Rex Kickass

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 21, 2010 -> 01:04 PM) perhaps it's because they sell out everyone under 30 when they govern. Or there's basically 0 outreach.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Jan 21, 2010 -> 11:36 AM) Wow, yes it is. And also probably a large reason why Coakley lost. Yes. Democrats depend on the youth vote. It's a huge reason why Obama got elected in 2008, yet the under 30 community is nearly totally ignored as election day comes around. Turnout in Virgina was around 17% for people under 30, and in New Jersey it was 19%. Not saying this would have made a difference but it might have made the NJ election much much closer.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 21, 2010 -> 11:24 AM) Because we want him to stay on the tonight show? And anyway, $45 million is chump change these days. Now, if he could qualify for bailout funds... He'd negotiated his release a week ago. If it was still a fight, I might still understand.

Nearly 6 out of every 7 registered voters in Massachussets under the age of 30 stayed home on Tuesday.

I don't understand the "I'm With CoCo" thing. I prefer Conan to Leno, but I don't think I need to stand in solidarity with someone that just got a $45 million golden parachute.

QUOTE (JorgeFabregas @ Jan 21, 2010 -> 10:05 AM) I heard multiple reports on NPR that the only people let into the airport in Haiti in the first days following the quake were people with American passports---even those with European passports had trouble leaving the country. Meanwhile, it's not clear that the Americans were invited to take over air traffic controlling duties (although perhaps they were right to assert themselves if the traffic was being mismanaged). The port au prince airport handles anywhere from 6 - 12 jet flights daily on a normal non-earthquake day. It's currently handling about 200 flights in and out on a single runway. If we weren't there doing this, we'd have another catastrophe in Haiti to deal with.

US Airways flight to Louisville diverted today because an observant Jewish person was wearing a phylactery on the flight to coincide with his morning prayers. A passenger thought the straps running down his arms and strapped to his head was a bomb. So the plane made an emergency landing in Philadelphia this morning.

QUOTE (Controlled Chaos @ Jan 20, 2010 -> 07:16 PM) Maybe it is about money...I don't know...but like I said...I don't think choosing life is hot button. If the commercial was about taking away the choice, then I see the argument and hypocrisy and I wouldn't want a commercial like that on during the superbowl. But one that just says choose life????....It's sad people are against that. It's even more sad that people are against a message of "You're always welcome at my church."

QUOTE (Controlled Chaos @ Jan 20, 2010 -> 04:46 PM) I don't know...I see the difference. One is promoting religion. This is the pc world we live in. Unless I'm missing them we don't see ads for other denominations either. Religion is just too controversial and they just stay away. So are most political messages. I don't see abortion as a political message. It's a social message. Children working labor jobs and saying "Guess who's going to pay off President Bush's $1 trillion deficit?" is a political message. One that is pretty relevant today with the switch of a name and dollar amount...but it still wouldn't get approved. I don't know the Tebow ad yet...I guess it might turn out to be controversial. But as of right now all know is people saying it's an anti-abortion message. But WTF is wrong with that?? I don't get it. If the message isn't about reversing roe v wade or changing law or whatever...what is the problem? If the message isn't about taking away a womens right to choose, where's the controversy. The pro-choice movement is about having the choice not having an abortion. I mean, in essence it's like people saying....I'm mad...choose an abortion!! Maybe a pro-lifer can help a guy stuck in the middle such as myself. Cause I don't get it. If the tebow ad is like...doctors told my mom to terminate she didnt yada yada yada Im fine. choose life. What is the problem?? Do we want a commercial that says choose abortion?? That's some ridiculous spin. A commercial that says "You're free to come to our church no matter who you are," is never more controversial than an ad that takes a side on a seriously hot button political issue. TV stations promote specific denominations all the time through paid advertising. Ask Jack VanImpe, ask Benny Hinn, ask the late Billy Graham for that matter. Most religious programming on non religious channels are paid programming. And if you're seeing them on NBC, ABC, CBS, FOX, WGN, Telemundo or Channel 50 in Chicago - that money is going to the network - because those stations are all owned by networks. If abortion isn't a political issue, you might have wanted to tell all the folks at the Catholic League and the priests and bishops who called for John Kerry's excommunication in 2004 because he supports a legal right to choose. This is all about money or respect. I think times are tough for TV, so if the UCC ad tried to air at the Super Bowl, it would get the nod today - because this is all about money. If it couldn't than its an issue of whose views are worth respecting - and that's pretty disappointing to think about.

