Today on Blogcritics
Home » Culture and Society » The Positive Power of “No”

The Positive Power of “No”

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

As the Republican minority in Congress refuses to cooperate with just about anything the Democrats put forward which involves expanding government programs and spending money which we don't have, they make themselves targets for the criticism that they are "the party of no" and that they have no positive policies and only want to block everything so that the Obama administration will look ineffective and the great spending machine will grind to a halt and nothing will get done.

Yet when what the government is doing is incredibly harmful and destructive and the only proposals which the majority allows to reach the floor for a vote mean more deficit spending and more expansion of government power, when everything the majority is doing is so negative and puts our future in peril, then standing up and shouting "no" is a very positive act. In fact, the history of some of our greatest accomplishments as a nation is the history of people of principle saying "no" to the status quo, to abusive policies and to the excesses of government in the hands of people of bad intent.

The struggle for liberty is the story of brave people saying "no."

It is the barons at Runnymede saying "no" to rule by royal decree.

It is the Puritans saying "no" to a corrupt and oppressive church.

It is the Sons of Liberty saying "no" to taxation without representation.

It is William Lloyd Garrison and Abraham Lincoln saying "no" to slavery.

It is Teddy Roosevelt saying "no" to child labor.

It is Churchill saying "no" to the Nazis.

It is Rosa Parks saying "no" to moving to the back of the bus.

It is Reagan saying "no" to Soviet expansionism.

It is the moment when people of courage declare that they will no longer compromise and will no longer accept excuses and will no longer let liberty be bargained away and destroyed by inches. Saying "no" is declaring that you will no longer be moved and are ready to push back.

When the alternative is saying "yes" to the same old bad ideas, suddenly "no" becomes a very positive concept. Day after day the forces of oppression expect us to say "yes" as they waste our money, take away our rights, and imperil the futures of our children. The Kings of Congress and their media lackeys will talk about the "spirit of bipartisanship" and how progress demands that we cooperate to get things done and fix the nation's problems. But this is all just hogwash, because the things they want to do are just more of the same things which created those problems in the first place — more spending, more bureaucracy, more deficits, more waste, more cronyism, more ideological nonsense, more war, more internal security — none of it good for us as individuals or as a nation, so why should we say "yes"? Why would it ever be a good thing to say "yes" and just acquiesce to the rape of our nation?

What we need is more people saying "no" and saying it more loudly. Reject the hype and the fear mongering and the false promises. Saying "no" to government is one of the most positive things you can do. It gives you back control of your life and announces that you are willing to take responsibility for your own destiny. It's powerful and remarkably effective and it's the best weapon we have as individuals and as a people against the forces of tyranny including the tyranny of the status quo.

And maybe, if you keep saying “no” long enough they’ll start saying something you want to hear and can say “yes” to.

Powered by

About Dave Nalle

  • http://joannehuspek.wordpress.com Joanne Huspek

    I’m afraid Big Daddy wants us all to say ‘yes’, hold hands and sing Kumbaya.

  • Mark

    I couldn’t agree more. Just say NO to war and exploitation.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Okay –

    NO! to the health insurance industry that wants us to complacently continue accepting their rate increases several times the rate of inflation, and their ability to refuse to insure people, and their ability to decide not to pay what they agreed to on the bottom line.

    NO! to those who insist that we must continue persecuting people for their sexual orientation.

    NO! to those who insist on preventing workers from organizing into unions so they can negotiate for fair pay and safer working conditions!

    NO! to those who gladly approved hundreds of billions of dollars for the war crime of invading Iraq…but who rabidly oppose covering the fifty million or so Americans who are uninsured or the tens of millions more who are underinsured, at a far lower cost than the illegal invasion of Iraq.

    NO! to the conservatives on the Supreme Court who just opened the floodbanks of corporate campaign finance! And we can thank EVERY conservative who voted for Bush for this travesty!

    YES! the logic of NO! works in both directions, doesn’t it?

  • Deano

    So you are now officially adopting the basic strategic maxim of six-years old everywhere as your official “go-to” policy on all elements of political or social discourse?

    Okay then, good to know.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Works for me, Deano. And Glenn, I’m fine with you saying “no” to anything you want. If we say “no” to everything then maybe they’ll just stop.

    Dave

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Dave,

    One way or another, we do have a dysfunctional government. So perhaps the entire question is misdirected because meanwhile, the country suffers.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Dave –

    I figured that’s exactly what you’d say.

    My grandmother used to say, “Do anything, even if it’s wrong.” I didn’t like that saying – didn’t make sense to me for a long, long time.

    But as time went on, I found that if there’s a problem, the worst thing one can do is almost always nothing. Sure, doing something might make things worse…but people usually learn from their mistakes and things turn out best in the end.

    99% perspiration, y’know?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    You are a hopeless liberal, Glenn.

    Too bad you fail to see that the Democratic party no longer reflects those ideals.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    ‘The Kings of Congress and their media lackeys will talk about the “spirit of bipartisanship” and how progress demands that we cooperate to get things done and fix the nation’s problems. But this is all just hogwash, because the things they want to do are just more of the same things which created those problems in the first place — more spending, more bureaucracy, more deficits, more waste, more cronyism, more ideological nonsense, more war, more internal security — none of it good for us as individuals or as a nation, so why should we say “yes”?’

    Isn’t that the whole point, though? How is anything at all to get done if the entirety of Republican tactics is ‘no’?

    If you want the talk the other side into doing at least some of the things you’d like to see done, then you have to at least meet them partway.

    No city ever lifted a siege by simply locking the gates and not even sticking an occasional head over the top of the wall.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    “No city ever lifted a siege by simply locking the gates and not even sticking an occasional head over the top of the wall.”

    Excellent!

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    When nothing positive is being offered, meeting the other side halfway or doing things they ask to build good will just gets bad things done. Saying “no” to it all at least means that things get no worse.

    Dave

  • Mark

    Saying “no” to it all at least means that things get no worse.

    This is not even close to necessarily true.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Well, Dave, why didn’t you say No to the last thirty years of political harm, that’s been done to this country?

    Why is “No” so important now?

  • Mark

    …but I hasten to add that it’s a good idea anyway. Show the people what your made of, GOP!

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    “When nothing positive is being offered . . .”

    Any new idea, however compromised, contains elements of “the positive” or, to say the least, elements capable of breaking new grounds.

    But to take an adversarial stance with respect to whatever is new – especially in light of the fact that the old is not working – is plain stonewalling.

    Yet, this kind of attitude does seem to depict “the conscience of the conservative.”

    In a nutshell, it’s kind of inbred resistance to, and natural suspicion of, any kind of change.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Why don’t we say no, as Mark has aptly commented on this or another thread, to things that really matter:

    corporate corruption and collusion between private and public interests, the preemptive and imperialistic wars in Iraq and Afghanistan which only drain this country’s resources and represent the old and failed policies of past administrations keen on perpetuating the myth of the American empire, the politics of fear ever-present in both our domestic and national policy – whether in the form of the Patriot Act and the surveillance mechanism of the state or the rather dubious call for the War on Terror?

    Say no to any those things, and I’ll be behind one hundred percent behind

    But no, you rather chose to oppose all efforts to bring about national health insurance bill, however flawed it may be – and if it is flawed, it’s only because of the obstinate resistance from the nay sayers, and of ways of trying to overcome that resistance, by catering to the same nay sayers, trying to appease them, suck their dick if necessary, all wasted efforts in my opinion because they were dead-set against the idea to begin with.

    Well, in light of your silence about real crimes against the American people and the world at large while trying to uphold the integrity of the Republic party when it comes to healthcare legislation or any social program that just might alleviate the suffering of many of your countrymen, I must conclude that your argument and appeal to the “no” principle is not very convincing.

  • Baronius

    The GOP needs to be able to say no, but to offer alternatives. Since no one’s listening, they need to offer them loudly and repeatedly. They’ve got some good proposals for health care reform, and maybe they’ll get a chance to air them this week. They haven’t presented a strong front on the economy or the environment.

    Actually, their position on the economy has been somewhere between “no” and “are you kidding me? of course not”. That’s been fine. But in the next few months they’ve got to come up with a promise on what they’d do for the economy if they were in charge – and it should probably be something that the tea partiers would agree with.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    When nothing positive is being offered, meeting the other side halfway or doing things they ask to build good will just gets bad things done.

    I didn’t say ‘halfway’, Dave, I said ‘partway’. Important distinction. And if you talk to the other side in the right way, you might just get one or two good things done which might make it easier to fix the bad things later on.

    Returning to my siege metaphor, let’s suppose the unfortunate city, while it is protected by impenetrable walls, does not possess the military strength which to fight its way out. Its two main options, then, are to sit out the siege or to negotiate surrender terms.

    In option one, everyone in the city starves to death and the invaders take over. In option two, the city surrenders and the invaders take over. Both options result in something the citizens do not want – the loss of their city – but with the second option there are at least some citizens still alive and the possibility of reversing the situation later on remains open.

  • http://www.maskedmoviesnobs.com El Bicho

    The Republicans are not struggling for liberty. They are struggling to win the next election.

  • Baronius

    Dread, that’s the power of choosing your own analogy. Looking at the health care reform proposals, I’d compare them to either withstanding the siege, or helping to burn and kill your population.

    If memory serves, it was Secretary of State Shultz who was being grilled by Congress in the mid-1980’s about the fact that the Reagan administration would be the first to not sign a nuclear treaty with the USSR. Shultz said that was the worst thing to think about during treaty negotiations. If you give up the freedom to say no, you lose the ability to walk away from a bad deal.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    Baronius, the Reagan administration was in negotiations…

  • http://www.futonreport.net/ Matthew T. Sussman

    See, I thought they were the Party of Noh, and I was gonna say to myself, “wow, that’s a hell of a theater niche to corner.”

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Dave,

    Where were they?

    “The trillion-dollar bailout of banks and Wall Street with tax dollars by the socialist President George W. Bush—where were the seething free marketers when their own money, and the economy of this nation, was on the line?

    I have no argument with fiscal accountability. I do have a problem with people attempting to promote a political agenda based on problems their own mismanagement created.”-Stanley R. Pietras

    I didn’t write this article, but I thought it deserved a good read.

  • John Wilson

    Nalle is utterly cynical.

