If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Wire)   Sorry NYC mayor-elect de Blasio and Massachusetts Sen. Warren, these two D.C. moderates just kicked the pot of gold in your rainbows   (thewire.com) divider line 65
    More: Interesting, Democrat Party, Blasio, Massachusetts Sen., Massachusetts, nyc mayor, moderates, John Hickenlooper, dead end  
•       •       •

2097 clicks; posted to Politics » on 04 Dec 2013 at 11:57 AM (33 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



65 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-12-04 10:57:37 AM
Jon Cowan and Jim Kessler are the president and senior vice president of Third Way, one of the several D.C.-based organizations focused on promoting a middle path in American politics, which, as we've noted in the past, means that they're pro-business, anti-deficit Democrats and not amenable to rousing the low-rent rabble.

s3.amazonaws.com
 
2013-12-04 11:01:28 AM
DeBlasio already has Schumer, Gillibrand and Cuomo in the way of his grand utopian schemes.
 
2013-12-04 11:45:42 AM
Some random think tank is rewrapping the same shiatty ideas. Yawn.
 
2013-12-04 12:01:44 PM

Dusk-You-n-Me: Jon Cowan and Jim Kessler are the president and senior vice president of Third Way, one of the several D.C.-based organizations focused on promoting a middle path in American politics, which, as we've noted in the past, means that they're pro-business, anti-deficit Democrats and not amenable to rousing the low-rent rabble.


img.fark.net

They appear likely to possess a balanced perspective...
 
2013-12-04 12:03:56 PM

Dusk-You-n-Me: Jon Cowan and Jim Kessler are the president and senior vice president of Third Way, one of the several D.C.-based organizations focused on promoting a middle path in American politics, which, as we've noted in the past, means that they're pro-business, anti-deficit Democrats and not amenable to rousing the low-rent rabble.

[s3.amazonaws.com image 550x400]


lol! what a joke... done in one
 
2013-12-04 12:04:46 PM
my gut is telling me not to click on a thewire.com link.
 
2013-12-04 12:09:32 PM

Glicky: Dusk-You-n-Me:

Glicky: Dusk-You-n-Me: Jon Cowan and Jim Kessler are the president and senior vice president of Third Way, one of the several D.C.-based organizations focused on promoting a middle path in American politics, which, as we've noted in the past, means that they're pro-business, anti-deficit Democrats and not amenable to rousing the low-rent rabble.

img.fark.net

They appear likely to possess a balanced perspective...


theswash.com
 
2013-12-04 12:09:48 PM
I was trying to read this but couldnt understand why an unaffiliated thinktank has anything to do with Blasio or Warren.
 
2013-12-04 12:12:15 PM

Zeb Hesselgresser: Glicky: Dusk-You-n-Me: Glicky: Dusk-You-n-Me: Jon Cowan and Jim Kessler are the president and senior vice president of Third Way, one of the several D.C.-based organizations focused on promoting a middle path in American politics, which, as we've noted in the past, means that they're pro-business, anti-deficit Democrats and not amenable to rousing the low-rent rabble.

[img.fark.net image 550x400]

They appear likely to possess a balanced perspective...

[theswash.com image 400x354]


just wait till next thread and he'll be socialist/communist usurper.
 
2013-12-04 12:14:52 PM
Third Way, one of the several D.C.-based organizations focused on promoting a middle path in American politics  an astroturfed think tank created/financed by Pete Petersen, hedge fund criminal and notorious hater of people who need Social Security.

FTFY
 
2013-12-04 12:16:18 PM
Trying to use Colorado's overwhelming rejection of Amendment 66 to push their point is weak sauce. There were a number of unique factors in its defeat that are not necessarily 'transferable' to other, similar plans.
 
2013-12-04 12:17:30 PM

Summercat: I was trying to read this but couldnt understand why an unaffiliated thinktank has anything to do with Blasio or Warren.


They wrote an op-ed designed to scare Democrats away from Warren and DeBlasio. If true progressives gain power, it would jeopardize their "centrist" agenda to privatize Social Security.

You can tell them to fark off here.
 
2013-12-04 12:18:15 PM
Jon Cowan and Jim Kessler are the president and senior vice president of Third Way, one of the several D.C.-based organizations focused on promoting a middle path in American politics, which, as we've noted in the past, means that they're pro-business, anti-deficit Democrats even bigger corporate whores than most Democrats,and not amenable to rousing the low-rent rabble.

