Nuggets

The point I alluded to a few days ago….http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/09/upshot/the-political-risks-of-an-obama-executive-action-on-immigration.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&_r=0

That executive amnesty is lawful or not is an irrelevancy. The Overton window is open to the possibility, and the President could try it. But why? Scream about how ‘nativist’ these or those voters are all ya want, but fact is executive amnesty gains the Democrat no votes for 2014, and probably loses a bunch. After, I doubt Republicans take the bait and impeach.

WWP comments…. Joe’s got a bone to pick with McFadden over Obamacare. Joe may as well be right on the wonky budgetary and enrollment details. It’s the premise I reject. Joe’s argument about spending is not one I’d bother to have.

http://www.wrywingpolitics.com/mcfaddens-new-ad-proposes-scissoring-health-care-systems-unhealed-wounds/

But Joe goes on to some George Lackoff style analysis on McFadden’s ad. Joe has used Lakoff-ian analysis before. At SRC and on occasions since Joe has whined that Frank Luntz calls the estate tax a ‘death tax’. Joe thinks that’s wholly dishonest even though the event that makes the estate taxable is, you know, ‘death’.

Here, Joe is…. … … right. I said it.  I do see the incongruity of McFadden’s kid sitting in that plush game room and talking about dad as the stern budgetmaster, the ‘daddy’ in Lakoff-ian terms. And it obviously isn’t true, not by the appearances of that game room. McFadden is permissive, coddling, and profligate, at least to a degree.

Anyway… deconstruct it how you will. I don’t think you have to be a class warrior to see that setting as ostentatious and cloying. They should have used a rustic cabin. Everyone like a rustic cabin, there’s no cultural baggage.

Oasis…. Dude is taking his lumps.

http://www.twincities.com/politics/ci_26293165/minnesota-minimum-wage-fees-are-tacky-mark-dayton

I have some sympathy for this fellow, but I think I am going to have to fault him for a lack of prudence with this.

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “Nuggets

    1. Erik Petersen Post author

      As a condition for reform, Republicans have ostensibly asked for some commitment to border security and employment verification. How is that exactly unreasonable?

      Yglesias’ analysis is frivolous. Republicans don’t get a 3rd or 4th best option if they just capitulate. They get nothing for a generation, say until amnesty 2040 rolls around.

      Reply
      1. pm1956

        Obama asked them to provide the necessary funding for border security–they refused. Indeed, they said that they do not trust Obama to secure the border–under any conditions. What they (the GOP) want is simple–they want to reverse the results of the last Presidential election.

        Sorry, but it does not work that way.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s