  • Mark

    John, are you recommending another pov with regard to the US government?

  • http://www.maskedmoviesnobs.com El Bicho

    Looks like new star of the Republican party Scott Brown didn’t get the memo and disagrees. I just read he voted for the jobs bill so he must be against liberty too.

  • http://etierphotography.blogspot.com/ FCEtier

    Re-elect NO one!

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Just say Yes.

  • http://www.indyboomer46.blogspot.com Baritone

    Dave has been carping on this idea for a couple weeks. I guess he thought it was sooooo clever he just had to codify it in an article.

    As usual, it’s filled with the same old bromides one comes to expect from him and his nihilistic view of anything Democratic.
    It comes down to mindless, obfuscating crap.

    As I’ve said before, the Republican stonewalling has nothing to do with ideology. Nothing to do with “saving the nation.” It is nothing more than a self-serving political ploy. They hate Obama to the core. They can barely stand to be in the same room with him. Their contempt is written all over their faces. They HATE that he won. They HATE that Obama stole what they believed to be their eternal entitlement to run the show at the behest of their corporate money bags.

    This notion that everything the Dems have to offer is worthy of no consideration is bullshit. The notion that Dems are out to ruin the country is also presumptious bullshit.

    Right wing sanctimony and condescension – their fear mongering which has been absolutely without peer – are at the least tiresome, and at worst, the true source of the harm that this country is now suffering.

    B

  • Clavos

    B-tone waxes hyperbolic yet again…

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Well, Dave, why didn’t you say No to the last thirty years of political harm, that’s been done to this country?

    I have been saying “no” to the direction our government has been going for about 34 years, Jeannie. Sometimes more loudly than at others because sometimes the government has been more off-track than at others.

    Dave

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    And in #18 Dr. D. expounds on the glorious benefits of slavery…lovely.

    Dave

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    Bullshit, Dave. You know perfectly well what I meant.

  • Ruvy

    Ah yes, Dave. One should always remember the positive power of “no!”. Just a little reminder of what a determined “NO!!” can get, when backed up by serious action.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Funny, you didn’t jump all over the fact that George W. really was a socialist, when it came to the re-distribution of wealth, Dave.

    Oh I Get It, when it’s taxpayers hard earned money, it’s not really wealth, it’s just what the owner-class pay us.

    Stop trying to hide, behind your feigned political indignation, it is really unattractive.

    me

  • Arch Conservative

    “Yet, this kind of attitude does seem to depict “the conscience of the conservative.”

    In a nutshell, it’s kind of inbred resistance to, and natural suspicion of, any kind of change.”

    As opposed to the liberal leftist consience.

    The liberal leftist believes that any change originating in his mind might as well have come from god himself because only the liberal leftist mind, which is superior to all others, knows what must be done.

    Give me an f-ing break.

    Change for the sake of change is the oh so tired, hollow, bailiwick of the modern American left.

    Oh we got change with Barry all right. Change without a rudder. Change steering us straight for the rocks. Never in my lifetime has then been such a complete lack of leadership coming from the White House. I guess Barry never got the memo during the campaign that if you’re actually elected people will expect you to “do stuff” as opposed to giving empty, rhetorical, pointless speeches every 3 days.

    In these times when money is tight for so many I’d reccomend that a great way to earn some money would be to start a pool picking dates as to when Barry will stand up and stop blaming everyone else for our ills while single handedly taking credit for saving fictitious jobs and stemming the 2nd great depression.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Archie,

    Get off your high horse. I put the term in scare quotes to begin with, a pun on words.

    As to change itself, it happens anyway, regardless. Nothing stands still. Even your own views have changed lately, however much you may care to deny it.

    So yes, we can either respond to changing times – in more or less intelligent ways – or we can try to resist them.

    That was the main point I was driving at, Archie. I’m sorry if it was too abstract.

  • http://www.powerofno.com Kim DeMotte

    There’s even a book by that title….

    “The Positive Power of NO: How that little word you love to hate can make or break your business.”

    “NO” defines us.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Kim DeMotte,

    This is true, the word “NO” does historically-define the American people. But, most people, will look at what they are being asked to do do, before saying this word.

    I admit, that my comment last night was made in haste. I just couldn’t resist the little joke that I made, when I wrote, “Just say ‘Yes’.” :]lol

    I, actually, never just-say either word without thinking about it first.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Kim,

    Are you selling this book? “The Positive Power of No.”

    because,

    I know some people that it might greatly-benefit from this book, if, they were to read it. It just might help to keep some people from trying to shame those that will not give them money.

    :] Thanks for this information.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Kim,

    I know some people that might greatly-benefit from this book, if, they were to read it. It just might help to keep some people from trying to shame those that will not give them money.

    I made a typo, so, I corrected it, since you don’t know me. I also, probably use way too many, or, not enough, commas, but I’m working on it. :]

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    The power, of opening your eyes, can, outshine the power of saying “No.” Saying ,”Yes We Can.” does not blind you, by any means.- ME

    :]My facebook status!

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Bullshit, Dave. You know perfectly well what I meant.

    Dr. D., not only did I understand what you meant, I understand what the real meaning that eluded you was.

    Dave

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Funny, you didn’t jump all over the fact that George W. really was a socialist, when it came to the re-distribution of wealth, Dave.

    Even funnier how you have no idea WTF you’re talking about, Jeannie. Go read my articles from 2 years ago and come apologize when you’re done.

    Dave

  • Baronius

    Baritone, when someone acts consistently with their stated beliefs, there’s no reason to suspect some deeper sinister motive. Republicans are voted into office for the purpose of voting against large, untested, expensive government initiatives.

  • http://www.indyboomer46.blogspot.com Baritone

    “Republicans are voted into office for the purpose of voting against large, untested, expensive government initiatives.”

    Not exactly. They are presumably voted into office to take part in our national governance. Perhaps being the “party of No” would be apt if we lived in a perfect nation within a perfect world.

    But, if you ever have the occasion to look up and around you, you might just discover that neither our nation nor the world at large even approach perfection.

    Congress has a mandate to actually DO something, to foster change where it is warranted. If you believe our health care system needs no change, then it’s doubtful that you’ve been victimized by it. If you believe all that needs be done to right our economy is to hand big tax cuts to the rich, you remain a Reaganite who gets his kicks out of watching the crumbs “trickle down” to the hapless masses.

    B

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Dave,

    Please, don’t resort to to the lower- depths of the English language.

    Say, what you mean, clearly and respectfully, if, you want me to learn anything from you.

    I only see anger, and, that makes it even- harder for me, to understand you.

    me

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/christine-lakatos-/ Christine

    D.A.R.E. teaches us to say NO to drugs…so when it comes to things that are unhealthy for our bodies and our country we should say NO!

  • Baronius

    Bar, there’s a difference between supporting any change and supporting good change. I believe our health care system needs to change, but I’m not going to support reckless or destructive changes. You should know that. I’ve blathered on about health care reforms over the past year (probably longer). It’s simply unfair for you to accuse me, or the GOP, of saying no to everything, when the Democrats have only presented a narrow range of choices.

    Really, your whole argument is unfair. Either I’m for these particular changes, you say, or I’m in favor of no change. In truth, I may be in favor of more radical changes than you are.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Christine,

    I was hoping that you would have read my last article, “The America We All Want.”

    me

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/christine-lakatos-/ Christine

    Jeannie: Just finished my book review of Game Change here for BC late last night. Damn it was a long book. So, now catching up on all the “BC gang” stuff and will check yours out next. There are so many new article in the two weeks I have been out. Thanks for keeping me posted.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Great! I look forward to hearing your impression of it.

    :]Your favorite Liberal, I hope, me

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Christine,

    I’ll have to come over and read your review, I’ll make it a point, right after this.

    :]

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Baronius,

    What?

    Republicans are voted into office for the purpose of voting against large, untested, expensive government initiatives.

    What, were these republicans doing during George W.’s time in office?

  • Clavos

    Not exactly. They are presumably voted into office to take part in our national governance.

    Since you are not, by your own admission, a Republican voter, how would you know what Republicans’ reasons for voting in their candidates are? Or are you presuming to set (your) standards for Republican votes?

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Clavos,

    Did you have a chance to look at my question regarding the article?

    :]

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Well, he did say “presumably.”

  • Vijai

    It is far easier to be naysayer than to create a solution. I think the power of ‘No’ is effective to a point in that it galvanizes the “opposition”, but the moment one creates an alternative solution, the opposition will become a house divided.

    The Tea Partiers for instance must have different ideas on healthcare, government spending and other issues- but one gets the impression that they want to first stop the agenda on the table and then think about the alternatives.

    This is not such a healthy idea. The fact is, they are not fighting something that is “absolutely evil”, such as corruption, fascism, etc; but they are fighting proposed solutions to known problems. If that is the case, then they need to offer alternatives. One cannot support a movement simply based on its opposition to certain positions, but on its own solutions.

  • Baronius

    “What, were these republicans doing during George W.’s time in office?”

    Screwing up, which is why they got fired. Although, to be fair, most of the damage they did was in their health care reform. Otherwise, they were fiscally responsible compared to the last 3+ years of Democratic Congresses.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Baronious,

    If you are against, both parties, then what type of reform or solutions to our crisis, are you for?

    and,

    For most Americans, right now, we are in a huge crisis of unprecedented proportions.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Baronius,

    most of the damage they did was in their health care reform. Otherwise, they were fiscally responsible compared to the last 3+ years of Democratic Congresses.

    What health-care-reform? Did I blink my eyes, and, miss it?

    Also, please tell me,

    What was even remotely fiscally responsible about the Bush/Cheney years?

  • Baronius

    I’m not against the Republicans when they behave like Republicans: with government only where it’s needed, and at the states’ level whenever possible.

  • http://www.indyboomer46.blogspot.com Baritone

    Clav – So, what you are saying is that Republicans ARE elected to accomplish nothing but block Democrats?

    I’d say that ALL pols, be they Dem or Rep are elected to do take part in national government. Is stonewalling a part of their job description?

    They take the stance that anything and everything coming from Dems is inherently bad. That is crap and nothing more than political posturing. The country has been sold a bill of goods by the Reps over the past year using far more devious fear tactics than anything coming from the Dems. The Reps are masters at dumming down everything and sending out the “kill grandma, death panel” crap that the ill informed eat up like candy. That is IMO loathesome to the nth degree.

