Tuesday Open Thread

Filed in National by on November 30, 2010

Welcome to your Tuesday open thread. The most exciting thing about my week so far is that I’m finally done eating turkey leftovers. What’s on your mind? Spill it below.

It’s the holiday season and it’s time for a holiday tradition – Fox New making up stories about the non-existent “War on Christmas.

Fox & Friends reported that a school in central Florida had banned the “traditional Christmas colors” red and green from we classrooms. In a statement to Media Matters, the school’s district spokesperson, Regina Klares, has denied this, stating, “There is not a ban on the colors red and green at Heathrow Elementary.”

Sigh. Since we have the Kenyan socialist/communist/fascist (choose depending on your mood) the War on Christmas has been intensifying! Did you hear that Obama decided no one in the U.S. Is allowed to say “Merry Christmas?”. I heard it on Fox News or read it in The Onion, I can’t remember which, so it must be true.

Another Democratic tax cut compromise plan has been proposed. How does this sound?

Over the past few days, a growing number of lawmakers have publicly embraced the idea of extending expiring tax cuts for families making as much as $1 million a year. They include newly elected Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) and Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), who argued on “Fox News Sunday” that “we should draw the line in the sand for millionaires.”

The idea’s chief proponent, Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), said that raising the income threshold from $250,000, as Obama has proposed, has the potential to unite fractious Democrats behind a single strategy on the tax cuts, which are set to expire Dec. 31 unless Congress acts.

Schumer also said the higher threshold would make it far more difficult for Republicans to say no.

“There’s a strong view in the caucus that if we make the dividing line $1 million, it becomes a very simple argument: We are for giving the middle class a tax break; they’re for tax cuts for millionaires,” Schumer said Sunday. At $250,000, the message is “too muddled,” he said. “It’s much clearer at $1 million. It unites our base and the independent voters we lost in this election.”

I think this is better messaging, but is it too little too late?


About the Author ()

Opinionated chemist, troublemaker, blogger on national and Delaware politics.

Comments (40)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. anon says:

    SB501: Senate Food Safety Bill: Put down your pens and keyboards as our Senators (Coons/Carper) both voted for AGriBusiness as the ONLY suitable source for food in this country. Agribusiness can now manipulate the DNA in ou fish and other food. They can fine you if you have a garden and give some away. You will not be permitted to “grow organically”. If I hear “peaceful dissent” one more time I’m gonna puke. I called Chris Coons office yesterday and the twit who answered the phone stated, “Senator Coons has his OWN advisors and he will be voting in support of SB510. I asked if Coons had read the bill? Staffer didnt know but again said, “we have our advisors”. Well who are your advisors Chris? Corporate America, Agribusiness. I told you all we gotta watch this guy. He is a go along to get away corporatist. We may have survived “I am not a witch”, but we got ourselves a “corporate witch” and his name is Chris Coons.

  2. anon2 says:

    Please educate yourself before posting scare tactic rhetoric….

    Farmers who sell most of their harvest directly to restaurants, food co-ops, farm stands, and farmers’ markets wouldn’t have to register with the FDA under SB 510. And they wouldn’t be subject to the regulations in the legislation. But such farmers would still have to abide by current state laws.

  3. anon2 says:

    PS- Turn off Glenn Beck and read this op-ed by Michael Pollan, who has authored several highly regarded books on organic and natural foods as well. I am pleased both senators supported this bill.


  4. anonone says:

    “OFA Tries to Get Supporters to Write Letters to the Editor Praising a Federal Worker Pay Freeze”

    “That’s right, the organizing project of the Democratic National Committee wants you to organize in support of freezing public worker salaries.”



  5. Jason330 says:

    Do you do anything besides spam these threads? Everyone here can read FDL. and Eschaton. Why not dig up something interesting or contribute something new. You are the Barack Obama of blog commenting.

  6. Geezer says:

    Only 9% of the public disapproves of Obama because he’s not sufficiently liberal. N-I-N-E percent. So please be aware you are espousing a decidedly minority viewpoint. I am among that 9%, and even I find you tiresome.

  7. anon says:

    No politican can say “only 9%” and win.

    Most of those 9% will hold their nose and vote Democratic. But some of them will not. Some of those are winnable for Obama if he wants them, but he has to start now.

    In 2000 Nader got 2.74% of the popular vote; he was polling about twice that. So presumably, about half the discontented liberals voted for Gore – which didn’t require too much nose-holding, because after all Gore had a winning record and unlike Obama, didn’t especially piss progressives off.

    So if Obama gets half of that 9%, he loses. Bush v. Gore shows that if you lose 2.74% of your base, you lose the election.

  8. MJ says:

    Rick Jensen is a real asshole. How can anyone stand to listen to him?

    Just thought I’d throw that out there.

  9. anonone says:

    Jason asks, “Why not dig up something interesting or contribute something new?”

