The robotic Peter Orzag, a Geithner-light short-term Team Barry wankanoid, is out with his swan song NYTimes op-ed entry, a discourse on his policy recommendations regarding disability benefits reform.

His observations are at once accurate, observant, and maddening coming from a guy who was among the best-placed to honcho an effective health care reform effort and who basically shaat the bed.

His essay suggests, not quite intentionally, how health, productivity and lost-worktime policies are entwined, and how, if adroitly aligned, reform policies might effectively address our clumsy, costly health system and our burdensome social welfare apparatus simultaneously.

Of course, it's better that the likes of him is vaccuumed up into the cash-lined bowels of a financial octopus like Citi, the better to ensure none of his notions will ever actually have a chance of implementation.

Obama leaving Clinton to answer questions

Surreal week in politics

Today was one of the most bizarre things I've ever seen. I was at a packed happy hour and no one had any idea why Clinton was holding a press conference from The White House. The entire place was dumbfounded. What was Obama thinking? This will turn into a campaign issue come election time.

jerseyhoya wrote:Bernie Sanders on his 8th hour of filibustering the tax cut bill.

What happened?

am i crazy? wiz, why are the libs going explicitly against their campaign ideas over in crazy old england? wtf? though, of course it's the tories to truly blame, but the libs are in their pocket a bit

Warszawa wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:Bernie Sanders on his 8th hour of filibustering the tax cut bill.

What happened?

He got tired and stopped talking

9/11 responders bill defeated by Senate GOP filibuster

FUCK YOU

Bill Clinton Takes The White House Stage, Again

Nice column from Dan Balz

I read the whole Clinton transcript. The man is incredible. Clearly his Jesuit education.

Doesn't the 9/11 responders bill getting shot down make you proud?

Just win baby

I think Just Win Baby would be in favor of the 9/11 Responders Bill. I'm not sure what the political upside is in opposing it.

jerseyhoya wrote:I think Just Win Baby would be in favor of the 9/11 Responders Bill. I'm not sure what the political upside is in opposing it.

Pat Buchanan's theory is that the responders have already received money from the city and state, so they're not in a desperate need for the money right now. Because of this, the Republicans are basically telling the Democrats to take care of the tax legislation first before we move onto anything else. Once the tax issue is taken care of, the Republicans will back it. That being said, I would expect to see it show up in a lot of campaign ads in the next cycle.

the average death age of first responders is 48 years old. they're definitely all good.

pacino wrote:the average death age of first responders is 48 years old. they're definitely all good.

ummmmmm

wait

it just happened nine years ago

how would you have an average death age?

i worded it wrong...of the people who have already died

so still useless?

Houshphandzadeh wrote:so still useless?

Considering that average may include the people that died on 9/11, yeah

how is that useless? over a thousand have died from various ailments from their work

whatever, enjoy your thread

because it's impossible to average in the survivors!

Wizlah wrote:

drsmooth wrote:
If you clicked on the little "camera-icon" thingie for S. Carolina on the map I linked to, the caption on the resulting picture contains the statistical information I posted here. I intended it merely as an observation - EIGHTY PERCENT of the population was SLAVES - because I can't see how it forms the basis for any particular assertion about the present day.

dunno. Anytime I see figures like that, I think of #$&! loads of capital.

almost slipped that one by me wiz

pacino wrote:how is that useless? over a thousand have died from various ailments from their work

whatever, enjoy your thread

The point was that there's enough money from New York City and State to cover short-mid term issues (at least I think that's what Buchanan was saying). I don't understand the Republican's logic, but I doubt they're actually against the idea in the long run.