension - and unlike some other former presidents, he may not find the drop in income too hard to get used to.

 

Yeah, right...

(#296422)

So why if he wants to be so sustainable is this guy's government pushing for an open pit iron mine right in the center of Uruguay, complete with a tailings and iron slurry pipeline all the way to the pristine (and supposedly protected) Uruguayan Atlantic coast?

 

The project is by a company of Indian capital (sorry Manish, but it would be better to be raped by Western companies that are at least more easily sued and must slightly protect their image), called Aratiri.

 

These lefties are all the same. They talk sustainable, they talk consumption, but they are as green as Sarah Palin. And stupid too (or corrupt), as the project has no value added in Uruguay. They won't even export iron, much less steel, just ore. In exchange Uruguay gets polluted water and a huge hole in the ground where there is now farmland, courtesy of 50,000 tons of explosives detonated every year for the 20 year life of the mine.

 

Screw Mujica and all like him.

I am not a pessimist. I am an incompetent optimist.

Oh, I agree.

(#296423)
mmghosh's picture

Our miners have an enviable record of environmental destruction - I have diaries on this.  Envied by Gina Rinehart, naturally.

The Project has been Put on Hold over Serious Concerns...

(#296427)

 

 

...I obviously don't know enough about the project to definitively defend it, but it has been seriously postphoned...also, if it does go forward it will be with Uruguay being a 50% partner...which would be different too.

 

However, I do appreciate the challenge on this old leftist that may have been hustled by an International corp, or maybe not. This is certainly different than the heart warming story I posted...

 

But things are not exactly as you say either:

 

http://en.mercopress.com/2011/08/03/uruguay-disappointed-with-indian-gro...

 

Best Wishes, Traveller

I don't see anything...

(#296487)

...in your link that contradicts what I've said.

 

The company has very noisily slowed down the investment, since the project is on hold. They have done this in order to maximize pressure on the government. Mujica wants the mine. He is so out of touch on this issue, that he originally proposed a popular vote, but soon canceled it as it became clear the project would lose.

 

Everywhere in Uruguay there are advertisements that say "Uruguay Natural" (Natural Uruguay), to brand the country as one with a clean environment. Uruguay faces a choice of becoming Mining Uruguay, as this is just the tip of the iceberg. Uruguay can be Mining Uruguay or Natural Uruguay. It cannot be both. if the mines go in, the tourists will leave and the real estate that took decades to develop will lose value. Uruguay is simply too small to have large open pit mines and mining ports, and a sound environment at the same time. The mining group's is described thus:

 

At the heart of Zamin's Strategy is its proven ability to partner with regional and federal governments to develop assets and clearly defined infrastructure and logistics solutions.

 

In plain English, the group's core competency is to grease public officials. Mujica is either corrupt or a fool, and possibly both. Neither possibility makes him a good president, regardless of his lifestyle.

I am not a pessimist. I am an incompetent optimist.

The Fukushima Radiation Bird.

(#296410)
mmghosh's picture

 

Kibitan (as he is known) is warning children not to play near: drains, gutters, puddles, trees, or grass, because of the naughty radiation that will poison you if you get too much of it in your body. So that leaves....um...well, not very much of Fukushima for all the little children to play in. Not that there is any need to evacuate, or anything like that. Just don't touch the trees, grass, puddles, gutters, or drains, and don't forget to wash and gargle every time you come in from outdoors, and you'll be just fine. Probably. Now isn't that reassuring?

 

Via James Annan

I had no idea

(#296431)
HankP's picture

that radiation poisoning was so cute.

 

I blame it all on the Internet

It is very often.

(#296439)

You hear it all the time from the medical profession:

 

" This child has a cute radiation poisoning. He needs 50cc of Hello Kitty stat!".

 

It's not always cute though. At lower doses it is funny:

 

" This child has comic radiation poisoning."

Never Played The Fallout Games? -nt-

(#296450)
M Scott Eiland's picture

.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

Anyone up for barbecue?

(#296468)

Funny, I've seen similar canards

(#296469)
Jay C's picture

directed at vegetarians!

