Comments on FiveThirtyEight: Politics Done Right: Dear Democrats: If You Must Blame, Blame Obama

酒店經紀人, 菲梵酒店經紀, 酒店經紀, 禮服酒店上班, 酒店小姐兼職, 便服酒店經紀, ...

2009-10-02T05:37:17.255-04:00

酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
菲
梵,

外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇 ...

2009-04-16T04:33:00.000-04:00

thanks for allشات-منتدى-يوتيوب-شات صوتي-قصص-العاب...

2009-03-13T22:00:00.000-04:00

thanks for all
شات-
منتدى-
يوتيوب-
شات صوتي-
قصص-
العاب:
صور:
دليل مواقع-
دردشة كتابية-
مركز تحميل:
دليل مواقع-
شات سعودي-
شات الشله-
الود-
صور-
افلام-
سيدتي-
توبيكات:

^^ very nice 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社, 徵...

2009-03-12T22:10:00.001-04:00

^^ nice blog!! ^@^徵信, 徵信網, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵...

2009-03-12T22:10:00.000-04:00

徵信社, 感情挽回, 挽回感情, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 捉姦, 徵信公司, ...

2009-02-09T02:01:00.000-05:00

情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,...

2009-02-08T21:27:00.000-05:00

Anyone who keeps a viper in his bed because it doe...

2008-11-20T09:44:00.000-05:00

Anyone who keeps a viper in his bed because it doesn't bite him most of the time will soon get what he deserves. Lieberman will sell out the entire progressive cause for one ounce of personal aggrandizement. MARK MY WORDS.

As an AIPAC asset Obama only wishes for more Liebe...

2008-11-20T09:01:00.000-05:00

As an AIPAC asset Obama only wishes for more Liebermans to enthusiastically applaud him when he starts his career as the new war-criminal-in-chief.

Nate, nice thread. Can we get a similar one about ...

2008-11-20T08:54:00.000-05:00

Nate, nice thread. Can we get a similar one about reading the tea leaves of prosecution/investigation/post-hoc-impeachment/pardons for the Bush administration, please? Main areas of crime: iraq lies, torture, executive overreach (signing statement, unsigning and violating treaties even with closest allies such as Canada, scientific supression), political prosecution/hiring/firing in justice department, Plame. I'm sure I missed a few but Gonzo is at the center of all 5 I mentioned, he would be a nice first target.

Personally, I'm disappointed by the Lieberman thing, but see the negative implications for frying the bigger fish as small.

42-13, eh? Now I'm convinced: this is what actuall...

2008-11-20T08:21:00.000-05:00

42-13, eh? Now I'm convinced: this is what actually went down.

"they can take the gavel away in two years if he d...

2008-11-20T02:34:00.000-05:00

"they can take the gavel away in two years if he doesn't behave"

He can do a ton of damage in two years, and what makes you think that the spineless democrats will finally stand up to something?

***********************

Ass Rider- A retarded monkey is more intelligent then you. Your insanity seems to increase at a rate proportional to the fame and the amount of money he gets from his book deal.

You need to deal with your jealously. Did you really expect someone to offer you a book deal based on your ignorant bipolar rantings?

I backed Obama 100% and was ecstatic the day after...

2008-11-20T02:31:00.000-05:00

I backed Obama 100% and was ecstatic the day after the election.

Now I feel uneasy:

1. Filling his administration with clintonoids is not change that we need.

2. Trembling before the "might" of Lieberman does not show strength. Obama is so damn fixated on including republicans that the minority party is going to have a tremendous amount of power. Obama is likely going to be cowering in the oval office in fear of the republicans accusations of partisanship. Obama is off to a weak and rocky start. He better find his balls, and soon. The election was all about a total rejection of republican policies and this pussy is kneeling at the feet of this redneck morons.

3. Speaking of no balls, he isn't going to hold Bush & co responsible for their treasonous actions. He can't talk about restoring justice when he is going to let the worst criminals in our nation's history get away with it.

So far he is showing that the democratic party still has no spine. It is depressing that only two weeks ago I thought this country was on the path to redemption and now it is obvious that we are going to get more of the same.

