Jack & Jill Politics

Wanda Sykes' take on the Tiger situation

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttZSjajdRd8

rikyrah: My FAV:

. . .his Black part bought the Cadillac and the Asian part wrecked it. :>)

GOOD 1! :>) :>)

Nov 30 2009, 8:24 pm by Marc Ambinder
The White House Takes On POLITICO

It's not just Fox News that's become subject of White House derision. The following is an excerpt from a joke e-mail that is circulating among White House staffers. It's a response, of sorts, to the analytical essay that POLITICO editor-in-chief John Harris wrote about the "seven stories that Barack Obama doesn't want told." It's fairly caustic -- and, truth be told, the White House maintains good relationships with POLITICO reporters and has been known to try and agenda-set by dishing out a few tips to the publication. But make no mistake: many on the White House senior staff dislike POLITICO's brand of journalism, and they do not like the effect that POLITICO's metabolism has on the rest of the press corps, including this (i.e., my own) corner of it. Still, don't read too much into this. There's been plenty of back-and-forth between the Whit House and the POLITICO, and the White House accepts the role -- which is often substantial -- that POLITICO plays in the newsgathering process.


7 narratives politico is fighting in their efforts to get an interview with the President

1. They are more interested in readers than accuracy

2. Its okay to be wrong everyonce in a while, if your are the first to break the news

3. More interested in gossip than news

4. A spouter of the worst sort of insider conventional wisdom

5. Their analysis about obama has been wrong more than any one

6. Click ... period

7. More obsessed with personality than policy



http://politics.theatlantic.com/2009/11/the_whi...

Damn that game has tired me out. I'm off to bed now

30 Nov 2009 06:14 pm
Taking Palin Seriously

Yglesias opines:

I know some liberals who are excited about the prospect of a joke candidate like Sarah Palin or Dick Cheney getting the GOP nomination in 2012. Not me. The basic fact of the matter is that power tends to alternate between the two political parties. Ultimately, the nation’s interests require both parties to nominate the best people possible. So I hope the Republicans find someone who’s very smart and compelling and does an excellent job of identifying and explaining the flaws in Barack Obama’s approach. Cheney couldn’t possibly win a presidential election...unless somehow he could, in which case the country would be set for a world of pain.

Palin, as Sam Tanenhaus ably demonstrates in his review of "Going Rogue," is not a joke candidate. Neither is Cheney.

They represent a real populist and authoritarian option for a declining power. In the face of a bewilderingly changing world, they stand for white America, the extension of its power across the globe, the elevation of torture as a core American value, the permanent Israeli occupation of the West Bank, and American occupation of client states like Iraq and Afghanistan. They represent a contempt for addressing climate change, and an indifference to debt - both Palin and Cheney have records of appalling fiscal profligacy. They also represent religious fundamentalism as the core Republican political philosophy. Cheney supports a party that would strip his own daughter - and has stripped his own daughter - of basic civil rights. Palin would criminalize all abortion.

The appeal of populist simplicity in complicated, demoralizing times is real and eternal. Obama has not in office been able to muster a scintilla of popular energy the way this rump right has. In fact, his moderate conservative governance has defused the energy of his campaign in ways that remain quite stunning. In this emotional game, the far right has the advantage of "us" vs "them." There are no real solutions to deep problems - no actual spending cuts proposed, nothing but the use of force abroad, nothing in energy policy but more carbon exploration, no immigration policy that isn't obsessed with resisting any sort of amnesty, and on and on.

One imagines that the American people - when they have to decide on a president who will actually have to govern - will turn away from a Palin. But that such a farce remains the most powerful figure on the right should sober anyone with complacency.

We live in a fundamentalist age. And there is only one fundamentalist party. Unless it is beaten repeatedly at the polls, it will at some point govern again.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily...

SAINTS BEATS PATRIOTS!!!

FINAL SCORE: SAINTS 38, PATRIOTS 17.

Who Dat...Who Dat..Who Dat Said They Gon' Beat Them Saints?

Saints 11-0.

At this point, I just hope they keep it up, and the icing on the top for me is if they beat the Cowboys on Dec 19

wooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! god i hate the Patriots. almost as much as I hate the Lakers, the Red Sox and the Yankees. Not even close to how much I hate Duke. but god I hate the Patriots.

woohoo Saints!

I understand. I can't stand the Patriots, either, but I just HATE Duke.

Baseball, though I can't help you. Hate it. I go into sports hibernation in the summer until Pre-season.

Damn, you need a transfusion for all that hate in your blood.

