Bloggingheads Community

Bloggingheads Community (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/index.php)
-   Diavlog comments (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=9)
-   -   The Year in Politics (Ben Smith & Dave Weigel) (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?t=6401)

Bloggingheads 12-28-2010 05:05 PM

The Year in Politics (Ben Smith & Dave Weigel)
 

ImmRefDotCom 12-28-2010 06:29 PM

Two Lying Hacks edition
 
As usual, this was a waste of time. However, since Weigel mentioned the 'partiers and immigration once or twice, it might be helpful to point out that they largely ignored that vital and fundamental issue for over a year. They mostly ignored the latest amnesty push and the only good thing I can say about them is that major r/w bloggers were even worse. And, there's definitely going to be a lot of video of 'partiers asking candidates questions but, as with all their other videos, they'll just throw tantrums or ask open-ended questions that allow the candidates to give stock speeches. And, they'll shout down those few people who might be able to ask candidates things that will really put them on the spot.

P.S. Dave Weigel wrote about me on his site and then refused to approve a comment I left showing how he was wrong. Giving a "Right of Reply" is time-honored journalistic practice, but then again Weigel isn't much of a journalist. Details at the link.

AemJeff 12-28-2010 06:34 PM

Re: Two Lying Hacks edition
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ImmRefDotCom (Post 193153)
As usual, this was a waste of time. However, since Weigel mentioned the 'partiers and immigration once or twice, it might be helpful to point out that they largely ignored that vital and fundamental issue for over a year. They mostly ignored the latest amnesty push and the only good thing I can say about them is that major r/w bloggers were even worse. And, there's definitely going to be a lot of video of 'partiers asking candidates questions but, as with all their other videos, they'll just throw tantrums or ask open-ended questions that allow the candidates to give stock speeches. And, they'll shout down those few people who might be able to ask candidates things that will really put them on the spot.

P.S. Dave Weigel wrote about me on his site and then refused to approve a comment I left showing how he was wrong. Giving a "Right of Reply" is time-honored journalistic practice, but then again Weigel isn't much of a journalist. Details at the link.

Wow. Keep flogging that! Eventually somebody, somewhere is certain to give a damn.

carkrueger 12-28-2010 08:30 PM

Re: The Year in Politics (Ben Smith & Dave Weigel)
 
The number one driver of the 2012 elections for the GOP will be healthcare repeal.

To the extent that healthcare becomes a central and animated issue will determine the Tea Party drive. Conservatives rank healthcare repeal above austerity measures. No doubt.

If the econmy shows signs of growth - Obama wins. If not, the game is open. If Obama does win my beat is the GOP keeps the house and takes the Senate.

My 2 Cents.

Baltimoron 12-28-2010 09:00 PM

Re: The Year in Politics (Ben Smith & Dave Weigel)
 
Generally, I thought this diavlog was informative. However, when it came to entitlements, I was surprised neither Weigel nor Smith got beyond this tired talk about Social Security. Health care reform is an entitlement for one, and it can't be emphasized too much. But, military spending and subsidies are even more costly. The problem with this echo chamber diavlogs, like WIB and now this one, is, that even bhTV reinforces the trite memes stuck in the MSM. Give me links, but let it be to people with some clues.

ginger baker 12-29-2010 12:05 AM

Re: The Year in Politics (Ben Smith & Dave Weigel)
 
Yawn. For "The Year in Politics" this discussion between two journalists *cough* posing as political scientists is myopic, trivial, and not even entertaining. Why sweet jesus why?

uncle ebeneezer 12-29-2010 01:58 AM

Re: 56
 
% either favor HCR or believe it isn't Liberal enough.

chiwhisoxx 12-29-2010 04:49 AM

Re: The Year in Politics (Ben Smith & Dave Weigel)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Baltimoron (Post 193160)
Generally, I thought this diavlog was informative. However, when it came to entitlements, I was surprised neither Weigel nor Smith got beyond this tired talk about Social Security. Health care reform is an entitlement for one, and it can't be emphasized too much. But, military spending and subsidies are even more costly. The problem with this echo chamber diavlogs, like WIB and now this one, is, that even bhTV reinforces the trite memes stuck in the MSM. Give me links, but let it be to people with some clues.

Not sure exactly what you're referencing with the spending, but Social Security ate up a bigger chunk of the budget pie in 2010 than DoD spending. So yeah, probably not just useless echo chamber banter.

Ocean 12-29-2010 08:49 AM

Re: 56
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by uncle ebeneezer (Post 193169)
% either favor HCR or believe it isn't Liberal enough.