    B

  • Clavos

    Jeannie,

    Please discuss editorial matters via email or the edlist, not on the threads.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Baronius,

    If this was true, That Government should only be at the State level,then, I wouldn’t even be able to vote in some states, and, I also suspect that there would still be slavery in others.

    sorry, but that’ the way I see it.

    I usually can work through it, but my back is killing me, today. I’ll be around later, I hope.:] this is a good debate, thank you.

  • Clavos

    Clav – So, what you are saying is that Republicans ARE elected to accomplish nothing but block Democrats?

    No. I am saying you can’t presume to know the intent of Republican voters, nor should you attempt to dictate (or suggest, if you prefer) what it should be.

  • Baronius

    I don’t know if you blinked, but the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003 was the largest reform in the program’s history. It created the prescription drug entitlement (Part D), Medicare Advantage plans, and health saving accounts. It introduced means-testing. Here’s the important thing – it cost about 5x as much as originally projected. There’s a lesson in this for supporters of the current health care reform proposals.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    I did, Clavos.

    I’ll look for a response later, right now I have to break.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Please, don’t resort to to the lower- depths of the English language.

    Oh please. I used a common internet abbreviation, not any bad language. Get a grip.

    Say, what you mean, clearly and respectfully, if, you want me to learn anything from you.

    You get the respect you deserve. If you accuse me of not criticizing Bush for the same things I criticize Obama for, then you need to go read articles I wrote 2 or 3 years ago. When you have you should come back and apologize. Clear enough?

    I only see anger, and, that makes it even- harder for me, to understand you.

    Another reason I rarely bother to direct comments to you. t’s hard to get through the fog.

    Dave

  • Baronius

    Jeannie, the federal government was set up to be limited. Rule of law, national defense, treaties, and not much more. We settled the issues of slavery and women’s suffrage with constitutional amendments (slavery took more than that, but the point is that they’re now encoded into our national law). I don’t see where the Constitution gives the national government authority to set up mandatory social programs.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    Dr. D., not only did I understand what you meant, I understand what the real meaning that eluded you was.

    You clearly didn’t, or I wouldn’t have had to expand on the metaphor and kill everyone.

    Look, the Dems are going to pass legislation whatever the GOP says. I just think the GOP might as well contribute. What would be easier for your lot to fix down the line, whenever you happen to get back into power? A completely Democratic bill which is anathema to you, or a negotiated bill which already has some GOP-friendly elements in it even if they’re minor?

    I thought Republicans were supposed to be the pragmatic ones…

  • cannonshop

    Jeannie, a lot of people who kinda-sorta-liked Bush for his first six or seven years in office, are pretty pissed at him over TARP right now, and probably will be pissed at him to-morrow over it, doesn’t mean they’re going to like Obama for doing the same thing(only bigger),does it?

    I suspect one of the main drivers of the 2006 democrat congressional victories (repeated in 2008_) is that the GOP brass decided to be “Democrat Party Light”. Americans ARE a funny bunch-we’re more likely to vote a sincere Lib in, than a PHake Conservative, but many of us would rather have an actual fiscal conservative, regardless of party affiliation. (Hence the crossover popularity of Bill Clinton.)

    After decades of Government spending demonstrating that the ‘affordability’ projections are WRONG-often catastrophically different from the rosy picture shilled to get them passed, a lot of people ARE saying “Hey, Hold it, stop and think about this!”

    The thinking behind much of the spending that the TP’s are opposing, is the same KIND of thinking that assumed real-estate values would climb forever at boom rates, and while the supperclubs in Washington D.C. might think this way still, the folks on main-street know better, and some of them (an increasing number) are standing up to say “HEY!! STOP! NO!”

    and the GOP brass are just as stunned by this, as the Democrats, Jeannie. People are tired of expansive government programmes that don’t do what they’re supposed to do or cost nearly what they were sold as costing, and they’ve got time to go to these things (Tea Parties, etc.) because the ‘economic stimulus’ hasn’t provided replacements for lost jobs, much less new job growth. In this “Recovery” and with a backlog of jet orders, Boeing’s cut five hundered more people-in the words of William Jefferson Clinton circa 1992, “It’s the Economy, stupid.”

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    “. . . a lot of people who kinda-sorta-liked Bush for his first six or seven years in office . . .”

    That’s kind of stretching it, Cannon. I wouldn’t put much credence in people who persevered that long.

    If your sole point, however, is “it’s the economy, stupid,” then I totally agree with you.

    Doug Stephens’ “Countdown of the Week” show had put the finger on it. During the first year, the main thrust of the stimulus package was on entitlements and extending the unemployment benefits, rather than on the “job bill.”

    Not to say the focus was unimportant, but why wait a whole year? Reinvigorating the economy should have been the utmost priority from the get-go.

    That’s why I can’t really stand behind this president or his judgment. I’m thinking of JFK and how he used to be able to energize the country, even though his life was cut short.

    Obama has none of those qualities. He’s just another bureaucrat.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Dave,

    Talk to me, after you have read some of my recent-additions to this site.

    me

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    An insightful article by George Lakoff, a conservative pundit and renown professor of linguistics, the author of Moral Politics if you need to dig any further.

    It consider it a perfect rebuttal to Mr. Nalle’s valiant article espousing the merits of saying “no.”

  • cannonshop

    #73 Roger, when I say “kinda sorta”, it’s a nicer way of saying “Didn’t hate the man entirely and agreed with some of his stated positions in principle.”

    The venom of the Bush Years was pretty pervasive-I mean, the Democrats’ entire strategy and platform in 2004 was “Kerry isn’t Bush”. Beyond that, they had no platform, and their strategy in 2008 was “John McSame”-banking on hatred of Bush to defeat McCain. (probably because McCain was such a weak candidate to begin with, his VP nominee was more interesting than HE was…) so you have to consider what The context of “Kinda-sorta-liked Bush for six years” comes down to.

    but yeah, my main thrust IS that it’s the economy-and you’re spot-on as to the reversed priorities here for the Porkulus package from Obama and co.

    It is my suspicion that it took a year for the same reason that people in real-estate were slow to realize there’s a point where the values just don’t go up anymore in the time-span you expect them to-Obama banked on a fantasy that simply dumping money out there will make people buy shit and lenders lend money after a major, crippling blow to the finance sector.

    They forgot shit doesn’t work that way in the really-real world, and that’s largely the fault of a political culture headed (on both sides of the aisle) by people who’ve never actually contributed to the economy, only sumped off the benefits of their parents and others who did…in the past.

    Now, I saw something on the Fox News site (Yes, I was looking for satire, not news…) and it’s a cunning bit of satire indeed- ending the antitrust exemption for the Insurance industry, and sponsored by Obama.

    I don’t believe it’s true; 1, it’s FOX NEWS reporting this, and 2, Obama? yeah, right, pull the other one, it’s got candy. Obama’s an establishment Dem, and from the left wing of the party, he’s about as unlikely to do that as I am to walk on the moon.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    cannonshop,

    Tarp, helped the Banks, who wont help the people who actually need help. That’s very clear.

    President Obama, was elected by the majority, and the majority rules, this is true, and, it is in the Constitution.

    Yet, he, has included the Republicans in almost every facet of his presidency, and, this still is, not enough.

    So, I have to ask, “When will it be enough, in order to satisfy the party that is not-really in power, right now?”

    As far as the little quote at the bottom of your comment, at first I thought you were calling me, stupid, but, I know this is not the case. I can see the crystal-clear differences between your comments to me and Dave’s.

    So I would like to change that little quote, and, say, “It is three preemptive wars,(one being fought by drones) a manufacturing base that has run-away( in an attempt to break the unions), and, a health care system that has broken this country’s back. I left out that little word, I never did like it, anyway.”

    cannonshop, I need to go finish my next article now. Please read it, here, when you get the chance.

    bye, for now.

  • Baronius

    Lakoff’s a conservative? What?

    Publishers Weekly’s summary of A Political Mind:

    Lakoff (Don’t Think of an Elephant) harnesses cognitive science to rally progressive politicians and voters by positing that conservatives have framed the debate on vital issues more effectively than liberals. According to his research, conservatives comprehend that most brain functioning is grounded not in logical reasoning but in emotionalism – as a result, huge portions of the citizenry accept the Republican framing of the war in Iraq and supporting the troops rather than liberal appeals and phrasing of the occupation in Iraq and squandering tax money. George W. Bush won the presidency by concocting a redemption narrative, persuading tens of millions of voters that his past moral and business shortcomings should be viewed as a prelude to pulling himself up, rather than as disqualifying behavior. While sections of the book employ technical scientific terminology, the author masterfully makes his research comprehensible to nonspecialists. His conclusion – that if citizens and policy-makers better understand brain functioning, hope exists to ameliorate global warming and other societal disasters in the making – will be of vital importance and interest to all readers.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Of course he is, Baronius – very much on your side of the nature-nurture question and family values. In fact, very much along the lines of William Bennett.

    Why don’t you read the book I cited and come again.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    What bother you, no doubt, is that he is a thinking conservative, a rather rare breed these days – naturally, your own person excluded.

  • Baronius

    Roger, I provided that longish writeup in full because I wanted to show that Lakoff’s not a conservative in any respect. He’s referred to as a progressive; he badmouths Bush and the Iraq War; he accuses the Republicans of appealing to emotionalism rather than reason; he ranks global warming as a top priority. In every respect he’s a liberal.

    I could go on. He founded the Rockridge Institute, which sought “to help progressives equalize the framing advantages enjoyed by conservatives”. He teaches at Berkeley. Howard Dean wrote the forward to one of his books. He was an advisor to the Kerry 2004 presidential campaign.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Baronius –

    Too many people today judge issues on whether it agrees with the side of the political spectrum they’re on…instead of allowing those selfsame issues to BE the judge as to which side of the political spectrum they’re on.

    It’s a bad thing to badmouth Bush and the war crime known as the Iraq war?

    Is it somehow not true that the Republicans appeal to emotionalism rather than reason?

    And when it comes to global warming, the vast majority of the climatologists know that it’s a fact and a grave and gathering threat.