YEAH.....

I just don't like the Pats.

Ron Kessler [In the President's Secret Service] is the name of the man who wrote the book about the issues with the Secret Service . Bev Smith has him on her show right now .

TOUCHDOWN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

SAINTS 38, PATRIOTS 17. 7:49 to play.

GO SAINTS!!!!

Brady intercepted, Saints ball.

Looks like the Saints are tyring to make a statement!!!!

Saints just rocked dat ass tonight. Good. I hate the Pats.

for all those who thought Ty Willingham got a raw deal from Notre Dame..

WEIS IS OUT...

bwa ha ha ha ha ha

Karma--it's not just for chameleons.

Just want you to know that I used that in my status update. I have been laughing ALL morning long over this statement!!

Weiss out and New England loses on the same day? Oh, I'm a happy woman. :)

if you live in Chicago, remember...

TONIGHT IS WHEN THE WINTER PARKING BAN BEGINS....

from 3am-7am

Parking fine - $150 to begin

Winter Parking? It's "Summer Parking" all year down here. I'll get some sunshine for yall.

I finally decide to watch a football game, and no football open thread.

Darnit.

I'm watching in hopes that the Patriots take a beating. So far, so good.

Is Brady the one who left his pregnant girlfriend for Giselle Buchhen?

Brady and Bridget the GoldDigger were already broken up by the time he went for Giselle. Bridget entrapped Brady by getting herself pregnant. Same old story. 'If I get pregnant, I can hold onto him'. Blah. These dudes need to wrap it up instead of trusting these hoes not to 'have a baby by me baby be a millionaire'.

As for Giselle, I always wondered if that was a long term escort deal like David Copperfield and Claudia Schiffer. Something about them just doesn't click for me. Oh well. Not my life and not my choices.

Well to hear him tell it, they were already broken up when he got with Giselle and Bridget found out she was pregnant.

As a trauma surgeon, I don't like to talk "shop" with people who are not in the medical profession. As soon as you start mentioning cytokines and mitochondria DNA, most people's eyes glaze over. But, with watered-down legislation creeping through the Senate at a glacial pace, I thought it was important for me to go over some of this literature. The literature makes approximately the same point that Keith Olbermann made approximate monthly go when he talked about having health insurance being life-and-death.

In trauma, we, trauma folks, would like to think that we treat patients all the same. Many states have trauma systems, in which an injured patient, is shunted away from small hospitals that probably cannot help that patient and toward trauma centers who have the expertise and the manpower to help. This move has been shown to save lives. Most, if not all trauma centers have protocols which are then individualized for a particular patient. We have found through numerous studies that these protocols help save lives. Therefore, you would figure that the outcome of a patient who was seriously injured in a car crash would be directly related to his or her injuries which is true for the most part. A recent study has thrown a wrench in this.

more here.

"Race and Insurance Status as Risk Factors
for Trauma Mortality" - this refers to trauma mortality at the trauma centers?

I noted that: "There are limitations to our study. Because we used a
retrospective registry, it was not possible to control for
comorbidities, complications that may have occurred during
hospitalization, and prehospital transit times that could
influence our outcomes. Data to analyze prehospital mortality
were also not available, and it could not be determined
if prehospital mortality is higher for uninsured or
African American and Hispanic patients."

Katrina refugee now living in Dallas here, I'm sick of hearing 'bout the Cowboys all day....GO SAINTS!!!!!

Go Saints!!! Bless You Boys (A little new Orleans tradition for ya'll)

go SAINTS

Okay,

here is my prolem with the blogosphere as a whole, and the MSM in general. Obama's upcoming speech really crystalizes this for me. I am truly one of those people who is generally torn about what is the best course for Afghanistan, but it just seems as if there is no where for someone like me to turn to to get (to quote "just the facts", no spin, no for or against absolutes, just the facts reported responsilbly. I know, I know, maybe I shouldn't just frequent all the "opinion" blogs, I need to also frequent more responsible sites, and newscast, but it's hard to find. I find the newshour on PBS really good, but I can't stand listening to the callers on C-SPAN.

I guess some of ya'll will just call me wishy-washy, but I just hate "absolutes". Nothing is ever just black or white, I think life is more gray than black or white.

Anyway...

