A "New flava in ya ear!" Production.
Friday, February 26, 2010
Party and Bullshit!
How to get rich [without really trying] in Hip-Hop:
Exhibit "A":
Soulja Boy.
Pretty Boy Swag.
[ED's NOTE: I just...uh, I, uh, I, uh, I can't y'all. I can't.]
Exhibit "A":
Soulja Boy.
Pretty Boy Swag.
[ED's NOTE: I just...uh, I, uh, I, uh, I can't y'all. I can't.]
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Quote of the Day!
"do you ever feel like spite hate fucking @johncmayer just to put hi in his place, hes a better guitarist than me but not better in bed !" Love tweeted. "but like say your fucking @johncmayer totally throwing him around the room in bits and then you just BAM punch him in the face? good times"-Courtney Love
A "New" Sensation?
Words.
"Oceans of ink, terabytes of blog space and an eternity of television time have been devoted to the latest object of media fascination, the "tea party" movement. Now (finally!), a poll conducted by CNN gives us some hard data on the Tea Party Nation.
Neither "average Americans," as they like to portray themselves, nor trailer-park "Deliverance" throwbacks, as their lefty detractors would have us believe, tea partyers are more highly educated and wealthier than the rest of America. Nearly 75% are college educated, and two-thirds earn more than $50,000.
More likely to be white and male than the general population, tea partyers also skew toward middle age or older. That's the tell. Most came of age in the 1960s, an era distinguished by widespread disrespect for government. In their wonder years, they learned that politics was about protesting the Establishment and shouting down the Man. No wonder they're doing that now.
Look closely at the tea partyer and what you see is a famil- iar American genus: a solidly middle-class, college-educated boomer, endowed by his creator with possessions, opinions and certain inalienable rights, the most important of which is the right to make sure you hear what he has to say..."
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
How Soon is Now?
HEALTHCARE: Still Walking with a Limp.
Words.
"Unless the sun rises in the West tomorrow, Thursday's health-care reform summit will yield no bipartisan concord. Congressional Republicans remain unalterably opposed to health reform; the ideas they've advanced -- which the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office says would insure no more than 3 million of America's more than 45 million uninsured -- barely reach the level of piddling.
But unto themselves, the Democrats have the votes to enact comprehensive reform. And -- what is new -- they finally have a plan on which the president has put his stamp.
The plan that the White House released Monday strongly resembles the compromise proposal that House and Senate Democrats have been negotiating. It is a more politically sustainable synthesis than the Senate's original offering; the Achilles heels and banana peels in the earlier bill have been scrapped. The subsidies that the president's plan offers low- and-middle-income shoppers on the new health insurance exchanges are more generous. It raises the threshold for the excise tax on high-cost insurance policies so that only a relative few policyholders will be nicked. It restores the progressivity of the House bill by extending the Medicare payroll tax to the interest, capital gains and dividend income of the wealthy. Instead of the federal government picking up only Nebraska's new Medicaid expenses -- Ben Nelson's stinkeroo of a deal -- it will now pick up the new Medicaid expenses for all states, easing the plight of America's chronically beleaguered state governments.
...So why are some Democrats still hanging back?
...for Democrats who question whether now is the time, I suggest they go back and read Harry Truman's November 1945 message to Congress calling for national health care. "The principal reason why people do not receive the care they need is that they cannot afford to pay for it," Truman said. At the time, the cost of health care accounted for 4 percent of the nation's income.
Truman didn't get his plan enacted, of course; no plan for universal care has been enacted since. The principal reason people don't receive care remains its unaffordability, but the aggregate cost of health care has since risen to 16 percent of the nation's income. Absent a universal plan, it will continue to rise.
Truman sent his message to Congress 65 years ago. The debate over national health care is old enough to collect Social Security. The question for timorous Democrats is: "If not now, when?""
Party and Bullshit!
How to get rich without really trying [in Hip-Hop]:
See Exhibit "A":
Jackie Chain [ED'S NOTE: I couldn't make this shit up if I tried]
Mack A Bitch. [ED'S NOTE #2: ... what year is this again?]