    Maybe I should just try linking to pictures of a pretty girl, just like one “lazy” blogger here.

    I post stuff in open threads in order to spark discussions. Sometimes they do and sometimes they don’t.

    That’s life.

  10. anonone says:

    “Only 9% of the public disapproves of Obama because he’s not sufficiently liberal.”

    Who cares? It isn’t a question of “sufficiently liberal.” People don’t vote on “sufficiently liberal.” First and foremost, they vote on their condition of their pocketbooks and their family’s and friends’ pocketbooks.

    Guess what? Obama’s economic policies are going in the wrong direction for growing the economy, expanding wages, and creating sufficient job growth. You think high unemployment and stagnant wage growth is a going to be a winning record to run on in 2012?

    We need a real hope and change Democrat in 2012.

    It is still the economy, stupid.

  11. cassandra m says:

    And this asshole — as well as the FDL writer — doesn’t read very well. The OFA request is a LTE in support of a range of fiscal policies, not just supporting Federal pay freezes. The LTE are an attempt to counter the BS that this President is fiscally foolish.

    You can agree or disagree with the goal or even the work, but at least have some basic honesty in dealing with the material you are getting your whinge on for.

    But then whinging about figments of your imagination are all you’ve got at this point. Too bad you and your imagination can’t just fuck off.

  12. anon says:

    Washington Post has an article up today about SB 501…do your homework and make sure you read the friggin comments. This bill has nothing to do with food safety, the FDA could have done something about that years ago. This bill is rotten to the core and AGRI business dream come true.

  13. Capt.Willard says:

    @cassandra m- my,my,my- Do you kiss your own picture with that foul mouth?
    And what,in god’s name , is “whinging”?
    Do you mean whining?

  14. anonone says:

    Direct quotes from the letter:

    “The economy is growing again, yet all across America families and businesses have been tightening their belts. The President knows their government must do the same.

    Yesterday, he announced a proposal to freeze pay for non-military federal employees for two years — a plan that will lead to $60 billion in savings over 10 years.”

    Cutting government spending and freezing federal wages are exactly the wrong things to do when trying to grow the economy out of a recession, stimulate job growth, and help the middle class. Asking people to write in to support Obomba’s austerity economic policies, including this wage freeze, is exactly what this letter does, and all your name calling and bluster can’t change the simple and plain fact that the pay freeze is the ONLY specific policy proposal discussed in the letter.

    Obomba = Money for war, not for wages.

  15. anon says:

    Anonone. Your absolutely correct. Freezing federal wages is opposite of what must be done. The only economy growing is Wall Street. Nothing has been done about derivatives and hedge funds? Wikileaks is about to release information about “a” bank, hoping its the Federal Reserve then we can really find out where all our money went. If repukes have their way the small changes made to curb the crimes on Wall Street will undone by the teabaggers. They simply wont fund it, and they dont support Warren either. Dupont got $8.9 million from the stimulus funds. WTF does dupont one of the richest companies in the frigin world need with stimulus funds. Shouldnt that money have been given to small business to create real jobs, like solar panels, windmill park or something?

  16. anotheranon says:

    anon stop being hysterical, you sound like that fat asshat on WGMD who’s been on the radio telling the ignorant masses that the FEDS will shut down their backyard gardens and put granny in prison for giving away her peach jam.

    The Food Safety Act doesn’t MENTION your backyard garden, it doesn’t require permitting of your backyard garden and it doesn’t give a fuck who you give your veggies or fruits to unless you’re SELLING them ACROSS STATE LINES.

    It doesn’t affect farmer’s markets, either, they are regulated by the STATE, not the fed.

    It also doesn’t deal with organic gardening or organic farms, they fall under the Department of Agriculture, not the FDA, and they have their own safety standards. The Food Safety Act is about the FDA.

    And all of the conspiracy theories about the connection between the Senator who introduced the bills husband and Monsanto have all been debunked, her husband’s business is POLLING, not lobbying, and he hasn’t dealt with Monsanto in over a decade.

    All of the hysteria has been debunked by factcheck.org and a number of other credible sites, but I’m sure we can find some reason to send the brownshirts to your house, what’s your address?

  17. cassandra m says:

    And Asshole1 is STILL an asshole — pulling this David Anderson bullshit of just picking the piece that bolsters your completely imagined way of the world:

    Yesterday, he announced a proposal to freeze pay for non-military federal employees for two years — a plan that will lead to $60 billion in savings over 10 years. It’s one of many tough choices the President has made to cut costs in the upcoming budget to begin to put our nation’s fiscal house in order. And it follows directly from this administration’s dedication to stretching federal dollars and reining in the long-term deficit.