I totally agree on this. The MSM especially on TV is horrible and the blogosphere, especially the liberal blogosphere, has not done a good enough research job on the facts. I read the NYT's articles on this and from what I can discern, the reason we are still in Afghanistan is that if we leave, the Taliban and AlQ are going to take over Pakistan and get to their nuclear weapons. The Pakistanis were ticked that we were even considering leaving b/c their government is so shaky, especially since the Taliban has infiltrated their military and

This is very complex. The Christian Science Monitor had some great articles on Afghanistan and a number of activists in Afghanistan don't want us to leave b/c they are scared the Taliban are going to take over--especially women. I remember at the beginning of the year reading a NYT editorial from an Afghan female activist that was horrified that Obama was considering leaving. Bush messed Afghanistan up and the best we can do is to stay their temporarily--negotiate with the moderate Taliban and warlords in order to neutralize Karzai and his drug-lord brother.

Oh, Google Christian Science Monitor Afghanistan and read the articles there.

I was in the car, listening to Rev Al and Boyce Watkins this afternoon, just cracking up. When Rev. Al came on and announced that Tiger wasn't going to be going - TO HIS OWN DAMN TOURNAMENT ---the first thing that came to my mind was...

WACO

bwa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

Dr. Watkins was hilarious, without even trying to be today. He was just telling truths, and he cracked me up, the way he slammed Tiger's ' statement' from yesterday, saying that - NO WAY- a PR Professional wrote that. He said that Tiger just put a bounty on his head for ANY AND ALL INFO, and now...for that PICTURE of Tiger. He said he didn't think Tiger and his ' people' were thinking this through because they had only poured water on a grease fire.

Democrats – Don’t be misled. The media is going to call Obama’s new Afghan strategy a “betrayal” of the Democratic base – but it’s not. It’s actually a decisive rejection of the Republican/Neo-Conservative strategy of the “Long War”

When Obama presents his new strategy for Afghanistan in the next few days it is inevitable that many in the press will describe it as a profound betrayal of the Democratic “base”. Obama will face fierce criticism from many progressive and anti-war Democrats who will consider his decision to significantly increase the number of troops as representing a complete capitulation to the military and Republican neoconservatives.

This reaction is understandable, but it is actually profoundly wrong. At the same time that Obama’s plan will authorize additional troops, his new strategy already represents a powerful repudiation of the fundamental Bush/neoconservative strategy and a historic reassertion of civilian control over the military after 9/11.

For many Democrats – those who do not carefully follow the cloistered and jargon-filled “inside the beltway” debates over counter-terrorism and military strategy -- this assertion will seem utterly and patently absurd -- how can a decision that significantly increases troop levels in Afghanistan possibly also represent a challenge to a militaristic strategy?

In order to understand why this apparent paradox actually makes sense it is necessary to view the specific issue of Afghanistan in two larger contexts --- the overall strategic debate about how to conduct the long-term “war on terror” and the proper relationship between the President and the military. The fundamental conflict that has been going on between, on the one hand, the Obama administration and the Republican/neoconservatives and the military on the other has actually been over these two larger strategic questions and not over the precise number of troops to send to Afghanistan. The size of the proposed troop increase in Afghanistan is only a single sub-issue within a much larger debate over what American military strategy and policy should be for the next ten, twenty and even fifty years.

On one side is the perspective that is variously called the Global War on Terror, World War IV or simply The Long War”. It is widely shared among Republicans and neoconservatives and is supported by a major sector of the military establishment.

This view was codified in the period immediately after 9/11. Its central premise is that military operations aimed at hunting down individual terrorists and dismantling specific terrorist organizations are totally inadequate – indeed almost worthless -- in dealing with the threat of global terrorism. It is only by fundamentally transforming the societies of the Muslim world – by introducing U.S. style political institutions and orienting their societies and economies toward the west and the global economy – that the roots of Islamic terrorism can be undermined.


This was the underlying basis on which the Bush administration decided to invade Iraq rather than maintain the focus on Afghanistan and Osama bin Laden. In the “Long War” perspective, if “regime change” and cultural transformation could be engineered in Iraq -- and after that Iran -- then more peripheral Muslim countries like Afghanistan would almost effortlessly fall into line.

In the initial plan for Iraq it was assumed that once Saddam Hussein was overthrown the people of Iraq would very quickly embrace western institutions and values with only minimal, top-level, direction from the occupation authorities. During the period from 2002-2004, in fact, the coalition authorities efforts were focused on building a massive network of military bases that were planned as a permanent hub for the projection of U.S. air and land forces over the entire region – and particularly as the launching pad for operations aimed at Iran.