And the approval has gone from 39% in March to 43% in December, disapproval (because it's too liberal) from 43% in March to 37% in December. Here.

conncarroll 12-29-2010 09:37 AM

Re: The Year in Politics (Ben Smith & Dave Weigel)
 
Don't listen to the haters guys, this was a great conversation. Especially on Coburn as model for Tea Party members of congress. Some nitpicks:
1. Overlooking the role negative headlines have played in keeping Obamacare unpopular. The billion dollar hits that Obamacare inflicted on Fortune 500 bottom lines,Exploding health insurance premiums, Companies dumping their health care plans, just to name a few. Far more Americans feel these effects than are happy about adding their unemployed 26 year-old to their health care plan.
2. Overlooking the starring role Medicaid will play in the austerity fights at the state level. Medicaid is now the largest spending item on most state budgets. Medicaid bailout stimulus funds will run out on June 30th. Over half of all Americans who are supposed to gain health coverage will do so through the Obamacare Medicaid expansion, which, while it does cover the benefit costs for the first three years, does not cover any of the administrative costs for the expanded roles. The fight to prevent federal bailouts of California and Illinois will be fierce.

DenvilleSteve 12-29-2010 10:35 AM

Re: The Year in Politics (Ben Smith & Dave Weigel)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by conncarroll (Post 193183)
1. Overlooking the role negative headlines have played in keeping Obamacare unpopular.

ok, but what are the republicans going to propose as an alternative? I think we have to get those who can't pay out of the private system. They are distorting the pricing mechanism. Replace medicare and medicaid with government run health care clinics.

Quote:

Originally Posted by conncarroll (Post 193183)
... the fight to prevent federal bailouts of California and Illinois will be fierce ...

how will it be a fight? The republicans in the house simply don't initiate any spending bills that give bailout money to the states. We only agree to such bailouts if the democrats agree to support an increase in states rights.

-Steve

bkjazfan 12-29-2010 10:56 AM

Re: The Year in Politics (Ben Smith & Dave Weigel)
 
It appears that there are many variables to consider when assessing the Obama presidency. Too many to wrap my head around. The one that sticks out to me living in California is the economy and jobs. Being a blue state he should take it in '12 but the repercussions this state is suffering due to employment losses and the like are becoming quite noticeable. My take is it will take years before things turn around here. There are just too many industries fleeing The Golden State for any kind of stabilization to occur. That coupled with the high cost of living portends a gloomy "new normal."

Meanwhile, yesterday at Disneyland the park had to stop admitting people for a few hours due to overcrowded conditions. It was the second straight day where they had over 75,000 visitors. Go figure.

John

conncarroll 12-29-2010 11:37 AM

Re: The Year in Politics (Ben Smith & Dave Weigel)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bkjazfan (Post 193189)
It appears that there are many variables to consider when assessing the Obama presidency. Too many to wrap my head around. The one that sticks out to me living in California is the economy and jobs. Being a blue state he should take it in '12 but the repercussions this state is suffering due to employment losses and the like are becoming quite noticeable.

Obama will cruise to an easy victory in California in 2012. It will not even be close. Even if unemployment is at 15%. Government unions own the Golden State. No GOP candidate will ever win any statewide wide election until the government unions have been broken.

bkjazfan 12-29-2010 11:50 AM

Re: The Year in Politics (Ben Smith & Dave Weigel)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by conncarroll (Post 193191)
Obama will cruise to an easy victory in California in 2012. It will not even be close. Even if unemployment is at 15%. Government unions own the Golden State. No GOP candidate will ever win any statewide wide election until the government unions have been broken.

The recent election confirmed your opinion that the democrats in all the statwide offices are running the show here. Some are opining that Governor to be Jerry Brown may pull a "Nixon in China" maneuver and start saying no to the public employee unions. We'll see.

John

badhatharry 12-29-2010 12:02 PM

Re: The Year in Politics (Ben Smith & Dave Weigel)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bkjazfan (Post 193189)
My take is it will take years before things turn around here. There are just too many industries fleeing The Golden State for any kind of stabilization to occur. That coupled with the high cost of living portends a gloomy "new normal."

You edited your comment about the rain! I was going to say that we live in the eastern sierra and I'm looking out my window watching it snow like crazy. We heard today that the snowfall is 200% of normal. But what do you bet they'll say we have a drought this summer? I think that's always a given. My cynical side says this is one of the state's ways of controlling the peeps.

As far as the high cost of living...if the economy was left to adjust itself I bet things could normalize. However we have legislation such as minimum wage and our endless list of environmental protections that won't let this occur.

badhatharry 12-29-2010 12:24 PM

Re: The Year in Politics (Ben Smith & Dave Weigel)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bkjazfan (Post 193192)
The recent election confirmed your opinion that the democrats in all the statwide offices are running the show here. Some are opining that Governor to be Jerry Brown may pull a "Nixon in China" maneuver and start saying no to the public employee unions. We'll see.

John

Ah, wouldn't that be lovely?
Wouldn't that be more accurately called a "Christie in Jersey"?