QUOTE (Controlled Chaos @ Jan 20, 2010 -> 02:09 PM) I think we should hold judgement. If the commercial is simply choose life and family...is that so wrong? I could see if they're showing embryos or something, but if it's in good taste and is simply a matter of choose life, why is that bad. If your pro choice does that mean you push for and encourage abortions?? I'm not sure what the issue here is, when we don't even know what the commercial is about. If it was some shock and awe pro life campaign, I would suspect it wouldn't get approved and it shouldn't. I'd agree with that.... if CBS hadn't refused to air this ad: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hx1u1v7hAtY

QUOTE (daa84 @ Jan 20, 2010 -> 12:18 PM) lol i love how 30 second advertisments can spark message boards to drop f bombs, hitler and taliban comparisons in a little over an hour.... its pretty simple people.....tebow as the right to do the ad as protected by the 1st amendment ....if this is your thing, then cool...if you don't like it, thats cool too - just ignore it and move on.... the main thing i can never comprehend is why people get so ferocious at each other for having differing viewpoints. its like some people refuse to acknowledge and fail to understand either side of the argument. I have my own opinion on this topic, which I frankly wouldn't like to share with anyone, but I will say that I'm not outraged by either side, and certainly understand that some people may feel differently on the topic than I do. It's all fake outrage in the end. This ad changes nothing. But it is kinda odd that the supposed liberal media won't take ads from left wing advocacy groups and even churches who have a slightly left of center message like we don't excommunicate the gays can't get their ads run during network shows that nobody even wants to watch - but when crazy right wing groups like Focus on the Family want to air a purely political advocacy ad during the most watched telecast of the year, its suddenly not an issue for the network anymore.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 20, 2010 -> 10:48 AM) Or on construction starts being way down... Jim Cramer did predict a 200 point rally on the back of a Brown rally. And he is always right, so... I'm blaming this on Obama.

I don't know why anyone is surprised. CBS banned an ad by the United Church of Christ that proclaimed the controversial message that they welcomed everyone. The real reason this ad is getting on the air is that the superbowl is in two weeks, and CBS still hasn't sold out all the spots despite the fact that they are selling for less than last year.

Governor Doctor Howard Dean

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 20, 2010 -> 12:05 AM) No I understand you, but the whole "trash the bill because it isn't want I wanted" crowd just drives me nuts. You are absolutely right about Kaine and them pushing out Dean. I was so happy we were done with DLC but it looks like they will have the keys again. It's no secret about what's happening there. Last year Deeds ran to the middle and he lost. That dude in NY-23 ran to the base message and he beat the teabagger. Run with the message that wins and win. Expect to win or run to the center (Republican lite) and you don't get your base to turn out and you don't get enough Republican votes to make up for it. (Say what you want about Corzine, but in a year where every Dem in the state but the governor wins, there's something very "special" about that specific race.)