By 2005, as Iraq continued to sink into chaos, it became clear that this “laissez-faire” military approach was not working and that a much more direct “hands-on” strategy was needed. The doctrine of “counterinsurgency” – an approach that had been employed by the British in India, China, Iraq, Afghanistan and Malaya, by the French in Algeria and by the U.S. in Vietnam and Central America -- was brought up to date in the “US Army-Marines Counterinsurgency Field Manual” and applied in the urban areas of Iraq.

As outlined in the Field Manual, a counterinsurgency strategy has two basic elements:

1. Heavy concentrations of troops must establish clear control over particular neighborhoods or areas.

In largely urban Iraq this involved building high concrete walls and barriers to separate ethnic neighborhoods and the establishment of elaborate systems of checkpoints, identity cards and frequent searches of vehicles and individuals. More recently in Afghanistan – in the small farming community of Nawa, for example -- it has involved constant foot patrols though the streets by U.S. troops – two patrols a day – by every single one of the 36 squads in the 1,100 man battalion.

2. U.S. forces must take major overall responsibility for managing the local economy and physical infrastructure of a particular area.

The Counterinsurgency Field Manual specifically lists four major objectives U.S. forces must try to provide (1) Security from intimidation, coercion, violence and crime; (2) Provision of basic economic needs, (3) Provision of essential services such as water, electricity, sanitation and medical care; (4) Sustainment of key social and cultural institutions.

Just within the category of “essential services”, the detailed list of the objectives needed for success is startling –

• criminals detained
• timely response to property fires
• water treatments plants functioning
• electrical plants open
• power lines intact
• all schools open, staffed, supplied
• roadways and bridges open
• hospitals and clinics open and staffed
• trash collected regularly
• sewage system operating...

Read the rest here: http://www.thedemocraticstrategist.org/strategi...

Why exactly do we belong in Afghanistan? What have the Afghan people ever done to America to deserve a nine year old occupation? Do you realize that we'll be there longer than Vietnam and WWII? And dont you think that we could be spending the billions we'll be spending there into helping peoples of color in America? How about New Orleans? How about Detroit? Why cant we spend the $60 Billion dollars per year to create an education system that works for all? More importantly (and this is the same question I was asking my republican friends during the Bush regime), are you signing up to fight this war? Have you been encouraging family and friends to sign up to fight in Afghanistan? If not, then why not? Why send someone else's children to kill folks that have NEVER threatened you or wish any ill will towards you?

Tiger's supposed ' woman', has hired Gloria Allred.

this is nothing but trouble.

Saw this. She's about to get paid........

Oh, lord. Allred? Talk about an ambulance chaser--for white women in distress.

Didja notice the photos from yesterday that Gloria Allred met her @ the LA Airport?

If anyone is watching Chris Matthews tonight, you will see why Peter King wants to do an investigation and you can see the propaganda forming around the "crashers".

They have already evoked 911 several times.

This is disgusting to me. Am I disgusted that the editors at this blog don't fucking get it.

This is disgusting to me. Am I disgusted that the editors at this blog don't fucking get it.

W.E.E. got disgusted too. Life is too short to be living in fear and supporting fear tactics from Republicans and Fauxgressives. As a matter of fact, people who threaten me don't stay in my life very long...I let them go. W.E.E. get you Craig. W.E.E. understand your frustration.

"Am I disgusted that the editors at this blog don't fucking get it."

Hi Craig. What are the editors not getting? (and I don't have cable... what's the cliff notes version of what happened regarding propaganda?) Is Matthews pro investigation or anti investigation?

What I want to know is, is there a 'banned list'? I know that one old guy was banned after busting into three inaugurations. The Salahis were caught with a Bravo tv crew busting into two of Obamas appearances; and also caught in the inauguration box after everyone left trying to make it look like they are part of his circle. But that even stealing someone seats at the CBC Foundation Awards dinner back in September and having to be thrown out is shows a criminal pattern. The third time's the charm with Mrs Salahi gate crashing a Redskins Cheerleaders reunion, after borrowing her co-worker's pom poms, all to claim that she's an ex-cheerleader. They're gonna keep doing this crap until they're forced not to. It's past time for a psychologist, they need jail moreso now that they've involved a cable tv outlet in their antics. At what point does 'gate crashing' pass from harmless fun to stalking?

What happens when Mrs Salahi decides to boil Sasha and Malias pet bunny?

I had a very enlightening conversation with someone whose opinion I truly respect earlier tonight. "Crashingate" came up and he was not smiling. he said [im paraphrasing]: "This is how power operates. This is Power's way of letting Obama know that him and his family could be get to....and in the White House, in-front of a world stage. Did you Notice how at first they were in denial about the crashers getting close to Obama? and then a couple of days later we saw the picture of Obama smiling, shaking the lady's hands? My friend, this is how the sausages are made here in America. Especially in light of a major war-making decision regarding Afghanistan."