See Exhibit "A":
Jackie Chain [ED'S NOTE: I couldn't make this shit up if I tried]
Mack A Bitch. [ED'S NOTE #2: ... what year is this again?]
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
"BOOTYBUTTCHEEKS!"
FILE UNDER: Coming Attractions.
PITCHFORK: Listen: The First Track from Aziz Ansari and Dave Sitek's Mixtape
Monday, February 22, 2010
Hollywood Shuffle.
"Shuckin' and Jivin'".
Words.
"This past weekend the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) held their annual conference in Washington, D.C. Many of the party stalwarts and presidential hopefuls such as Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, Glenn Beck, and former Vice President Dick Cheney were in attendance.
After watching the videos and reading the speeches one can clearly see a party that is at war with itself in terms of ideology and imagery. Are they the party of the "tea-baggers" with Dick Armey and Sarah Palin or the party of Mitt Romney who has now moved to the right on abortion and gay rights (when he once supported them) and against health care reform that he championed as governor of Massachusetts? What do the Republicans stand for and which face will they turn to as they articulate their message in upcoming elections?
On the one hand, the head of the Young Americans for Freedom's California chapter, Ryan Sorba, was booed off of the stage for condemning CPAC for accepting sponsorship from GOProud, a group that represents gay Republicans. "I'd like to condemn CPAC for bringing GOPride to this event, ...Guess what. Civil rights are grounded in natural rights. Natural rights are grounded in human nature." Keynote speaker Glenn Beck contradicted RNC Chairman Michael Steele's attempt to open the party to more Americans with a "big tent." Beck said, "All they're taking about is: 'We need a big tent. We need a big tent. Can we get a bigger tent'...what is this, a circus?"
...The problem with ideologies is that by themselves they are not rational. They tend to focus on and confuse the imagery of the "should be" and "ought to be" with the practical "is." Without people who are able to inject pragmatism and tie logic and reason to an ideology, it can take an institution, group or country down some very perilous roads. This is why ideologues like Beck and Limbaugh would make terrible politicians. The ideologies they have articulated have made for very bad public policy. Ideologues are so focused on the "should be" that they fail to take into account the practical applications of the "how."
During the George H. W. Bush administration neo-conservative ideologues hijacked American politics and policy. The so-called Reagan Republicans co-opted American domestic and foreign policy. At the same time, Christian social conservatives controlled the parties' social agenda in an attempt to redefine American values.
...After eight years of ideological babble such as "compassionate conservatism," "American internationalism," "ownership society," and "war on terror," Americans rejected this failed direction. They began to focus on real issues such as home foreclosures, affordable health care, outsourcing American jobs, global warming and sky rocketing energy costs.
The majority of Americans do not want the country to go backwards as Palin, Cheney and Romney want to take it. The majority of Americans are not listening to the rhetoric and diatribes of Limbaugh, Hannity and Beck. Americans want to move forward and are looking for workable long-term solutions not slogans.
As America moves towards the 2010 mid-term elections and the 2012 presidential election, the question of what Republicans stand for remains an open one."
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Friday, February 19, 2010
Thursday, February 18, 2010
Money in the Bank.
OBAMA. STIMULUS. WHAT! WHAT!
Words.
"Those who say the federal stimulus program didn't create jobs have ignored a crucial sector of the economy: critics of the package, who right now are enjoying record production levels and full employment.
This burgeoning industry of conservative lawmakers, political operatives, think tanks and media outlets has benefited enormously from the legislation.
...President Obama, marking the first anniversary of the stimulus legislation Wednesday, said that "the Recovery Act is responsible for the jobs of about 2 million Americans who would otherwise be unemployed." While exact numbers are unavailable, it seems reasonable to estimate that a large portion of the 2 million jobs have been created in businesses related to stimulus criticism -- "stim crit" for short.
...the vast majority of stimulus beneficiaries are small-time entrepreneurs who have used the measure to build an assembly line of press releases.
