Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[CGVT]

Geezer must had dozed off during Franken's questioning.

DeVos looked like a clueless PTA mom.

Fuck her.

[froot loops]

I'm not sure she would sully herself with the PTA.

[iam416]

Unfortunately for the Ds, being in favor of school choice isn't going to move the needle. And I doubt their confirmation efforts will do much, either. But, you can tell, even by the left-leaning press organizations, that school choice is a position that they HAAAAAATE.

It is definitely worth watching the entire testimony rather than relying in snippets. I have no interest in watching the entire testimony, so I try not to rely on the snippets. Though, I did learn she gave some money to FIRE. Good for her.

[Jeff Buchanan]

Watched the second part of the PBS series, America Divided last night.

The portrayal of the Freedom Caucus and the departure of Speaker Boehner was troubling. VA's Eric Cantor (who was surprisingly defeated by David Brat in 2014) and Boehner were identified in this presentation as wanting to work with Obama. As such they became targets for elimination by the Tea Party and Freedom Caucus.

When you get inside this stuff, the Congress, and see how disruptive R's have been to the established legislative process, ostensibly to advance their own conservative agenda, it's ugly. As the story is told by the narrator of this documentary, in the back ground, you hear Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Medved, Michael Savage, Mark Levin voice overs just ripping Obama and the D's whipping up support for the conservative - read Tea Party - agenda; that was ugly.

I can see why so many voters, unexpectedly, went for Trump over the potential of paving the way for the Clintons and the continuation of the hated failure of the D's agenda. OTH, I can't say for sure what the R's agenda is - repeal the ACA, re-write the tax code, keep immigrants out of the US? I think if I felt better about what the Republican Conservative Agenda was, beyond what I actually think it might be, I could claim allegiance to a Republican, conservative agenda.

Frankly, I don't think the R's agenda - as it is unfolding under the takeover of Congress lead by the Tea Party and Freedom caucus is terribly appealing to me. I am, however, completely willing to see how things unfold with Trump in the White House. The first test is clearly going to be the ACA, then immigration and right up there with that will be the budget and entitlement programs.

[iam416]

The opposition party opposes. They don't have to stand for anything; they just have to be adamantly opposed to some things. The big things Obama wanted to do (and/or did) were easy for them to oppose.

I mean, they were absolutely horsewhipped in 2008. They had nothing. All they could do was oppose or go gently into the night.

The Ds are sort of in the same position. It's not as decisive as it was in 2008, at least Federally, so the Rs have to grind a bit. The Senate, in particular, will be a real limiting factor, IMO.

In some regards it reminds me of the Ds and GWB's foreign policy. They excoriated his foreign policy decisions -- in some cases, rightly so -- made a bunch of promises about changing shit and about how the World will love us again! And, man, you get into that chair and you realize that it's not going to be like that. There's no magic wand.

[froot loops]

Unfortunately for the Ds, being in favor of school choice isn't going to move the needle. And I doubt their confirmation efforts will do much, either. But, you can tell, even by the left-leaning press organizations, that school choice is a position that they HAAAAAATE.

It is definitely worth watching the entire testimony rather than relying in snippets. I have no interest in watching the entire testimony, so I try not to rely on the snippets. Though, I did learn she gave some money to FIRE. Good for her.

I don't think the DeVos experiment has went well at all in Michigan. It's one thing to be for school of choice or charter schools, but get a person from a place where is has worked well. I have kids in both private and public schools, believe me I never would have guessed that but the funding cuts have decimated the local district.

The proficiency versus growth question is important one and one that was teed up for her. If you are for school of choice or charters or anything of the sort, that would be the argument you should be seizing. It is really the distillation of the reason a parent sends their kid to a different school. Anyone who gets those report cards that have Ms, Ds and Ps knows what I'm talking about. When the kids start getting real grades, it's a tremendous shock.

[Dr. Strangelove]

British banks announce at Davos that they will moving thousands of jobs out of Britain due to Brexit. They have to maintain a certain % of their workforce in EU countries in order to do business there, I believe.

http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/18/news/economy/brexit-banks-financial-services/

[Jeff Buchanan]

The opposition party opposes. They don't have to stand for anything; they just have to be adamantly opposed to some things. The big things Obama wanted to do (and/or did) were easy for them to oppose........

I think back to the middle to late 60s, when I was old enough to understand what governance was all about, and my impression then was not like that at all. Sure, politics and all that, but there always seemed to be an environment of compromise, hands across the isle stuff.

I have this vision, maybe an inaccurate, one of Sam Rayburn and John McCormac moving the congress ahead to pass some pretty decent legislation, most notably that Great Society legislation of LBJ's time as president..... and I'd add, you don't have to be a Great Society supporter to know that this stuff was controversial yet it made its way through the House and the Senate.

