Dana Millbank, writing for the Washington Post, says that to
call the current 112th Congress the "do-nothing Congress" would be an
insult to the 1947-48 Congress immortalized by Harry Truman as "the
Do-Nothing Congress."
That 1947-48 crowd, which so enraged Truman, passed 908 laws. By comparison, the 112th to date has passed 106 laws.
Of course, they still have 34 weeks to go -- but they plan to be on
vacation (euphemistically referred to as 'doing constituent work' back
home and really meaning campaigning for re-election) for 17 of those
weeks.
Given the recalcitrant partisanship of the
current Congress -- and in the midst of an election campaign to boot --
the chance of much getting done in those other 17 weeks seems dim, at
best.
Does anyone doubt why it has been so unproductive -- and who is responsible?
All
you need do is remember that a group of Republican leaders met the day
of Obama's inauguration to plot their strategy for defeating him -- not
just defeating him for re-election but defeating his every effort to get
anything done.
The Senate minority leader, Mitch
McConnell, said publicly that their main goal was to make Obama a
one-term president. That doesn't even address the extremism and the
obduracy of the Tea Party dominated House.
The "Do Nothing Congress" was a winning campaign slogan for Truman. It should work for Obama.
Ralph
Thursday, May 3, 2012
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
Just one more . . . too good to pass up
Newt Gingrich gave his long-awaited speech announcing the end of his presidential campaign today. Well, it wasn't the speech that was long awaited, it was finally getting Newt off stage.
But first, Newt had to give his speech -- his last self-indulgence while the world waited for him to leave. It won't be his last, you can be sure.
The speech fell during a certain tv news commentator's hour, and the producers decided to air it. At the end, the show's anchor said, "Wow, well I'm exhausted." Then speaking directly to the TV audience he said, ". . . I'm guessing both of you are exhausted as well -- the two of you who stayed with us."
Then turning to his fellow pundit, he said, "I feel like I've just been transported to another world here." Recalling a conversation he had with Newt before the campaign began: "I thought then he was delusional, and now I'm sure. . . . I don’t know anyone on his side of the aisle who can stand him anymore.”
This amazingly frank, on-air assessment was not some liberal firebrand. It was FoxNews' Shep Smith speaking about the former Fox News commentator, Newt Gingrich.
It sort of restores my faith that "truth will out" and gives a tad of justification for the long, drawn-out primary process. I remember now someone predicting that Newt might fool the people for a short time, but he couldn't sustain it without self-destructing, given enough time for it to play out.
Now if he and Callista will just have the decency to go take another Mediterranean cruise and disappear from the news. I don't want to look at her hair or see his doughy body and angry-little-attack-muffin face -- ever again.
Ralph
But first, Newt had to give his speech -- his last self-indulgence while the world waited for him to leave. It won't be his last, you can be sure.
The speech fell during a certain tv news commentator's hour, and the producers decided to air it. At the end, the show's anchor said, "Wow, well I'm exhausted." Then speaking directly to the TV audience he said, ". . . I'm guessing both of you are exhausted as well -- the two of you who stayed with us."
Then turning to his fellow pundit, he said, "I feel like I've just been transported to another world here." Recalling a conversation he had with Newt before the campaign began: "I thought then he was delusional, and now I'm sure. . . . I don’t know anyone on his side of the aisle who can stand him anymore.”
This amazingly frank, on-air assessment was not some liberal firebrand. It was FoxNews' Shep Smith speaking about the former Fox News commentator, Newt Gingrich.
It sort of restores my faith that "truth will out" and gives a tad of justification for the long, drawn-out primary process. I remember now someone predicting that Newt might fool the people for a short time, but he couldn't sustain it without self-destructing, given enough time for it to play out.
Now if he and Callista will just have the decency to go take another Mediterranean cruise and disappear from the news. I don't want to look at her hair or see his doughy body and angry-little-attack-muffin face -- ever again.
Ralph
Obama and bin Laden's killing
President Obama went to Afghanistan to sign an agreement with Karzai and to observe the anniversary of the killing of Osama bin Laden.