 

However, this bit was hilarious:

 

It adds: "The Arabs who helped in constructing the Suez Canal lived on wheat and dates and were superior to the beef-fed Englishmen engaged in the same work."

Not sure who they're referring to here, since the foreign, umm.. "consultants" who constructed the Suez Canal were actually French: maybe the difference between "beef-fed" and living on foie gras and canard a la'orange escapes the vego-fascists.....

It's true

(#296471)
HankP's picture

meat-eaters do lie and commit sex crimes. As do vegetarians.

 

I blame it all on the Internet

What, you people have never had meat so good

(#296473)

that you wanted to knock over a Best Buy and sodomize the shop clerks?

A man must be orthodox upon most things, or he will never even have time to preach his own heresy.

 

Hell is other people's blogs.

(#296472)

Le Blog de Jean-Paul Sartre.

A man must be orthodox upon most things, or he will never even have time to preach his own heresy.

 

This makes me happy.

(#296480)

Unfortunately I can never be truly happy.

M Aurelius was probably right.

But one must imagine Jordan happy nt

(#296481)
HankP's picture

.

I blame it all on the Internet

Test, test. Catchy sucks. Test, test.

(#296479)

This thing on?

M Aurelius was probably right.

Who is a Civilian in Gaza? Are There Any? I See Mothers...

(#296494)

 

..with trembling children, but I ask, what did they do to stop Hamas and Jihadi forces from firing rockets into Israel?

 

If you did nothing, I don't care much what happens to you or you angry son that will be killed in some alley.

 

There is no Occupation of Gaza as Hamas alleges...there will never be open borders with Israel, so stop shooting rockets and move to be absorbed by Egypt where you belong.

 

The problem is that Egypt or no one wants Palestinians around.

 

Best Wishes, Traveller

Ah so mothers and children are supposed to stop armed men

(#296495)

interesting point of view considering that the IDF and the Israeli security forces seem incapable of stopping settler violence against Palestinians in the West Bank. But we expect more from kids in Gaza. And those pesky Gazans! If they would just let themselves be ethnically cleansed all this unpleasantness would just disappear.

I Believe That was a Modest Proposal

(#296497)

from Mr Traveller.

Traveller.

(#296669)

That sort of heartless invective is beneath you. Perhaps you think it is all clever rhetoric, but it is nothing more than an invitation to murder the innocent among one of the poorest and most oppresesed populations on the earth. 

 

There are no civilians in Gaza? Just as there were no civilians in Shabra and Shatilla?

 

Next time you are lucky enough to have a chance, sit down and have a conversation with a three year old. 

 

Open your eyes. This round of violence was kicked of by Israel to try to stop the breaking of the siege of Gaza. Egypt, Qatar, Tunisia all finally starting to act to relieve one of the greatest humanitarian disasters of the modern era. They kicked it off by killing the head of the Hamas military organisation. This is the man who was best postioned to control the violence on the Palestinian side. Shalit's Gaoler.

 

The Israelis are sitting on the biggest challenge to their precarious equilibrium in 30 years. If Qatar and Egypt can free up the Gazans the West Bank will start to ask what their cooperation with their opressors wins them. They obey, they meekly do as they are told and their land and their water, bit by bit, are taken from them. 

Gazan Cooperation with Israel? The Blockcade is to Prevent...

(#296683)

 

...the smuggling of war materials...and yes, cement used to build defensible rocket sites, so I understand the desire of Gaza to end the blockade.

 

It will end when Gaza changes its stated goals.

 

Talk to Gazans, not me.

 

They continue to have unacceptable goals.

 

A free Gaza State, we can talk, the end of Israel not so much.

 

Traveller

The third big test for

(#296498)

The third big test for Obama's Presidency after 1) fiscal crisis 2) GOP temper tantrums?  Or will the US mostly sit this one out?

 

With the Arab spring, I'm not sure a full-on Israel embrace is helpful or appropriate this time around.  Can Egypt and Turkey be coerced into being constructive partners in the peace process?

 

To me, Israel is plunging headlong into something they aren't really prepared to finish.  That's the problem with having tons of military equipment, a large standing army, and a large reserve army just sitting around and needing a justification for existence.

Elections coming up in Israel

(#296499)
HankP's picture

nothing like some military action to rally the right wing base.