...one must also take into account the huge indirect benefit of the criticism industry, measured by what economists call the multiplier effect. As more Republican Party figures criticize the stimulus, jobs are created for researchers, printers and binders, webmasters and those who build and maintain servers to keep up with the crushing e-mail loads.
As the economic dollars continue to trickle down, the stimulus criticism means an increase in ratings and advertising money for conservative broadcasters. "A new CBS News poll shows that only 6 percent of Americans think the bill has created any jobs at all," celebrated Fox News's Sean Hannity in a broadcast this week. "There's more proof you cannot fool Mother Nature or the American people."
...Clearly, the Republican Party believes the stimulus funding has the ability to create jobs -- for Republican candidates.
...From all corners of the land, the great wheels of industry spun out press release after press release: "Failed . . . Hodgepodge of favored giveaways . . . Holy Out-of-Touch, Batman . . . Looming storm clouds of Obamanomics . . . Just how out of touch is the White House?"
Rep. Joe Wilson (S.C.) even wrote up a greeting card. "Happy Anniversary Stimulus," his press release said. "Wish You Came with a Gift Receipt."
He lies! Wilson would never return the stimulus. Criticizing it has brought him enormous prosperity."
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Disenchanted Lullaby.
He's got the whole world in his hands?
Words.
"Teddy Roosevelt famously lauded "the man who is actually in the arena," who "if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat." What happens, though, when the arena is dysfunctional? The Senate, with its endless holds and 60-vote points of order, may be the epitome of a place that knows neither victory nor defeat.
...Maybe the arena has shifted. Maybe, for the man -- or woman -- who wants to make a difference, politics is not the optimal venue. Maybe it's easier to make your mark from the Gates Foundation than from a Senate seat. Maybe the chief executive of Google -- your average Google vice president, even -- wields more influence over people's lives than an individual member of Congress. Maybe it's a better use of time to promote scientific research than to slog from one quorum call to the next.
...Bayh, who speaks with the experience of a man with $13 million in his campaign account, attributed some of the changed atmosphere to the incessant demands of fundraising. "Back in my father's day, the saying was that you legislated for four years and you ran for reelection for two," he said. "If you're constantly raising funds, if you're constantly running for reelection, that affects how people behave."
...The optimist in me would like to see Bayh's departure as the wake-up call the Senate needs.
..."The forecast for this country is bleak if people are just going to say that the dysfunction has been institutionalized," [Virginia Democrat Mark] Warner told me. "I just can't accept that."
The realist in me watches the fervent Tea Partiers, tugging the Republican Party even further to the right, and the Republican congressional leadership, reaping the short-term rewards of obstruction -- and worries.
"What I think Evan has been trying to communicate is that politics cannot be seen as a zero-sum game where one side wipes the floor with the other side," [Oregon Democrat Ron] Wyden told me. Until this happens, he said, "I think you're going to see more good and thoughtful people say that they're going to find other things to do.""
SEE ALSO:
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Snap, Crackle, and POP!
A Moment of Clarity.
Everything to Everyone.
Words.
"It's possible that Sarah Palin's best quality is that she has none at all. She exists for both her friends and enemies as a fantasy figure. For the left, she is a harbinger of the hard-right government takeover they fear is coming. And for the right, she is the leader -- all instinct and no sophistication -- that they knew would someday lead America out of its current socialist wilderness. The pity for them both is that in reality, not to mention the polls, she sorely disappoints.
...Alas, for both the right and the left, Palin is not a leader. She neither founded nor leads a movement and, as far as anyone can tell, has no ideas of her own. She's a validator, satisfying her audience's narcissistic urge to be told they are correct in their thinking. They look at her and see themselves. Ah, love."
THE WASHINGTON POST: Sarah Palin, finally a fallen star
Everything to Everyone.
Words.
"It's possible that Sarah Palin's best quality is that she has none at all. She exists for both her friends and enemies as a fantasy figure. For the left, she is a harbinger of the hard-right government takeover they fear is coming. And for the right, she is the leader -- all instinct and no sophistication -- that they knew would someday lead America out of its current socialist wilderness. The pity for them both is that in reality, not to mention the polls, she sorely disappoints.
