fine.
footie can come much later.
footie can come much later.
Things Smackie Thinks You Need to Know...
youre going anger smackie more than me
and you better thank your canadian god mank isnt here
and you better thank your canadian god mank isnt here
Originally posted by god's shoeshine:uh oh, i'm in serious trouble then - based on the number of mistakes in your first sentence, i take it that you're livid and can hardly think straight :p seriously tho, i said that to get a rise out of you. i'm not as big a footie fan as you lot, but i definitely like the beautiful game. i played soccer competitively until i was 16.
youre going anger smackie more than me
and you better thank your canadian god mank isnt here
and FYI, we canadians are godless (and anti-capitalist, to boot. why do you think all our hockey teams are broke?!?)
hahaha…i wrote that while on the phone
i really wanted to just zong you for being canadian cause its funny
i really wanted to just zong you for being canadian cause its funny
David Brooks nailed this…with apologies to the leftists, but he's spot on.
———————————–
Change I Can Believe In
By DAVID BROOKS
Published: November 7, 2008
I have dreams. I may seem like a boring pundit whose most exotic fantasies involve G.A.O. reports, but deep down, I have dreams. And right now Iâ??m dreaming of the successful presidency this country needs. Iâ??m dreaming of an administration led by Barack Obama, but which stretches beyond the normal Democratic base. It makes time for moderate voters, suburban voters, rural voters and even people who voted for the other guy.
The administration of my dreams understands where the country is today. Its members know that, as Andrew Kohut of the Pew Research Center put it on â??The NewsHour,â? â??This was an election where the middle asserted itself.â? There was â??no signâ? of a â??movement to the left.â?
Only 17 percent of Americans trust the government to do the right thing most or all of the time, according to an October New York Times/CBS News poll. So the members of my dream Obama administration understand that they cannot impose an ideological program the country does not accept. New presidents in 1932 and 1964 could presuppose a basic level of trust in government. But today, as Bill Galston of the Brookings Institution observes, the new president is going to have to build that trust deliberately and step by step.
Walking into the Obama White House of my dreams will be like walking into the Gates Foundation. The people there will be ostentatiously pragmatic and data-driven. Theyâ??ll hunt good ideas like venture capitalists. Theyâ??ll have no faith in all-powerful bureaucrats issuing edicts from the center. Instead, theyâ??ll use that language of decentralized networks, bottom-up reform and scalable innovation.
They will actually believe in that stuff Obama says about postpartisan politics. That means there wonâ??t just be a few token liberal Republicans in marginal jobs. There will be people like Robert Gates at Defense and Ray LaHood, Stuart Butler, Diane Ravitch, Douglas Holtz-Eakin and Jim Talent at other important jobs.
The Obama administration of my dreams will insist that Congressional Democrats reinstate bipartisan conference committees. Theyâ??ll invite G.O.P. leaders to the White House for real meetings and then re-invite them, even if they give hostile press conferences on the White House driveway.
Theyâ??ll do things conservatives disagree with, but theyâ??ll also show that theyâ??re not toadies of the liberal interest groups. Theyâ??ll insist on merit pay and preserving No Child Left Behindâ??s accountability standards, no matter what the teachersâ?? unions say. Theyâ??ll postpone contentious fights on things like card check legislation.
Most of all, theyâ??ll take significant action on the problems facing the country without causing a mass freak-out among voters to the right of Nancy Pelosi.
Theyâ??ll do this by explaining to the American people that there are two stages to their domestic policy thinking, the short-term and the long-term.
The short-term strategy will have two goals: to mitigate the pain of the recession and the change the culture of Washington. The first step will be to complete the round of stimulus packages that are sure to come.
Then theyâ??ll take up two ideas that already have bipartisan support: middle-class tax relief and an energy package. The current economic and energy crisis is an opportunity to do what was not done in similar circumstances in 1974 â?? transform this countryâ??s energy supply. A comprehensive bill â?? encompassing everything from off-shore drilling to green technologies â?? would stimulate the economy and nurture new political coalitions.
When the recession shows signs of bottoming out, then my dream administration would begin phase two. The long-term strategy would be about restoring fiscal balances and reforming fundamental institutions.
By this time, the budget deficit could be zooming past $1.5 trillion a year. The U.S. will be borrowing oceans of money from abroad. My dream administration will show that it understands that the remedy for a culture of debt is not more long-term debt. It will side with those who worry that long-term deficits could lead to ruinous interest-rate hikes.
My dream administration will announce a Budget Rebalancing Initiative. Somebody like Representative Jim Cooper would go through the budget and take out the programs and tax expenditures that donâ??t work. â??If we have no spending cuts, then weâ??re saying government is perfect. Nobody believes that,â? Cooper says.
Having built bipartisan relationships, having shown some fiscal toughness, having seen the economy through the tough times, my dream administration will then be in a position to take up health care reform, tax reform, education reform and a long-range infrastructure initiative. These reforms may have to start slow and on the cheap. But real reform would be imaginable since politics as we know it would be transformed.
Is it all just a dream? I hope not. In any case, please be quiet and let me have my moment.
