So, NO LABELS adopts the Pendulum theory

It is both heartening and sobering to read about the new effort to give us, the Middle Indpendents, a voice.
Bloomberg and Bayh? Lieberman and David Gergen? Well, maybe
Read the "Raging Moderate" description of the No LABELS Launch:

http://newmoderate.com/2010/12/16/what-i-saw-at-the-no-labels-launch-part-1/

Yes, even The New York Times gets the concept of the Pendulum!

Ross Douthat wrote a great Oped piece in Monday's NYT.
It describes the utter partisanship that now drives most of America: we either agree with everything one side does or disagree with everything the other side does.
In a description of the swing of the Pendulum, he decries the phenomenon, and offers a slight ray of hope!

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/opinion/29douthat.html?_r=1&ref=opinion

Arizona protest

James Rubin advocates by-passing the U.S. Senate

Read Rubin's NYT Oped, followed by my letter to the Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/22/opinion/22rubin.html?scp=1&sq=rubin%20treaty&st=Search

"Rubin advocates by-passing the Senate"

"Farewell to the Age of the Treaty", James Rubin, November 22, 2010

 

I was appalled by Professor Rubin's "cojones", to quote his former boss.

His Oped piece does not even try to disguise the intent, and its slippery slope:

- Unlike other countries, the U.S. "Government" (Executive branch) does not control parliament.

- Goals of Treaties are "held hostage by a small number of Senators who represent a tiny fraction of the American public."

- "Fortunately" there is a legislative alternative that only requires a simple majority (as in 53?)

- "Critical procedures" may not even require legislative action and can be established by "executive agreements" [Presumably President Obama and S.of S. Alb... err, Clinton.]

- The clincher: that is what we are doing with Kyoto and Climate Change.

 

SAY WHAT? Did I just read a former State official actually advocate by-passing the requirement for a two-third majority of the Senate, then if that does not work with a simple majority, then "Executive Agreements" will get it done?

Then again, why should we be surprised? Some are already insisting that Kyoto and Cap-and-Trade can be accomplished by the Executive branch through regulation and rulemaking.

Let's just do away with the U.S. Senate!

I wonder why Mr Rubin waited this long: he could have made his suggestion while George W. Bush was President: he and his buddy Putin would have worked things out just fine! 

 

Guedy

Was the Nobel prize in Economics wasted on Paul Krugman?

Krugman's column is meant as a column on the economy.
Week after week however, it has turned into a systematic and vitriolic attack on Republicans.
Below is a link to his column, and my letter:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/22/opinion/22krugman.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=krugman%20blood&st=Search

To the New York Times:

"There will be blood", Paul Krugman.

 

I continue to read Krugman's column waiting for nuggets of economic wisdom, explained as clearly as, say, a submission to the Nobel Committee.

All I read though is an incessant invective against "The Republicans".

Monday's column mentions "Republican" or "GOP" no fewer than 11 times, with utter disgust oozing between the lines, while bemoaning the loss of the "Good old days" when our "two great parties came together...". As SNL would say, REALLY?

I'm sure we want to get back to the cooperation that Bush got from Democrats for instance. "Loser!"

More likely, Krugman is waxing nostalgic about a congress where Republicans were perenially in the opposition, a position they learned to navigate adroitly for 40 straight years.

Sadly, Democrats don't seem to have acquired that skill; thus the only avenue left is total ridicule of the other "Great party", to quote Krugman.

Perhaps more sadly, the editorial pages of the Times are nearly unanimous in that sentiment.

Reading the Oped section of the Week in Review, Krugman, Friedman, Rich, Herbert, Biden are all easily interchangeable. Last week, in a column on living with insecurity, Friedman lamented ("I am disgusted by Republicans") for...not supporting an additional gasoline tax so that "we can stop sending money to the people we are fighting." 

Tsk tsk, Mr Friedman, are we really buying oil from the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan?

What does the Gray Lady hope to accomplish by preaching to the Choir?

 

Guedy

Dennis Miller on Airport Machines and Obamacare

I love Dennis's idea!
Every flyer should be registered as having gone through the machine, and the scan sent to their doctor.
That would in turn eliminate the need for mammograms, chest X-rays, TB screening, etc...
We would save a ton of money in support of Universal Health Care!
Leave it to Miller to make lemonade out of this!

Are you sure you would not vote for gingrich?

Let's forget the ideological battle.
Let's listen instead to what the individual's perspective on American History is.
Gingrich is a Historian (and zoologist)
Let anyone propose an opposing viewpoint that is not ad hominem..
Then we'll be having a real Historical debate:
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=qtjfMjjce2Y