Instead of the fear mongering of Bush, we are going to get somewhat cheaper health care to distract us. It is clear that by many of the posts here that people are already distracted by it and they won't care what he does as long as he provides a slightly better health care system.

Same shit different president.

GaryBLet's see, what was their to gain by turning ...

2008-11-19T23:19:00.000-05:00

GaryB

Let's see, what was their to gain by turning Joe into an enemy?

Getting Joe "Obama's Ideas Are Dangerously Naive" Lieberman the hell away from a committee charged with government oversight.

What's to be gained by leaving him in? He votes Democrat most of he time. He's now fairly bought. What, he'll rule on some homeland committee policy in a way you don't like. Basically: He'll disappear into a useful player ... he might even help McCain play nice.

In 2006, he won over Democrats by promising to investigate the Bush administration's handling of the Katrina response and by committing himself to getting a Democrat elected president in 2008. As you may remember, he went back on both of those promises.

If he can lie to the people that voted him into vote, what makes you think he won't lie to Harry "Thank You Sir May I Have Another" Reid?

This will turn into a game of chicken, where Lieberman continues to fuck us over in an increasingly blatant fashion until we finally have to toss him from the chair mid-session, which will be infinitely tougher than doing it right now.

This was a dumbass lose-lose move by Reid, and Obama's progressive agenda (that he was elected to enact) will have to suffer for it.

While I trust you and Dean, think of the magnitude...

2008-11-19T22:21:00.000-05:00

While I trust you and Dean, think of the magnitude of damage to Joe's legacy if, out of pure spite, he's willing to vote against the two most important issues of both his career and the 21st century.
This is simply more of that red state fear-mongering practiced so well by the current crop of Democratic leaders to get what they want.

I can see Obama just wanting to stick a pacifier in Joe's mouth to shut him up. That actually makes sense in a painful way.

We're very fair and sensitive people we Democrats. It just isn't right that the brat got cookies and we didn't get nuthin, that's all we're sayin.

Gee, Mason, so I'm "daft" and now a "whiny bitch" ...

2008-11-19T21:50:00.000-05:00

Gee, Mason, so I'm "daft" and now a "whiny bitch" because I had the chutzpah to disagree with you?

For others who are actually participating in this comment thread instead of expressing repressed maturity issues through ad hominem attacks, I note only that the choice was not between "embrace" and "cast into the wilderness," but between allowing him to retain his committee chairmanship or not. And the back scratching old boys club that is the US Senate (the most exclusive club in the world!) decided not to embrace change and to leave in a leadership role someone who, I think even Mason would admit, embodies the opposite of the change we need.

And yeah, I've been saying for a while now that I'm afraid Obama will make good on his wild threats of bipartisan compromise. IMHO the way to lead is to, you know, go somewhere new and let others follow... but I'll reserve judgement until I see Obama push a health care or environmentalist bill through... or fail to do so, or water it down to impotence.

And I note again my "daft" point that Lieberman is a non-Republican from a Blue state, so anyone who says this represents bipartisanship is just using that term as a smokescreen for an internecine political power play.

I don't know about you, but I thought the change I...

2008-11-19T21:25:00.000-05:00

I don't know about you, but I thought the change I was voting for was to get leaders with the courage of their convictions. Lieberman retaining his leadership position is not change, either literally (he was already a chairman) or effectively (he was an ineffective chairman, and a really bad Democrat).

Did you think he was kidding about that, "No red America. No blue America. United States of America," stuff? Those are his convictions. That's the change. You don't cast someone into the wilderness because he had the chutzpah to disagree with you, especially if you think he may be useful to you at a later date.

In short: Don't be a whiny bitch because you didn't get your pound of flesh. Washington is a tough town, and you shouldn't go out of your way to piss people off. If you just go about your business, you'll do that naturally.

This was a complete no-brainer from the start, it'...

2008-11-19T20:59:00.000-05:00

This was a complete no-brainer from the start, it's just tiresome reading all the liberal bloggers outraged bla bla.

Let's see, what was their to gain by turning Joe into an enemy? Yes, satisfaction, but politically. Distraction, less coherence, a new flank of attack open to the right.