    Now, if you listen to some talk radio hosts or a few of the talking heads on cable news, you’ll hear a very different assessment of our fiscal policies. These voices ignore the irresponsibility of the past while pinning the blame for “reckless spending” solely on this administration. It would make a good fairy tale if it weren’t so dangerously untrue.

    But these voices — as loud as they are — are spreading bunk. Cutting costs and spending responsibly has been a cornerstone of this administration’s record. And we need your help to get the truth out there.

    Will you take a few minutes and write a letter to the editor today to set the record straight?

    For those that won’t go look — this is a more complete version of the request, pretty clearly asking for support in getting out the message of the administration’s cutting costs and spending — NOT asking for support in defending the pay freezes.

    You are still a whinging asshole and you really ought to go over the Delaware Politics or FDL where the David Anderson tactics of clear dishonesty are the coin of the realm. And apparently all of that dishonesty keeps you from seeing that trying to bully people into sharing your most impotent rage isn’t exactly a project anyone here gives a shit about.

  18. anon says:

    Anon2: Thanks but I dont listen to the lying Faux News or Beck or any of those assholes. The progressives were not suporting this bill because of other issues. Obviously you all look at what a couple of progressive groups say, and then you jump in with both feet. Simply unbelievable. My question, have of YOU read the bill? Answer NO you have not. This bill permits AGRIbusiness to manipulate DNA of fish etc…and you need to know more about a farm being 400 miles from the markets…damn some people are simply dense or such Obama supporters you loose your mind which it comes to critical thinking. We are as right about this issue as we were about Single Payer health care! Wendell Potter and Michael Moore have vindicated all single payer supporters but would any of you ever admit that our very own Karen Peterson bought the “corporate bullshit” and gave YOU and other legislators bad information!

  19. anon says:

    Wahoo: Senator Patty Murphy just made Chair of the DSCC. A real progressive who will hold their feet to the fire.

  20. anonone says:

    The letter was sent out the day he announced the policy proposal, and it is the ONLY specific policy proposal discussed in the letter! Why is that so hard for you to understand? And tell me why should any Democrat write in to support wage freezes for working families and Obama’s other job-killing austerity measures?

    Wouldn’t it have been nice to get a letter asking for support in ending the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans and keeping them for the middle class? Where is that letter? No where.


    Because just like the public option, that is another fight this President isn’t making. Easier for him to freeze the wages of working people than fight for ending Bush’s unfair tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans. Even Warren Buffet supports ending those tax breaks – why doesn’t Obomba fight for that?

    I know that you’ll support whatever this President does, no matter how anti-progressive it is. But I won’t.

    Obomba = Money for war, not for wages.

  21. cassandra m says:

    It is one example of several of the “cost cutting and spending responsibility” that they are clearly looking for support for, you dishonest asshole.

    Support it or not, but spare us the dishonest impotent faux rage, ok?

  22. anon says:

    wowie! Cassandra having a hissy fit or what? Wikileaks on Democracy Now, Comcast Chan 20 at 7:00. Cassandra can you name even one economist who agrees that “cutting salaries” or freezing them is a way out of this economic mess? Cut the middle class, cut social security, cut medicare/medicaid/ and freeze wages! This is progressive talk? Obama put together that catfood commission, cuz he knew what they were going to do, go after the weaker people, but keep 737 military bases around the world, continue to violate international law by using force against defenseless countries? Can you say IMPERIALISM and DISASTER CAPITALISM in the same breath.

  23. anonone says:

    cassandra_m wrote “It is one example of several of the “cost cutting and spending responsibility” that they are clearly looking for support for…”

    Really? What other SPECIFIC examples other than the wage freeze did they cite in that letter?

    I’ll save you some time: There weren’t any others. Nor was there any asking for support for ending Bush’s unfair tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans or extending jobless benefits.

    Obomba = Money for war, not for wages.

  24. cassandra m says:

    The fact that there are not more examples is not evidence that it isn’t used as an example — which people accustomed to reading abit more honestly would be able to tell.

    But hey — this is you trying to argue that plain English is not what it clearly is, which still makes you an asshole loser as well as still wrong for trying to pass off all of that dishonesty as argument.

  25. anonone says:

    You said it was “one example of several” and then you wrote “The fact that there are not more examples is not evidence that it isn’t used as an example” (whatever that means).

    Your interpretation of that letter is different from mine and from the FDL writer and from everybody else who commented on it there. But all you can do is make stuff up (“one example of several”) and then accuse me of being dishonest and an “asshole loser.”

    People can read it and decide for themselves, but calling me “dishonest” and an “asshole loser” pretty clearly depreciates the quality of your argument. I am sorry that you continually choose to argue your points of view with me at that level. You’re surely capable of better.

    Obomba = Money for war, not for wages.

  26. cassandra m says:

    And yes, you are still an asshole dishonest loser.