...Alas, for both the right and the left, Palin is not a leader. She neither founded nor leads a movement and, as far as anyone can tell, has no ideas of her own. She's a validator, satisfying her audience's narcissistic urge to be told they are correct in their thinking. They look at her and see themselves. Ah, love."
Southern Hummingbird.
Solange.
Dirty Projectors.
Stillness is the Move.
LIVE.
PITCHFORK: Solange Sings With Dirty Projectors
Dirty Projectors.
Stillness is the Move.
LIVE.
Monday, February 15, 2010
Friday, February 12, 2010
Oh Word?
I can do bad all by myself(?).
Words. For Your Consideration...
"By 2008, Americans were disgusted with their government. They were sick of partisan gridlock and general incompetence. Along came Barack Obama offering to usher in a new era. It was time, he said, to put away childish things.
...Obama was inaugurated in the midst of an economic crisis, and the activist policy proposals took precedence. If, a year ago, you had been asked to describe the administration’s goals in one sentence it would have been this: Barack Obama will usher in the third great wave of Democratic reform. Franklin Roosevelt had the New Deal. Lyndon Johnson had the Great Society. Obama would take the third step, transforming health care, energy, education, financial regulation and many other sectors of American life.
A distinct Obama governing style emerged, which was half Harvard Economics Department and half Boss Daley. The administration is staffed by smart pragmatists who are optimistic about the government’s ability to devise comprehensive plans. Their proposals were processed by Congressional Old Bulls who made sure the legislation served Democratic interest groups.
...The country has reacted harshly to the course the administration ended up embracing. Obama is still admired personally, but every major proposal — from the stimulus to health care — is quite unpopular. Independent voters have swung against the administration. Voters are not reacting to the particulars of each bill. They are reacting against the total activist onslaught.
...A president can’t lead a social transformation without a visceral bond with the center of the electorate and without being in step with the rhythm of the times. Obama is lacking these things. As a result, the original Obama project, the third Democratic wave, is dead."
Blinded by the RIGHT!
An Ongoing Discussion.
This post is brought to you by the letter R!
Words.
"Furious denunciations of any effort to seek cost savings in Medicare — death panels! — have been central to Republican efforts to demonize health reform. What’s amazing, however, is that they’re getting away with it.
Why is this amazing? It’s not just the fact that Republicans are now posing as staunch defenders of a program they have hated ever since the days when Ronald Reagan warned that Medicare would destroy America’s freedom. Nor is it even the fact that, as House speaker, Medicare would destroy America’s freedom. Nor is it even the fact that, as House speaker, Mr. Gingrich personally tried to ram through deep cuts in Medicare — and, in 1995, went so far as to shut down the federal government in an attempt to bully Bill Clinton into accepting those cuts.
...No, what’s truly mind-boggling is this: Even as Republicans denounce modest proposals to rein in Medicare’s rising costs, they are, themselves, seeking to dismantle the whole program.
...The bottom line, then, is that the crusade against health reform has relied, crucially, on utter hypocrisy: Republicans who hate Medicare, tried to slash Medicare in the past, and still aim to dismantle the program over time, have been scoring political points by denouncing proposals for modest cost savings — savings that are substantially smaller than the spending cuts buried in their own proposals.
And if Democrats don’t get their act together and push the almost-completed reform across the goal line, this breathtaking act of staggering hypocrisy will succeed."
THE NEW YORK TIMES: Republicans and Medicare
This post is brought to you by the letter R!
Words.
"Furious denunciations of any effort to seek cost savings in Medicare — death panels! — have been central to Republican efforts to demonize health reform. What’s amazing, however, is that they’re getting away with it.