 

I blame it all on the Internet

Nothing Like Missiles Rainging Down to Depress Approval Rating

(#296501)

 

...I don't particularly like Bibi, but what exactly do you expect him to do? Missiles firings from Gaza have been increasing for months.

 

Which also demonstrates part of the problem of a two state solution...the acquisition of missiles into Gaza has been fantastically successful.

 

In a two state solution it would be even more so.

 

A dilemma to be sure. 

 

Israel is losing this war, as it did the last.

 

Which is no reason not to fight it.

 

Deterrence is about all that is left.

 

Traveller

Apparently. . .

(#296502)
M Scott Eiland's picture

. . .responding to repeated attempted murder is fascist, and all Palestinian men are involved in the attacks, since apparently no one but women and children are available to deal with the attackers.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

You might have a point

(#296504)

if the IDF showed a bit more success in dealing with settler attacks on Palestinians. But for an organization with such a fearsome reputation they seem to be curiously incompetent at the task.

Settler Abuse, (a greater Problem), and Attacks on Palestinians

(#296508)

 

...is a crime and should be deal with severely.

 

Violence by Jewish settlers has been cited for the first time in a US state department list of "terrorist incidents", as Israeli political leaders condemned a string of recent attacks on Palestinians in the West Bank and Jerusalem.

 

There have been some efforts by the Israeli's in this regard.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/aug/19/jewish-settler-attack-terror...

 

Of course, maybe a hundred thousand Settlers need to be moved.

 

Best Wishes, Traveller

What I expect him to do

(#296506)
HankP's picture

and what he actually should do are two different things. What he should do is stop building and expanding settlements in the West Bank, and negotiate for a Palestinian state.

 

I blame it all on the Internet

Yes, But Including Gaza?....nt

(#296509)

Traveller

Technically, no.

(#296512)
mmghosh's picture

This latest invasion of Gaza seems to be a signal to the Arab world that Gaza is not a game worth supporting.

 

As you are aware, the Arab world has been coalescing in their support for Gaza over the past 6 months.

The attack came a day after the prime minister, Ismail Haniyeh, hosted his Egyptian counterpart in that very building, a sign of Hamas’s new legitimacy in a radically redrawn Arab world. That stature was underscored Saturday by a visit to Gaza from the Tunisian foreign minister and the rapid convergence in Cairo of two Hamas allies, the prime minister of Turkey and the crown prince of Qatar, for talks with the Egyptian president and the chairman of Hamas on a possible cease-fire.

The emir of Qatar recently announced a large investment program in Gaza.  The obvious reason for Israel to attack Gaza and rocket its buildings is to discourage and disrupt this sort of independent economic activity.  It needs to keep up the image of recalcitrant Palestinians hooked on terror chic.

Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani, the emir of Qatar, has arrived in the Gaza Strip to inaugurate a Qatari investment project worth hundreds of millions of dollars to rebuild the impoverished and overcrowded coastal enclave.

---

"This visit has great political significance," said Hamas government spokesman Taher al-Nunu.

"He is the first Arab leader to break the political siege."

 

The investment project seeks to build 1,000 homes for poor families in the devastated Khan Younis area in the south of the Strip.

Laying the foundation stone of the project, Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh thanked the emir "for his brave decision to visit Gaza".

 

"The visit of the emir announces officially the breaching of the political and economical siege imposed on Gaza for more than five years," said Haniyeh

Even Giving You This, Why the Constant Barrage of Rockets?!?

(#296513)

 

...if Gaza was intent on Economic Success...then constrain their militants, and if this were not possible, apologize immediately and formally for lack of control...let the world know they were on a new Road.

 

They did none of this.

 

You story doesn't wash.

 

Gazians are just arrogant killers NOW trying to talk their way out of their difficulty.

 

Even today they could do as I suggest...they do not, they will not.

 

You story doesn't wash.

 

West Bank is quiescent...

 

I see no rocket from the West Bank, hence no attack on the West Bank.

 

My story makes sense, your's does not.

