PDA

View Full Version : Only one party’s to blame?



Qtec
05-28-2012, 01:50 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <span style='font-size: 14pt'>Only one party’s to blame? Don’t tell the Sunday shows.</span>
By Greg Sargent

Last month, Thomas Mann and Norman Ornstein published an Op ed and a book making the extremely controversial argument <u>that both parties aren’t equally to blame for what ails Washington.</u> They argued that the GOP — by allowing extremists to roam free and by wielding the filibuster to achieve government dysfunction as a political end in itself — were demonstrably more culpable for creating what is approaching a crisis of governance.

It turns out neither man has been invited on to the Sunday shows even once to discuss this thesis. As Bob Somerby and Kevin Drum note, <span style='font-size: 14pt'>these are among the most quoted people in Washington — yet suddenly this latest topic is too hot for the talkers, or not deemed relevant at all.</span>

I ran this thesis by Ornstein himself, and he confirmed that the book’s publicity people had tried to get the authors booked on the Sunday shows, with no success.

“Not a single one of the Sunday shows has indicated an interest, and I do find it curious,” Ornstein told me, adding that the Op ed had well over 200,000 Facebook recommends and has been viral for weeks. “This is a level of attention for a book that we haven’t received before. You would think it would attract some attention from the Sunday shows.’

Ornstein also noted another interesting point. <span style='font-size: 14pt'>Their thesis takes on the media for falling into a false equivalence mindset and maintaining the pretense that both sides are equally to blame.</span> Yet despite the frequent self-obsession of the media, even that angle has failed to generate any interest. What’s more, some reporters have privately indicated their frustration with their editorial overlords’ apparent deafness to this idea.

“The piece focused on press culpability — it would be hard to find a more sensitive issue for the media than the question of whether they’re doing their job,” Ornstein said. “We got tons of emails from some of the biggest reporters in the business, saying, `We’ve raised this in the newsroom, and editors just brush it aside.’”

Ornstein, while stressing that he wasn’t casting any blame, noted that the topic hasn’t come up on Howard Kurtz’s weekend media show.

This is curious. <span style='font-size: 14pt'>Is “experts confirm that, yes, one side is more to blame than the other, and journalists should say so” really too hot a topic for the Sunday shows? </span>Is it not relevant or interesting?</div></div>

So much for the liberal press.

link (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/only-one-partys-to-blame-dont-tell-the-sunday-shows/2012/05/14/gIQAXOcPPU_blog.html)

Q



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"We have been studying Washington politics and Congress for more than 40 years, and never have we seen them this dysfunctional," wrote Thomas Mann and Norman Ornstein in The Washington Post. "In our past writings, we have criticized both parties when we believed it was warranted. Today, however, we have no choice but to acknowledge that the core of the problem lies with the Republican Party." </div></div>

cushioncrawler
05-28-2012, 01:59 AM
Yes, but.
The core of the problem layz with krappynomicysts and krappynomix.
If ekonomists kood agree then the gov wouldnt be dysfunktional.
Better still, if ekonomists had the answer, then the gov wouldnt be dysfunkional, and employment would be ok.
mac.

LWW
05-28-2012, 03:11 AM
I see Snoopy still worships at the altar of the state.

Soflasnapper
05-29-2012, 09:49 AM
'Worshipping at the altar of state' = returning to the form of government, and self-government of the Senate, that the Founders would recognize.

This 'rule by minority' using only the Senate rules was never contemplated by the Founders, and is no part of the COTUS, where actually, 50% + 1 of those duly constituted senators present and voting are sufficient to pass things in the Senate.