FTFY.
 
2013-12-04 12:19:19 PM
not amenable to rousing the low-rent rabble

Third Way sounds an awful lot like the Romney way.
 
2013-12-04 12:19:37 PM
Two people we've never heard of fronting an organization dedicated to center right politics, despite their middle of the road name?
 
2013-12-04 12:21:59 PM

meat0918: Two people we've never heard of fronting an organization dedicated to center right politics, despite their middle of the road name?


I don't know if I'd classify "privatize Social Security" as "center-right". It's funny how this "third way" largely resembles current Republican policy.
 
2013-12-04 12:23:57 PM

Dusk-You-n-Me: Jon Cowan and Jim Kessler are the president and senior vice president of Third Way, one of the several D.C.-based organizations focused on promoting a middle path in American politics, which, as we've noted in the past, means that they're pro-business, anti-deficit Democrats and not amenable to rousing the low-rent rabble.

[s3.amazonaws.com image 550x400]


Yeah, that pretty much kills their credibility.  Third Way = Astroturfers.
 
2013-12-04 12:24:58 PM

Ow! That was my feelings!: Trying to use Colorado's overwhelming rejection of Amendment 66 to push their point is weak sauce. There were a number of unique factors in its defeat that are not necessarily 'transferable' to other, similar plans.


and blatantly overlooks the basic fact that more people live in NYC than the entire state of CO so if you are trying to suggest direction for national elections based on small (lightly voted) referendum in a mid-west state you don't understand math.
 
2013-12-04 12:27:51 PM

monoski: Ow! That was my feelings!: Trying to use Colorado's overwhelming rejection of Amendment 66 to push their point is weak sauce. There were a number of unique factors in its defeat that are not necessarily 'transferable' to other, similar plans.

and blatantly overlooks the basic fact that more people live in NYC than the entire state of CO so if you are trying to suggest direction for national elections based on small (lightly voted) referendum in a mid-west state you don't understand math.


i.chzbgr.com
 
2013-12-04 12:49:38 PM

qorkfiend: I don't know if I'd classify "privatize Social Security" as "center-right".


I would. Mark Warner wants to do it. So does Dick Durban, Dianne Feinstein, Max Baucus, Joe Manchin, Chris Coons, Tom Carper, and Michael Bennett.

I'd also bet that Chuck Schumer, Kirsten Gillibrand, Bob Menendez, Cory Booker, Dick Blumenthal, and Chris Murphy would support it if it came to a vote.
 
2013-12-04 12:57:59 PM

monoski: Ow! That was my feelings!: Trying to use Colorado's overwhelming rejection of Amendment 66 to push their point is weak sauce. There were a number of unique factors in its defeat that are not necessarily 'transferable' to other, similar plans.

and blatantly overlooks the basic fact that more people live in NYC than the entire state of CO Mountain West time zone so if you are trying to suggest direction for national elections based on small (lightly voted) referendum in a mid-west state you don't understand math.


(That's metro NYC, not city-limits NYC.)

Just for a sense of scale. (source)

If we let the popular vote choose presidents and had a more parliamentary style of choosing Representatives, how quickly do you think the country would move left, and how far?

// I'd guess it'd be the biggest leftward shift at least since Eugene Debs had an outside chance at residing on Pennsylvania Ave
 
2013-12-04 01:00:31 PM

meat0918: Two people we've never heard of fronting an organization dedicated to center right politics, despite their middle of the road name?


Economically they are fairly far-right but since they don't seem to embrace Christian fundamentalism I guess that exempts them from that label.

While I haven't I haven't seen any pronouncements from them on foreign policy, given the names of the board members I guess they would be strongly pro-Israel.,
 
2013-12-04 01:11:21 PM

Biff_Steel: my gut is telling me not to click on a thewire.com link.


There's nothing wrong with The Wire. Until last month it was The Atlantic Wire, and is associated with The Atlantic. If you're looking for news analysis you could do worse.
 
2013-12-04 01:34:36 PM

Summercat: I was trying to read this but couldnt understand why an unaffiliated thinktank has anything to do with Blasio or Warren.


Because if Democrats start nominating candidates like de Blasio and Warren en masse, it's going to be very awkward for the corporate whore wing the party to stand for things like free trade, de-regulation and privatization and make it difficult to rake in the corporate cash that those positions generate.  We could end up with a party that represents the economic interests of its constituents. So, be afraid. Be very afraid.
 
