Just say it didn't work (scott)

Wouldn't it be nice if politicians would admit they messed up. They would get up onto TV or whatever and tell everyone, their plan that they thought would work didn't. Then everyone could move on to trying to fix the problem. That goes for both sides the other side and the independent side. I would tell them "don't worry, its not as if we already think you have no clue what your doing."
just a rant for the day.

What do elections tell us? by Scott

As the people the real only voice they have is in an election. So what did the election of Scott Brown tell us?

Jacob S. Hacker and Daniel Hopkins wrote in the Washington Post "If there is a lesson in the Massachusetts vote, it is this: pass a [health-care] bill. The nation needs reform. Democrats need an accomplishment. And Democratic activists and voters need a new cause: fixing reform, not abandoning it."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/19/AR2010011902846.html

Fred Barnes from the Weekly Standard, "The health care bill, ObamaCare, is dead with not the slightest prospect of resurrection. Brown ran to be the 41st vote for filibuster and now he is just that. Democrats have talked up clever strategies to pass the bill in the Senate despite Brown, but they won’t fly. It’s one thing for ObamaCare to be rejected by the American public in poll after poll. But it becomes a matter of considerably greater political magnitude when ObamaCare causes the loss of a Senate race in the blue state of Massachusetts."
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/health-care-bill-dead

Todd Purdum writes this from Vanity Fair, "If a wildly popular new president, with sizable majorities in both houses of Congress, couldn't bend the system to his will already, the fate of a single Massachusetts Senate candidate should hardly matter a damn."

Obama: Bank Tax

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100114/ap_on_bi_ge/us_obama_bank_fees

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/15/us/15tax.html?ref=business

"I think it is entirely reasonable to say that the industry that, A, caused these problems more than any other and, B, benefited from the activity, should be contributing," said Democratic Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee.

"Politics have overtaken the economics," said Scott Talbott, the chief lobbyist for the Financial Services Roundtable, a group representing large Wall Street institutions. "This is a punitive tax on companies that repaid TARP in full or never took TARP."

Even before details came out, Jamie Dimon, chief executive of JPMorgan Chase & Co., said: "Using tax policy to punish people is a bad idea."

What do you think?

Post from Nathan

I would have posted this for open post monday but this will have to due. Its a politically related sort of hypothetical: if we remove the issue of slavery (so that ethical considerations don't play as much of a role here) would you rather live under the USA or the Confederacy?

two sides of annoying

There are two presidents that I am really beginning to hate (it's a strong word but I will go with it). It's not really the presidents themselves or their adminstrations (although i do enjoy debating them), but more of my hate is towards the people that love, embrace, worship the presidents.

The first president is FDR.
people talk about him as if he is the greatest man that ever was. they forget about the facts and just assume everything he touched he turned it to gold and that he was so moral and good. The hero worship has to stop.

The second president is Reagan.
The worship of this guy is so out of control. He defeated communism! not really, and i have proof of that. His economics were amazing! his spending wasn't, that's for sure.

both presidents have become the lords of the parties. From the left people are hoping Obama will be the next FDR, and people on the right are searching for the next Reagan. What's funny is that both sides have made these two men into gods, which they never were, so when they are hoping and looking for the next FDR, or Reagan they are really looking for the next god of their party. I'm laughing because that day will never come.

however, worship of public figures is very interesting. Is it healthy for a Republic? Is it something to worry about? Is it a good thing to have examples, even if they are false ones?

the Two parties and spending

I read this from an article that talks about how much taxes need to be raised to balance the budget in 2020. it's kind of crazy how much.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/07/13/the_consequences_of_big_government.html

here is a quote from it that i think sums up really well how the two parties work when it comes to spending and taxes. "Everyone favors benefits and opposes burdens (taxes). Republicans want to cut taxes without cutting spending. Democrats want to increase spending without increasing taxes, except on the rich. The differences between the parties are shades of gray."
I think that is right on.
Can we think of any other subjects that the two parties are just different shades of gray?

politics in every part of our lives

I was talking with a friend today and he brought up an interesting thought. The idea is that almost everything in our everyday lives has become political. Example, someone who ones an ipod is more liberal than someone who bought their mp3 player at walmart. Where you drink your coffee, or where you eat. if you eat here you are this and if you eat that you are something else.
so is this really true? is this really going on? and if so is it healthy or unhealthy for a society?