That would not have happened today and the rancor associated with the opposition from the right that accompanied almost everything Obama wanted to do (gun control, health care, immigration) was obstructionist to the point of destruction.

I saw the gun control legislation after Sandyhook that made it to the chamber for a vote and failed after the defection of key R's that supported it under pressure from the gun lobby and Freedom Caucus as a good example of the destructive nature of obstructionism. One can argue that the failings of the ACA, and there are some, are a direct result of "compromises" that gutted the fundamental mechanics of the ACA rendering it likely to collapse - which was the goal of the R's to begin with. That is destructive and not in any measure good for the nation. There are other examples such as immigration reform.

I simply can't get on board a conservative R agenda that is willing to destroy what at face is decent legislation which produces decent policy/law to advance a philosophy that is not at all clear to me.

I think Geezer and Hannibal represent that philosophy and, to a certain extent, they've represented it well. I can agree with some of what both of them seem to say about any number of issues that have been debated here. But I fundamentally can't dismiss the role of government, the level of that role as it is defined in the Constitution, like I am interpreting their posts as demonstrating their willingness to do.

[entropy]

a point of view...

http://www.paulkeckley.com/

Key Takeaways from Confirmation Hearing for Tom Price, Nominee for Secretary of Health and Human Services

[froot loops]

I think the issue is being the opposition and opposing everything ensures you can get into power later on. I'm not sure that was evident back in the days of LBJ or even the Reagan/Bush era. The secret sauce was discovered that bipartisanship is deadly to the party out of power.

[Jeff Buchanan]

Good read.

Notwithstanding several assertions requiring fact-checking, Dr. Price was poised and remained on message: ‘give patients more choices, let physicians practice without constraint, let markets work, and manage spending aggressively’.


Good philosophy ...... devils in the details.

[Da Geezer]

The Hill reporting that Trump wants to cut spending 10% across the board and cut the federal workforce by 20%. That saves $ 10 Trillion over 10 years. Hey, somebody has to pay for the excesses of the Obama Administration, and better us than our children.

http://thehill.com/policy/finance/314991-trump-team-prepares-dramatic-cuts

Whitley, I was just pointing out that froot had the wrong day in his post. That's part of the problem with fake news. Froot said something about "proficient" vs. "growth" and DeVos not knowing the difference. Froot doesn't know that "proficient" is an educational term of art, which is a standard that represents the middle grade in federal assessment tests. Proficient basically means "average" or "a C student". Language matters.

What you are seeing in most hearings for the nominees is the word "accountable". As a practical matter "accountable" means "subject to a bureaucrat's approval or disapproval." Again, language matters.

[Da Geezer]

froot:

I don't think the DeVos experiment has went well at all in Michigan.

Well, some government schools haven't teached good.

[Da Geezer]

Jeff:

I think back to the middle to late 60s, when I was old enough to understand what governance was all about, and my impression then was not like that at all. Sure, politics and all that, but there always seemed to be an environment of compromise, hands across the isle stuff.

Agree. And compromise was viewed as a strength, not a weakness.

While no one event is ever "the whole cause", most historians now point to the Bork nomination hearings as the end of comity. I think the gradual trend from 1960 on was for the SC to become an unlimited legislative panel (and hence of outsized importance) was what actually precipitated our current situation (as Talent has pointed out).

[froot loops]

The Hill reporting that Trump wants to cut spending 10% across the board and cut the federal workforce by 20%. That saves $ 10 Trillion over 10 years. Hey, somebody has to pay for the excesses of the Obama Administration, and better us than our children.

http://thehill.com/policy/finance/314991-trump-team-prepares-dramatic-cuts

Whitley, I was just pointing out that froot had the wrong day in his post. That's part of the problem with fake news. Froot said something about "proficient" vs. "growth" and DeVos not knowing the difference. Froot doesn't know that "proficient" is an educational term of art, which is a standard that represents the middle grade in federal assessment tests. Proficient basically means "average" or "a C student". Language matters.

What you are seeing in most hearings for the nominees is the word "accountable". As a practical matter "accountable" means "subject to a bureaucrat's approval or disapproval." Again, language matters.

I know what the term means and Franken's follow up clarified it for her. It was a question based on the No Child Left Behind act. I believe that since the law has been retired, it is less of an issue. Unfortunately, the time was up and we didn't get to hear where she stood. You would think she would have seized on the question. You don't send your kid to another school for a curriculum whose big goal is to reach proficiency. That would mean you get rid of advanced or accelerated programs and focus on programs that focus on getting the most students into the proficient category.