    But what’s happened is that if one political side accepts position A on a particular issue, the other political side accepts position B without ever considering whether position A is right or wrong!

    Case in point: Health care reform. The centerpiece of what the conservatives derisively call ‘Obamacare’ is a ‘health care exchange’…but if you’ll check, that ‘health care exchange’ is precisely what the Republicans proposed in opposition to Hillarycare back in the 90’s!

    But it’s not all against the Republicans. There’s NO good reason not to support more nuclear power plants…but my fellow liberals rail against them as if such would end the world tomorrow. I support nuclear power because modern plants are clean and safe and effective and very, very green. Apparently President Obama came to the same conclusion…to the disappointment of his Democratic base.

    It all goes back to what I’ve been (uselessly) saying for well over a year now: your beliefs should not determine the facts. The facts should determine your belief.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Baronius,

    With all due respect, you’re citing irrelevant point.

    Opposing George W. certainly is no kind of proof when it comes to discrediting anyone as a conservative. Not is, by any stretch of the term, the opposition to the Iraqi war. The position on global warming is another non-issue. As to his (alleged) support for Kerry, it’s no kind of indictment either. Dubya shouldn’t have been re-elected. Lots of righteous Americans felt that way.

    But what I’m referring to is Lakoff’s mindset.

    You really ought to read the book I cited.

    But then again, you may simply object to the idea of a conservative who thinks for himself.

  • Baronius

    Yes, Roger, I hate conservatives who think.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Glenn,

    Nuclear waste is not green. The power plant proposals, which are getting rave reviews, are a Republican want.

    Apparently they are getting a lot more than they want to admit, at least while the Tea is still brewing.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Roger, “moral politics” is an oxymoron.

    Dave

  • http://www.indyboomer46.blogspot.com Baritone

    If this repeats something already pointed out above, here’s begging your pardon but…

    Are the Reps being obstructionists simply for the sake of blocking Dems & Obama? Let’s see.

    A number of recent bills which had bi-partisan sponsorship failed to get Rep votes – EVEN FROM THE REPS WHO SPONSORED THE BILLS!

    Republicans have invoked the filibuster more times during this past year than during ANY session in history.

    There are currently a grand total of 294 bills which have passed the House, but which are languishing in the Senate – many which had significant Rep votes in the House.

    Then there’s John “Store Bought Tan” Boehner. Several months ago he led the pack in denouncing the health care reform bill because it was too long. Now, he attacks Obama’s reform bill outline as being too short. Which is it Johnny Cakes? Ya want to let us all know what you’d consider to be “just right” – you know that happy medium between Papa Bear and Baby Bear?

    It has been Reps accusing Obama of having closed sessions regarding health care reform and other issues. Now that Obama wants the Health Care meeting on Thursday to be televised for all to see, it is the Reps led by the esteemed Mr. Boehner charging that this will amount to nothing more than a side show – that this shouldn’t be an open meeting. Which is it boys and girls? We’re back to the Papa/Baby Bear conundrum. If it does turn out as they predict, whose fault might that be? If they choose not to participate, not to offer viable solutions of their own while at least making the attempt to seek common ground – it will be the Reps who continue to obstruct. Frankly, it is my hope that they do just that, and manage to look like the self-serving asses that they in fact are.

    Again, despite what Clav says, it is a legislator’s job to, well, legislate! It is also been historically the practice for the minority party to use the filibuster advisedly and with caution. The will of the people in November of 2008 was that Democrats were to be the majority party in Congress – and the majority rules or so the voters thought. Few people back then imagined that the Reps would use the arkane rules in the Senate to stonewall any and every issue brought before it.

    Claims that the Reps are “saving the nation” are not only disingenuous, but IMO are verging on treason. They are openly and purposefully thwarting the will of the people to advance their own political and financial fortunes.

    There is no evidence beyond their own claims that Obama’s agenda is or will be hurtful to the nation. Such claims are at best misleading, and at their worst outright lies meant to demonize Obama and all Democrats in general. Again, I say they are despicable.

    Oh, BTW – Newly seated Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown has already managed to piss off the tea-baggers by casting his vote FOR the jobs bill. Ahh. Success is often ephemeral and fame fickle.

    B

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Baritone,

    That comment was definitely, on target, I can only add to it by saying it is not just the Democrats who are being demonized.

    So, what if Obama is not in the private club? Exclusion allows one to think for themselves, and. it always has.

    I believe if Obama went lock-step with that little click,(anymore than he already has),then, they would like him, and we would all be screwed.

    We are going to be burned,(quit a bit) by this health care bill, I can now see all of the bills that have been replaced by, republican inclusion.

    The more I read, the louder I want to say, “Run away, while you still can!”

    me

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Perhaps, people who think politics shouldn’t be moral are …

  • Clavos

    John “Store Bought Tan” Boehner

    The crack about his tan is irrelevant and unnecessary to the discussion, but tells us a bit about your mindset, B-tone.

    And no, I don’t always vote for someone so that they will legislate, B-tone, and I’m sure I’m not alone in that.

    Sometimes, a cigar is just a cigar.

  • Baronius

    I vote for legislators to legislate *well*. I wouldn’t go to a butcher who said that flawed meat is better than nothing, because depending on the flaw, it’s a lot worse than nothing.

  • http://www.indyboomer46.blogspot.com Baritone

    Clav, I don’t assume “everyone” does anything in lock step, nor should they. Nevertheless, I think its fair to assume that anyone being voted into any political office is expected to take an active role in the workings of his or her respective office. Frankly, I can’t imagine expecting otherwise. If things are so hunky dory in this country, perhaps we should just suspend congress altogether. The country should be able to run on auto-pilot for some time.

    As to my “crack” – while it may have been “unnecessary” I chose to use it to hightlite my belief that Boehner is pretty much a phony to the inclusion of his “tan.”

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Yes, and that tan is going to kill that man.

    I’m with B, here!

    “Get real.”

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    I keep hearing people shouting, “No Government!” They should try to open their own eyes, rather than trying to close everyone else’s to the truth.

    “Like it or not, this is the “United States of America.”

    I am not a blind follower of Obama. In fact, I have many bones to nit-pick!

    But, damn it, this is our country, all of us.

    I am middle class, there are those here that are upper-class, some are middle-pretending to be upper. I don’t care what class you are in.

    Tolerate each-other, so, something will get done!

    My two cents, sorry B, I wasn’t trying to jump on your band-wagon here. It just happened.

  • http://www.indyboomer46.blogspot.com Baritone

    I have no band wagon. You’re free to jump when and where you may choose. :)

    What I find to be at least ironic is that all these Obama/Dem naysayers who decry big government are often the first ones to rise up in complaint whenever government chooses to cut off some or all of their particular piece of the pie in efforts to cut costs. Again, it is much the same group who supposedly hate so called “ear marks.” Yet they will be the first to demand that when these same funds are to be spent in their backyard, that they are right and proper.

    How many sanctimonious Reps have railed and voted against the TARP funds and the stimulus packages – claiming that they are wrongly targeted and will provide NO jobs, yet are the first to show up at sites where that money is being spent with big shit eating grins claiming credit while performing ribbon cuttings with those big scissors? Talk about 2 faced hypocrites. All you righty-tighties are being had.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Dave, #86,

    That’s the title of Lakoff’s book.

  • Baronius

    Jeannie, who shouts “no government” except Cindy?

  • Baronius

    Baritone, good question. How many Republicans opposed TARP and take credit for its projects? Maybe there are some, but I haven’t heard about it.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Jeannie –

    Nuclear waste is not green. The power plant proposals, which are getting rave reviews, are a Republican want.

    What IS green?

    Solar? It’s relatively inefficient, and you must cover large tracts of land in order to place enough solar panels to make a difference.

    Hydro? Check the damage to fish populations by dam construction.

    Geothermal? Sure, it’s green…but is it doable on a large-enough scale to make a difference?

    Tidal? Disrupts the life cycles of the local fish population…and is presently not doable on a large-enough scale to make a real difference.

    Space-based solar? Japan’s got a plan in the works for precisely this…but what effect will the power that’s beamed down (as infrared? microwave? laser? I don’t know) have on the atmosphere?

    Fusion? It’s wonderful when it comes on line – and it will happen, but we’ve been working on it for half a century now. There’s hope that this year America’s National Ignition Facility will finally be able to start a fusion reaction with positive energy output…but even if they do, we’ve got decades to go before we could begin to get enough fusion plants on line to make a difference.

    Wind? The constant noise disrupts local wildlife – IIRC, even disrupts the mating season for some animals.

    With nuclear energy, we can store all the nation’s nuclear waste (and we’ve well over a hundred nuclear power plants just in the Navy) in ONE place. Yucca mountain was a good location, I felt, but the NIMBY’s wouldn’t have it. Think about it – the effective sacrifice of ONE mountain as a nuclear waste dump for all the nation’s nuclear waste…compared to the hundreds of square miles of solar power panels that would be needed to power even just California.

    In my opinion, getting rid of coal is paramount…and the only power source presently available that is powerful enough, efficient enough, and can be put on line in a reasonable time frame is nuclear power. Clean coal, from what I understand so far, is a myth – ain’t gonna happen. If we’re going to get rid of coal anytime soon, nuclear power is the ONLY way to do it. That, ma’am, is a fact.

    Modern nuclear power plants ARE safe, and ARE more powerful and more efficient than any other source presently available…and – with the exception of ONE mountain of the government’s eventual choice – is IMO greener than solar power for the reasons stated above.

    Jeannie, I’m a pragmatist. I strongly believe in not sacrificing the good for the goal of the perfect, when the perfect is not practically attainable.

    France gets 70% of their energy from nuclear power – and my nephew who went there a couple years ago was telling me just how much more environmentally responsible western Europe seems to be than America.

    Remember how I keep saying let the facts determine one’s belief, rather than letting one’s beliefs determine the facts? That’s why when it comes to this particular issue I side more with the conservatives than for the liberals…but for reasons that should be obvious to my fellow liberals.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I should add, Dave, to #96, that in that case we might as well burn all the books by Aristotle and Plato.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Glenn,

    When I’m finished with what I am presently doing, then, I will answer you.

    :]I promise, and, that! You can bank on.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Baronius, #84,

    “Yes, Roger, I hate conservatives who think.”

    You’re distorting what I said, Baronius. I give you more credit than that.