I agree that the focus should not be on the "crashers", but the focus should rightly be on the security lapse that occurred. Like I said upthread, I was reminded today by a older co-worker of mine about the stabbing of MLK by the Curry woman. She got close enougth to stab him with the letter opener even before King's security brought her down.

Forget the crashers, focus on the lapse in the SS security detail. All the other stuffer is just stupid politico-action movie fodder.

No one should ever be that close to the President, and no one should be on WH grounds who's not supposed to "officially" be there

Craig, it's not that we don't see your point. But, what is supposed to happen here?

fi yuo cna raed tihs, yuo hvae a sgtrane mnid too.

Cna yuo raed tihs? Olny 55 plepoe out of 100 can.
i cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdanieg. The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid, aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it dseno’t mtaetr in waht oerdr the ltteres in a wrod are, the olny iproamtnt tihng is taht the frsit and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you
can sitll raed it whotuit a pboerlm.

Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Azanmig huh? yaeh and I awlyas tghuhot slpeling was ipmorantt!

lamh32: stih si aaaaaawy ocooool!!! :>)

Hantks!!! :>)

So what's Sarah Palin's excuse?

Town: ACTUALLY - -SHE can SPEAK It - - -SHE just DON'T KNOW what she said!! :>)

LOL!!

I guess I'm one of the 55. Hmpf, cool, I guess.

This was cool

The Decline: The Geography of a Recession by Latoya Egwuekwe
A stunning visual of the unemployment rates by county from Jan 2007-Sept 2009

http://cohort11.americanobserver.net/latoyaegwu...

How desperate is your town for income? Aspen might revive their mining days brothels.

I used to fly people into Aspen all the time. There isn't anything to do there besides ski and look at mountains. Some of these religious fanatics think the world is going to end if you legalize all these vices. The US has been fine since they ended Prohibition.

Did anyone watch Matthews tonight? This man is way to cute for his own good. He asked Joan Walsh of Salon if she was going to bang the President. It was barely barely within the context of the as a liberal are out going to get on his case about his Afghan decision. You could here the director screaming in his earpiece.

What the hell???

Here's the video. Watch his look and her response. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036697/#34212380

Oooooh the Salahi's ...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ar...

A caller on Ed Schultz this p.m. called them nothing less than a couple of confidence people. Gypmeisters. Grifters in designer clothing. This guy was in the polo crowd in Virginia and knew that their smack was as phony as a $3 bill.

That being said, a woman holdover who was eased out of her job in June, Cathy Hargreaves, blamed the current social secretary, Desiree Rogers, for the lapse in security. While this definitely looks like sour grapes, what got my attention was the kind of back-up of the back-up that was instituted during this broad's tenure.

Both the White House and the Secret Service coordinated their efforts with the official list, with the SS playing the muscle role, and the assistants running people through the list at several junctures, weeding out those who were gate-crashers.

In no way am I accusing Ms. Rogers of not doing her job, or even letting the Secret Service or the Salahis off the hook, but perhaps there could be some tighter coordination next time between the White House and the Secret Service. I'm just looking for answers--not squabbles-- for the next time there is something this big happening at the White House or elsewhere.

Hope this is not a dupe.

The first set of SS personnel who let them through the perimeter need to be fired. Period. The Salahis were not on the list, not on the list you gets no access. Period. They are saying these people's SUV was turned away by the first set of SS personnel, so they drove away then CAME BACK. That first set of SS let them through. When they came back they should have been DETAINED to see what's up. Call Desiree or her assistant and find out if they are on the list. If not, hold them for questioning as to why they keep trying to get in the WH.

Now if they find out that any of those sets of SS *DID* try to contact the Social Secretary or her office and Ms. Rogers told them to buzz off, then she gotta go.

Lastly, something tells me that if Michaele Salahi had brown skin and brown hair, both she and her husband would have been detained from jump when they tried to get in the first time around. Blond hair has its' privileges, I guess.

I think she is and will take some heat for it. She has cast herself in a more high profile role than other social secretaries which is risky and this incident has revealed the consequences of such.

She's a close friend so she might survive but the situation calls for some heads to roll. Somebody at the SS and somebody at the WH will have to go. Apparently there was some liason at the pentagon who was trying to get invitations for the couple and that is where they got the impression that they had been cleared by the WH. If it's true, she might have to go as well.