The GOP, when the shoe was on the other foot, seemed to get this point. They found the filibustering of just 7 of W's judicial nominees SO HORRIBLE that they suggested they would eliminate the filibuster themselves, creating a crisis. What would they do-- what will they do-- once holding the Oval Office again, should the Dems play the 'you need 60 votes to pass ANYTHING' game that the GOP currently loves?

cushioncrawler
05-29-2012, 04:29 PM
WHAT, THE FOUNDLING FARTERS WERENT PERFIKT???
WHAT, THE COTUS IZNT PERFIKT???
WHAT, DEMOCRACY IZNT PERFIKT???
SO, WHAT IZ PERFIKT???
A STORM IZ PERFIKT. HEKUMDESTORM.
MAC.

Sev
05-30-2012, 05:41 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">'Worshipping at the altar of state' = returning to the form of government, and self-government of the Senate, that the Founders would recognize.

This 'rule by minority' using only the Senate rules was never contemplated by the Founders, and is no part of the COTUS, where actually, 50% + 1 of those duly constituted senators present and voting are sufficient to pass things in the Senate.

The GOP, when the shoe was on the other foot, seemed to get this point. They found the filibustering of just 7 of W's judicial nominees SO HORRIBLE that they suggested they would eliminate the filibuster themselves, creating a crisis. What would they do-- what will they do-- once holding the Oval Office again, should the Dems play the 'you need 60 votes to pass ANYTHING' game that the GOP currently loves? </div></div>

The founding fathers wanted a small limited federal government with powerful state rights. Each state was supposed to be an incubator of experiments and just shy of an independent country of its own.
Elected federal representatives from their representative parties have striven to strip both the states and citizens of their rights and freedoms under the auspices of they needing to be protected and it being for their own good.

Gayle in MD
05-30-2012, 02:47 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">'Worshipping at the altar of state' = returning to the form of government, and self-government of the Senate, that the Founders would recognize.

This 'rule by minority' using only the Senate rules was never contemplated by the Founders, and is no part of the COTUS, where actually, 50% + 1 of those duly constituted senators present and voting are sufficient to pass things in the Senate.

The GOP, when the shoe was on the other foot, seemed to get this point. They found the filibustering of just 7 of W's judicial nominees SO HORRIBLE that they suggested they would eliminate the filibuster themselves, creating a crisis. What would they do-- what will they do-- once holding the Oval Office again, should the Dems play the 'you need 60 votes to pass ANYTHING' game that the GOP currently loves? </div></div>

The founding fathers wanted a small limited federal government with powerful state rights. Each state was supposed to be an incubator of experiments and just shy of an independent country of its own.
Elected federal representatives from their representative parties have striven to strip both the states and citizens of their rights and freedoms under the auspices of they needing to be protected and it being for their own good. </div></div>

The Founders also wanted separation of church and state, and personal privacy and Freedom to live as one chose to live.

They believed in the principle of one man, one vote, and tht the Federal Government was to provide for the common good.

Repiglicans have destroyed all of that.

G.

Sev
05-30-2012, 03:11 PM
As have the democrats.

Gayle in MD
05-30-2012, 04:12 PM
No, the Democratic Party is for equal rights, not against equal rights.

It isn't the Democratic Party, that is trying to remove Planned Parenthood, help for women who need birth control, mamograms, and other well woman check ups to prevent cancer.

Democratic Party is not trying to destroy the Department of Education, or the Environmental Protection Agency.

the Democratic Party is not the Party which is tryng to purge eligible voters, from their right to vote.

The Democratic party is not the party that refuses to respect the separation of church and state.

The Repiglicans have destroyed the country, now, as always, it is up to the Democratic Party, to protect us from Repiglican corruption, Repiglican Greed, Repiglican spending and borrowing, warring annd lying, growing government, and removing safegaurds against the greedy crooks on Wall St...

As I wrote often during the late ninties, and early 20000's:

"CORPORATIONS CANNOT BE TRUSTED TO REGULATE THEMSELVES!"

Oh, how true that has proven to be!



"The Trickle Down Theory, has never worked."

And....this last failed attempt by Repiglicans, proves my statement very well.


"Republicans always grow the government, and leave huge deficits!"



How very prophetic!

G.