    “You hate conservatives that don’t think like you” would be closer to what I meant.

  • Baronius

    Roger, how about you just once admit that you’re wrong. Lakoff is a liberal who supports liberal candidates on behalf of liberal causes. It’s nothing personal, Roger; you were just factually wrong when you called him conservative.

    This is part of the reason that I don’t buy what the “deconstruction” crowd sells. The danger in that type of analysis is looking down on others, personalizing every issue, and that’s what you do every time. Well, this isn’t personal. You stated something that was wrong.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Roger –

    When you do reply, remember – this is the gist of my whole argument:

    I’m a pragmatist. I strongly believe in not sacrificing the good for the goal of the perfect, when the perfect is not practically attainable.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Why don’t you read, Baronius, the book I cited and we can talk then, Again, you’re citing irrelevant facts such as who supported which candidate.

    That’s a strictly political definition of a conservative, and not very helpful for the fact. Lakoff is conservative in a far more important respect than the one you bring to the table – in terms of conservative ideas and values, not simply in terms of strict partisanship politics and voting along the party line.

    In fact, his values and views are quite akin to William Bennett’s, but I said it already.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Glenn,

    I buy your argument but only to a point. We’ve got to distinguish here between realm of action.

    And my position is that basic human morality never ought to be subject to any kind of compromise. There is no gradation here and no kind of incrementalism. Indeed, once you compromise your basic moral principles, you’re on a slippery slope. Well, we never should.

    As much as I approve of Dreadful’s “besieged city” analogy – remember the other thread – I happen to thing that even this analogy is subject to certain limits.

    What limits? Perhaps it’s for us to decide.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    To add to my last post, I don’t regard moral stance as any kind of perfection, only as a working principle.

    Which isn’t to say that human morality is evolving, daily I should add, and in that respect it strives for perfection.

    But I don’t believe this little aside is any kind of contradiction.

  • cannonshop

    99: Glenn, check the geo-plats, Yucca Mountain is seizmically unstable and sits on top of the main aquifer for that region. It’s a terrible site for storing something that stays dangerous for ten thousand years. a better site would be somewhere in Ohio or any other state situated on the shield, you know-where the bedrock’s both thick, and stable, and not sedimentary.

    Unfortunately, most of THOSE states are also heavily populated and people are terrified of “Nukular” anything.

    (and of course, repealing Carter’s idiotic 1979 executive order forbidding work on closing the fuel-processing loop would be even smarter… then you only have to worry about the stuff you can’t reprocess, AND you don’t have to buy as much raw Uranium…)

  • cannonshop

    Roger, I think you’re having the same problem with the term “Conservative” that I often sense with the term “Liberal”-there’s multiple definitions, but you’re not using the one your chosen audience is using.

    There’s “conseervative” in terms of moderation of temperament, temperance, and a belief in established values.

    there’s also “Conservative” in terms of political leanings, respect for the Founders, and a desire to uphold a particular view of the Constitution.

    THEN, there’s “Conservative” in terms of a more religious/religious moral stance in public life.

    THEN, there’s “Conservative” as being in opposition to the Left.

    (There’s more, but I think I hit the most common definitions…)

    so…which kind of “Conservative” are you talking about when you refer to Lakoff being a “conservative”? (For benefit of the audience, now.)

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I don’t think I have a problem, Cannon.

    As to what I meant when I spoke of Lakoff, I should think I expressed it pretty clearly in #105.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I’m sorry if I have been unduly curt, Cannon.

    Between you and me, I don’t give a hoot for pubic opinion or public conception.

    I’m trying to use the term in its honorific sense, to mean mainly adherence to certain conservative values, instead of the vulgar rendition to which Baronius, in his jesuitical zeal, was trying to commit me to – like voting along party lines and all such nonsensical things.

  • cannonshop

    111 It’s a communication thing, though-one of the big problems we’re all guilty of around here, is speaking around each other, instead of communicating with each other.
    (then again, that’s maybe a good thing-using the Babelfish example (Douglas Adams, The Hitchiker’s Guide to the Galaxy), actually UNDERSTANDING one another’s position could cause more and bloodier flame-wars… a certain amount of delusional obfuscation and incorrect assumption may be all that keeps the level of civility we HAVE…)

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    It’s always the “communication thing,” Cannon.

    It’s human forte, I should say, to be able to deflect when the position we’re being confronted with is unpalatable.

    Common understanding has no limits; and neither has human perfidy.

    We’re made that way.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    cannonshop,

    I, am going to jump in here, feet first, and say,”There was nothing idiotic about Carter’s vision for an America powered by clean renewable energy.”

    If Reagan, hadn’t removed all of those solar panels from the roof of the White House, you and I, might have met under an essay written in culture, not here in politics, with all of us freaking-out!

    Please consider this thought.

    Am I, afraid of Nucs? You betcha.

    This country hasn’t even figured out health care yet, why the hell, would they be trusted with going down that same old filthy energy route?

    Have you been to West Virginia lately?

    How about Ohio?

    We need clean energy, and, we need the jobs to produce it.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Good comment.

    We really can’t be trusted with anything yet, let alone nuclear power plants.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Glenn,

    Please read #114, that I addressed to cannonshop. Hopefully, between the two of you, I’ll get an answer without any insults from Roger, :] Smile Roger, please.

    My back is hollering at me. Damn, I hate to go.

    :[I’ll be back!

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    oh good you spoke to me again! byee

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Veering somewhat off the subject, I’m referring back to Doug Stephan’s “Countdown” show.

    The European roads and highways, from autobahns and the like, stand as they are, for over fifty years or so, without any need of refurbishing or rebuilding. They were made to last.

    But thanks to American version of capitalism and the profit motive, all based on the idea of shoddy workmanship, shoddy materials, and the like, in the interest of disposable goods, our highways and infrastructure is always in need of repair.

    And it suits our government just find, spinning the wheels and proving to everyone and all concerned that it’s doing something, employing people to productive ends, and all that baloney.

    Shoddy standards, shoddy workmanship, all done for show instead of lasting utility and public good – that’s the face of US brand of capitalism in a nutshell. And the government is just as complicit in this undertaking.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Jeannie –

    As with many other things in life, the more we know about them, the less we’re afraid of them.

    So it is with nuclear power. I remember looking at the design of the nuclear power plant on the USS Abraham Lincoln and thinking to myself, “Y’know, with all the fail-safes and redundancies here, if the crew got together and deliberately tried to cause a meltdown, they just might be able to do so…but probably not.”

    Sure, we all know about Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, but there are hundreds of nuclear power plants – over half of which are on ships which rock and sway and shudder from the shock of the waves – that have been working just fine.

    Coal, on the other hand, has been killing thousands of people every single year since before the Industrial Revolution.

    I think it’s time to join the Good Doctor and learn to stop worrying and love the [nuclear power plant].

    (for those too young to understand that last reference, Google Dr. Strangelove).

  • John Wilson

    There are a couple more objections to nuclear power that I don’t think have been mentioned here:

    (1) everybody who lives within 10 miles of a reactor must keep on hand a supply of Potassium Iodide (KI) as a prophylactic device against accumulation of radioactive iodine in the thyroid in case of an “incident”. cf. KI

    (2) enormous amounts of ready fresh water must be available for cooling. Salt water cannot be used for corrosion reasons.

    By contrast, all the nations power requirements can be met by existing PV technology deployed in a square array in the Nevada desert, variously computed to be 25 to 90 miles on a side (this has been discussed extensively in past issues of Scientific American as well as Science). Of course, that would require a huge distribution grid, so you wouldn’t concentrate the collectors like that, you’d distribute them where needed.

    But a distributed system is anathema to existing power companies (coal, oil, etc.) because it obviates the need for gigantic monopolies sucking subsidy money out of the government, so they bend every effort to assure that it is not even discussed. Your politicians at work (while taking orders on their Blackberries from the lobbyists who sponsor them).

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    John Wilson,

    Great comment!

    After coming back on-line, to check my e-mail, I stumbled upon this.Cracking down on fracking.

    Take a look at it, if you have time.

    bye

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Glenn,

    Take a look at John Wison’s comment, perhaps the fact that I live in the, “Thyroid belt” is one of the reasons that I no longer have one.

    My doctors in Buffalo actually refer to this part of the country as, “The Thyroid Belt.” There has been an unusually high number of cases of “hot nodes” found in women in, the Great lakes region.

    I’ll look for a link to this fact, when I can.

    sorry, to talk so personally here.
    bye

  • John Wilson

    Environmental radioactive iodine will accumulate in the thyroid and cause thyroid cancer. Thus, in case of a nuclear ‘event’, swallow a bunch of Potassium Iodide (KI) pills hoping the KI will occupy all the thyroid sites first and preclude radioactive iodine from situating there.

  • http://www.indyboomer46.blogspot.com Baritone

    Just another instance of Reps lying: All day today, Republicans have been refering to the possibility of Dems using the 50 vote reconciliation to pass elements of health care reform as the “nuclear option.”

    Nay, nay, nay!

    If not, what is the nuclear option?

    The so called “nuclear option” was the effort by Senate REPUBLICANS (specificly “Senate procedural Rule 22″) to do away with the filibuster being used by Dems to block Rep judicial appointments back just 5 years ago. How quickly they forget. Forget my ass! They have simply taken the phrase, bent it around, and used it again in the (probably correct) assumption that at most, people will have no more than a vague memory of what “nuclear option” originally meant in terms of Senate procedures.

    Not only that, Reps are admonishing Dems for attempting to use reconciliation to pass health care when they have used it innumerable times – perhaps most recently – to pass Bush’s tax cuts for the rich – TWICE.

    Are Republicans somehow given special dispensation? Is their position on the pedestal so special that they can do as they damn well please, while Dems are to be prevented from using the same tactics to pass their legislation? Again, are Republican lies to be ignored or forgiven because their ends supposedly justify their means? Their arrogance knows no bounds!

    B

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    What’s the big deal, Baritone. Reconciliation option as as legitimate as it gets. If you like, I can refer you to an NPR program today concerning the very subject.

    I don’t see what’s there to be upset about it. They should just avail themselves of the option and pass the health-bill with no hustle.

    And if they don’t, it’d only show they’re spineless.