 

Best Wishes, Traveller

No your story doesn't make sense Trav

(#296514)

since history did not begin last week. And how do you expect the Gazans with a barely functioning state structure to control their militants when the Israelis are unable to control theirs? There are no clean hands in this conflict and saying that the West Bank is quiescent is a red herring. It has erupted in the past (the rather recent past) and will erupt in the future because the one universal constant in this mess is that the settlements continue to expand.

 

I recall reading an interview with a former head of the Shin Bet about 10 years ago where he was asked what would be required for a lasting peace. His response was an Israeli Civil War. That's what it would take to stop the expropriations and expansion and as long as those go on the conflict will continue. Yes there will be lulls in the violence from time to time and place to place but it won't end.

No, my Way is Easy..I'm Not Looking For Clean Hands, I'm Looking

(#296515)

 

...an actual commitment to peace.

 

Just tell the World they are sorry they can't control their militant groups, but they will work on it and even accept aide from Israel in gaining this goal.

 

We have help coming from Qatar and other counties and are committed to our own economic development.

 

Pretty easy...and everyone would abandon defending Israel...I'm looking for a Gandhi and a Martin Luther King offensive.

 

Win-win for everyone.

 

Best Wishes, Traveller

But that's not what Israel wants

(#296516)
HankP's picture

they want the bulk of the west bank, with palestinians confined to small, separated banustans. And they'll get it, they'll just keep doing what they've been doing for decades.

 

I blame it all on the Internet

Maybe, But I'm Speaking about Gaza...West Bank Palestinians

(#296517)

...is a whole different question.

 

I will not cede Hamas to speak  for West Bank Palestinians.

 

I want a peace initiative from Hamas.

 

Traveller

They're not separate problems, they're the same problem

(#296520)
HankP's picture

and you don't get to decide who speaks for whom over there, the palestinians do.

 

I blame it all on the Internet

The history of Gaza

(#296518)
mmghosh's picture

was as a city that developed after WW2 to a large extent as an influx of Palestinian refugees from Israeli territories in the 1948 Arab-Israeli war.  There were few Egyptians in Gaza at the time.  In other words the people of Gaza are not Egyptians, neither do they want to be Egyptians.  When Gaza was controlled by Egypt from 1948 to 1967, the people of Gaza were not given Egyptian citizenship, neither did they ask for it, and neither is there any movement today within Gaza to become Egyptians.

Why the rockets?  Well, there is a military conflict between the 2 states.  One uses rockets, the other resorts to blockade and military invasion.  Far more Gazans have died than Israelis in the past 30 years.

There are plenty of city states in the world.  It should certainly be possible to arrive at a negotiated truce between Gaza and Israel.

Finally, Manish, We Agree...

(#296519)

It should certainly be possible to arrive at a negotiated truce between Gaza and Israel.

 

Yes.

 

Traveller

History again Trav

(#296522)

After the Oslo accords were signed and before the start of the second intifada Palestinian security forces in both the West Bank and the Gaza strip cooperated with the Israelis to control extremist factions. There was still some violence from both sides but it was pretty low level for the most part (Baruch Goldsteins massacre and Palestinian retaliation being an obvious exception). The Palestinians were upholding their end of the bargain. Yet land confiscation and settlement construction never slowed down and the settler population doubled. If you think it's easy for the Palestinians to make a commitment to peace then it should be easy for the Israeli's to make a commitment to stop the settlements right? But forces within both groups have made it impossible.

You Are Just Citing Me The Truth...What Does this Have to Do

(#296523)

 

...with finally moving toward peace?

 

I'm not saying this would not be hard and difficult considering the history, but I support the Abbas UN initiative for non state status as a beginning and a leverage against Israel.

 

Abbas is bearing fruit and if Hamas weren't such whack jobs, peace might be possible.

 

Best Wishes, Traveller

This view of Gazans as killers and West Bankers as Gandhians

(#296675)
mmghosh's picture

is probably not fully correct.  Gazans rocket because they can.

 

FP: The number of rockets fired at Israel seems, at this point, to be exceeding the rate of fire during Operation Cast Lead. How has Hamas been able to expand its inventory?

SB: Through this smuggling, which was only accelerated as a result of the changes in Egypt. Sinai is actually a no-man's land. It's a kind of Wild West, and the Egyptian government doesn't really control it.