His campaign released an ad that brags a little bit about Obama's courageous decision and his credentials as a bold commander in chief. Maybe the ad was a little bit tacky -- but the Republicans, who are crying "how awful" to politicize such an historical and solemn moment, are just jealous that they didn't get to do the bragging themselves.
Jon Stewart lit into them -- reminding them of George Bush's putting on a jet pilot's costume and landing on an aircraft carrier to declare "Mission Accomplished" -- BEFORE the fact. In fact, it was waaay premature to claim victory -- about six years, in fact.
More than that, though, Stewart said those going "Waah" (and that includes Mitt Romney and Rudy Giulani) are "just pissed that they didn't get to do it [the bragging]."
Here's my take on it. How much criticism have these same people heaped upon Barack Obama as a "weak" commander in chief, taunting his "leading from behind" strategy in Libya, saying he is endangering our national security by his "weak" foreign policy stances? Nothing he could do was right.
The truth is that Obama has been a bold warrior president -- and he has acted against his own inclinations and done it magnificently, in some instances. He had to play the hand he was dealt, not the hand he would have held if he had been in charge in 2003 and beyond. We would not have invaded Iraq; Afghanistan would not have been half-abandoned in order to invade Iraq on trumped up charges and lies.
So give Obama credit for stepping up and doing what had to be done to get us out of his predecessor's mess (and that means not just Bush, but Chaney, Rumsfeld, and the whole pack.)
Taking out bin Laden was a very risky special operations mission. If it had failed, Obama would have been pilloried by the right and the left -- one for failing, the other for trying. So let him have some bragging rights about making the bold decision and taking the responsibility -- when his advisers were divided. This was an act of presidential courage.
Ralph
His campaign released an ad that brags a little bit about Obama's courageous decision and his credentials as a bold commander in chief. Maybe the ad was a little bit tacky -- but the Republicans, who are crying "how awful" to politicize such an historical and solemn moment, are just jealous that they didn't get to do the bragging themselves.
Jon Stewart lit into them -- reminding them of George Bush's putting on a jet pilot's costume and landing on an aircraft carrier to declare "Mission Accomplished" -- BEFORE the fact. In fact, it was waaay premature to claim victory -- about six years, in fact.
More than that, though, Stewart said those going "Waah" (and that includes Mitt Romney and Rudy Giulani) are "just pissed that they didn't get to do it [the bragging]."
Here's my take on it. How much criticism have these same people heaped upon Barack Obama as a "weak" commander in chief, taunting his "leading from behind" strategy in Libya, saying he is endangering our national security by his "weak" foreign policy stances? Nothing he could do was right.
The truth is that Obama has been a bold warrior president -- and he has acted against his own inclinations and done it magnificently, in some instances. He had to play the hand he was dealt, not the hand he would have held if he had been in charge in 2003 and beyond. We would not have invaded Iraq; Afghanistan would not have been half-abandoned in order to invade Iraq on trumped up charges and lies.
So give Obama credit for stepping up and doing what had to be done to get us out of his predecessor's mess (and that means not just Bush, but Chaney, Rumsfeld, and the whole pack.)
Taking out bin Laden was a very risky special operations mission. If it had failed, Obama would have been pilloried by the right and the left -- one for failing, the other for trying. So let him have some bragging rights about making the bold decision and taking the responsibility -- when his advisers were divided. This was an act of presidential courage.
Ralph
Let's take a deep breath . . . and wait.
There's some really awful stuff begin said out there about the various social issues that the far-right and the bigots are trying to make big election issues.
Examples: The Texas Attorney General compared Planned Parenthood to a terrorist organization. Some anti-gay preacher said that gays were responsible for the Nazi's coming to power. Their warnings about the end of Western Civilization if we allow gay marriage doesn't carry a lot of weight if you look at Massachusetts, Iowa, Connecticutt, Vermont, New Hampshire, and New York. But then who looks at evidence and facts? All of those states have lower divorce rates than most of the Bible Belt Southern states.