  • Clavos

    Shoddy standards, shoddy workmanship, all done for show instead of lasting utility and public good…And the government is just as complicit in this undertaking.

    The United States government is the SOURCE AND LOCUS of most of what is shoddy in this country. The government(s) build those shoddy roads…

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Exactly.

  • http://www.indyboomer46.blogspot.com Baritone

    Roger – You missed the point. Rep hypocracy is palpable, and they use the lie to further dupe their constituencies into believing that reconciliation is some kind of underhanded maneuver, when in fact, it’s the manner in which I believe all Senate business should be handled.

    You are correct regarding Dem’s and their dubious spines.

    B

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    And it has been handled that way for years – part of budget reconciliation, pure and simple.

    I did get the point, Baritone, but it shouldn’t matter at this stage of the game. So I say, fuck ‘em.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Clavos,

    I wish that you had communicated a little better. Since I’m not supposed to discuss writing matters openly in the threads , I can’t even mention, what it was that I wished was said.

    :] Have a wonderful day.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Baritone,

    Your audience, for the most part, is unable to hear you, me , or, anyone who doesn’t play the game.

    Very disheartening, but, not the end of the struggle.

    me

  • cannonshop

    “cannonshop,

    I, am going to jump in here, feet first, and say,”There was nothing idiotic about Carter’s vision for an America powered by clean renewable energy.”

    If Reagan, hadn’t removed all of those solar panels from the roof of the White House, you and I, might have met under an essay written in culture, not here in politics, with all of us freaking-out!

    Please consider this thought.

    Am I, afraid of Nucs? You betcha.

    This country hasn’t even figured out health care yet, why the hell, would they be trusted with going down that same old filthy energy route?

    Have you been to West Virginia lately?

    How about Ohio?”

    There wasn’t anything wrong with the idea, Jeannie, what was idiotic, was his execution of that idea-particularly the order shutting down closed-cycle nuclear research-which, instead of reducing waste, mandates that we take the spent fuel rods from existing, now never to be upgraded or replaced plants, and bury them in a hole to leech into the ground water.

    THAT is idiotic. The reason he did it, is simply that reprocessed nuclear fuel has a name…

    Plutonium. Plutonium does not (normally) occur in nature (there was a tiny bit found at Oklo, but that was a freak event-a natural reactor some two billion years ago, and the PLU found there wasn’t even PLU-it was the radioactive breakdown product of PLU decay.)

    Okay? to be on the same page, yes? Okay. Which is stupider: being stuck with thousands of tonnes of radioactive material you can’t safely dispose of, plus facilities you can’t safely decommission or grandma’s heart-lung machine stops working and the power goes out, but you won’t build any replacements because…survey says?

    Obselete equipment failed when it was worn out and some radiation got released into the reactor room at TMI-which is to say, one room was irradiated-and that room was BUILT to be Irradiated. (remember, Carter wrote the executive order almost ten years before Tchernobyl-a reactor built using forties tech in a nation at the time even more corrupt than ourselves.)

    Here’s the deal, Jeannie: Properly built nuclear is “Safe” (as safe as living down wind of a coal plant, or oil-burner, or downstream of a dam). What’s rotting around our country are plants that are obselete and based on an obselete model-there are better designs (WE even have some of them-they just can’t be put into service!) It could be safer, it’s physically possible and the technology’s already been built-it’s blocked by an executive order with the force of law, written in 1979, based on an incident that is arguably one of the flimsiest excuses for helping big oil on the federal dime out there.

    See, Jeannie, what motivated President Carter wasn’t TMI, it wasn’t safety concerns-it was that the end product of reprocessing spent uranium is an artificial element called Plutonium-and there’d already been a “Theft” (Put in quotes because it’s an open secret who and where it was knicked off to) of refined U-238 concurrent with the revelation that Israel may-have-built-a-nuclear bomb. This was the same administration that put a guy in prison for LIFE for selling the israelis technology for a tank gun. (AFAIK, Pollard’s still in prison for that.)

    so, you need to put things in context here… it’s not about ‘safety’ or we’d be replacing the damn things before they fail (which we aren’t), using the newest proven research (Like the Argonne-6 reactor, designed so that when you lose steam pressure, the rods separate and the reaction stops regardless of what may or may not be going on in the control room, also the rods are ‘unjacketed’ rods, they lose density as they reach critical, and don’t push TOWARD each other the way that conventional rods do…) but we aren’t.

    The executive order wasn’t about safety, it was about a host of unrelated political items, paranoia about materials control, and it was about Jimmy Carter’s lack of a spine-which is how he managed to lose in 1980 against a washed-up actor who featured in B movies.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Cannonshop,

    I just saw this comment, but I have to go to the docs today.

    I will be back on-line tonight with an answer, and I will read what you are saying to me. I am not passed the point of reason here. I can still change my mind as it is not petrified by pride. Do you know what I mean? I hope someone on this thread besides, Baritone and Glenn does.

    :] bye for today.

  • http://www.indyboomer46.blogspot.com Baritone

    Reagan was almost as good a president as he was an actor. Not quite, mind you, but almost.

    AND

    It should be noted that Reagan set the standard for improbable hair that many Reps have copied and even enhanced since the 80s. It’s these kind of contributions that so often go unnoticed – like Reagan’s single handed salvation of the jelly bean industry, while with the other, just as deftly bringing down the Soviet juggernaut. What a guy!

    B

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Yep, Johnny Carson was good at giving Reagan’s impersonations – haircut and all.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    C-shop –

    What puzzles me about Carter is that he was a Navy nuclear engineer who served on subs during the height of the Cold War – he shouldn’t have had any problem with nuclear power. In a note of irony, the world’s most advanced submarine is at a base less than ten miles from where I sit. Its name? USS Jimmy Carter (SSN 23). To borrow a phrase from back in the day, I’d almost – almost – give my left testicle to check it out…but that ain’t gonna happen.

    But Jimmy Carter was not stupid, nor was he spineless. Go ask anyone familiar with naval nuclear power and ask about ADM Hyman Rickover, and they’ll describe the definition of a maverick with brass balls that went clang, clang, clang as he walked. Rickover once drank a glass of primary reactor water in front of Congress to prove to them how safe it was. Rickover was also as coarse and abrasive as they come – he didn’t suffer fools. If Jimmy Carter was ‘spineless’ as you say, Rickover would never have selected him.

    Rickover personally selected Jimmy Carter to in the design and development of nuclear propulsion plants for naval vessels. Carter was certainly a qualified naval nuclear engineer…and he knew what the heck he was talking about.

    I think if you’ll look back at the times, you’ll find many parallels between conservative castigation of Carter, of Clinton, and now of Obama…because they’re Democrats and therefore ‘spineless’ and unAmerican and socialist and whatever. It’s nothing more than the perennial claims by conservatives that they’ve got more testosterone than the Democrats do…and I could go on all day about that particular red herring….

    Concerning Pollard, I have no problem with him being in prison for life. Espionage is espionage is espionage, regardless of who it’s for. Why? Do we really know that one of the individuals on the receiving end isn’t on the payroll of, say, China? No, we don’t. We can’t.

    But I maintain that while Carter may not have been a stellar president, and certainly not an inspiring president, he wasn’t that bad. He’s turned out to have been right about solar power, about the Panama Canal, and about encouraging fuel efficiency by the auto industry. And you must admit he was infinitely better than your boy Dubya!

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Jeannie –

    Concerning nuclear power –

    You know that Cannonshop and I regularly butt heads and go at it hammer-and-tongs…but he and I strongly agree when it comes to nuclear power.

    When two good people from opposite ends of the political spectrum both strongly agree on a political hot-button issue, you should think twice about opposing what they’re saying.

  • zingzing

    but glenn, aren’t all conservatives manly men? even palin?

    actually, it is quite funny to look back even 50 or 60 years ago and see the same damn tactics being used in politics.

  • http://www.indyboomer46.blogspot.com Baritone

    I guess they feel if it worked against Carter, why change horses now?

    B

  • Baronius

    Zing, I recently saw some footage from the 1948 presidential campaign. Dewey was promising to dismantle the programs of the Roosevelt administration. Truman said that Dewey and the Republicans would serve only the special interests. It was eerie.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    And the beat goes on.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    IMO, Obama is pussyfooting on the issue. I understand the motivation behind the televised summit, to convince the American public that the legislation on the table – far from being radical enough for my taste – isn’t any kind of socialistic take-over.

    Well, I think these efforts are waisted. Republicans will not change their mind and will continue stonewalling. Nor will those who have already made up their mind that Obama care is an evil thing.

    So why not just do it through the reconciliation option and get it over with?

    Again, I see lack of conviction, properly backed by what ought to be executive decision.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    cannonshop,

    Well, my doctor thinks that I have a fractured vertebrae, so this comment is going to be a lot shorter than I wanted it to be. but, it hurts for a good reason.

    It’s true as Glenn, pointed out , Jimmy carter was a nuclear physicist. This is a fact that too many people fail to mention.

    So, I have to ask this question, “Why would a nuclear physicist have such reservations about the clean-up and containment process for spent nuclear waste?”

    I will look some facts up.

    [I have been labeled by a nuclear promoter as a nuclear paranoid, a designation which I willingly accept. I believe anyone who isn’t paranoid about nuclear energy doesn’t know how bad the situation is, and how detrimental its continuation will be for all future generations. A discerning newspaper editor characterized my writing about nuclear matters as “a diatribe against the whole nuclear industry,” a description which I honor as wholly consistent with my being a nuclear paranoid, concerned with the welfare of my grandchildren and their progeny.] A. Stanley Thompson

    I’m sorry, but, I need to stick by stanly!

    I still have Jackson Browne , “No Nukes” t-shirts hanging in my closet, and, this spring I plan to be wearing one of them.

    :] Sometimes an old dog, just can’t change her mind,no-matter how hard she tries.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    BTW, B-tone,

    In a little publicized SCOTUS decision yesterday, the court suspended the application of Miranda rights after 14 days of the suspect’s release from initial questioning.

    The reasoning goes that 14 days is sufficient enough time for the suspect to recover their state of mind and to be able to fend for him/herself once he’s brought in for questioning the second time around.

    Consequently, informing the suspect of her Miranda rights during the second and all subsequent stages of questioning was unanimously declared as unnecessary.