DenvilleSteve 12-29-2010 12:35 PM

Re: The Year in Politics (Ben Smith & Dave Weigel)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by conncarroll (Post 193191)
Obama will cruise to an easy victory in California in 2012. It will not even be close. Even if unemployment is at 15%. Government unions own the Golden State. No GOP candidate will ever win any statewide wide election until the government unions have been broken.

my observation is that it is the native born who have the goverment jobs. They have the connections and insider info needed to know how to qualify and apply for that kind of employment. I see a divide developing in the country between foreign born and the natives. The foreign born participating in a cash based, black market like economic system. If Sacramento has to become more aggressive in collecting taxes from the immigrant communities ( I am assuming there is a thriving black market there ), then those currently democrat voters might turn against the native born goverment workers living the good life.

chiwhisoxx 12-29-2010 12:38 PM

Re: The Year in Politics (Ben Smith & Dave Weigel)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by conncarroll (Post 193183)
Don't listen to the haters guys, this was a great conversation. Especially on Coburn as model for Tea Party members of congress. Some nitpicks:
1. Overlooking the role negative headlines have played in keeping Obamacare unpopular. The billion dollar hits that Obamacare inflicted on Fortune 500 bottom lines,Exploding health insurance premiums, Companies dumping their health care plans, just to name a few. Far more Americans feel these effects than are happy about adding their unemployed 26 year-old to their health care plan.
2. Overlooking the starring role Medicaid will play in the austerity fights at the state level. Medicaid is now the largest spending item on most state budgets. Medicaid bailout stimulus funds will run out on June 30th. Over half of all Americans who are supposed to gain health coverage will do so through the Obamacare Medicaid expansion, which, while it does cover the benefit costs for the first three years, does not cover any of the administrative costs for the expanded roles. The fight to prevent federal bailouts of California and Illinois will be fierce.

Adding on to the second point, Peter Suderman wrote a great article for Reason about Medicaid, Obamacare, and the states:

http://reason.com/archives/2010/09/1...tes/singlepage

Baltimoron 12-29-2010 08:25 PM

Re: The Year in Politics (Ben Smith & Dave Weigel)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by chiwhisoxx (Post 193174)
Not sure exactly what you're referencing with the spending, but Social Security ate up a bigger chunk of the budget pie in 2010 than DoD spending. So yeah, probably not just useless echo chamber banter.

No, I disagree. It's not that I dispute the facts about pensions. It's that I think that military spending and subsidies put structural reforms front and center in a way pension reform doesn't. But, that's misleading, because concentrating on numbers obscures deeper trends, like demographics and the politics of reform.

Quote:

In the past the political priorities and voting preferences of the elderly were much like everyone else’s. Mr Binstock says this may be because ideological, economic or national-security issues loomed larger than greybeard ones, such as pensions. Or it may be because politicians, terrified of political retribution, avoided anything that would offend the old.

Advocacy groups, especially the almost 40m-member AARP (formerly the American Association of Retired Persons), have exploited this fear. Their support helped George Bush create the Medicare drug benefit in 2003, and their opposition helped kill his proposal for private Social Security accounts a few years later. In December, while most of Washington was transfixed by the tax deal between Mr Obama and the Republicans, AARP took aim at a scheduled cut in Medicare fees to doctors. After 100,000 of its members wrote, e-mailed and phoned, Congress voted almost unanimously to override the cuts, despite the $15 billion price tag.

In recent years the elderly have become a more distinctive voting block. People over 65 increasingly identify themselves as conservative and vote Republican, while young voters do the opposite, according to Andrew Kohut of the Pew Research Centre. The pattern was particularly striking in the last mid-term elections (see chart 2), when Republicans’ share of the over-65 vote exceeded the Democrats’ by a whopping 21 percentage points. For those under 25 the shares were reversed.

This may reflect a “cohort effect”, the notion that a person’s lifelong voting habits are established early on. Charlie Cook, a political analyst, says today’s retired were shaped by the perceived failure of Jimmy Carter in the late 1970s and the success of Ronald Reagan in the 1980s. In 2008 some may also have identified more with the 72-year-old John McCain than the 47-year-old Mr Obama.

But it was the result of the 2010 mid-term elections that most clearly revealed entitlements as a driving political force. Andrea Campbell of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology believes it was the creation of Social Security in the 1930s and Medicare in the 1960s that transformed the elderly into the most politically engaged age group in America. Ever more comfortable in retirement, they had the time and the means to follow politics and an issue to motivate them. But threats to the programmes seldom seemed significant or imminent. That may have changed in 2010 with Mr Obama’s health-care reform.

The president sought to insulate the elderly from any bad effects. While workers with employer-provided insurance will have their tax benefits curtailed and the affluent will pay Medicare tax on their investment income, the elderly got an immediate expansion of their Medicare drug coverage. In spite of that they remained, as they had begun, staunchly opposed to Mr Obama’s reform. “They already have national health care,” Ms Campbell explains, “and can’t imagine extending coverage to 16% of the population without a hit to their benefits.”