One of those ignorant, rabble-rousing preachers made totally false claims about the medical results of gay sex. Another one advised parents to beat the gay out of their 5 year old sons if they start acting feminine.
The Catholic bishops are opposing Obama's entire health care plan because the compromise he made to accommodate their anti-contraception stance didn't go far enough. The bishops say one thing, but the majority of Catholic voters just ignore the Church about birth control -- and these same bishops just lost a big chunk of women voters when they reprimanded the organization of American nuns for putting more emphasis on helping the poor and caring for the sick than on opposing abortion and birth control.
What I'm trying to remember is that this a losing strategy for the Republican candidates in the races that are close. The ones where these "social values issues" are important to voters will be won by Republicans anyway, given the redistricting patterns.
For the majority of moderate voters and independents, these issues are not controversial any more. Pushing the conservative position will lose votes for Republicans in the key swing states.
So, yes, the lies must be countered. But we should try to just take some deep breaths and wait them out.
Ralph
Examples: The Texas Attorney General compared Planned Parenthood to a terrorist organization. Some anti-gay preacher said that gays were responsible for the Nazi's coming to power. Their warnings about the end of Western Civilization if we allow gay marriage doesn't carry a lot of weight if you look at Massachusetts, Iowa, Connecticutt, Vermont, New Hampshire, and New York. But then who looks at evidence and facts? All of those states have lower divorce rates than most of the Bible Belt Southern states.
One of those ignorant, rabble-rousing preachers made totally false claims about the medical results of gay sex. Another one advised parents to beat the gay out of their 5 year old sons if they start acting feminine.
The Catholic bishops are opposing Obama's entire health care plan because the compromise he made to accommodate their anti-contraception stance didn't go far enough. The bishops say one thing, but the majority of Catholic voters just ignore the Church about birth control -- and these same bishops just lost a big chunk of women voters when they reprimanded the organization of American nuns for putting more emphasis on helping the poor and caring for the sick than on opposing abortion and birth control.
What I'm trying to remember is that this a losing strategy for the Republican candidates in the races that are close. The ones where these "social values issues" are important to voters will be won by Republicans anyway, given the redistricting patterns.
For the majority of moderate voters and independents, these issues are not controversial any more. Pushing the conservative position will lose votes for Republicans in the key swing states.
So, yes, the lies must be countered. But we should try to just take some deep breaths and wait them out.
Ralph
Sunday, April 29, 2012
Well done. Thank you.
What's the opposite of my curmudgeonly "Bah, humbug"? Maybe: "Well done, thank you." Whatever . . . that's what I want to say to whomever changed that sign.
Some years ago, road signs began showing up all over that said "Limited Sight Distance." It seemed there had been some system-wide decision to adopt this language as the official road sign for areas where a hill or a curve obscured driveways or crossings and made it hard to know what's ahead -- or for, say, people backing out of blind driveways to know you were coming. So there was a reasonable need for caution.
I knew what the signs meant: Be careful because you can't see ahead, and they can't see you coming. But the wording was so cumbersome that I would get distracted trying to parse that phrase: what does "limited sight distance" actually mean? I would forget the need for caution in my preoccupation with the awkward phrase.
Today, driving to the Whole Foods store, I passed one of those signs where there are concealed driveways just over the crest of a steep hill. The "Limited Sight Distance" sign had been replaced. It now says, simply:
Now that's the way to communicate. Well done, Somebody.
Thank you.
Ralph
Some years ago, road signs began showing up all over that said "Limited Sight Distance." It seemed there had been some system-wide decision to adopt this language as the official road sign for areas where a hill or a curve obscured driveways or crossings and made it hard to know what's ahead -- or for, say, people backing out of blind driveways to know you were coming. So there was a reasonable need for caution.
I knew what the signs meant: Be careful because you can't see ahead, and they can't see you coming. But the wording was so cumbersome that I would get distracted trying to parse that phrase: what does "limited sight distance" actually mean? I would forget the need for caution in my preoccupation with the awkward phrase.