2013-12-04 01:58:48 PM
"Third Way", sort of an unfortunate choice of a moniker.

i.imgur.com

"I thank Heaven for a man like Adolf Hitler, who built a front line of defense against the anti-Christ of Communism..."

--Frank Buchman
 
2013-12-04 02:03:13 PM
DiBlasio didn't win on his populist platform. He won because his son has a biatchin 'fro.
 
2013-12-04 03:09:08 PM
Third Way is an "unaffiliated" as Fox News is "Fair and Balanced". They're biased up the wazoo. It's a front operation created by hedge fund tycoon Pete Petersen to destroy Social Security. That's why they totally lost their sh*t when Warren called for Social Security instead of slashing it, so they ran an article in the Wall Street Journal this week to tear her down.
 
2013-12-04 03:14:01 PM
FTA:

'the now-hoary Social Security "solvency crisis," which they call "undebatable" - a particularly cheap way to skip over the fact that the program's long-term solvency in fluctuating economic circumstances is very much in debate.'

Irrespective of the validity or invalidity of rest of the article or the op-ed to which it responding, social security crisis deniers are innumerate idiots several levels below climate change deniers.
 
2013-12-04 03:33:48 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: Irrespective of the validity or invalidity of rest of the article or the op-ed to which it responding, social security crisis deniers are innumerate idiots several levels below climate change deniers.


Find me a study that doesn't project outlays without projecting inflows (i.e. projects what we'll spend on currently-working people's retirement, but not what their currently-too-young-to-work or too-imaginary-to-be-taxed kids will put in), doesn't project over the infinite horizon (which is dumb. Even a $75 trillion unfunded liability, over the infinite horizon, is ridiculously cheap to pay off: set aside $2/year not funded by debt, and in only 37.5 trillion years - which will seem so long ago in the year 947659184659614797614676876756756780526 - you're paid off), and doesn't pretend that some plan sitting in a locked file cabinet for the last 20 years, even if it is the desk drawer of your favorite wonk or Congressperson will take effect.

Because every study I've seen assumes at least 2 of those, and even then has the "crisis" 30-40 years away - in the 1990s, crisis would hit by 2020, and now, crisis may not hit until 2040-2050.

// besides which, there are very simple fixes available that extend this 30-40 year horizon to 80-100 years
 
2013-12-04 03:48:30 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: FTA:

'the now-hoary Social Security "solvency crisis," which they call "undebatable" - a particularly cheap way to skip over the fact that the program's long-term solvency in fluctuating economic circumstances is very much in debate.'

Irrespective of the validity or invalidity of rest of the article or the op-ed to which it responding, social security crisis deniers are innumerate idiots several levels below climate change deniers.


If we invested in Social Security roughly the same amount that was spent by choosing to go to war in Iraq, SS would solvent forever.  Forever being the 75 year actuarial window the CBO uses for entitlements.

SS funding is so easily fixable it's laughable that the word crisis is ever attached to it. The crisis is on Wall St. which realizes they have a relatively short political window to seize on the opportunity to soak the fund for fees.
 
2013-12-04 04:38:03 PM
I don't see how privitizing social security is a "centrist" concept.
 
2013-12-04 05:11:45 PM

Karma Curmudgeon: Debeo Summa Credo: FTA:

'the now-hoary Social Security "solvency crisis," which they call "undebatable" - a particularly cheap way to skip over the fact that the program's long-term solvency in fluctuating economic circumstances is very much in debate.'

Irrespective of the validity or invalidity of rest of the article or the op-ed to which it responding, social security crisis deniers are innumerate idiots several levels below climate change deniers.

If we invested in Social Security roughly the same amount that was spent by choosing to go to war in Iraq, SS would solvent forever.  Forever being the 75 year actuarial window the CBO uses for entitlements.

SS funding is so easily fixable it's laughable that the word crisis is ever attached to it. The crisis is on Wall St. which realizes they have a relatively short political window to seize on the opportunity to soak the fund for fees.


And, of course, the minute Wall St. takes a bath and takes the SS fund down with it, they'll run to the nearest politician to cover their ass.
 
2013-12-04 05:12:48 PM

Mrtraveler01: I don't see how privitizing social security is a "centrist" concept.


That's just talk from the brokerage house pigs trying to privatize SS.
 
2013-12-04 05:21:27 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: social security crisis deniers are innumerate idiots several levels below climate change deniers.