What's to be gained by leaving him in? He votes Democrat most of he time. He's now fairly bought. What, he'll rule on some homeland committee policy in a way you don't like. Basically: He'll disappear into a useful player ... he might even help McCain play nice.

What are the real issues??
Energy / Environment
Economy
Foreign policy / war

The rest is basically right-wing distractors.

Agree with 350.org, that is. And the public opini...

2008-11-19T20:55:00.000-05:00

Agree with 350.org, that is. And the public opinion Obama is soliciting is all the people who care, as well as experts.

Leaping forward,Just heard from 350, and agree tha...

2008-11-19T20:54:00.000-05:00

Leaping forward,

Just heard from 350, and agree that Obama's recent moves on the environment and soliciting public opinion are ahead of the curve. We who are serious activists are being outflanked by his excellence!

Another Mike said... "eric, why would Republicans ...

2008-11-19T20:12:00.000-05:00

Another Mike said... "eric, why would Republicans ever vote to strip Lieberman of his chair?"
Not one of them has to. The question is whether all 40 of them would stand firm on a filibuster against it, shutting down motion on everything else to protect Joe. I doubt that very much.

"It's not an issue vote, where some Republicans might cross over. Stripping Lieberman is all about partsan politics and that's the one thing Republicans will not cross over on. Besides, even if you could get a Republican vote or two, what makes you think the Democratic caucus would vote in lock step."
Because, as you said, that's a partisan matter. Voting in lockstep on such things as chairmanships is what "party membership" is all about. Even if, within the caucus, there's a contentious fight for Banking Chair (or whatever) that splits 30 to 28, on the floor all 58 will vote for who the caucus picked: or else they're not in the caucus anymore.

I guess I'll feel more comfortable when actually b...

2008-11-19T19:54:00.000-05:00

I guess I'll feel more comfortable when actually begins doing some of those positive things. Not sure yet whether Reconcilitation You Can Believe In is what I signed on for. However, Bush sure f..ed up with his political capital when he tried to change Social Security. Maybe this methodical approach to the presidency is going to take some time to get used to.

And I should also add how stunning it is to me tha...

2008-11-19T19:31:00.000-05:00

And I should also add how stunning it is to me that people on this blog and others, who should know better, keep on thinking that this was a vote to keep Lieberman in the caucus. No! It was all about whether he should keep his Homeland Security chairmanship. And that's it. He should have been removed from that, definitively and without argument. Let him stay in the caucus by all means. But don't let him have his cookie.

And I also get a kick out of those here who are happy as punch that no 'revenge' was taken on Lieberman. Well, that's not true either - he was removed from some environmental subcommittee leadership position. Now you should ask yourself, why bother doing that, if you honestly believe in moving on and being all bipartisan and shit? Is that removal a punishment, retribution, revenge? Kinda sounds like it to me.

So those of you thinking that your side took the high road and said you don't believe in 'revenge' in this affair can get off your high horse, and recognize that you DO believe in revenge just like I do - it's just a matter of degree, apparently.

Obama has the upper hand here, make no mistake. J...

2008-11-19T19:27:00.000-05:00

Obama has the upper hand here, make no mistake. Joe knows he has little room for being a spoiler. Just a glance at the map suggests more opportunities for offense. If Obama and his Congressional allies play the cards right, further Senate gains are probable in 2010. And, they may consider relinquishing his chairmanship(s) sooner if he really becomes that obstructive. In 2012, let's hope we can finally be done with him. CT voters apparently aren't too thrilled with him right now, with poor favorables/unfavorables...

That the Senate Dems took their cues from Obama do...

2008-11-19T19:22:00.000-05:00

That the Senate Dems took their cues from Obama doesn't frankly speak all that well to the way they run things in the Senate. Once Obama resigns from the Senate, his opinions, while interesting, shouldn't be relevant to the issues of how the Senate runs its affairs. That's what's got my panties in a wad.

I hope y'all are right, that Lieberman has been cowed and won't be a thorn in the side of the Senate or the Obama administration. But if history is any guide, it won't be that long before we get stabbed in the back again. The Senate seems to be quite good at writing sternly worded letters, but not at actual discipline. And believe me, the Senate Repubs are taking very good notes on how much they can get away with.