Today, driving to the Whole Foods store, I passed one of those signs where there are concealed driveways just over the crest of a steep hill. The "Limited Sight Distance" sign had been replaced. It now says, simply:
"Hill Blocks View"
Thank you.
Ralph
Bill Maher
Bill Maher was hitting on all cylinders -- some of it a little too raunchy for this blog, but incredibly funny in his wry, derisive humor.
His main theme was the media's (and hence the public's) obsession with sex, particularly the sexual indiscretions of politicians. Here's a sample:
But let's put that aside for now and enjoy Bill Maher's humor. I certainly do.
Ralph
His main theme was the media's (and hence the public's) obsession with sex, particularly the sexual indiscretions of politicians. Here's a sample:
"Newt Gingrich, over his long career, has committed every sin in Dante's Inferno except grave robbing; and that's just because shoveling is work. But why is he ineligible for high office? Adultery.
"Or take Herman Cain. . . . Every time he opened his mouth something frighteningly stupid, factually inaccurate, or mathematically impossible would fall out. And the media just stood around saying, "Hey !! Wow !! He's the front-runner"; but, as soon as a woman came forward with some dirt, say "hello" to Woodward and Bernstein."Or take the John Edwards' trial -- please. . . . Stories like that bring out the 'people have a right to know' fervor in our intrepid reporters. . [Then followed a very funny sexual joke that I will not repeat here] . . . John Edwards' favorability rating is 3%. The worst ever recorded. Is he really the worst person in the world, ever? The crime he is accused of is a campaign finance violation.
OK, so Maher ignores some things. There are plenty of other reasons Newt is unelectable -- like a cosmic ego that can't be bothered with the real world. And there are plenty of other reasons why John Edwards is in such low regard -- like the massive betrayal of trust to his family and to the American people. Just suppose he had gotten the nomination and his affair had remained under wraps until two weeks before the election. We would be in the third year of a McCain-Palin administration in the White House -- if we survived that long. I might be living in Canada or New Zealand."But back to the Supreme Court. Last week Mitt Romney's SuperPac was able to get an anonymous $10 million donation. For all we know, it came from Vladimir Putin or Mel Gibson . . . . The Supreme Court did a lot more to corrupt campaign finance than John Edwards."Why do we punish sex so much more than everything else? Clinton lied about a blow job and got impeached. Bush lied about a war and didn't. I can't help but think that, if an alien landed in American tomorrow . . . he would say: 'Is there no end to your childish fixation with pee-pees and wee-wees?' Even Rick Santorum was fascinating to us because of sex -- albeit in reverse: That someone could be that sexually repressed. I never worried that Rick would have an affair. I worried that he would dress up as his mother and kill women in a motel."
But let's put that aside for now and enjoy Bill Maher's humor. I certainly do.
Ralph
Saturday, April 28, 2012
Clueless Romney
Do we need any more evidence that it's just not in Mitt Romney's DNA to have any empathic conception of what ordinary people's lives are like? He makes these awkward gaffe's that obviously come from his life experience where getting money when you need it has just never been anything he had to think about.
Not that we needed any more evidence, but here's the latest: Talking to college students at Otterbein University (Columbus, Ohio) about taking initiative, developing their futures, etc. He said: "We've always encouraged young people: "Take a shot, go for it, take a risk, get the education, borrow money if you have to from your parents, start a business."
This is less than 24 hours since the big fight in the House over student loan interest rates. Doesn't he realize that the conversation is about college students whose parents don't have the money to pay for their kids' education? So how are they going to be able to lend them money to start a business?
So here's a new slogan for Romney's opponents (with apologies to "Sleepless in Seattle"):
Ralph
Not that we needed any more evidence, but here's the latest: Talking to college students at Otterbein University (Columbus, Ohio) about taking initiative, developing their futures, etc. He said: "We've always encouraged young people: "Take a shot, go for it, take a risk, get the education, borrow money if you have to from your parents, start a business."
"Borrow money from your parents"
So here's a new slogan for Romney's opponents (with apologies to "Sleepless in Seattle"):
"Clueless in Columbus"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)