The couple tells their story on the Today show tomorrow which is probably going to bring new wrinkles.

She needs to take a little heat. Anedoctal reports in the paper from people who were invited to the dinner reveal that regardless of how the Salahi's made it through, this new process Desiree has (or has not) instituted needs some work. Maybe next time she will take her name off of the guest list and she and her staff can actually work the party to ensure that the process works smoothly and there are fewer glitches.

It's a huge event -- anyone who has thrown a large party knows that someone will invariably be left off the list or there will be late add ons who didn't make the list. That's why you have someone at the door to say "yes" or "no." She should have had her people out there with the Secret Service -- that seems like common sense to me.

Maybe it was that ugly dress she was wearing that messed up her night. They have a lot of Christmas events coming so she will have time to revamp the process and dial back her presence as well.

Why do I get the feeling there will be plenty of "causalities" as this "investigation" continues, but, in the end, the Salahi's are going to be OK?

Of course they will be okay. I saw a news report this evening where someone is trying to direct blame towards the social office. I think we knew that was coming.

I think that there is enough blame to go around.

Question,

How is not voting in the 2010 midterms as a "protest" vote any different from casting an actual "protest" voter for Nader in 2000, and 2004?

These so-called progressives love to cut off their own noses.

Ya'll know what's been running through my mind about these "gate crashers"? Ive been thinking about with MLK was stabbed by that woman with the letter opener. Which aside from the pointed end, isn't that much sharrper than a table knife. Once she got close enought, she actually did stab him with the opener before King's security brought her down.

I truly believe that the gate crashers didnt' mean any harm, and all the attention they are geting in aggravating, but even with the best security in the world, you could inflict alot of damage with regular household items before the securit takes you down.

At the end of the day, the President's left with prayer IMO.

This has been really eye opening. Especially the desire to paper over the issues with security; something that has been a real problem. I saw a dude wrote book about this issue and did an interview on the Daily Show about how over worked the Secret Service is right now.

It just freaks you out if you think about it enough; so I just say a prayer and move on because I honestly can't handle it. That sounds weird to post; but that's how I feel.

I am actually glad this incident happened because it's shining a light on how the Secret Service is falling down on the job. We saw this with Bush. Mr. Shoe Thrower should not have been able to take off his second shoe to aim it at Bush. Everyone in that room except Bush and Mr. Shoe Thrower had slow reflexes and they were all like DUUUUUUUUUUH. Bush had to channel Neo from the Matrix to dodge that shoe.

Chris Matthews had an ex SS officier on tonight. He pointed out that since 2003, when the SS was moved from the Treasury to Homeland Security, the SS has been cutting corners.

I need for the Obama administration to stop reading their little books and dreaming their little dreams and get down to business.

1. Move SS back to Treasury or wherever and DEMAND increased funding. F*ck a Republican or TeaBagger who wants to cry about more government spending.

2. STOP being so concerned over what Chip, Chuck, Jake, Hannity, Beck, Republicans, etc have to say. If Obama declared December 25th "Christmas" they would bitch and moan about that. Homeland Security (under BUSH) is the one who wrote that report about right-wing crazies and the Obama Administration is always like "We Sorry" and shuffling their feets everytime a Republican opens their mouth to whine. Homeland Security's report states the nation is under threat from right wing crazies, and damn if you don't see right wing crazies expressing death wishes and showing up with guns and holding pseudo Klan rallies.

I need for some reality to be dealt with. It seems like the only person keepin' it real in the Obama Administration is Michelle, who is like "F*ck this shit, I'm living it up before we get shipped back to Chicago."

LMBO over the Bush Neo Matrix reference you are speaking the truth Ruth. Even though I had some initial schadenfreude over the shoe-throwing fiasco, the second thing I thought was that Obama could get hurt by the same lapses. Mr. Shoe Thrower shouldn't haven't gotten that second shoe out of his hand at all.

I gotta give Bush his props on dodgin' them shoes. It could have been a more serious situation, but damn if that dude wasn't smooth when he ducked them loafers.

BUSH was the only one (besides the shoe thrower) who had quick reflexes. Everyone else stood around like "D'Oh! What jes' happen?" and Bush was not trying to find out what happened, he was trying to duck.

rikyrah: THAT RENDERING - - - B-E-A-U-T-I-F-U-L!! :>) THANKS!!

