tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post4584882931928449071..comments2024-03-28T15:24:53.579-04:00Comments on Rational Nation USA: On Raising the Debt Ceiling...Les Carpenterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01120280762698472496noreply@blogger.comBlogger85125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post-14059196792306505392014-02-03T18:33:37.256-05:002014-02-03T18:33:37.256-05:00The closest that MSNBC has is probably Chuck Todd....The closest that MSNBC has is probably Chuck Todd. He's not too bad.Will "take no prisoners" Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02315659209094683602noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post-67639391854129318132014-02-02T07:33:56.400-05:002014-02-02T07:33:56.400-05:00I have said many times that there's not much d...I have said many times that there's not much difference between Fox News and MSNBC.<br /><br />Well, there is some. You have pointed out Shep Smith, Will. Does MSNBC have anyone to match him?<br /><br />And then there is the fact that the MSNBC fans tend to number among the a lot more the censorship freaks who want government to intervene to silence their "enemy", Fox News. <br /><br />Fox News fans? Not as much of a problem. They laugh at MSNBC, but there is not near as much of the hatred of the First Amendment and demand to censor their "rival".dmarkshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07269773990064736457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post-79274967070981165932014-01-31T22:41:42.291-05:002014-01-31T22:41:42.291-05:0047 isn't THAT bad. I mean, is their viewership...47 isn't THAT bad. I mean, is their viewership all that much more than that?Will "take no prisoners" Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02315659209094683602noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post-11775993957468898332014-01-31T20:25:31.143-05:002014-01-31T20:25:31.143-05:00Let's see: Turn off MSNBC?
A Facebook page wi...Let's see: Turn off MSNBC?<br /><br />A Facebook page with a mere <a href="https://www.facebook.com/pages/Turn-off-Msnbc/130416557010503" rel="nofollow">47 likes</a><br /><br />Turn off Fox News? A Facebook page with <a href="https://www.facebook.com/turnofffox" rel="nofollow">6402 likes</a><br /><br />That's 136 times as many kooks wanting to crush Fox News for not conforming to their ideology than the number of kooks wanting to crush MSNBC for not conforming to their ideology.<br /><br />Things are really tilted way out of whack, at least on this matter, when it comes to comparing each side's tolerance for diversity in opinion and respect for the freedom of the press.dmarkshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07269773990064736457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post-22996672917809449252014-01-31T20:20:19.786-05:002014-01-31T20:20:19.786-05:00Of course, RN. You are quite correct. I would oppo...Of course, RN. You are quite correct. I would oppose a similar campaign to the one directed against Fox News, if it were against MSNBC instead. If I could find one....<br /><br />Personally, it does not offend me that someone watches or listens to any of thesedmarkshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07269773990064736457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post-23026997830620442312014-01-31T20:03:34.046-05:002014-01-31T20:03:34.046-05:00"This puts me in contrast with the more jackb..."This puts me in contrast with the more jackbooted wing of the left that wants to silence Fox News (such as active silencing campaign by those who hate free speech)"<br /><br />And then there is the jack booted wing of the libertarian and conservative activists that are as equally as nefarious and repugnant.<br /><br />Just being objective and balanced.Les Carpenterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01120280762698472496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post-26994575470763150492014-01-31T19:31:58.911-05:002014-01-31T19:31:58.911-05:00Will Remember RN said, "Sometimes frustratio...Will Remember RN said, "Sometimes frustration causes people to say " stuff" they may not normally say. Ms. Shaw I'm sure was frustrated."<br /><br />Given that, I've made my point, she's made hers, and that's fine. Though I am sure Mr. Dervish is going to spin (whirl like a dervish?) in order to make it into something it wasn't at all, like his claim that Shaw's statement was directed at me somehow.<br /><br />(My own view on such matters is that even if/when I disagree strongly, I never want "them" to shut up. Even if it is MSNBC. This puts me in contrast with the more jackbooted wing of the left that wants to silence Fox News (such as <a href="http://turnofffox.tumblr.com/post/3205438828/petition-turn-off-fox-bad-news-for-america-free" rel="nofollow">active silencing campaign</a> by those who hate free speech)dmarkshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07269773990064736457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post-57698479893548303262014-01-31T18:40:59.069-05:002014-01-31T18:40:59.069-05:00I wonder if Shaw thinks that the anti- Vietnam War...I wonder if Shaw thinks that the anti- Vietnam War protesters should have STFU during the regimes of LBJ and Nixon.Will "take no prisoners" Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02315659209094683602noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post-2232740695445233132014-01-31T16:27:11.089-05:002014-01-31T16:27:11.089-05:00True, has happened to all of us. True, has happened to all of us. dmarkshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07269773990064736457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post-12563545753281559702014-01-31T16:16:54.256-05:002014-01-31T16:16:54.256-05:00Sometimes frustration causes people to say " ...Sometimes frustration causes people to say " stuff" they may not normally say. Ms. Shaw I'm sure was frustrated.Les Carpenterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01120280762698472496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post-13561859603588627722014-01-31T16:14:29.185-05:002014-01-31T16:14:29.185-05:00I view the CRITERIA Ms. Shaw stated in her comment...I view the CRITERIA Ms. Shaw stated in her comment as specific. In that regard I can not disagree with Mr. Sanders statement.<br /><br />Now if one wishes to diagree and argue whether her particular view is "right" or "wrong" that is another matter.Les Carpenterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01120280762698472496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post-51468587722624900272014-01-31T15:56:35.467-05:002014-01-31T15:56:35.467-05:00In summary, asking those who dissent against the m...In summary, asking those who dissent against the most powerful ruler on the planet to "STFU" (regardless of how narrow we interpret this demand) shows a disrespect for the freedom of dissent.