Another GTL™ Open Thread Friday — Have Your Say…
Here we go again — lots of political news going on out there on The ‘Nets and with it being hard to zero in on any particular issue for THIS blogger, and considering the fact our readers seem to be having a lot of fun with these open threads since we’ve launched them in the last few weeks, I figured “What the heck? Let’s do it again.” Particularly since we haven’t done one this week yet. This is YOUR chance to introduce yourselves to the blog, broadcast the latest cross you’re carrying, opine on something we (or even the mainstream media — “MSM” hasn’t been giving enough weigh to lately, etc., etc., etc.
As always, I’ll begin by coving the most “viral” topics of The Blogospheres at this particular moment just to give a little bit of “fodder” to the ‘Spheres’ proverbial “cannon”. Opine on these issues if you wish or any others grabbing your attention, which you might believe need to grab the attention of tens of thousands of other political blog readers. Or, simply pop out of the woodwork to introduce yourself, should you fit the profile of one of tens of thousands of our readers who have, to date, simply been content to check in on us ever day or three.
To kick things off — here’s what’s happening at the top of the folds in today’s ‘Spheres, courtesy of MemeOrandum:
BOO-HISS!!!! Department: Mike Allen of The Politico reports a far-right Christian “think-tank” and lobbying group, led by The Hill’s David Keene had approached FedEx with an opportunity to pay them (The American Conservative Union – “ACU”) to write really nice anti-union things on their behalf in op-eds, spam emails, etc., etc., etc. FedEx Chairman Frederick W. Smith just said “Thanks but no thanks” and within hours, the ACU began writing anti-FedEx hit pieces while trumpeting its number one competitor, UPS and its interests in what was obviously yet another Pay-To-Play scandal. It just goes to show ya’, Former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich “The Cabbage Patch Kid” ain’t the ONLY one who knows how to play the game. Wait, I take it back — they all got caught so I’m not sure that points to any sort of a “mastery” of the Pay-To-Play scheme by either side. And all this time, I thought blackmail was illegal? Silly MOI (and yep — part French and proud).
Another Celeb Bites The Dust: The passing of a REAL journalist (a dying breed these days) has occured according to The New York Times after his battle against cerebrovascular disease. Rest In Peace, Walter Cronkite — 92 years old. When I was I young child you were an aging television talking head -slash- CBS anchorman who my parents respected enough to tune into despite their quite far-RIGHT leanings both then and today. The struggling MSM loses yet another I.Q. point as a result.
Whatchya think about any of the above? Did I miss something important? It’s YOUR turn now…
***
Loading ...
1:07 am on July 18th, 2009 1
A certain radio talk show host, which I won’t mention as a courtesy to GTL, but whos name ryhmes with Rush Limba, was asked a hypothetical question about writing something into the U.S. Constitution if he could. He gave what I say was a rather safe, political answer, that he wouldn’t want to add or change anything. But just for fun, what would you all like to be able to clarify in that fine document? To lead out, and I’d probably want months to pour over the exact wording I would use, but I’d like the right to bear arms to be more clear that the people need to be armed well enough to kick the government’s behind if necessary. Also I’d like the commerce clause re-explained in modern language to let congress know how terribly astray they are.
5:25 am on July 18th, 2009 2
@Mike: My first choice would be forcing congress to read and vote on every single bill that comes before them. Yea/Nay/Abstain. Don’t show up wouldn’t be an option. Not reading the bills to be met with a firing squad and a new election.
None of this Read The Bills Act crap that would grant anyone willing to face a fine the ability to veto any bill. We shoot them on the lawn and replace them before the end of the week.
I don’t know why they think it’s ok to refuse to do the job they pitched a fit to have, or why we let them get away with it.
I want all politicians drug tested once a week too. That’s just in there for humiliation value. To remind them they aren’t special.
I agree, I’d also like to see “Keep and bear arms” reflected a little better. That’d be my 2nd choice.
@GTL: I’m not sure how people are shocked *shocked!* at the Mike Allen thing. I long ago lost my ability to be shocked at absolutely anything anyone calling themselves a “thinktank” does.
It’s a damned shame tarring and feathering went out of fashion.
10:12 am on July 18th, 2009 3
In 6 months SARAH PALIN will be more popular then Barak Obama.
10:13 am on July 18th, 2009 4
JT- I understand the sentiment, I love the drug test idea. Make it public so we know they aren’t cheating. But I would think the read the bill requirement would have to take a backseat to a requirement that they know how to read. That is something I wouldn’t advocate any violence about, in fact it might be interesting to hear how some of them sounded if they weren’t reading prepared statements all the time.
10:15 am on July 18th, 2009 5
In the health care debate, 50% of voters now oppose creation of a public insurance company to compete with private insurers. Seventy-eight percent (78%) believe that health care reform is likely to lead to middle class tax hikes.
5:11 pm on July 18th, 2009 6
Sarah Palin is already more popular than Barack Obama, in some circles. But it’s unlikely those circles will get any bigger.
9:00 pm on July 18th, 2009 7
You know. Bill Clinton was a pretty far left dude too. Then the midterms happened and the GOP took over. Im telling ya. The GOP is primed to make a huge comeback in 2010. Not because they are all that great…..its just..
Well the Democrats are sucking.
9:40 pm on July 18th, 2009 8
Doomed, you may be right.
