Jots with dots March 3

Conservative outrage dujour: Hillary’s emails http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/03/hillary-clinton-email-transparency-secretary-state/386641/Not a big deal. Sure, it would be if it was a Republican, but understand that everything Republicans do benefits the Koch brothers. So it’s a false equivalence.

Conservative outrage dujour: Executive orders on taxes. http://hotair.com/archives/2015/03/02/good-news-from-josh-earnest-obamas-very-interested-in-using-executive-action-to-raise-new-tax-revenue/ Bernie Sanders has a list of about 8 suggestions. I agree with the carried interest one, while appalled in general over the idea of executive orders. But really, sooner or later we’ll get a court case that puts a stop to this nonsense.

I’m just not sure the country is ready to elect a sexless nag as President: http://www.businessinsider.com/warren-buffett-elizabeth-warren-should-be-less-angry-2015-3

Sexy nag: http://blogs.citypages.com/blotter/2015/03/lisa_bender_addresses_trolls_explains_vote_to_demolish_nicole_curtiss_beloved_orth_house.php Ya know, if Curtis wants all these houses saved, to me there’s an easy solution. Buy them, Nicole.

Got the radio on this morning, which is a rarity for me. Rolled into the 9 hr to some Glenn Beck. Apocalyptic prophesies. Aye carumba, it’s like this all the time I’m sure, right?

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “Jots with dots March 3

  1. pm1956

    Hillary: not a conservative outrage at all. You sourced the Atlantic: not a conservative source at all.. Lots of people are upset by this:
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/03/03/hillary-clintons-private-email-address-at-state-reinforces-everything-people-dont-like-about-her/

    get the conservative chip off of your shoulder.

    Executive Orders: see the Yglesias piece here for an explanation of why this is so. I think he is right (as are you in concern over use of executive orders for stuff like this):
    http://www.vox.com/2015/3/2/8120063/american-democracy-doomed

    Reply
    1. W.E. Peterson Post author

      I’ve embraced a shtick here. Anyway, if it would stop Hilary from getting the nomination, it would matter. Actually, thing is I think she’s going to be revealed as weak through the year. Whereas there was all these thoughts of inevitability, its going to be too tempting and some Democrats of reasonable prominence are going to jump in. One of them will best her for the nomination.

      I read the MattY piece at your prompting, thought it was good, contemplative, not hyperbolic. Chait poo-poos it somewhat this morning.

      Reply
  2. pm1956

    Talkin’ ’bout talk radio……here is a great piece by Conor:
    http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/03/republicans-cant-trust-talk-radio-coverage-of-foreign-policy/386767/

    I know talk radio isn’t your thing, but still, this is entertainment, not politics. Pretty much the same with Fox News. But do the people listening to it know the difference? Some do, but there are a lot who do not make that distinction. Do they vote based on this stuff?

    Reply
  3. pm1956

    maybe I have paranoid tendencies as well…is it just coincidence, or deliberate? Boehner uses all of the kerfluffle of the Netanyahu visit/speech to distract press attention from his backing down on Obama’s “unconstitutional” immigration actions (passing a clean DHS funding bill).

    Reply

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