Why is this amazing? It’s not just the fact that Republicans are now posing as staunch defenders of a program they have hated ever since the days when Ronald Reagan warned that Medicare would destroy America’s freedom. Nor is it even the fact that, as House speaker, Medicare would destroy America’s freedom. Nor is it even the fact that, as House speaker, Mr. Gingrich personally tried to ram through deep cuts in Medicare — and, in 1995, went so far as to shut down the federal government in an attempt to bully Bill Clinton into accepting those cuts.
...No, what’s truly mind-boggling is this: Even as Republicans denounce modest proposals to rein in Medicare’s rising costs, they are, themselves, seeking to dismantle the whole program.
...The bottom line, then, is that the crusade against health reform has relied, crucially, on utter hypocrisy: Republicans who hate Medicare, tried to slash Medicare in the past, and still aim to dismantle the program over time, have been scoring political points by denouncing proposals for modest cost savings — savings that are substantially smaller than the spending cuts buried in their own proposals.
And if Democrats don’t get their act together and push the almost-completed reform across the goal line, this breathtaking act of staggering hypocrisy will succeed."
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Blinded by the RIGHT!
This post is brought to you by the letter R!
Words.
"What's most exasperating about the flap surrounding White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel's recently publicized use of the "R-word"?
The fact that he made the remark six months ago but it somehow only surfaced last week, (perhaps in the wake of growing disenchantment with the president)? Or that Sarah Palin, via Facebook, is calling for Emanuel's resignation and at the same time defending Rush Limbaugh's repeated use of the word? Or Emanuel's round of perfunctory apologies, notably to Special Olympics Chief Executive Timothy Shriver, who, with other advocates of the mentally disabled, issued a press release saying Emanuel has promised the Obama administration will "look for ways to partner with us, including examining pending legislation in Congress to remove the R-word from federal law"?
The "R-word" in question is not "recession" or "reform" (as in healthcare) or even "recall" (as in Toyota) but "retarded."
...It's not clear when the counter started keeping track, but as of Wednesday, it says The Times had used the "R-word" 16 times. I can promise you, though, that we didn't use it the way Emanuel did. That's because his exact words combined "retarded" with an expletive that, while quotidian for the famously foul-mouthed Emanuel, is barred from this family newspaper. I trust you know what I'm talking about.
Tellingly, it's something like that kind of trust -- the covenant that helps us understand each other despite unclear speech and misused words -- that appears to be missing from this tempest in a teapot. And because this misunderstanding pretty clearly falls into the willful category, I think it's fair to call it a high violation of that trust. Moreover, the surrounding opportunism is far uglier than anything Emanuel said.
Anyone even slightly capable of understanding meaning versus mere words (and despite her acts to the contrary, that includes Palin) can see that the chief of staff harbors no animosity toward the developmentally disabled...Sure, he should have known better, but compared to Limbaugh -- who (on the radio) referred to a Shriver meeting at the White House as a "retard summit" -- Emanuel doesn't need to be first in line for sensitivity training.
...by all appearances, Emanuel hasn't joined Shriver's cause as much as he's been bullied into performing community service for it. And that, I dare say, is a [insert your word of choice here] waste of time. Not only because there are better people for the job (those with expertise in the rights of the developmentally disabled) but because Emanuel surely has other "R-words" to deal with."
QUESTION!
"Does it matter if the judge hearing the lawsuit challenging California's ban on same-sex marriage is gay? Would his sexual orientation interfere with his ability to render an impartial judgment in the case, or the public's confidence that he could decide the case fairly?"
WHAT IT IS?!
Words. For Your Consideration...
"So what exactly is the Tea Party movement and why has it risen up?
The ferocity of its opposition to President Obama is mystifying to political progressives. Most of the left simply doesn't see him as especially liberal, let alone "socialist."
...Why has this middle-of-the-road leader inspired such enthusiastic counter-organizing and called forth such venom?
The most popular theory on the left is that Obama's race is a big part of the story, and that we are seeing a reaction among some whites against the multiracial, multicultural political coalition he has brought together. The phrase "losing our country" is often on the lips of his enemies, which raises the question of who they mean by "our."