9:51 pm on July 18th, 2009 9
As a person, Judge Sotomayor is a racist, a bigot and a liar, there is no way, besides blatant liberal hypocrisy, to excuse her statements of the last 20 years, let alone the way those statements exactly contradict the ones of the last twenty days. As a judge, she is mediocre at best and cowardly at worst, She has shown no exceptional abilities to explain why she should attain the highest level of her profession, besides a decidedly liberal bent.
If her personal opinions were voiced by anyone besides a “wise latino woman” that persons public service career would come to a very abrupt and publicly humiliating end. Schumer, Leahy et all would make sure of it.
10:27 pm on July 18th, 2009 10
@Doomed:
Good lord…compared to what?
The only thing I could really tell that Clinton disagreed with Rush Limbaugh on was health care..and that was pretty half-assed. (Much like the current attempt.)
I disliked the Clinton too, but for the same reason I disliked Bush (both of them), and Obama: Not caring about civil liberties. Any kind of civil liberties. Between the lot of them, I think the only one they’d have left us with, had they been able to get away with it, would’ve been maybe the third amendment. And that only because it’s now cheaper to quarter troops in a centralized area.
10:32 pm on July 18th, 2009 11
Links, and support please. Judge Sotomayor has a longer record than any nominee in the past generation, surely there are several cases that show her lack of exceptional abilities and decidedly liberal bent, and contradict the ABA’s rating of “Well qualified,” as well as her record of being rated (at a minimum) qualified over her tenure.
12:01 am on July 19th, 2009 12
I dunno I am trying to follow the arguments here and keep balanced, I think I am a true northern New England libertarian and hold both sides in my head as worthy of consideration. I think Mr Obama is spending a lot of money and I worry about how my kids are gonna pay that back… but I was also kinda worried about that before this whole mess… now I am doubly worried.
I didnt really see anything deeply wrong with Sotomayor… she made a few odd statements over a long career, but I wouldn’t want my life under that kinda microscope. She seems like a good egg, pulled her self up by her bootstraps, she’s respected by her peers, and she built an impressive life for herself. Who cant applaud that?
Also, I haven’t seen the attack on my second amendment rights. I value them very much believe me, I just have not seen it…
3:31 am on July 19th, 2009 13
If any conservative or moderate justice seated presently had ever once even mumbled anything remotely similar to what has basically been a mantra of Sotomayor, the liberals in congress and the media would have crucified them. The double standard that has been achieved here is stunning.
4:55 am on July 19th, 2009 14
Sphouch-Vegofish: Oddly I kind of agree and disagree with Vego- Soto’s comments alone indicate some bias, but who among us is completely bias free? I think the double standard is blatenly obivious too, it isn’t that Soto is that bad, her record indicates she tends to overcome her bias more than not, if I were given a vote , I would vote to confirm her. But dang! no non-minority would ever get a break on saying anything like what she said, they would be dead in the water. That is what is so frustrating, the zero tolerance towards one group that is not applied to others.
8:52 am on July 19th, 2009 15
There was no doubt that Obama was going to nominate a far left liberal judge. Sotomayer is not that great but the question remains does the GOP want to use up their capital fighting this judge or use it up and force Obama to nominate a not so out in left field NEXT justice?
Im betting Sotomayer gets tough questions but only because the right wants her to explain herself.
She passes. This is all gamesmanship right now. The true battle comes in the next appointment.
9:53 am on July 19th, 2009 16
I never imagined GHWB would appoint anyone who was far left liberal to any judicial position. But again, I ask for the opinions that she wrote that establish her as a far left liberal as well as her reported lack of quality in her position, as well as explanations for those opinions demonstrating why they are liberal (or as others have suggested on other sites “activist”). Here, I’ll start the ball rolling by posting to another Obsidian Wings post on Sotomayor’s record, which in turn links to a Tom Goldstein SCOTUS Blog post on her record. His summary:
In sum, in an eleven-year career on the Second Circuit, Judge Sotomayor has participated in roughly 100 panel decisions involving questions of race and has disagreed with her colleagues in those cases (a fair measure of whether she is an outlier) a total of 4 times. Only one case (Gant) in that entire eleven years actually involved the question whether race discrimination may have occurred. (In another case (Pappas) she dissented to favor a white bigot.) She participated in two other panels rejecting district court rulings agreeing with race-based jury-selection claims. Given that record, it seems absurd to say that Judge Sotomayor allows race to infect her decisionmaking.
This record stands in stark contrast to the position that she is a racist or a bigot, though it does demonstrate she is of a different caliber than Justice Alito, who announced at the opening of his confirmation that he does use his ethnicity to help him form his opinions, a statement borne out in his concurring opinion in Ricci, arguably an activist decision based on empathy.
12:51 pm on July 19th, 2009 17
Splouch, it is your choice to ignore what she has repeatedly stated is her belief, the comment concerning her gender and ethnicity allowing her to render better decisions than others who do not share those same traits is not a one time, off- handed comment. It has been an oft repeated, ingrained belief, which happens to be bigoted and racist. My point being, and thank you Mike for getting it, is that their exists a huge double standard in the Lib/ Demo leadership that is repugnantly hypocritical.
3:16 pm on July 19th, 2009 18
As it’s been so oft-repeated, then posting links to said oft-repetitions should be quite easy to supply.