 

In the West Bank OTOH, access is tightly controlled, emphasised by the Wall.  And Israeli settlers have matters heavily loaded in their favour.

Products coming from the Israeli settlements are competitive on the global market partially because of the massive state assistance farmers and producers in the occupied territories receive. Companies that put down roots in the settlements receive direct government subsidies and tax breaks. The government has also set up a fund to help companies pay customs penalties.

 

By purchasing products from the settlements, EU support for the Israeli outposts is mostly indirect. Sometimes, however, it is direct, as in the case of the Ahava cosmetics company, based in the illegal settlement of Mitzpe Shalem on the Dead Sea. As part of its research and development funding program, it awarded Ahava €1.13 million, according to the report.

 

And the harm to Palestinians, in some cases, is notable, for example in the Jordan Valley. There, according to the human rights organization B'Tselem, 10,000 settlers use a quarter of the water available to the 2.5 million Palestinians who live in the area. Much of that water goes toward the cultivation of fruit and vegetables that are then exported to Europe.

---

According to a United Nations report released in September, the Palestinian economy "has lost access to 40 percent of the West Bank, 82 percent of its groundwater and more than two-thirds of its grazing land" as a result of the occupation and the construction of settlements. Additionally, Palestinian farmers are not allowed to import certain types of fertilizers because they can be used to manufacture explosives.

 

The biggest problem, though, is the myriad obstacles preventing Palestinian goods from being moved easily. Before goods can leave Palestinian territories for Israel or other countries, they often have to pass through several checkpoints where they are examined, unloaded and even confiscated for a time. Potential customers cannot depend on reliable delivery.

Technically, having won the Six-Day War, the Israelis can do whatever they wish in the Occupied Territories, just as settlers did in the USA and Australia.  But this may not be the most sensible thing to do in today's world. 

 

Somebody get Scott some Xanax

(#296554)
HankP's picture

since Kansas State and Oregon just lost, it looks like the new #1 will be ... Notre Dame.

 

I blame it all on the Internet

Naw, I'm Fine

(#296555)
M Scott Eiland's picture

The funny thing is that I slept through most of it--I woke up and saw the score tied in OT and the thought went through my head "You know, if someone had told me that Oregon would score only 14 points in regulation, I'd have assumed that they'd lose rather badly." Ironic that the offense (particularly the kicker at the worst possible moment) let them down with all the injuries the defense has had. ND is undefeated, and will deserve to be #1 for now--unlike their status in the computer polls up to now.

The SEC haters are the ones who will *really* need the Xanax--Alabama will almost certainly be #2 when the BCS standings come out tomorrow. It's anyone's guess who will be in the BCS title game with Alabama if they run the table and USC beats ND next week. Oregon will probably beat UCLA (who beat USC today--woo hoo!) in the PAC-12 title game assuming they beat Oregon State next week in the Civil War, which means their strength of schedule will still be solid.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

I'll be at the Civil War next week

(#296556)
HankP's picture

while I think it's a long shot for OSU to win (although they're beating the snot out of Cal as we speak) what I'm really worried about is having to pay for my daughter to go to the Rose Bowl if they do manage it.

 

I blame it all on the Internet

Several weeks back

(#296564)
stinerman's picture

A friend of mine made mention that if Ohio State wins out along with some interesting BCS losses, they have an outside shot at being AP national champions.

 

That'll never happen even if they are the only undefeated team.  It has nothing to do with strength of schedule and everything to do with politics.

The Constitution does not vest in Congress the authority to protect society from every bad act that might befall it. -- Clarence Thomas

As The MLB Experience Has Proven. . .

(#296584)
M Scott Eiland's picture

. . .sportswriters do what they want to do. Since the NCAA in its infinite wisdom didn't put a "you are not allowed to acknowledge any championship voted to you by any journalistic organization during this probation in any way" clause in Ohio State's punishment, if the AP looks at the wreckage of the BCS eligible teams and decides that Ohio State is better than any of them, they will be voted #1, Ohio State will be allowed to brag about it, and the NCAA won't be able to do squat about a situation they could have solved instantly by adding one line to a multipage document.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.