...Where is the party of Abraham Lincoln? The GOP's leaders have been shockingly silent...
...So, yes, parts of this movement do seem to be motivated by a new nativism and by racism. But it would be a mistake to see the hostility toward Obama only in terms of race.
Something else is going on in the Tea Party movement, and it has deep roots in our history. Anti-statism, a profound mistrust of power in Washington, dates all the way to the Anti-Federalists who opposed the Constitution because they saw it concentrating too much authority in the central government. At any given time, perhaps 20 to 25 percent of Americans can be counted on to denounce anything Washington does as a threat to "our traditional liberties."
This suspicion of government is not amenable to "facts" -- not because it is irrational, but because the facts are beside the point. For the anti-statists, opposing government power is a matter of principle."
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
"SECURITY!"
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Hot Fuss.
Words.
"An election is coming, so the Republicans are trying to scare Americans by making it appear as if the Democrats don’t care about catching or punishing terrorists.
It’s nonsense, of course, but effective. The be-very-afraid approach helped former President George W. Bush ram laws through Congress that chipped away at Americans’ rights. He used it to get re-elected in 2004. Now the Republicans are playing the fear card for the fall elections.
The most recent target is the Obama administration’s handling of the failed Christmas Day bomber, particularly its decision (an absolutely correct one) to have the F.B.I. arrest and interrogate the suspect and file federal terrorism charges rather than throw him into a military prison where the Republicans seem to expect that he would be given no rights, questioned and held without charges.
...It is good that the administration is pushing back.
...The Republican propaganda is a distraction from the real issue: that the counterterrorism system is malfunctioning more than eight years after the Sept. 11 attacks. Like many of the nation’s other problems, Mr. Obama inherited this one. For eight years, Congress failed in its legal duty to oversee the intelligence community and the basic operational tasks of the Department of Homeland Security and correct the abusive system of detention at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and elsewhere that made our country more vulnerable, not less.
Congress should be helping the president fix those problems, not piling up sound bites for November and trying to bring that shameful detention system home."
Love TKO.
A "New flava in ya ear!" Production.
PITCHFORK: Listen: Hercules and Love Affair Remix Lady Gaga's "Bad Romance" Twice
Tuesday, February 09, 2010
Hill Street Blues.
A Moment of Clarity.
America, Healthcare: "Too Big To Fail".
Words.
"If President Obama and his Democratic allies are still hoping to eke out a victory this year in their long struggle for healthcare reform, they're going to have to agree on a strategy. Democrats in Congress -- and on Obama's own staff -- are divided over what the next step should be. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) and other liberals are pressing for enacting the bill the Senate passed last month with adjustments that would need only a simple majority to pass. But moderates and campaign strategists worry that voters would see that as a shady backroom deal.
Last week, Obama characteristically came down in the middle. He said his heart is with the liberals but his head is with the pragmatists who are calling for a pause in the healthcare campaign.
For now, he said, the top priority should be a jobs bill, because unemployment is "the thing that's most urgent right now in the minds of Americans."
After that, he said, he'll call on Republicans to join in a new national debate on healthcare. But he didn't sound like a man in a hurry. "We should be very deliberate, take our time," Obama said, and he acknowledged that Congress might not pass a bill at all this year.
It was an underwhelming call to arms from the man whose job is to lead the charge...
...If Obama, Reid and Pelosi want to pass a bill this year, they can start by agreeing on a list of changes to reassure worried voters that their voices have been heard. Reid and Pelosi will have to persuade their fractious Democratic caucuses to walk in step, which is no small task. They'll need more help from Obama to do that.
And Obama will need to appeal directly to the public to rebuild support for reform. He did that once before -- in September, after conservatives touched off public alarm about the bill in congressional "town meetings" -- and met with some success. But last week, the White House wasn't yet ready to say how much of a campaign Obama was willing to wage.
Unless Democrats agree on a strategy soon, the more likely scenario is a months-long deadlock between the Senate and House that will end by giving Democrats in the House a choice they will find unpalatable: Either pass the Senate bill many of them dislike, or allow healthcare reform to die.