———————————–
Change I Can Believe In
By DAVID BROOKS
Published: November 7, 2008
I have dreams. I may seem like a boring pundit whose most exotic fantasies involve G.A.O. reports, but deep down, I have dreams. And right now Iâ??m dreaming of the successful presidency this country needs. Iâ??m dreaming of an administration led by Barack Obama, but which stretches beyond the normal Democratic base. It makes time for moderate voters, suburban voters, rural voters and even people who voted for the other guy.
The administration of my dreams understands where the country is today. Its members know that, as Andrew Kohut of the Pew Research Center put it on â??The NewsHour,â? â??This was an election where the middle asserted itself.â? There was â??no signâ? of a â??movement to the left.â?
Only 17 percent of Americans trust the government to do the right thing most or all of the time, according to an October New York Times/CBS News poll. So the members of my dream Obama administration understand that they cannot impose an ideological program the country does not accept. New presidents in 1932 and 1964 could presuppose a basic level of trust in government. But today, as Bill Galston of the Brookings Institution observes, the new president is going to have to build that trust deliberately and step by step.
Walking into the Obama White House of my dreams will be like walking into the Gates Foundation. The people there will be ostentatiously pragmatic and data-driven. Theyâ??ll hunt good ideas like venture capitalists. Theyâ??ll have no faith in all-powerful bureaucrats issuing edicts from the center. Instead, theyâ??ll use that language of decentralized networks, bottom-up reform and scalable innovation.
They will actually believe in that stuff Obama says about postpartisan politics. That means there wonâ??t just be a few token liberal Republicans in marginal jobs. There will be people like Robert Gates at Defense and Ray LaHood, Stuart Butler, Diane Ravitch, Douglas Holtz-Eakin and Jim Talent at other important jobs.
The Obama administration of my dreams will insist that Congressional Democrats reinstate bipartisan conference committees. Theyâ??ll invite G.O.P. leaders to the White House for real meetings and then re-invite them, even if they give hostile press conferences on the White House driveway.
Theyâ??ll do things conservatives disagree with, but theyâ??ll also show that theyâ??re not toadies of the liberal interest groups. Theyâ??ll insist on merit pay and preserving No Child Left Behindâ??s accountability standards, no matter what the teachersâ?? unions say. Theyâ??ll postpone contentious fights on things like card check legislation.
Most of all, theyâ??ll take significant action on the problems facing the country without causing a mass freak-out among voters to the right of Nancy Pelosi.
Theyâ??ll do this by explaining to the American people that there are two stages to their domestic policy thinking, the short-term and the long-term.
The short-term strategy will have two goals: to mitigate the pain of the recession and the change the culture of Washington. The first step will be to complete the round of stimulus packages that are sure to come.
Then theyâ??ll take up two ideas that already have bipartisan support: middle-class tax relief and an energy package. The current economic and energy crisis is an opportunity to do what was not done in similar circumstances in 1974 â?? transform this countryâ??s energy supply. A comprehensive bill â?? encompassing everything from off-shore drilling to green technologies â?? would stimulate the economy and nurture new political coalitions.
When the recession shows signs of bottoming out, then my dream administration would begin phase two. The long-term strategy would be about restoring fiscal balances and reforming fundamental institutions.
By this time, the budget deficit could be zooming past $1.5 trillion a year. The U.S. will be borrowing oceans of money from abroad. My dream administration will show that it understands that the remedy for a culture of debt is not more long-term debt. It will side with those who worry that long-term deficits could lead to ruinous interest-rate hikes.
My dream administration will announce a Budget Rebalancing Initiative. Somebody like Representative Jim Cooper would go through the budget and take out the programs and tax expenditures that donâ??t work. â??If we have no spending cuts, then weâ??re saying government is perfect. Nobody believes that,â? Cooper says.
Having built bipartisan relationships, having shown some fiscal toughness, having seen the economy through the tough times, my dream administration will then be in a position to take up health care reform, tax reform, education reform and a long-range infrastructure initiative. These reforms may have to start slow and on the cheap. But real reform would be imaginable since politics as we know it would be transformed.
Is it all just a dream? I hope not. In any case, please be quiet and let me have my moment.
does this dream have John Kerry as Secretary of State?
Originally posted by vansmack:oh christ, not you too, its amazing how fast conventional wisdom forms
David Brooks nailed this…with apologies to the leftists, but he's spot on.
center-right! center-right!