P.S. AxelFoley: Get your - - PAPER LOADED :>) :>)

LOL ;-)

You KNOW that the knives out for Rogers are just attempts to cut at Michelle Obama. Chip Reid made it crystal clear asking Gibbs today if the White House would take any responsibility for the gate crashers or would they allow the secret service to be "scape goated". Wow. Forget that the Social Secretary's office isn't responsible for protecting the president and that with 400 names on a list; they wouldn't be doing ANYTHING that guard should have done (look for the dude's name!). Rogers is the one they want to take down.

Not the Secret Service officials who screwed up.

And they want to create an incompetent White House meme.

Correction, they want to create an incompetent BLACK White House meme. Niggas can't do nothing right. I knew this was coming when Bush's social assistant came out and said Desiree Rogers fired her and none of this would have happened if Rogers had left competent people in place (paraphrasing). I guess if the Salahis had actually shot Obama while the Secret Service was chomping on chicken the White Wing Meme would be that Valerie Jarrett, Reggie Love and Desiree Rogers need to be fired for not protecting the president.

You are so right. I have a feeling that this whole thing was set up from the get go.

That's all it is.

I'd love to put my foot up Chip Reid ass, too. What kinda grown-ass man calls himself Chip?

I've never understood the rationale behind taking funding away from a troubled public school system to fund a charter school for some of the public school students. Now NY is taking funding and space from the public schools.

Why not just FIX the public schools or make all public schools charter?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/30/education/30s...

The NYC school system does strange things. They do not fire teachers - when a school administrator wants to get a teacher out of a school, they send the teacher to sit in a room at a central location. These teachers then sit there and get paid. Some read, some do art, some listen to music - but they all get paid full wages - secondary to Union contract.

Because some people don't have time to wait for the government to get their stuff together.

I clearly understand the benefit for the kids lucky enough to be cherry picked out of the failing school.

What about the others?

According to this article, now they have a failing school without access to the library.

I just don't understand why the charter isn't being put in charge of the entire school system. If you are so darn great, then why not educate all the kids not just some of the kids? Then again, its like taking the best and brightest & claiming success without the responsibility of teaching the (huge quotations for lack of a better phrase) "less desirable students".

That is Mel King's position in Boston, with the caveat that the charter schools are "community" schools open to all (through lottery -- no cherry-picking students) --- curriculum, pedagogy and culture driven by parents and people in the community where the school is. Your suggestion is the only way to make the education fair, in his opinion.

Do you agree or have another approach?

I'm certainly not faulting anyone for doing anything & everything to help educate kids, I just don't see that this is any different that the Gifted/Honors/AP/IB vs regular class debates in other schools. Sifting the "good" students from the "bad" requires you to be fairly accurate in your identification of those who are "worthy of being saved" I see no difference than the failed HR policies of identifying HiPo employees for special attention and fast track leadership opportunities.

I hear people in DC beating the hell out of Rhee for her methods and I wondering out loud if she deserves more support just because of the sheer reach of saving the entire school system as opposed to a select group of targeted achievers.

Its a whole lot tougher to raise the standard of education across the board than it is to nurture a few HiPos from the herd.

Only time will tell; however, I wonder if DC will end up in a better place than NY because in the end, the goal is making DC public schools better for all kids.

I agree with Mel. All children have gifts and things to contribute. And folks in the community know what they ought to be learning that is relevant to their lives. For instance, our youth love to consume technology and respect people who can build technologies that they like, but the way math and science are taught, they are so disconnected from real life. In our Learn 2 Teach, Teach 2 Learn program, we get youth involved in math, science and technology building things that interest them (solar powered ipod chargers mounted on benches, an ibed alarm that only stops when they get out of bed, a tshirt embedded with programmed soft circuits that speak and flash lights to educate about police corruption, a robotic minesweeper by some youth with family in cambodia) and they achieve amazing things. Often, when they go back to school and drop some of the knowledge they learned and show some of their projects, teachers and principals are amazed --- because they never show any of that initiative and talent in schools. We have been working to get our model into a local school that takes kids who have been asked to leave other public schools, because we know the youth can achieve and learn using our model and that they will be engaged.

November 30, 2009 12:28 PM
Desiree Rogers: No-Fault Insurance »
By Kenneth R. Bazinet

The White House is angrily defending Social Secretary Desiree Rogers’ role in overseeing the infamous Indian state dinner, where publicity-hungry gatecrashers slipped through a Secret Service checkpoint.

In the past, the social secretary routinely positioned staffers at the gates to cross-check names. Aides were not deployed to the checkpoints for last Tuesday’s state dinner, leaving the screening job to the Secret Service.