    Feel free to rejoin this conversation when you understand something about the business of rhetoric. Big Hint tho – David Anderson is not a reliable teacher.

  27. jason330 says:

    I’d ban him (her?) and his (her?) 24/7 boring, dishonest, loseryness.

  28. cassandra m says:

    I would too. My blogmates, however, seem to think that:
    1. There is something noble or will make them better liked in keeping this asshole loser (who adds absolutely nothing to the conversation here) around and
    2. That I really am dumb enough to buy the “if you ignore him he will go away” bullshit.

    Much likes Mike Protack, this fool is here to perform for what he thinks is his huge audience. And we banned Protack for basically being here tagging the site every 5 damn minutes, just like asshole1 does.

  29. another-anon says:

    The exchange between cassandra m and anonone is a microcosm of our national political “discourse”. One side denies facts, the other calls names, even when the facts support her argument. No wonder we (as a nation) are going the way of the Romans.

  30. jason330 says:

    Yeah. It is that name calling. Not the violent ass fucking that bankers are laying on us.

  31. anonone says:

    So, two liberal bloggers on a liberal blog want to ban a liberal commenter because he liberally posts opinions that are too liberal for them.


  32. Jason330 says:

    You know full well that is because you are a boring dishonest asswipe. We can get that from every media outlet at any moment of the day. There is no reason for this blog comment section to become yet another Fox News when there are scores of places trying to copy that format.

    And THAT is the last comment I will directing at you. If when I return to the United States, you are not banned, I will ban you myself.

  33. cassandra m says:

    So, two liberal bloggers on a liberal blog want to ban a fringe commenter because he routinely posts whining, fact-free bullshit on how the world is simply not perfect yet. And said commenter wants to bully everyone else into his whining, fact-free worldview.

    Much like Mike Protack, you aren’t here for dialog or conversation. You just want to parade your leftier-than-thou fact-free persona in an effort to pretend that you’re somehow superior to those who are trying to have a conversation. It is disruptive in the extreme and stupid to boot.

  34. anonone says:

    Jason, 90% of your political posts link to or quote directly from other blogs or news sources; no different from mine. You can get your sources “from every media outlet at any moment of the day”, too.

    And “Fox News”? Get a grip. This blog will become just like Fox news when you ban people for expressing opinions that you deem to be too liberal.

    Cassandra_m, unlike Protack, I actually do engage in long dialogs and conversations; this thread itself attests to that (and so do numerous others). And you can call me names and claim that I am fact-free (even though I link to source data almost all the time), but it doesn’t make it so. It is funny to have someone like you who constantly resorts to “fact-free” name-calling and personal insults tell somebody else that they “pretend that [they are] somehow superior.”

    People who disagree with you aren’t automatically dishonest and fact-free.

  35. a price says:

    cass, i am going to attempt to counter your point AND insult a1 at the same time

    Dont you agree that we should let Nazis march and the KKK hand out leaflets?

  36. cassandra m says:

    Nazi’s and KKK handing out leaflets *in a public space* is fine. This is not Rodney Square, however, so your counter doesn’t apply.

    And asshole1, as I point out to Delusional David often, just *saying* that you are a productive commented doesn’t make it so. You are only here to disrupt.

  37. anon says:

    It is good to see DL bloggers get passionate about something again. Now try to focus your rage on something that actually matters and needs to be opposed energetically. Like tax cuts for the rich, or cuts in Social Security, or the blocking of unemployment extensions.

  38. anonone says:

    I come here to read other peoples comments and opinions and to express my own, just like everybody else. I made this comment in an open thread; maybe “open thread” means something else here than it does any place else in the blogosphere.

    Just because I don’t worship Obama or parrot the milquetoast, DLC, corporatist Democratic party line may make me a “fringe commentator” in your narrow worldview, but there are many others in this country that share my opinions.

    Obama’s proposal to freeze federal wages is abhorrent to many progressive Democrats like me. There is nothing “fact-free” about that. But nobody else on this blog mentioned it, in either in a post or comment. So if that is a so-called “fringe” comment that is “boring,” “disruptive in the extreme” and one that I should be banned for, then that says much more about your own ability to tolerate dissenting opinions from other liberals than it does about any opinion that I might have.

    If you choose to be a “liberal blog” that arbitrarily bans other liberals with political opinions that you arbitrarily deem outside whatever Obama and his corporatist DLC Democrats espouse (or whatever other movable goal posts you have), then you ought to put that in your rules.

    Obomba = Money for war, not wages. There is nothing “fact-free” about that.

  39. Geezer says:

    I support your presence, A1. I’ve made my opinion about your opinions clear. I have no problem with the facts you present. I find “Obomba” a juvenile tic. I avoid reading any sentence with an = sign. Myself, I wish folks would spend more time on Delaware and less on national affairs. I continue to think you’ll attract more agreement with less confrontation.