    Also little publicized item in MSM – the extension of the Patriot Act in all its splendor and glory for another full year.

    It was also a unanimous decision, as best I can tell.

    Don’t tell me now that this administration is all that much different, in substance, from all the previous ones.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    shutting down closed-cycle nuclear research?

    I’m going to really look into this. As soon as I can sit here for a while.

    Is there someone that will edit my article here?

    Hell, maybe Dave will do it for me. What could happen? :]I’m even trusting him at this point! Actually, I don’t think we really have that much that’s not in common with each other. We both want change!

    bye for a while.:[

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    I agree wholeheartedly with Cannon’s # 132. [stands up and applauds]

    I’m a strong supporter of nuclear energy – and not just because I’ve visited nuclear power stations and they are majorly cool places.

    Nuclear only has a bad name because of the destructive power of nuclear weapons. Yet if you look at the safety record of nuclear, especially when compared to that of other sectors of the power generating industry, it is nothing short of stellar.

    Opponents will say that it only takes one accident, but that’s true of many industries. The effects of the accident at Bhopal, for instance, were just as nasty as Chernobyl. And what if one of the huge new dams on the Yangtse were to break? The scale of that sort of catastrophe would be mindblowing.

    Just putting the risks into perspective…

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Indeed, I do too.

    France, for one, has taken the lead in conversion to nuclear power, and they’re doing just fine.

    The China Syndrome surely affected the American mind, and so did Chernobyl.

    My only concern is leaving the requisite kind of technology at the shoddy hands of American firms and equally complicit government.

    The Europeans ought to do it.

  • cannonshop

    146 Arguably, Doc, Bhopal was WORSE than Tchernobyl.

    138: If you think it’s bad now, or fifty years ago, keep looking. the brief moments of civility are the exception to the viciousness that is the default setting of the American political scene. (imgagine the following historical cartoon: Andrew Jackson in full regalia, astride a Hog, saying “To the Victors Go the SPoils.” or a U.S. Senator who used his cane to win a debate on the floor of the Congress-by beating his opponent about the head.)

    147 There aren’t many U.S. firms left in that industry, Roger, I suspect it would HAVE to be the Europeans.

  • http://delibernation.com Silas Kain

    IMO, Obama is pussyfooting on the issue. I understand the motivation behind the televised summit, to convince the American public that the legislation on the table – far from being radical enough for my taste – isn’t any kind of socialistic take-over.

    I’ve watched some of the summit today and I’m more outraged now than ever. On the surface both sides seem to differ on a host of issues – the truth is insurance lobbyists have them ALL right where they want them. This is the GOP season, folks. Wall Street and other special interests are funding the GOP this cycle. In two years they’ll fund the Dems. They play each side every two years just so they can maintain their stranglehold on the American political system. I’m very unhappy with the President at this stage. He’s trying; however, he’s not being Presidential. It’s time for him to get down, get dirty and put members of Congress in their place beginning with Harry Reid.

    Meanwhile, in RI teachers (as well as teachers “unions” across America) are fuming over the mass firing of the faculty at Central Falls High School. What the MSM fails to report is the fact that Central Falls is a microcosm of this nation. What’s happening there this week is about to occur in school districts across the land. We must achieve education reform and it begins with making concrete decisions on education administration – like reduction of bureaucracy and increasing accountability. While many on the GOP side talk about the dangers of BIG government, I say there’s concrete proof that big government cannot function. Rhode Island is a classic example. I’ll be talking about that tonight.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Harry Reid has indeed been a disgrace, and that’s regardless of where one stands on the issues.

    It used to be a prerequisite for any whip, majority and minority, to be decisive, arm-twisting if necessary, after the manner of LBJ. Harry Reid is uniquely unqualified for the post. He’s anemic.

    And so is Nancy, bless her heart.

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    Silas,

    Is you show on tonight?

  • http://delibernation.com Silas Kain

    Yes, Ma’am. I’m hot to talk tonight. This Central Falls, RI High School firing has my knickers in a twist among other things.

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    Okay, consider me your groupie then. :-)

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    As long as your panties are not curling.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    That was meant for Silas, Cindy, lest you get wrong impression.

  • http://delibernation.com Silas Kain

    I love you, Cindy. I love Roger, too!

    Got some interesting stuff to share tonight.

    I’m off to get some work done. Catch ya’ll later.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    What can one say to something like that.

    It’s disarming.

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    155 Thanks for straightening that out! lol Okay I am off to shovel us out of the current blizzard.

  • John Wilson

    Clavos: “The United States government is the SOURCE AND LOCUS of most of what is shoddy in this country. The government(s) build those shoddy roads…”

    Nonsense. Military equipment, NASA, etc., all have superb quality.

    The roads in the interstate system were very well built.

    How do you support your claim?

  • John Wilson

    One might also point out that Carter negotiated the only lasting peace in the middle east, between Israel and Egypt.

    “But I maintain that while Carter may not have been a stellar president, and certainly not an inspiring president, he wasn’t that bad. He’s turned out to have been right about solar power, about the Panama Canal, and about encouraging fuel efficiency by the auto industry. And you must admit he was infinitely better than your boy Dubya!”

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    John, Clavos is the ultimate cynic. I do see his point, though, to an extent.

    Private companies are motivated not to do a shoddy job. If a private contractor builds a substandard road, it’s not likely to get more road-building contracts and will go out of business.

    A government that builds a shoddy road remains a government with the wherewithal to build roads.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Concerning Pollard, I have no problem with him being in prison for life

    You are lucky that I don’t run this country. Anytime any Yank came to whine about anything, I would tell him that until Pollard was freed and pardoned, there would be nothing to discuss with the United States whatever.

    Everything your country had here would either be tossed out or confiscated. Any American money here would be confiscated and used to pay the pensions of Israeli-Americans living here, and any Israeli money in America would be pulled out – immediately. Your fleet would either leave – or be blown out of the sea here. Your soldiers would either leave – or be imprisoned. Economic relations with the United States would be cut. NO American vehicles would be allowed in the Arab areas of this nation until they had been annexed and the terror regimes in power there snuffed out.

    Glenn, we do not need you. You need us, and you would find that out damned quick.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    One might also point out that Carter negotiated the only lasting peace in the middle east, between Israel and Egypt.

    We would be better off “at war” with Egypt – and still in possession of the Sinai. All we need do to END the existence of Egypt is to blow up the Aswan High Dam. Millions of Egyptians would die and that would be the end of the country altogether.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    John Wilson,

    Please keep telling them, eventually they will listen. Or, there will be a huge nuclear fallout, and then, they will all say, “Why didn’t anyone warn us?”

    Silas, I wish I could listen to your show. How do I find it?

    me in pain, bye :[

  • Baronius

    We do not need you. You need us.

    So, Ruvy, let me get this straight. You guys sold one of your brothers into slavery, ended up hungry in Egypt, and G-d led you home through Moses. Then, you got overrun and exiled again, and lost the Temple, and G-d led you home through the pagan Cyrus. A few hundred years later, you lost the second Temple, and were exiled for 1900 years. This time Britain and the UN gave you your land back. And now you’re saying that you don’t need any outside help? How do you know? What benefit does it do Israel to shake its fist at the few people who recognize it?

  • http://www.maskedmoviesnobs.com El Bicho

    “If a private contractor builds a substandard road, it’s not likely to get more road-building contracts and will go out of business.”

    Yes but that doesn’t stop the crook from going into another business and bilking someone else out of more money.

    We the people are the government. If you think a bad job is being done then get involved because bitching from the sidelines contributes very little to change.

  • John Wilson

    Have you ever negotiated a long private driveway built by a private contractor without government supervision?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Just a basic link to autobahn.

    There is no mention of any kind of road work or repair because there is no need for one. Those roads were made to last, courtesy of Adolph Hitler.

    This topic was discussed on Doug Stephan’s “Count-down” show a couple of days ago. Look in the archives.

  • http://delibernation.com Silas Kain

    “If a private contractor builds a substandard road, it’s not likely to get more road-building contracts and will go out of business.”

    Not if the contractor has greased the palms of the right politicians. Take a look at Boston’s Big Dig. In some cases, company names change but the principals remain. And there is no better evidence than what’s happened in the financial sector.

    Jeannie, just go here for the information. I’ll be there at 11 — call in!

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Silas Kain’s Delibernation Thursdays from 11 PM – Midnight Eastern Time.

    Cool! I will try to get up, or, stay awake until then.
    It would be good to hear your voice, and i bet if you heard mine, you’d be really surprised.

    I sound like a sweet mild-mannered lady!

    But, we know better…don’t we? :]

    I will try, Silas but, I can’t promise you. my pain medication is kicking in now. bye again.

  • zingzing

    whoever said “If a private contractor builds a substandard road, it’s not likely to get more road-building contracts and will go out of business” needs to wake up. when dealing with the government, it’s infinitely more complex. the buck is passed, the system roles on, and the question of quality rarely ever comes up. they don’t care how shitty the work is, as long as its cheap, because the dollar is all-powerful. can’t be seen as paying too much, if there’s someone willing to do it cheaper.

  • http://www.indyboomer46.blogspot.com Baritone

    Zing,

    That’s why more than one astronaut has voiced concern in the knowledge that the various space vehicles we’ve sent into space were built by the lowest bidder.

    And look at Blackwater. Consider the crap they’ve been responsible for, and yet they continue to win new contracts. It’s a crock.

    B

  • cannonshop

    A private contractor that builds a shoddy PRIVATE road probably won’t get hired to build or maintain another PRIVATE road.

    Shoddy contractors who build shoddy public roads usually pay the right kind of kickbacks to keep building shoddy public roads, and it’s not about cost-it’s about whose palm gets the ikkywaxxing. and this extends to other things, as well. The USAF had a supercruise capable airframe in 1979 (the F-16XL) that used existing (at the time) technology-but it wssn’t until the nineties that we got a design for a fighter capable of supersonic-cruise-no-afterburner (the F-22), and it wasn’t a cost issue-it was defense-contract struggling between McD and General Dynamics-in which, GD lost to MD and so we have F-15E’s.