There are only a few narrow pathways to passing a bill, and a dozen different ways to fail."
LOS ANGELES TIMES: Healthcare reform -- a plan in search of a strategy
America, Healthcare: "Too Big To Fail".
Words.
"If President Obama and his Democratic allies are still hoping to eke out a victory this year in their long struggle for healthcare reform, they're going to have to agree on a strategy. Democrats in Congress -- and on Obama's own staff -- are divided over what the next step should be. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) and other liberals are pressing for enacting the bill the Senate passed last month with adjustments that would need only a simple majority to pass. But moderates and campaign strategists worry that voters would see that as a shady backroom deal.
Last week, Obama characteristically came down in the middle. He said his heart is with the liberals but his head is with the pragmatists who are calling for a pause in the healthcare campaign.
For now, he said, the top priority should be a jobs bill, because unemployment is "the thing that's most urgent right now in the minds of Americans."
After that, he said, he'll call on Republicans to join in a new national debate on healthcare. But he didn't sound like a man in a hurry. "We should be very deliberate, take our time," Obama said, and he acknowledged that Congress might not pass a bill at all this year.
It was an underwhelming call to arms from the man whose job is to lead the charge...
...If Obama, Reid and Pelosi want to pass a bill this year, they can start by agreeing on a list of changes to reassure worried voters that their voices have been heard. Reid and Pelosi will have to persuade their fractious Democratic caucuses to walk in step, which is no small task. They'll need more help from Obama to do that.
And Obama will need to appeal directly to the public to rebuild support for reform. He did that once before -- in September, after conservatives touched off public alarm about the bill in congressional "town meetings" -- and met with some success. But last week, the White House wasn't yet ready to say how much of a campaign Obama was willing to wage.
Unless Democrats agree on a strategy soon, the more likely scenario is a months-long deadlock between the Senate and House that will end by giving Democrats in the House a choice they will find unpalatable: Either pass the Senate bill many of them dislike, or allow healthcare reform to die.
There are only a few narrow pathways to passing a bill, and a dozen different ways to fail."
Monday, February 08, 2010
Sunday, February 07, 2010
"ALL MY WOMEN WHO INDEPENDENT!"
"THROW YOUR HANDS UP AT ME!"
New flava in ya ear!
Candi Redd feat Rasheeda and Kandi.
Independent.
New flava in ya ear!
Candi Redd feat Rasheeda and Kandi.
Independent.
PAID.
A Moment of Clarity. For Black History Month. Starring Diddy. O Lets Do It. The Remix.
[The rapping (and trust me, you wanna here these bars), starts around the one minute mark]
[The rapping (and trust me, you wanna here these bars), starts around the one minute mark]
Friday, February 05, 2010
This is how we do it.
Yes it is Luther. You don't even know...
Now if you visit this blog often, you know that old school jams are more often than not posted under the "Old School Funk for the True Funk Soldiers" headline. But sometimes old school joints are so good, so well put together, so classic to a brotha, [see Montell Jordan's This is how we do it] that all I can do is marvel at their goodness as they boldly play on and show us how's it done. This jam, presented below, is one such example.
Luther Vandross.
Never Too Much.
Now if you visit this blog often, you know that old school jams are more often than not posted under the "Old School Funk for the True Funk Soldiers" headline. But sometimes old school joints are so good, so well put together, so classic to a brotha, [see Montell Jordan's This is how we do it] that all I can do is marvel at their goodness as they boldly play on and show us how's it done. This jam, presented below, is one such example.
Luther Vandross.
Never Too Much.
MIXTAPE FRIDAYS!!!
"BE THERE!"
KLYMAXX
1/Take Your Time (Do it Right)/S.O.S. Band
2/Upside Down/Diana Ross
3/Ring My Bell/Anita Ward
4/Joy and Pain/Frankie Beverly & Maze
5/For the Love of You/The Isley Brothers
6/Mary Jane/Rick James
7/Square Biz/Teena Marie
8/Never Too Much/Luther Vandross
9/All Night Long/Mary Jane Girls
10/Don't Be Cruel/Bobby Brown
11/Meeting in the Ladies Room/Klymaxx
Wednesday, February 03, 2010
WHO'S BAD?