Republicans made hay with this. In August 2009 Sarah Palin falsely claimed that government “death panels” would decide who received health care. Republican senators targeted the Independent Payment Advisory Board, an expert panel created under the new law to recommend changes to Medicare coverage. Last July they accused it of threatening “access to quality care for seniors”—while at the same time, perversely, they attacked the health bill’s failure to rein in “skyrocketing costs”.

Traditionally, Republicans have been less trusted than Democrats on health care and Social Security. Polling by Rasmussen Reports suggests that by late 2010 they had made up this deficit. Whether they can maintain this near-parity is another matter. Their tea-party supporters are passionate about cutting the deficit and government spending, yet doing either without touching benefits for the elderly is virtually impossible. Last year Mr Obama’s bipartisan deficit commission recommended expanding the powers of Medicare’s cost-control panel and scrapping or reforming the CLASS Act, which creates a new entitlement for long-term care of the old and frail. Paul Ryan and Alice Rivlin, Republican and Democratic commission members, have separately proposed replacing traditional Medicare with vouchers for private care. All those proposals are complete anathema to the elderly.

They are not alone. Ms Campbell says that young and middle-aged voters are just as opposed to benefit cuts, perhaps because they have elderly parents or realise that they too will one day need the benefits. Polls find that, among all voters, the single most popular fix is to raise the cap on earnings subject to the payroll tax—no doubt because this would be borne by a minority of affluent working people. Yet to finance the boomers’ retirement with no cut in benefits would require unprecedented increases in taxes, which could be even more unpopular. The boomers’ capacity to upset the political apple cart is as great as it ever was.
I think tackling military spending and subsidies puts the issue of what a future American way of life should be in a way pensions reforms can't. I might be violating my agonist leanings by sounding deliberative, but I thinking the warring factions of entitled groups in American i.e., the elderly, Wall Street, corporate and agribusiness interests, etc. should have to defend what they get from the government and then let everyone fight it out. Starting out with pensions is a softball for the elderly, and even I don't want to argue with my parents about their retirement. I also think none of this is possible without constitutional reform, namely how Congress and the executive work together.

Markos 12-30-2010 02:50 AM

Re: The Year in Politics (Ben Smith & Dave Weigel)
 
VERY EXCELLENT DIAVLOG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Baz 01-02-2011 09:29 PM

Two Lying Hacks edition
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by AemJeff (Post 193154)
Wow. Keep flogging that! Eventually somebody, somewhere is certain to give a damn.

What?

I agree with him that Weigel shouldn't be called a journalist. A journalist should present facts to the public without fear or commitment to their masters in power. You jumped to Weigels defence also on his previous charade when he criticized wikileaks for "making it more difficult for us to prosecute wars". And by "us" what he means is his secret masters in power who he'll back up even if it means mass murdering a million innocent Iraqi's.

AemJeff 01-03-2011 12:26 PM

Re: Two Lying Hacks edition
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Baz (Post 193426)
What?

I agree with him that Weigel shouldn't be called a journalist. A journalist should present facts to the public without fear or commitment to their masters in power. You jumped to Weigels defence also on his previous charade when he criticized wikileaks for "making it more difficult for us to prosecute wars". And by "us" what he means is his secret masters in power who he'll back up even if it means mass murdering a million innocent Iraqi's.

Check the poster's history. He's been nursing a grudge forever, and it's pointless. I have defended Weigel, and still do (despite disagreeing with a lot of his POV) - but that wasn't my point there. I'll be kind and mostly ignore the tin-foil hat aspect of those last couple of sentences.

Baz 01-03-2011 05:39 PM

Re: Two Lying Hacks edition
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by AemJeff (Post 193461)
I'll be kind and mostly ignore the tin-foil hat aspect of those last couple of sentences.

Ah I see, your like the liberal version of Fox news, deviate from the mainstream discussion and your a conspiracy theorist. Are you gonna deny reality and say a million innocent Iraqi's were not murdered by US forces who are still occupying their country against their will while people like Weigel complain about wikileaks revealing facts to the public.

chiwhisoxx 01-03-2011 07:31 PM

Re: Two Lying Hacks edition
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Baz (Post 193476)
Ah I see, your like the liberal version of Fox news, deviate from the mainstream discussion and your a conspiracy theorist. Are you gonna deny reality and say a million innocent Iraqi's were not murdered by US forces who are still occupying their country against their will while people like Weigel complain about wikileaks revealing facts to the public.

*you're

Baz 01-03-2011 09:25 PM

Two Lying Hacks edition
 
Thank you. I'm glad to see someone is paying close attention.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:08 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.