    Neither the Best, nor the Cheapest win the contracts-it’s the ones that have the right representatives (at whatever level) in their pockets with the right connections to the ruling political party of the time. Same thing for Civil supply contracts. There’s how the system is supposed to work, and how it DOES work-and they aren’t the same thing.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Zing,

    Really?

    when dealing with the government, it’s infinitely more complex. the buck is passed, the system roles on, and the question of quality rarely ever comes up. they don’t care how shitty the work is, as long as its cheap, because the dollar is all-powerful. can’t be seen as paying too much, if there’s someone willing to do it cheaper.

    When Bush was driven through our area of New York State, one of the few words that he spoke publicly-on the news, from the window of his armored limo was, “Fix your potholes.”

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    cannonshop,

    Well said. This is why we have so many potholes!

    Neither the Best, nor the Cheapest win the contracts-it’s the ones that have the right representatives (at whatever level) in their pockets with the right connections to the ruling political party of the time. Same thing for Civil supply contracts. There’s how the system is supposed to work, and how it DOES work-and they aren’t the same thing.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    cannonshop,

    Did you look at the link in my response to your nuclear position? I have to give credit to A Stanly Thomposon’s word, because he was in the program since it’s beginning.

    But I still need to know more about “closed-cycle nuclear research?

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Clavos,I’ll be back on-line in few hours. I would like to get this finished today.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    To follow up on #142, Baritone, here’s a summary account of how the process of reconciliation has been routinely used to pass all manner of legislation.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    For full coverage of the summit, including live blog, see the following link.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Roger,

    Why would a deconstructionist be this concerned with the working of our present government?

    The reason they are not just going for reconciliation, is that they want to include all of us in this process.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    I may not be happy with this bill in it’s present form, and we are probably not going to see a public option, let alone the best choice, which is single payer.

    It is crystal clear, that President Obama and his administration are doing a great job!

    Especially, if you realize what would be happening if the Republicans were totally in charge of health care reform, nothing.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    The summit for for PR reasons mainly, to lay the cards on the table for the American public. It’s not going to change any Republican hearts or minds.

    Ultimately, it will be up to the Democrats to pass this legislation, if their nerve will hold up.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    You should try to focus on less topics simultaneously, Roger. I am betting that you could probably fix our problem with health care by yourself.

    I will have to say again, that this country is made up of many people from all walks of life. PR has nothing to do with it. It is the American people that want to see what is going on. Not, just the elitists.

    I’m glad that they are all at, Blair House. This way we are also invited.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    roger,

    You’ll have to read my next article. I’m sure you will have plenty to say on the topic.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Whatever you say, Jeannie. I’m not in the mood to argue.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Roger,

    I am speaking directly, without all the frills here. So, kindly don’t take my directness as some sort of personal attack on you. I actually like you, although it might not appear that way.

    My back is really hurting right now so I will break for a while. I wish that I could type laying down. :[

    I even tried to figure out how, but I don’t have a laptop. If I did it would be called a bedtop.

    :]bye for now, Roger.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Roger,

    Stop trying to pin that little argument word on me.

    Woman also, can have strong opinions.

    I really find it hard to tolerate double standards.

    bye again.

  • Mark

    Rog #178, thanks for the link — interesting history.

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    lol, a bedtop–that’s good. :-)

  • http://www.indyboomer46.blogspot.com Baritone

    As one gets older, entering her or his so called “golden years,” one becomes aware that gravity is a bitch.

    B

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Not to mention lucid thinking.

    I’ve heard it somewhere that people don’t really change with age. It’s just that they become less attractive, because all their negatives which were rather concealed by the charm of youth are at long last allowed to run rampant.

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    Trying to explain yourself, Roger? My narrative runs in the opposite direction. :-)

    (joke)

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I was talking about unthinking masses, Cindy. And that’s no joke.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    But damn right it’s true of me, too. I’d like to be more tolerant at times than I am.

    I have to work on it.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Good dig roger, did you think that one up all by yourself?

    How do rate here? Being able to call me unthinking? I bet we go toe to toe on every issue, I just don’t use a thesaurus as much as you.

    So please try to get over yourself. It’s really tiring. And as far as looks go, I have never seen a picture of you.

    :)very interesting.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Hi, Cindy,

    Don’t pay attention to the little man behind the curtain.

    :]lol

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Baritone,

    There is no gravity, the earth sucks!

    :) Hi, B. and Bye B.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Roger, How do you rate here? Now it’s perfect.

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    B –

    The trick is to always hang out with people older or much younger, but never your own age. The older ones make you feel young and the much younger ones make you feel smart. :-)

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    Hiya Jeannie,

    Roger was just talking about people in general, not about you. (And probably not just any…but ones who we would probably think are obnoxious.)

    How much snow did you get? I think we got two feet or more. I have to shovel in layers. Last time we had this much snow I was snowed in at the Embassy Suites in NYC. Fortunately they honored the cheap room rate I’d gotten for another night. It was so cool, as the only people around the streets were sporting cross-country skis!

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Jeannie,

    I used to look like Richard Burton and Robert Taylor put together.

    I am no longer the beauty I used to be, but I can still hold my candle to most.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Actually, Charles Bronson, another Polack, is a fair approximation, even today.

    Just the right kind of mixture of masculine roughness and feminine sensibility.

    I haven’t posted any mugshot yet for fear of all the female contingent to become overly excited.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I’d have another problem altogether with my gay admirers.

    I hope you can appreciate my dilemma.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Jeannie responds:

    23 – jeannie danna
    Feb 26, 2010 at 9:52 am
    Thank You, for that beautiful and intelligent comment. I’m framing it!

    24 – roger nowosielski
    Feb 26, 2010 at 9:53 am
    Wait until I send in my picture. That will be the proper object for framing.

    25 – roger nowosielski
    Feb 26, 2010 at 9:55 am
    I’m surprised, Jeannie, you don’t know that men have far greater ego than women – especially beautiful men.

    After all, Narcissus was a man, or so the legend says.

    26 – roger nowosielski
    Feb 26, 2010 at 9:56 am
    We are the peacocks of the species, just admit it.

    27 – roger nowosielski
    Feb 26, 2010 at 10:03 am
    That’s why Clavos, ugly as sin – both inside and out – has no lesser ego than I. In fact, in that particular respect, we’re evenly matched. (Of course, he excels in matters of erudition, native intelligence, clear thinking and last but not least, immaculate grammar. There’s no way I could hold the candle for him in the mentioned respects, however hard I try. Even so, I try!)

    And if this doesn’t prove the utter superiority of the male subspecies, I don’t know what will.

    END OF TRANSCRIPTION

    PS: Actually, Jeannie’s response (#23), as I was soon to find out, was to Bob Lloyd, but I thought it was pretty pertinent to this thread as well; hence it’s now part of the record.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    “hold a candle to . . .” idiom

    Now I’m going to be pried open like a can of sardines.

    Woe is me.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    Now I’m going to be pried open like a can of sardines.

    I’m reminded of a skit by the English humorist Alan Bennett, in which he plays a vacuous preacher giving a sermon:

    “Life, you know, is rather like a tin of sardines. We’re all of us looking for the key.

    “Some of us think we’ve found the key, don’t we? We peel back the lid of the sardine tin of life, to reveal the sardines, the riches of life, within. And we get them out, we enjoy them.

    “But you know, there’s always a little bit in the corner you can’t get out. Is there a little bit in the corner of your life? I know there is in mine.”

    :-)

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Ain’t that the truth. The fork won’t do it.

    And if you try your fingers, you’re liable to get cut.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Cindy,

    After giving you advice about shoveling snow, I went out and fractured one of my vertebrae. Please don’t try too hard, to keep up with snow. Just let it melt. That’s what we are doing at our house now!

    As far as old Roger here, I think it is so painfully obvious that he is lonely, and, I feel sorry for him.

    :[ Nothing I can do about it, he just spits venom whenever I approach him. So, I’ll have to ignore him. He doesn’t even know why, he acts this way. Maybe you can help him to understand.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I am glad, though, Jeannie, that you’re doing so well.

    But don’t you worry. When you approach me with real need, I’ll be there.

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    Oh, that’s how you got hurt, Jeannie. Sorry to hear that. I wish you a speedy recovery.

  • cannonshop

    Jeannie, I have to correct you on something here…

    Roger’s not venomous, and he doesn’t spit. He’s a nice person, kind of like Glenn, or Cindy, or YOu.

    I, on the other hand, AM venomous, even vicious and unreasonable, possibly hostile, nasty, cruel, heartless, and a deluxe-grade understudy of evil, whose place in the afterlife is both stoked and noisy with the other damndesouls out there (assuming, that is, one actually believes in an afterlife, and the imaginary friend with the judgement issues.)

    and while it’s somewhat amusing to watch the nice people tear into one another for no particular reason, it’s not particularly satisfying, especially when it’s over one of them being yet-more-sensitive than the rest over nothing.

    Roger’s comment had to do with ‘people’ in general-which is true-most people don’t think, refuse to think, and insist on not thinking. This is how you get people voting party-line or yellow-dog rather than actually reading up on the candidates and issues (or platform)and choosing rationally.

    Most people not thinking is how we keep winding up in the same mess (only worse) every time.

    Glenn Beck and Keith Olbermann rely on masses of people who don’t think to pay their bills (through ratings), Ideologues HATE it when people START thinking on their own.

    But you should stop taking things so personally-especially when they’re not aimed at your person. Once in a while is fine, everybody does it, but on a constant basis loses one’s “Nice People” status.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    cannonshop,

    I don’t really care who is good or evil here, I find all of you equally very puzzling, and frankly, it doesn’t really matter.

    What I am doing here does matter a lot,to me.

    Now you can come upon this thread hours after the fact and try to figure out what happened if you wish. I say ,”Good luck with with, this one.”

    Now, in Roger’s 204, my 23 was speaking to Bob Loyd, on another thread.
    I was followed there by Roger, who by the way, finds it almost impossible not to chime in whenever anyone says anything to me. I find this very tiring to say the least.
    Whenever I express my thoughts here, they are labeled as an emotional tirade of some sort; this, frankly is nothing more than a double standard.
    I believe that most people here wish that I would either, shut up, change my beliefs, or go away.
    I am me, cannonshop, and that’s all on this subject, that I would care to discuss.
    If you wish to discuss, nuclear power,road construction, or what health care we should adopt for this nation, then, please do me the favor of reading my articles here, so that we may debate them.

    me