Words. For Your Consideration...
"...protecting young people has long been used to justify marijuana prohibition. But in reality, our drug laws have failed to stop marijuana use among American youth but have succeeded in punishing them with damning criminal records, loss of financial aid for college and removal from after-school activities.
The simple truth is that prohibition doesn't work, and regulation and education do. Most young people will tell you that marijuana is easy to buy despite nearly a century of prohibition that has cost billions of tax dollars and put thousands of people behind bars.
Anti-drug groups such as D.A.R.E. refuse to acknowledge that today's marijuana prohibition causes the same problems as alcohol prohibition did in the 1920s. It's no wonder, then, that D.A.R.E. has been called ineffective by the National Academy of Sciences and, in 2001, was placed under the category of "ineffective programs" by the U.S. surgeon general. The Government Accountability Office reported in 2003 that there are "no significant differences in illicit drug use between students who received D.A.R.E. . . . and students who did not."
...Legalizing and taxing marijuana won't cure California's chronic budget woes. But should we really be cutting from education while spending all the money it takes to enforce our failed prohibition policies? Furthermore, the California Tax and Regulate initiative on the November ballot would not allow the use of marijuana by people under 21. I certainly don't want more young people smoking marijuana. But some of the teens I helped as a substance-abuse counselor told me that it was easier to purchase marijuana inside their own schools than it was to buy beer or cigarettes from a convenience store. This is not what a successful policy looks like.
...D.A.R.E. can warn people all day about the harm associated with marijuana use. What it refuses to acknowledge is that these arguments only support ending prohibition. If marijuana is so dangerous, D.A.R.E. and its allies ought to support efforts to remove control over distribution from black-market drug dealers.
It's time for D.A.R.E. to take a back seat to evidence-based drug prevention programs that don't use scare tactics. It's time to legalize marijuana."
Monday, February 01, 2010
New Jack City.
"Don't call it a comeback"?
Words.
"The gloves are off.
President Obama made a brief effort to sound bipartisan last week, saying he still hoped to find some ideas that both parties can embrace.
But the affability was mostly tactical, and so were the professions of hope. The reigning emotion at the White House has been frustration -- frustration that Obama's mandate for change has eroded and that Republicans have been so successful in mounting an effective opposition.
The message from Obama's aides, who don't labor under their boss' obligation to sound charitable, has been blunt and bitter: no more Mr. Nice Guy.
...Obama's proclaimed goal of bi-partisanship was always a long shot.
It never meant meeting the GOP all the way in the middle; he hoped his popularity could detach a few moderate Republicans and help him enact big changes. Instead, sharpening partisanship on both sides has eliminated the middle.
By last week, bipartisanship was no longer an aspiration; it was a cudgel.
...In a conversation with journalists, Obama's chief political strategist, David Axelrod, was blunt about what Republicans can expect if they don't find a way to compromise.
"We are going to very visibly seek their support moving forward, and we will shine a bright light on them when they don't," he said. "If they want to block everything . . . they will be held to account."
Axelrod accused the GOP of "rooting for failure."
...Until now, he suggested, Obama has been too gentle. "They didn't pay enough of a price for what was a determined strategy not to work with us," he said.
Now, "they either work with us or they have to pay the price for working against us."
...At the White House last week, Axelrod sounded as if he were preparing talking points for a defeat.
"The country needs to know that we tried to do it, that we reached out, that we tried that opportunity," he said. If the effort fails, he said, he wants to make sure the blame falls on Republicans, not on the failures of disorderly Democrats. "It has to be on them; it's not going to be on us."
Obama hopes to win his popular mandate back by running against the congressional minority, putting their flaws in the spotlight instead of his own.
It won't be transformational. It won't change the way Washington works. It won't be pretty. But it's a strategy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)