<br /><br />Hillary Clinton famously said "Dissent is patriotic". While there is some ironic amusement due to the times when she has bashed dissent, it is indeed a valid "sound bite" that is good to abide by. The opposite of what Hillary said is to tell critics of a President to STFU.dmarkshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07269773990064736457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post-26105726757171617182014-01-31T15:46:57.542-05:002014-01-31T15:46:57.542-05:00Delay/obstruction that works for the common good b...Delay/obstruction that works for the common good by obstructing very negative actions is anything but a problem. <br /><br />"The only reason Dennis thinks it isn't a problem is because the majority being tyrannized is Democratic."<br /><br />That is pure imagination on your part, and perhaps an intentional lie. As it contradicts my views that the Democrats in Congress had every right to obstruct Bush, for a similar example.<br /><br /><br /><br />Thank you for quoting the Federalist Papers, Mr. Sanders. I look forward for you telling me where these rough drafts and notes were passed into law.dmarkshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07269773990064736457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post-43446078548532199932014-01-31T15:43:26.498-05:002014-01-31T15:43:26.498-05:00RN: The quotation is very broad, even as you summa...RN: The quotation is very broad, even as you summarize it.<br /><br />As Mr. Sanders took it to be specific to me (or "Dennis"), I don't think he was correct in either case: I never took what Shaw said personally. And very very incorrect when he accuses me (or "Dennis") of supporting illegal wars, as there have been none that I support. dmarkshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07269773990064736457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post-11062611409960513772014-01-31T13:06:19.769-05:002014-01-31T13:06:19.769-05:00No, she didn't make that broad of a statement....No, she didn't make that broad of a statement. She said, and I quote... "Unless people are full non-violent, anti-war activists for all wars and skirmishes everywhere on this planet [AND FOR EVERY REASON], they need to STFU about their hurt feelings when presidents do what they've being doing since the beginning of this country"<br /><br />dmarks, Mr. Sanders is correct on this one. A careful and thorough reading of Ms. Shaw's remark, which was carefully constructed, clearly does NOT say in a general sweeping atatement STFU. Her statement was very specific.Les Carpenterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01120280762698472496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post-9117263021577304342014-01-31T10:37:20.883-05:002014-01-31T10:37:20.883-05:00Dennis: Shaw specifically said the critics of the ...<i>Dennis: Shaw specifically said the critics of the President should "STFU".</i><br /><br />No, she didn't make that broad of a statement. She said, and I quote... "Unless people are full non-violent, anti-war activists for all wars and skirmishes everywhere on this planet [AND FOR EVERY REASON], they need to STFU about their hurt feelings when presidents do what they've being doing since the beginning of this country"<br /><br />This was a statement about hypocrites who criticize Obama in his role as commander in chief when they've vociferously supported past illegal wars by past presidents with an "R" after their name (I take that to mean YOU, Dennis). Although Shaw doesn't get complete agreement from me (in that I think there are legitimate criticisms to be made)... but, regarding the hypocrite Dennis, she is correct (and Dennis definitely whines about that). Also, I have no "imaginary man-crush". Not one that shares your name. Not one with any other name either.Dervish Sandershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13671865801885224353noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post-55795639011366602212014-01-31T10:22:33.257-05:002014-01-31T10:22:33.257-05:00When the constitution was written two of the autho...When the constitution was written two of the authors of the Federalist papers DID worry about "factions". Alexander Hamilton wrote about the problem in Federalist No. 9, and James Madison wrote about the problem in Federalist No. 10. Neither suggested it couldn't NOT be a problem but was "designed into the system" that one party could decide the government shouldn't work. Although they worried about a "tyranny of the majority", today we have a tyranny of the minority. The only reason Dennis thinks it isn't a problem is because the majority being tyrannized is Democratic.<br /><br /><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_No._10#Modern_analysis_and_reaction" rel="nofollow">From Wikipedia</a>: <i>Garry Wills is a noted critic of Madison's argument in Federalist No. 10. In his book Explaining America, he adopts the position of Robert Dahl in arguing that Madison's framework does not necessarily enhance the protections of minorities or ensure the common good. Instead, Wills claims: "Minorities can make use of dispersed and staggered governmental machinery to clog, delay, slow down, hamper, and obstruct the majority. But these weapons for delay are given to the minority irrespective of its factious or nonfactious character; and they can be used against the majority irrespective of its factious or nonfactious character. What Madison prevents is not faction, but action. What he protects is not the common good but delay as such".</i><br /><br />Delay/obstruction that works against the common good is what we currently have... and YES, it is a problem.Dervish Sandershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13671865801885224353noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post-31986938920449430392014-01-31T06:13:22.653-05:002014-01-31T06:13:22.653-05:00Addressing Mr. Sanders directly. You are running ...Addressing Mr. Sanders directly. You are running on assumptions without apparently having read the comments. Shaw specifically said the critics of the President should ""STFU". She made no reference to your imaginary man-crush, Dennis. No basis for there to be a perception of me "whining".dmarkshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07269773990064736457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post-3078388705859566502014-01-31T06:07:06.497-05:002014-01-31T06:07:06.497-05:00"....partisan like you..."