I can't believe the oligarch gunga din thinks social security is in crisis, always on script.
 
2013-12-04 07:22:11 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: FTA:

'the now-hoary Social Security "solvency crisis," which they call "undebatable" - a particularly cheap way to skip over the fact that the program's long-term solvency in fluctuating economic circumstances is very much in debate.'

Irrespective of the validity or invalidity of rest of the article or the op-ed to which it responding, social security crisis deniers are innumerate idiots several levels below climate change deniers.


Uh huh. Sure. You keep saying that.
 
2013-12-04 07:23:22 PM

Karma Curmudgeon: Debeo Summa Credo: FTA:

'the now-hoary Social Security "solvency crisis," which they call "undebatable" - a particularly cheap way to skip over the fact that the program's long-term solvency in fluctuating economic circumstances is very much in debate.'

Irrespective of the validity or invalidity of rest of the article or the op-ed to which it responding, social security crisis deniers are innumerate idiots several levels below climate change deniers.

If we invested in Social Security roughly the same amount that was spent by choosing to go to war in Iraq, SS would solvent forever.  Forever being the 75 year actuarial window the CBO uses for entitlements.

SS funding is so easily fixable it's laughable that the word crisis is ever attached to it. The crisis is on Wall St. which realizes they have a relatively short political window to seize on the opportunity to soak the fund for fees.


Next time some dickhead starts yammering about Social Security's impending crisis, ask them what year the Pentagon is supposed to go broke.
 
2013-12-04 07:33:28 PM

Lest we forget who these guys are, they are the financial geniuses behind Clinton's decisions to:

Kill Glass Steagall

Prevent regulation of deriviatives

Allow the outsourcing of America's manufacturing jobs through NAFTA and China's permanent most favored nation trading status.


For those unfamiliar, when Wall Street bought the Democratic Party they wanted their transaction to be called the triumph of "Third Way" politics in association with other gains by finance capital and neoliberal politicians around the world, especially the UK. They were essentially advocating that Democrats concede the economic argument to Ronald Reagan and let his governing paradigm stand with some marginal tweaks. Progressive politics would be limited to social issues or "the culture war."

They found their man in Bill Clinton who had no core principles just great instincts for triangulating popular positions and hearing a rhythm in polls. As the old story goes, if Clinton were a teacher and you asked him if the world was round or flat he would merely say "I can teach it either way."

Now Third Way is back, with a vengeance. Warning Democrats to lay off the rich/themselves

A board packed with investment bankers that relies on corporate lobbyists and Big Business to fund its operations - hard to believe they hate economic populism!

It goes without saying that the corporate/establishment media will buy into the Third Way narrative, it's self-serving. What remains an open question is whether or not the American people are open at all to hearing this corporate clap trap in the wake of a financial crisis caused by Third Way policies such as deregulating Wall Street.

We'll see.
 
2013-12-04 07:56:24 PM

BullBearMS: Lest we forget who these guys are, they are the financial geniuses behind Clinton's decisions to:

Kill Glass Steagall


Because if there was one guy in the Senate that Clinton would choose to be his flag bearer, it'd be Phil Gramm.
 
2013-12-04 07:59:08 PM

Vlad_the_Inaner: BullBearMS: Lest we forget who these guys are, they are the financial geniuses behind Clinton's decisions to:

Kill Glass Steagall

Because if there was one guy in the Senate that Clinton would choose to be his flag bearer, it'd be Phil Gramm.


dl.dropboxusercontent.com

Phil Gramm didn't propose killing glass Steagall.

Clinton did.
 
2013-12-04 08:09:41 PM
By this logic, of course, the far-right policies of politicians from Nebraska, North Dakota, Arizona, Idaho, Alabama, Utah, South Carolina, Kentucky and so on - states that have never had a native elected president - should be dismissed out-of-hand.

Lincoln was a Kentucky native.
 
2013-12-04 08:23:23 PM
 
2013-12-04 08:25:20 PM

BullBearMS: Vlad_the_Inaner: BullBearMS: Lest we forget who these guys are, they are the financial geniuses behind Clinton's decisions to:

Kill Glass Steagall

Because if there was one guy in the Senate that Clinton would choose to be his flag bearer, it'd be Phil Gramm.

[dl.dropboxusercontent.com image 415x249]

Phil Gramm didn't propose killing glass Steagall.

