PastaJoe

So now you're advocating violence? And even though the current administration was voted in by a majority of Americans in a multi-party election, because you disagree with it's policies you call it tyranny? The founding fathers came from a history of monarchies. They set up our republic to allow for civil debate and discourse with our ELECTED government.

You're off your meds again, aren't you. I never posted an opinion on the Gates case. But thanks for the title of Professor of Sanity. And this country was founded by people who knew that civil discourse and debate was the only way we could survive together given the varied opinions of our citizens. Citizens are allowed to question, debate, and discuss issues with their representatives, and vote them out if a majority disagree with their representation. Your support of anarchy over the Constitution and civil law is disappointing. BillsNYC isn't an astroturfer, he's using the civil methods of expressing his opinions to his representatives, not showing up to just shout them down and stifle debate because some lobbyists or radio commentators tell them to do so. FYI, the term "astroturfing" is credited to Senator Lloyd Bentsen, who was quoted by the Washington Post in 1985 as using it to describe a "mountain of cards and letters" sent to his Senate office to promote insurance industry interests, which Bentsen dismissed as "generated mail."

Now you're just being silly.

There's nothing wrong with people showing up to town hall meetings with their representatives to listen to their views, ask questions, and offer civil debate and alternatives. But to just show up and shout them down so there can't be a civil discourse is just an attempt to shut down debate and get some publicity. I don't like it when Code Pink does it on the left, and I don't like it when these Astroturfers (faux grassroots) do it, because it just turns the debate into a shouting match. If you really have a different viewpoint, then show up and engage in some honest debate and offer alternatives. Just following the marching orders of Dick Army and other lobbyists, and shouting people down and saying "No" isn't going to solve any problems.

Yeah, it's terrible that it might be possible to peacefully resolve issues diplomatically with countries we don't like. But I don't have much sympathy for Americans who needlessly put themselves in danger, like the 3 hikers now in Iranian custody. What, hiking on the Appalachian trail with Mark Sanford isn't good enough? And I don't think just anyone could have done this. Imagine sending Bush or Cheney.

Dude, you're F'd in the head. Talking about economics and you feel compelled to remind us we have a black president. What's next with you, he's a Muslim who was born outside the U.S.? And that's also MY tax money that had to compensate for the tax breaks that the wealthy and corporations got, who still decided to close the plant I worked at for over 20 years and move it to China because of cheaper labor and lax regulations. The fallacy of trickle down policy has been exposed, it doesn't save or create U.S. jobs. If you took your lips off the ass of wealthy and corporate welfare you'd see the big picture.

Protectionist would be to put a penalty on imports, like other countries do to us. This would be an incentive.

All these complaints whenever an incentive program benefits the middle class. But this is a drop in the bucket compared to the trickle down policies that gave huge tax breaks to the wealthy and corporations, who still took the money and ran to cheap labor outside the U.S., costing us jobs and slowing the economy. I'm tired of waiting to be trickled down on, it's about time the benefit went directly to the middle class. I wish they would extend this program to major appliances like ovens and refrigerators manufactured in the U.S.. Perception plays a big part in economics, and if people see others starting to spend, they will feel more confident in the economy and start to spend themselves, which will draw down inventories, which requires more production, which requires more workers, and the economic engine becomes primed for a recovery.

That extremist talking point that reform=gov't run is just a lie. There is no bill coming out of committees in Congress that calls for a takeover of private insurance. The public OPTION may or may not be in a final bill, but it is an OPTION. Ask senior citizens if they think Medicare should be eliminated, because that is a public option.

If that's what you think health care reform is all about, then you haven't been paying attention. The costs of the status quo system are rising for all of us. Who do you think pays for the uninsured when they go to the costly emergency room for minor medical issues that could be handled for less cost at a doctor's office? If car insurance were optional, do you think your premiums would go down?

Biden is an "everyman", who even the officer said lightened up the conversation with some jokes, and was very kind to his family during the tour of the White House. Obama can be a little stiff at times, and there probably was the thought that having just Obama there with his friend Gates might be perceived as ganging up on the officer, even though that was not the intention.

Just like the complaints about federal spending, the Republicans would have credibility if they had complained about this when Bush was in office and they were in the majority. To do it now is just sour grapes. In general, I do believe that the Congress sat back and let Bush overreach with this and signing statements, because they were afraid of being labeled anti-American in the "War on Terror", and I would like the Congress to provide more of a real check to the executive branch, regardless of who's in office.

The House on Friday passed a bill to allocate another $2 billion to the Cash for Clunkers program. The bill passed 316-109. The Senate is not expected to vote before Monday.

