• comment on a post Journalism! over 5 years ago

    An exercise for the critic of the critics:

    1)  compare the turnover rate of Boxer's staff compared to Feinstein's staff

    2)  take a poll among constituents as to which office provides better constituent services, including piddling things like arranging Capitol tours that one of the office just can't be bothered with

    3)  draw conclusions accordingly

    4)  for bonus credit, conduct an "Inside the Beltway" survey as to which Senator is more effective and more highly regarded, ideological differences or affinities not withstanding

  • comment on a post Sarah Palin: 'The Life is about choices!' Speech over 5 years ago

    OMG.  I seldom click on YouTube links but I just listened to her entire speech.

    What a remarkably blathering, jittery, unfocused piece of work.  

    The speech didn't have much going for it either.

  • Mmmph.  Once upon a somewhen, I was a very junior Senate staffer and this was one of the things burned into me.

    Not sure where it's written down or if it is where it might be Googlable.  Might want to consult a Congressional Directory.  Now that I think of it...do they even publish that in hardcopy anymore?  I think they do.

  • Not so fast, grasshopper.  The Dems have 60 votes but those 60 include Specter, both Nelsons, Landrieu, and Lieberman.  On some issues we'll have them all, on others we won't.   Add Snow & Collins to the mix and the truth is that on some key votes we need to score five out of seven.  Not a slam dunk by any means.

  • comment on a post Final reflections on Franken vs. Coleman over 5 years ago

    Yes, seniority among members of the same class will be crucial ten years from now if two or more people are vying for the same committee assignment.  Or is line for a subcommittee chair.  Franklin will always be tail-end Charlie, behind even Kirsten Gillibrand.

    Push come to shove, seniority is measured to the day.

  • on a comment on Waxman-Markey passes House over 5 years ago

    No, our elected officials are not ignoring us all.  They are ignoring you.  In this instance, they're accommodating my desires.

  • on a comment on Waxman-Markey passes House over 5 years ago

    [quote]Here's a special bottle of Veuve Clicquot, a vintage Brut to highlight the Brute force within a velvet voice that is Madame Speaker Pelosi, our leader in the House.[/quote]

    Well, damn, I know very little about your politics but I applaud your choice of champagne.  Just gave a bottle exactly as you describe as a gift to a client at the close of difficult transaction.

  • comment on a post A Coup in Albany over 5 years ago

    !@#$%^&*!

  • This is good news.  The only way to beat Specter in a primary is with a single strong opponent...Specter wins a multicandidate primary easily.  Sestak alone would have a chance.  Don't know how good a chance, but a chance.

  • comment on a post PA-Sen: The Democrat Who's Already Running over 5 years ago

    Agree with the preceding.   Moreover, if more than one Democrat runs against Specter, the splitting of the field virtually guarantees his re-election.

    My take:  move along, there'll be nothing to see.

    Would like to pry Olympia Snowe out of the Republican caucus.

  • The thought of Garamendi running against Lungren is both well-intentioned and plausible but from Garamendi's point of view the idea is to be unemployed and the CA-10 is much surer shot.  I can't blame him.  

  • WSB, things vary wildly from parish to parish.  I get the hives just driving by churches in St. Louis, which is where my wife is from, because of their anti-abortion signs out front.  (We're in SoCal ourselves).   Years go by with abortion being mentioned from the pulpit here, though I suspect there are Catholics with very strong feelings on both sides of the aisle, fwiw.  (And I think it's a good thing that the issue is put aside.  Too divisive and the absence lets people work together on other things without acrimony.)

    Fwiw, if one is looking for a tolerant parish, I suggest looking for one staffed by either Paulists or Jesuits as opposed to ordinary diocesan priests...much more educated, which is a start.

    And I make no claim of being anything but a heterodox Catholic in several dimensions...my Facebook page says "Subversive Catholic" as my religion.

  • WashBlue, do not confuse the hierarchy with the institution with the faith communities.  Our parish has a lot of middle-aged people (40-60) and a very healthy contingent of 20- and 30-somethings.  Of course, it tends to be things like gay-tolerant and I think the issues of married priests, women priests, and pro-choice would be fairly close if a vote were taken...I think "pro-choice" would win.

    The Catholic Church in America is not homogeneous.

    Note:  my Facebook page lists "Subversive Catholic" as my religion.

  • comment on a post More AND Better Democrats, Get It? over 5 years ago

    I agree that some Democrats should be fair game for a primary.   But I think some activists have idiotic expectations and standards of who should be primaried.

    We take glee when the Club for Growth challenges some perfectly acceptable Republican (from the Republican point of view) office holders...we should not commit the mirror image mistake of challenging perfectly acceptable (from the Democratic point of view) mainstream Democrats.

  • I was talking to someone who works with the Hill the other day.   For any given piece of legislation, the automatic Democratic votes are around 53-54.

    Yes, getting to 61 or 62 might mean that Nelson, Bayh, and Landrieu are the "new" Snowe, Specter, and Collins but that's still a leftward shift.

    The frustrating thing is that some of the folks in the pivot are doing it not for policy reasons per se but to prove that they're important.

Diaries

Advertise Blogads