Backed by the full faith and friendship of First Lady Michelle Obama, Rogers is feeling “absolutely no heat whatsoever,” insisted a White House aide, claiming there hasn’t been a whisper from the Secret Service or even inside the White House about placing any of the blame on Rogers.

Over the Thanksgiving holiday weekend, an item on the Daily Beast Web site suggested Rogers might have been at fault for attending the dinner as a guest instead of a social office troubleshooter.

Like senior West Wing advisers David Axelrod and Valerie Jarrett, Rogers is a member of the “Chicago Mafia” at the pinnacle of the Obama inner circle. She is particularly close to First Lady Michelle Obama. Because of her ultra-insider status, she is considered a political untouchable in the Obama White House.

“This is a Secret Service messup,” said a source with strong Obama connections, “but you can be sure if anyone outside the Service bears any blame, it won’t be Desiree.”

The Secret Service supported the White House’s position, saying Rogers was not at fault. The guard should have radioed supervisors and then the social secretary’s staff when the gatecrashers’ names did not appear on the list, but the officer did not follow that protocol, a veteran Secret Service agent and senior spokesman told The Mouth.

“There are times when the plan calls for the social secretary’s staff to be at the gates, and there are times when the plan does not. The plan for Tuesday night’s state dinner did not call for the social secretary’s staff to be positioned at the (two) entrances. The plan called for the (Secret Service uniformed) officers to have the guest list and check people in. Even if they were standing there it doesn’t absolve us. We just have to accept responsibility for this. It will make us more vigilant,” said senior Secret Service spokesman Jim Mackin.

The White House aide forcefully rejected questions over why Rogers did not position a staffer with a guest list to doublecheck the names of guests as they passed through the gates.

“Social secretary staffers were constantly walking around. They were nearby. They were in the guard shack at times. Even the Secret Service has said that having someone right there from the social secretary’s office would not have made a difference…The guard literally didn’t check for the name. They screwed up. There’s nowhere else to go with this,” an Obama aide told the Daily News.

with Thomas M. DeFrank



Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dc/2009/11/des...

Does anyone here own a swimming pool, been a life guard or even seen what happens when someone drowns? You want to ruin a friendship or have yours ruined let someone jump on your kid in a swimming pool or have them drown. In most drowning accidents the problem is the brain has been staved of oxygen long enough to do severe damage. Be a parent and have to wake up every morning and open a door and look in on your child. Be aware of the swoosh sound of a ventilator, check a cathater for infection and think you don't hate.
Desiree Rodgers friendship just went to hell in a hand basket. She almost drowned the President. I can't see the lab rat surviving this.

I've heard some rumbling over the blogosphere about Desiree being the "scapegoat" for the crashers. They're saying that the social secretary has never been as "out front" as Desiree. The social secretary is usually working more behind the scenes, they are not usually covergirls, and I'll admit, I've seen at lot more of Desiree than I'm comfortable with.

My whole problem, I honestly don't think it's about Desiree. Sure, she's not serving the First Family IMO and I rember how Gibbs had to come down on her during the first 100 days. But, this feels a lot like people taking shots at Michelle through Desiree. Which, actually, means maybe they need to be careful having friends in high places. Valerie Jarrett for example keeps a low profile and always makes news ONLY about the message the White House is sending. Rogers doesn't do as good a job keeping the focus only on Michelle. JMHO

Doesn't change she's getting a bum rush IMO. The Social Secretary's office isn't about security and with 400 names an aide wouldn't do anything different than that guard could have done. The main point being; the guard didn't check the lists or seek confirmation just waved those folks in. And IMO there is a coverup for the Indian embassy - those folks knew SOMEONE in high places to get them allowed entrance and that someone likely was the Indian ambassador.

I agree that it is about Michelle. Michelle picked Rogers, Rogers under orders from Michelle botched the job. Since Michelle can't go, Rogers needs to.

No she didn't. The Secret Service botched the job. Michelle and Desiree put together a gorgeous state dinner and that's been forgotten because of this drama.

Um, no she doesn't.

I agree with ya, I think Desiree is a scapegoat, but she ain't going no where. Still I hope this makes Desiree more aware that she should be less "covergirl", more behind the scenes.

lamh32: but she ain't going no where.



SPEAK TA-RUTH!! :>)

LOL - its always someone elses job.

Hurricane season is officially OVER in South Florida. I didn't put up one shutter. Gotta Love it.

congrats

I'm glad!!! My home town Na'wlins are probably letting out a sigh of relief.