dajafi wrote:

traderdave wrote:

Albany Governor Debate Verges on Farce

So this is the state of American politics at the moment. Sharron Angle insulting Latinos; Asians; Deerborn, Michigan and Canada. Carl Paladino threatening to "take out" reporters and openly bashing homosexuals. Christine O'Donnell promising us she is not a witch. Joe Miller arresting reporters and suggesting we build an "American Wall". I'd summarize a few things Rand Paul is up to but my TV doesn't get reception from Mars. The totality of the crap spewed by these idiots makes the typical Jersey Shore episode look like the Gaithers Gospel Hour. The right to vote is one of our most sacred rights and most people either don't bother or they make a joke out of it. Wake the $#@! up America!!!

I guess it's easy to posit the inevitability of anything that happens, but I do believe that the state of our politics now is a direct reflection of a culture that elevates spectacle over substance and shows endless tolerance for selfishness. What I find most disgusting about the Tea Party is that, with a very small handful of exceptions, its adherent candidates are not really about "small government"; were that the case, they'd talk about what they would personally and societally sacrifice, acknowledge that there's some pain inherent to that, and make the argument that those tradeoffs are justified in the bigger picture.

What they're about is picking winners and losers when it comes to sucking at the government teat. When Joe Miller gets assistance from the welfare state, he's deserving; when some African-American woman (or her kid!) gets it, she's a parasite. It's more cultural than racial, though that might be a distinction without a difference.

I'm all for the country living within its means and willing to see some of the cows I like get slaughtered to make that happen. I'm sure there are many Republicans like that as well. But between the unapologetic and totally self-righteous selfishness rampant in our culture and the zero-sum, heroes-and-villains approach we collectively take to politics now, who's going to compromise? Who even has incentive to compromise?

dajafi wrote:So here's a deeply weird political story.

Thomas's wife seems like one of the kookier birds out there. You figure no grown-up would be serious about referring to policies with which one disagrees as "tyranny," but I guess it's inevitable that some fraction of these people (on both sides) start to believe their own bull $#@!.

“Good morning, Anita Hill, it’s Ginny Thomas,” she said, according to ABC News. “I just wanted to reach across the airwaves and the years and ask you to consider something. I would love you to consider an apology sometime and some full explanation of why you did what you did with my husband. So give it some thought and certainly pray about this and come to understand why you did what you did. Okay have a good day.”

dajafi wrote:So here's a deeply weird political story.

Thomas's wife seems like one of the kookier birds out there. You figure no grown-up would be serious about referring to policies with which one disagrees as "tyranny," but I guess it's inevitable that some fraction of these people (on both sides) start to believe their own bull $#@!.

The parties share blame for the current fiscal situation, but federal budget statistics show that Republican policies over the last decade, and the cost of the two wars, added far more to the deficit than initiatives approved by the Democratic Congress since 2006, giving voters reason to be skeptical of campaign promises.

Calculations by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office and other independent fiscal experts show that the $1.1 trillion cost over the next 10 years of the Medicare prescription drug program, which the Republican-controlled Congress adopted in 2003, by itself would add more to the deficit than the combined costs of the bailout, the stimulus and the health care law.

The House Republican leader, John A. Boehner of Ohio, has called for immediate cuts in “non-security discretionary” spending to prerecession 2008 levels. Independent analysts say that would require eliminating about $105 billion — or more than 20 percent of spending by departments like Education, Transportation, Interior, Commerce and Energy — a level of reductions that history suggests would be extremely hard to execute. (Since 1982, nonmilitary discretionary spending has never dropped by more than 5.5 percentage points in any given year.)

At the same time, most Republicans are calling for the permanent extension of all Bush-era tax cuts, which would add $700 billion more to the deficit over the next 10 years than President Obama and Democratic leaders have proposed by continuing only some of the lower rates.

Republicans say extending the cuts will spur economic activity, but that is hardly guaranteed. And the cost of either plan is astronomical: Mr. Obama’s plan will add more than $3 trillion to the deficit; the Republicans’ plan will add more than $4 trillion.

dajafi wrote:Just the facts:

Our political history suggests that you can only ever take an unpopular but necessary step on bipartisan lines. But our current political culture makes bipartisanship close to impossible: it hurts ratings at Fox and MSNBC, dampens blog traffic, etc. Those who only very occasionally try, or even suggest that the other side isn't Satanic, turn out like Bob Bennett or Bob Inglis.

Should be interesting.

jerseyhoya wrote:So Christie has offered the state Education commissioner job to Rhee. Press says she's strongly considering it, but not sure how it will work with being married to the mayor of Sacramento.

I dunno exactly what the state education head does, and if it's a step up or a step down from running the DC school system, but it's certainly an interesting offer.

jerseyhoya wrote:So Christie has offered the state Education commissioner job to Rhee. Press says she's strongly considering it, but not sure how it will work with being married to the mayor of Sacramento.

I dunno exactly what the state education head does, and if it's a step up or a step down from running the DC school system, but it's certainly an interesting offer.

dajafi wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:So Christie has offered the state Education commissioner job to Rhee. Press says she's strongly considering it, but not sure how it will work with being married to the mayor of Sacramento.

I dunno exactly what the state education head does, and if it's a step up or a step down from running the DC school system, but it's certainly an interesting offer.

Remember how I've been saying for years that education reform is potentially a silver-bullet issue for Republican presidential hopefuls?

That. There are things about Christie I find pretty deplorable, but no question he's smart as hell.

drsmooth wrote:

dajafi wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:So Christie has offered the state Education commissioner job to Rhee. Press says she's strongly considering it, but not sure how it will work with being married to the mayor of Sacramento.

I dunno exactly what the state education head does, and if it's a step up or a step down from running the DC school system, but it's certainly an interesting offer.

Remember how I've been saying for years that education reform is potentially a silver-bullet issue for Republican presidential hopefuls?

That. There are things about Christie I find pretty deplorable, but no question he's smart as hell.

So you two are suggesting Christie's going to proudly assume the mantle of moderate Republican, pro-activist education policy (with at least some attendant bureaucracy), when it seems the "dismantlers" are ascendant just now? Seems risky for him.

traderdave wrote:

drsmooth wrote:

dajafi wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:So Christie has offered the state Education commissioner job to Rhee. Press says she's strongly considering it, but not sure how it will work with being married to the mayor of Sacramento.

I dunno exactly what the state education head does, and if it's a step up or a step down from running the DC school system, but it's certainly an interesting offer.

Remember how I've been saying for years that education reform is potentially a silver-bullet issue for Republican presidential hopefuls?

That. There are things about Christie I find pretty deplorable, but no question he's smart as hell.

So you two are suggesting Christie's going to proudly assume the mantle of moderate Republican, pro-activist education policy (with at least some attendant bureaucracy), when it seems the "dismantlers" are ascendant just now? Seems risky for him.

Especially given the extent to which he gutted New Jersey's schools during his short administration. I doubt he is going to get much support from many people in or around education.