Clinton did.


Who sponsored the bill that did the deed, why did he decide to sponsor it?  Because of Clinton's musing 4 years before?  Suggestions are not decisions.
 
2013-12-04 08:43:24 PM

Vlad_the_Inaner: Who sponsored the bill that did the deed, why did he decide to sponsor it?


LOL

You think the Republicans were going to oppose it?

They are just as sold out to the rich as Clinton i is.

Financially, it's worked out very well for Clinton as he left office in debt and is not worth more than a hundred million dollars he earned from "speaking fees".

In 2004, Clinton got $250,000 from Citigroup and $150,000 from Deutsche Bank. Goldman paid him $300,000 for two speeches, one in Paris. As the bubble peaked, in 2006, Clinton got $150,000 paydays each from Citigroup (twice), Lehman Brothers, the Mortgage Bankers Association, and the National Association of Realtors. In 2007, it was Goldman again, twice, Lehman, Citigroup, and Merrill Lynch.

Hillary just took about half a million dollars from Goldman Sachs this year.
 
2013-12-04 08:48:18 PM
 
2013-12-04 09:00:38 PM

Vlad_the_Inaner: PS:

"His successor, Alan Greenspan, had more faith in the self-correcting machinery of unfettered markets. During the presidency of George H.W. Bush, Greenspan and Treasury Secretary James Baker took steps that weakened Glass-Steagall by, for example, letting banks underwrite municipal bonds on the premise that they were safe by definition. In 1991, the administration called on Congress to repeal the law outright. Although a bill to that effect was voted down in the House of Representatives that year, the anti-Glass-Steagall movement was clearly gaining steam."


/no doubt Clinto used the protoype of Obama's time machine.


Again, you seem to be trying to convince people that the Republicans being sold out to the rich bastards excuses Clinton also being sold out to them.

This is not the case.
 
2013-12-04 09:07:57 PM

BullBearMS: Vlad_the_Inaner: PS:

"His successor, Alan Greenspan, had more faith in the self-correcting machinery of unfettered markets. During the presidency of George H.W. Bush, Greenspan and Treasury Secretary James Baker took steps that weakened Glass-Steagall by, for example, letting banks underwrite municipal bonds on the premise that they were safe by definition. In 1991, the administration called on Congress to repeal the law outright. Although a bill to that effect was voted down in the House of Representatives that year, the anti-Glass-Steagall movement was clearly gaining steam."


/no doubt Clinto used the protoype of Obama's time machine.

Again, you seem to be trying to convince people that the Republicans being sold out to the rich bastards excuses Clinton also being sold out to them.

This is not the case.


The 'bad ideas' have a momentum of their own. (because lobbyists don't retire when the balance of power shifts)  Clinton pushed for things like NAFTA and "clipper chip" key escrow, both of which were ideas from the previous administration.  Your claim that Clinton came up with the idea was overstated.
 
2013-12-04 09:10:20 PM

Vlad_the_Inaner: Your claim that Clinton came up with the idea was overstated.


I said that Clinton proposed killing Glass Steagall, because he did exactly that:

dl.dropboxusercontent.com
 
2013-12-04 09:12:56 PM

BullBearMS: Vlad_the_Inaner: Your claim that Clinton came up with the idea was overstated.

I said that Clinton proposed killing Glass Steagall, because he did exactly that:

[dl.dropboxusercontent.com image 415x249]


forgot all about your "Lest we forget who these guys are, they are the financial geniuses behind Clinton's decisions to ...Kill Glass Steagall ", eh?
 
2013-12-04 09:15:23 PM

Vlad_the_Inaner: BullBearMS: Vlad_the_Inaner: Your claim that Clinton came up with the idea was overstated.

I said that Clinton proposed killing Glass Steagall, because he did exactly that:

[dl.dropboxusercontent.com image 415x249]

forgot all about your "Lest we forget who these guys are, they are the financial geniuses behind Clinton's decisions to ...Kill Glass Steagall ", eh?


So Clinton didn't propose killing Glass Steagall?

Do you have some defense for why it was perfectly OK for Clinton to do the bidding of these "Third Way" banker assholes?
 
2013-12-04 09:18:14 PM
Since Senator Warren is mentioned in the thread, it's worth watching her give an epic spanking to the banker shills on CNBC when they try to act like putting a modernized Glass Steagall back into place is a bad idea.
 
Displayed 50 of 65 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report