I am all for a pragmatic, professional approach to governing based on data and expertise over politics, but most of this shit is conservatives trying to neuter any kind of Obama mandate.
i like this dream the Keep It Simple Stupid approach is what is needed right now…Obama's straight forward approach health care proposal appealed to me, McCain's just seemed like one huge gimmick
i'm encourage by this
"Walking into the Obama White House of my dreams will be like walking into the Gates Foundation. The people there will be ostentatiously pragmatic and data-driven. Theyâ??ll hunt good ideas like venture capitalists. Theyâ??ll have no faith in all-powerful bureaucrats issuing edicts from the center. Instead, theyâ??ll use that language of decentralized networks, bottom-up reform and scalable innovation."
i had this wacky idea yesterday that wouldn't it make sense to pair Council of Arts funding for musicians like they have in Scotland and Canada to the American Service initiative… so in exchange for getting support to pursue a career as a musician they would be expected to do community outreach in the form up teaching students in schools…
i'm encourage by this
"Walking into the Obama White House of my dreams will be like walking into the Gates Foundation. The people there will be ostentatiously pragmatic and data-driven. Theyâ??ll hunt good ideas like venture capitalists. Theyâ??ll have no faith in all-powerful bureaucrats issuing edicts from the center. Instead, theyâ??ll use that language of decentralized networks, bottom-up reform and scalable innovation."
i had this wacky idea yesterday that wouldn't it make sense to pair Council of Arts funding for musicians like they have in Scotland and Canada to the American Service initiative… so in exchange for getting support to pursue a career as a musician they would be expected to do community outreach in the form up teaching students in schools…
Originally posted by pdx pollard:I disagree, and I've always considered myself a moderate as it were - socially liberal, fiscally conservative.
oh christ, not you too, its amazing how fast conventional wisdom forms
It will be fine to be center-left (and yes, it does exist), but to think that a 364 Electoral College vote would be a mandate is the wrong approach. It was narrow margins in the swing states, and President Obama should approach it that way, especially with the current state of the economy.
Middle Class Tax Relief and a comprehensive energy plan are priority number one. responsible withdrawl from Iraq and increased presence in Afghanistan and Pakistan number two.
He's asking for the return of Clinton minus any prospective onslaught from the right (it took 14 years, but Congress has recovered from the Contract with America). I don't see much wrong with that.
Originally posted by kosmo vinyl:While that seems harmless, it would be ridiculed in the world David Brooks lives in. I just find it frustrating that anytime Dems get any power they trip over themselves to give some of it away, or are so afraid of being criticized that they end up looking useless.
i had this wacky idea yesterday that wouldn't it make sense to pair Council of Arts funding for musicians like they have in Scotland and Canada to the American Service initiative… so in exchange for getting support to pursue a career as a musician they would be expected to do community outreach in the form up teaching students in schools…
Originally posted by very sonick:Absolutely not.
does this dream have John Kerry as Secretary of State?
Originally posted by pdx pollard:You would rather we take the Bush approach?
While that seems harmless, it would be ridiculed in the world David Brooks lives in. I just find it frustrating that anytime Dems get any power they trip over themselves to give some of it away, or are so afraid of being criticized that they end up looking useless.
Originally posted by vansmack:
Originally posted by pdx pollard:I wouldnt say its a strong mandate, but by recent standards its a pretty good mandate. I don't want to have to start compromising on the socially liberal stuff as much as Clinton did right from the start, and the groundwork for that happening is being laid before Obama is even inaugurated. There is plenty of evidence that there is a lot of progress still to be made in this country (see prop 8 and other state measures), and I think it would be nice if the president was a leader in making that progress.
[qb]but to think that a 364 Electoral College vote would be a mandate is the wrong approach
i clearly need to steer clear of any policy discussions as i just don't follow it closely enough … which is why i'll soon be stop reading of liberal bloggers, as it seems to me they are already acting like a bunch of spoiled children
Originally posted by vansmack:There is a world of difference between what I am talking about and the Bush approach. Do you really think there is nobody in the Dem party who can serve on National Security issues? Yet everybody is throwing Republican names around. I am all for hiring the best person for the job, but don't eliminate half the candidates before starting in the interest of appearing bipartisan.
You would rather we take the Bush approach?
See - now why does it have to be the extreme? Why is it that if one person is suggested, your response is that I think there's no Dem who can serve on National Security issues? You're asking a guy who joined State because of Madeleine Albright and then quit because he felt let down by Colin Powell (of all people) if he thinks there are no Dems that can handle National Security issues. Ridiculous.
David Brooks is not asking for all of them, but he's asking for a couple, and there's nothing wrong with that.
The Gates one is an easy one - ask him if he supports and can accomplish a calculated troop withdrawl and if he agrees, let him do it. When he's done, replace him. It's actually, the most efficient way to get the job done and would probably save 6 months time.
David Brooks is not asking for all of them, but he's asking for a couple, and there's nothing wrong with that.
The Gates one is an easy one - ask him if he supports and can accomplish a calculated troop withdrawl and if he agrees, let him do it. When he's done, replace him. It's actually, the most efficient way to get the job done and would probably save 6 months time.
Originally posted by vansmack:Sorry that wasnt meant to be "you dont personally think there are any dems". It is a reaction the the fact that Republicans are who get talked about most when it comes to national security jobs. I just wish it wasnt the first reaction for so many people. I guess I would just like "liberal" to stop being a bad word, and it is going to take a leader who isn't afraid of it to make that happen.
See - now why does it have to be the extreme? Why is it that if one person is suggested, your response is that I think there's no Dem who can serve on National Security issues?
wait i thought obama was going to make bill ayers secretary of education and louis farakahn secretary of religion. with rev wright as secretary of state
and oprah will be in charge of the treasury, seeing as she is already well adapt at the redistribution of wealth
i was thinking billy bragg