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 19, 2010 -> 11:52 PM) I know. But I've fought for everything too, but i was under no illusion that it had a final point, the way so many did. And I continue to fight, even here in Brazil for gay marriage rights. It's a strange country, it really ISNT catholic anymore, people aren't religious, but the disgusting social dictating the church did hangs true. But slowly they make progress, we hold awareness meetings, the more they show their faces the better it will become. Big Brother, a huge show, just had it's first gay castmate. Anyway here's my email to TPM. These are my thoughts. In the summer, i was just laughing at the people saying Obama had to dictate, this HAD to go through the legislature, but now, now is when he needs to dictate. email: Well, I'm sure you are bombarded with emails about now. But I had to. What drives me crazy is that Massachusetts, the go-to for liberal thought, has done this to me/us. And I have to think, did they not realize that for the next two years 1/2 of their votes will now be controlled by Oklahoma? I get the appeal, I do, really, the "ohh, he's just like us and understands our problems" thing...but the guy will be the newest member with no power, and is in a party controlled by KY and SC. Does it matter he's pro-choice? No. Those battles in the health care bill about this don't matter, because he won't vote for it anyway. Does it matter he's a moderate? No, he won't vote for anything. So congratulations MA, you are now in common bond with the south. Who cares about if she was awful, she's a vote, if the past year (the first year our Congress has had to work in 40 years) didn't convince you that that is ALL a senator is and nothing more, then you deserve it. Thanks for handcuffing the country, much appreciation. And to my fellow progressives in general, I'm just shocked and appalled at the little fight in all of them. You thought you won? It's ALWAYS easier to stay the same, even if it's awful. You can show a meth addict how much more put together his/her life would be clean, and it wouldn't matter, they know their life now and think they can handle it. And our rationale is to hand it back to republicans to teach the DEMS A LESSON. Brilliant. You fight tooth and nail for progress. You got a democratic majority. But that was made up with conservatives...you support them to pass what they can, and then you fight for more liberal members to pass what they can, and so on. Progress. When you fall on your face you are still moving forward (thanks courage wolf). But instead, we whine and cry and say OHhhh but Obama's just a shill for the corporations, waaaaa. We are the children hiding behind our mother's dress, hoping she fixes everything for us and then throwing a tantrum when she doesn't. Put on some gloves and get to work. And better, try working with a dose of reality. I'm disgusted. I still work. I'm working on a campaign now, as a volunteer. But I'm calling a spade a spade. My party is f***ed up. We have no will to win. And we're run by a bunch of McGovernite losers who have been hanging on and being generally worthless since 1972. The Democrats actually handed the keys to the party to the people after 2004 and within four years they have 60 votes in the Senate and a huge majority in the house. They got everything they needed to succeed. And then, somehow, the losers who got us in the s***ty spot we were in after 2004 got the keys again. I'll still work - but the more I'm taken for granted, the less interested I am.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 19, 2010 -> 11:37 PM) Rex yr supposed to be the fighter to make me fight. I'm over anger. There's too much of it. Yet I'm pissed. I'm pissed that I have to be pissed. What can I tell you? I'm disaffected right now - I have a party that expects my support but won't act to make me equal. That's a personal insult for someone who's gone out for every campaign since 2004. And I mean every campaign. President, Governor, Senate, Congress, Freeholder, City Council... The Democratic Party deserves to have its ass handed to it this year. I think I'll get excited about electing them to affect positive change again when the people I helped elect decide actually doing something to win and make the change we voted them in for is important again. I think teabaggers are crazy, but at least they've lit a fire under the GOP's ass. The Dems are looking a lot like the 2006 White Sox right now. Tons of potential, no urge to realize it.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jan 19, 2010 -> 09:30 PM) I'm sure, also, as Rex was alluding to, this wasn't about Obama and his policies, this was simply about a dumb woman who couldn't run her campaign, right? Wrong. Even in Massachusetts, this was about Obama. That's all I'm going to say on this whole thing. I'm gonna go with s***ty candidate, s***ty party here. Is there anger against Obama? Sure. But in Mass he has 60% approval. Just too bad they pick candidates who thinks that they are owed their seat and have a base of voters who think "but I just voted in 2008!" Democrats don't have the anger necessary to keep their party vital and the machine is run by people who don't get it. The Democrats deserve to have their ass handed to them this year, because they've basically conceded defeat with 59 seats in the Senate.