Congressional sources said early Thursday evening that the program would be put on hold. But Obama administration officials said later that Clunkers had not been suspended and that they were studying the situation. "Auto dealers and consumers should have confidence that all valid ... transactions that have taken place to date will be honored," a White House official said in a statement. An official at the Department of Transportation, which manages Cash for Clunkers, said the administration would try to work with Congress to find more funds to keep it going. One of the program's main champions in Congress, Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., called on Congress to appropriate more money. Stabenow said the effort has provided an important boost to the economy and resulted in 200,000 car sales. "I am delighted to hear dealers say that all of their salespeople are busy and they are selling more cars in a day than they had been selling in a month," Stabenow said. Meanwhile, the Transportation Department was sorting out how much of the plan's funds have already been committed. Cash for Clunkers, which Congress passed in June, is set to end on Nov. 1 or whenever its $1 billion budget has been depleted. An early version of the Clunkers proposal in Congress called for appropriating $4 billion. http://money.cnn.com/2009/07/30/autos/cash...ended/index.htm

Since you don't even know what is on MSNBC, for you to comment on other networks was disingenuous at best. At least I know what shows are on FOXNews, having watched all of them at various times, which confirmed what others have said about their bias. Sheppard Smith is the only one who tries to give a balanced presentation.

People without a goal and vision are less likely to push for solutions, and are willing to settle for war, health care for some, and intolerance. Too bad you're willing to settle for less than success.

Really? MSNBC has a morning show headed by Joe Scarborough. Pat Buchanan is a regular analyst on their shows throughout the day. Hardball regularly has on Republican congressmen and strategists, and former Bush and Cheney advisers. Just last night they had a Republican congressman from Michigan on who's put forth a bill to investigate Obama's reaction to the Gates incident and call on Obama to apologize for his comments.

If Republicans supported spending more money on funding clinics like you suggest, that would have been done years and would have alleviated part of the problem. Why have they never supported that alternative?

Part of Sarah Palin's "No Mas" speech yesterday as read by William Shatner: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCdqRbWYWbU

You could paint the walls white, but then have a wide blue stripe going horizontally across the walls, with a thinner red stripe above and a thinner gold stripe below the wider blue stripe.

Did I say Iranians were Arabs, Brokeback? No, I said the Arab states, i.e. the other countries in the region who have diplomatic, economic, and religious ties to Iran. How does bashing Bush somehow make the reason for invading Iraq more valid? You neo-con numbskulls think the first solution to any problem is attacking another country. You want Obama to attack Iran but at the same time be more supportive of the protesters in Iran. If you don't think those protesters will turn their opinion against the U.S. if we attacked without an imminent threat to the U.S. then you know nothing about nationalism.

"The diplomats emphasize there are no indications of plans for such a nuclear test. They told the AP Friday it was unlikely Iran would risk heightened confrontation with the West — and chances of Israeli attack — with such a course." Like the article says, just because they know how doesn't mean they will. I think the Arab states will pressure them to abstain from assembling a nuclear weapon, they don't want a nuclear arms race in the middle east. There would be no advantage for Iran to use a nuclear weapon, they want to leave it uncertain so no other countries threaten them with an attack in the future. They are entitled to create nuclear power facilities for civilian use. They want to be able to export more of their oil to increase revenue and boost their economy.

The same arguments were made about Roosevelt's New Deal. But now most economists agree that the reason the recovery took longer back then was that the government didn't spend enough to restart economic growth. And that is what many are saying now, that the 2nd stimulus package (Bush had the 1st last year) wasn't big enough. Like trying to prime an engine, but only giving it 2 squirts of gas when it needs 3 to turn over. Of course only about 10% of the 2nd stimulus has been spent so far, so I think it's too early to tell. Like your doctor saying you need 10 treatments to get relief from your ailment, and you saying it's a failure after only the 1st treatment.

Not a good analogy because unions have contracts which specifically spell out the rules, while salaried personnel have to rely on some general guidelines that are open to interpretation by the company management. If a union member applies for a salaried position, they have to abide by the rules that apply to salaried positions. More facts on the firefighter case are that this was the first time that this test was given, it was weighed to count more than other considerations like interviews, and the results of this new test was that it disproportionately disqualified black applicants compared to the historical numbers of black applicants that passed the old testing methods. So New Haven had good reason and were within their rights to throw out this new test after it showed that it wasn't consistent with previous tests. The district court, as well as Sotomayor's court, may have felt empathy for those who did best on the test, but used the law and precedent to decide the case, not empathy. It was the 5 most conservative judges on the Supreme Court who used their empathy to go against previous similar rulings and change the standard. But at the time Sotomayor had to make a judgement, it was not the standard. So if you don't want judges to change the standards by their rulings and legislate from the bench, then you can't fault Sotomayor; she followed the legal standard.

And at the same time, Ilan Berman, on the conservative AFPC think tank's website, praises Obama's actions regarding Afganistan. http://www.afpc.org/publication_listings/viewArticle/697 Shocker!