Be that as i..."....partisan like you..."<br /><br />Be that as it may, I have held my partisanship in check in these comments. You have let yours dive everything.<br /><br />Obama = Lincoln? Raises eyebrow... you certainly are not a historian.<br /><br />Anyway, my point in bringing up Obama's low skills was to point out the "problem" of his not being able to ram through his agenda unimpeded (even when good own party is in control) has a lot to do with his own lack of capability, and can't be blamed entirely on others.dmarkshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07269773990064736457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post-45055205310461029322014-01-31T05:59:46.296-05:002014-01-31T05:59:46.296-05:00Will: as if such obstruction, which was designed i...Will: as if such obstruction, which was designed into the system, is a problem.dmarkshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07269773990064736457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post-72806180157048915882014-01-30T23:31:12.579-05:002014-01-30T23:31:12.579-05:00And right after she chided dmarks for not being an...And right after she chided dmarks for not being an historian she goes out and makes some claim about Obama being the most obstructed President in U.S. history. My suggestion is that she open up a history book and learn about the Andrew Johnson and Woodrow Wilson administrations.Will "take no prisoners" Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02315659209094683602noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post-44817244242540782532014-01-30T23:01:49.949-05:002014-01-30T23:01:49.949-05:00Shaw doesn't have time to chronicle Mr. Obama&...Shaw doesn't have time to chronicle Mr. Obama's transgressions (lying to the American people about healthcare and Benghazi, sextupling the drone attacks into going on 4 countries now, continuing Mr. Bush's policies of rendition and warrentless wiretapping, sending 30,000 American youngsters into that meat-grinder over in Afghanistan, going after the press in a manner that is unlike any other since Nixon, etc.). She's much too busy chiding Romney for his having put a dog on the roof of his car.Will "take no prisoners" Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02315659209094683602noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post-43949702494338688012014-01-30T18:37:57.661-05:002014-01-30T18:37:57.661-05:00Well said Shaw. You are 100 percent correct. Also,...Well said Shaw. You are 100 percent correct. Also, I don't know WHO Dennis thinks is telling him to STFU. RN is publishing his comments. Just a lame whine as far as I can see.Dervish Sandershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13671865801885224353noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post-34807406442441634412014-01-30T13:11:04.987-05:002014-01-30T13:11:04.987-05:00Context please! Did Mr. Turley explain how obstr...Context please! Did Mr. Turley explain how obstructionist the GOPers have been? Of course not. Presidents don't act in a vacuum. Mr. Bush actually had cooperation from the Democrats when he needed to pass his proposed legislation; Mr. Obama has had NONE.ZERO. So I'm not impressed with Turley's opinion, since no president has had to deal with Congressional obstruction and intransigence on this level ever in our history.Shaw Kenawehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08637273000409613497noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post-22849449600099374712014-01-30T11:43:13.074-05:002014-01-30T11:43:13.074-05:00According to the Christian Science Monitor, Bush h...According to the Christian Science Monitor, Bush had 165 executive orders in his first 5 years and Obama's had 167. And this is what Jonathan Turley has to say about our dear President - "It's really the character of the actions, and their subject. In my view, Obama has surpassed George W. Bush in the level of circumvention of Congress and the assertion of excessive presidential power. I don't think it's a close question." He also characterized the Obama administration as the "rise of an uber Presidency."Will "take no prisoners" Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02315659209094683602noreply@blogger.com