Ah Democrats.... never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 18, 2010 -> 02:55 PM) There have been illegal and unprosecuted firings in 30% of attempted unionizations over the past few years. Over 90% of employees go through closed-door anti-union sessions during attempted unionization movements. 50% of companies/offices face threats of closure because of union organizing. Unionization processes typically are drawn out for years even when union organizers do everything correct and legal. Penalties have been stripped back so far that they're less than a slap on teh wrist. According to a Human Rights Watch report: I'd be more than willing to admit that a card-check plan could be the wrong way to go. But the playing field ABSOLUTELY needs some leveling in favor of workers and to say it isn't is simply to ignore reality. The last 30 years it's gone the other way, and it's gone quite a bit too far. +1. The idea of physical intimidation by the unions on a worker to worker level is seriously overblown.

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Jan 18, 2010 -> 04:23 PM) Well certainly NV,ND,CO,MA,DE,PA,AR,and CT are in play. And I would say the first three are surefire pickups for the R's. ND is a solid pickup for the GOP. CO is a toss up at the moment depending on who ends up shaking out of the fold for the Dems. NV looks bad for Reid but there is a Dem machine in Nevada that can move a lot of votes so I wouldnt count him out 10 months before election day. CT is not really in play with Dodd on the sidelines, and I don't know that PA is going to be all that competitive either frankly. I think its realistic to look at a 3-5 seat loss on the Democratic side this year, and maybe 20-25 pickups in the House. For 2010 to change the balance of power, it would have to be like 2006, not 1994 - because even in 1994 there were R to D shifts in some places. 2006 was a much bigger wave than 1994 was in that respect.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 18, 2010 -> 01:53 PM) Are you sure that's not some weird thing coming out because all of his staff are independent contractors anyway? (Reported yesterday I believe, probably so that he doesn't have to pay for his staff's health care). No thats different. The independent contractor thing is not uncommon to be honest, when I worked campaign staff in 2005, I was employed by the county party as an independent contractor. GOTV is usually volunteer (often paid volunteer, but volunteer none the less). Going to a temp agency means that the organization is pretty weak.

Such a strange election: apparently the Brown campaign doesn't have many volunteers so they are hiring temps to work GOTV operations. In the meantime, there's been a huge groundswell of DEM campaign veterans going to Mass and working GOTV efforts with the Coakley campaign. Two polls today show Brown up by 5 and a dead even tie at 48, so what happens here is anyone's guess.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Jan 18, 2010 -> 12:07 PM) Sure, those helped. But the whole card check idea is crap, and people know it. Actually, no it isn't. I would wager the amount of pressure organized labor place would place on individual workers to sign cards of intent to be represented by a union pales in comparison to the intimidation that big business uses to prevent unions to organize in their place of business to begin with.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 16, 2010 -> 10:18 PM) i agree. I'm not sure I do anymore. It's a turnout election this time around - and some serious cash got laid in this week. It's entirely possible Brown peaked on Thursday, which could be a shame for him because the election wasn't Thursday, it is Tuesday. There are a couple points to note about the polls - apparently the leaked internals were one day samples and not necessarily a three day moving average - which means that taking them at face value could be very pointless. The other thing to note is Coakley actually had a great primary GOTV plan and outperformed her poll numbers by 10 points. I don't think you'll see her with 57 or 58 percent, but a 52-48 win is conceivable. In a sense, I think a Coakley loss would be one of the best things for the Dems to experience as a party heading into November - because it would signify that even safe seats aren't safe if you don't work to keep them. It would also be a great exclamation point to the fact that my party is stupid. The McGovernites who have run this party since 1972 managed to put us into a perfectly powerless position by 2004 and within four years of new party leadership from the grassroots (read: Obama, Dean) - suddenly the Democrats are competing everywhere and gained almost 15 seats in the Senate within four years and 70+ in the house since 2004. Now that the majority was solidly built, Dean was shoved out the DNC door and more establishment types (read: Tim Kaine) get shuffled back in. Its super frustrating.