Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
120 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Lizzie Warren had an axe, (Original Post) MannyGoldstein Sep 2013 OP
... xchrom Sep 2013 #1
HE WAS NOT THE NOMINEE Capt. Obvious Sep 2013 #2
And she made damn sure of that madokie Sep 2013 #3
This is another glorious victory for President Obama MannyGoldstein Sep 2013 #11
Promoting Summers for the Fed was just a diversionary tactic Jackpine Radical Sep 2013 #14
HA! SammyWinstonJack Sep 2013 #17
How funny Cryptoad Sep 2013 #26
Obama didn't nominate him because O didn't have the votes. Divernan Sep 2013 #39
Proof? Cryptoad Sep 2013 #51
How a small team of Democrats AgingAmerican Sep 2013 #70
Speculation and conjecture is not Proof...... nt Cryptoad Sep 2013 #81
OFFS NealK Sep 2013 #94
The article states facts AgingAmerican Sep 2013 #112
Obama never runs things up the flag pole? How funny indeed. merrily Sep 2013 #72
Amazing you know who runnings who up whose flag pole,,,! nt Cryptoad Sep 2013 #83
I'm just observant. merrily Sep 2013 #89
but the trouble lies in fact Cryptoad Sep 2013 #108
You have no clue what I think or what my rules are. merrily Sep 2013 #113
Keep posting, babe! Poster child for Obama supporters! Divernan Sep 2013 #98
Does snarking make you feel better inside? Cryptoad Sep 2013 #107
When it comes to snarking, you da man! Divernan Sep 2013 #109
I'll take that as a YES,,,,,, Cryptoad Sep 2013 #110
Proof? nt. Democracyinkind Sep 2013 #86
ummmm Cryptoad Sep 2013 #111
Or maybe it is Wall Street playing multi-dimensional chess. pampango Sep 2013 #30
Well, nobody's gonna appoint Stiglitz or Robert Reich, after all. Jackpine Radical Sep 2013 #33
I don't think we're supposed to talk about Yellen yet. progressoid Sep 2013 #49
Or Krugman. merrily Sep 2013 #73
Nice post. Enthusiast Sep 2013 #79
... davidpdx Sep 2013 #71
There sure are a lot of diversionary tactics. Enthusiast Sep 2013 #76
Isnt there a rule about one Manny posting in another Manny threads? How about if one Manny alerts rhett o rick Sep 2013 #41
I think I saw that rule too MannyGoldstein Sep 2013 #54
We have been dependent on Manny to survive. Fate, it seems, is not without a sense of irony. Kennah Sep 2013 #59
The victory was in confining to two the universe of possibilities. merrily Sep 2013 #92
"The real debate should have been, of all the eligible people in the U.S., who should…" Jackpine Radical Sep 2013 #106
Yeah, me, too. merrily Sep 2013 #114
NO ONE WAS THE NOMINEE n/t Orsino Sep 2013 #36
Right. Captain Obvious was aping a certain poster Jackpine Radical Sep 2013 #50
Exactly, and NO ONE wanted to bomb Syria. Like to find out who the hell NO ONE is. nm rhett o rick Sep 2013 #58
:) TBF Sep 2013 #4
Here's to this becoming and oft repeated refrain. morningfog Sep 2013 #5
We could only hope! Aerows Sep 2013 #62
But she supports Janet Yellen! Doesn't that make her some kind of a lickspittle ... 11 Bravo Sep 2013 #6
But ... But .... 1StrongBlackMan Sep 2013 #7
DU has always liked Elizabeth Warren and for damn good reasons. Divernan Sep 2013 #10
I was speaking to ... 1StrongBlackMan Sep 2013 #61
Some of us are concerned with actions rather than with personalities. Maedhros Sep 2013 #68
Me too.....nt Enthusiast Sep 2013 #84
And others ... 1StrongBlackMan Sep 2013 #101
So you were just making things up again. Marr Sep 2013 #69
Okay ... 1StrongBlackMan Sep 2013 #103
I've learned to reserve judgment until I see actions. merrily Sep 2013 #75
Again ... 1StrongBlackMan Sep 2013 #104
Again, that was not how you set up the hypothetical. merrily Sep 2013 #116
Okay n/t 1StrongBlackMan Sep 2013 #120
As opposed to what? Blindly supporting someone, no matter how many bad things they do? merrily Sep 2013 #82
Or blindly ... 1StrongBlackMan Sep 2013 #105
That was not how you set up the hypothetical, though. merrily Sep 2013 #115
True ... 1StrongBlackMan Sep 2013 #119
I like EW every day. Not in a romantic way, in the Autumn Sep 2013 #63
No doubt ... 1StrongBlackMan Sep 2013 #64
I don't mind compromise votes. Sometimes they are necessary. Autumn Sep 2013 #65
Exaggerate much? merrily Sep 2013 #77
Probably so ... 1StrongBlackMan Sep 2013 #100
"Note to reader: I am being facticious ... but only barely." merrily Sep 2013 #117
Harvard women get the last laugh - all too delicious for words! Divernan Sep 2013 #8
Limericks make me smile ReRe Sep 2013 #9
Full disclosure: I ripped it off MannyGoldstein Sep 2013 #12
I recognized the similarity ReRe Sep 2013 #16
I know the original and was thinking yours doesn't scan very well-- Jackpine Radical Sep 2013 #18
Tough crowd... MannyGoldstein Sep 2013 #37
Lizzie Borden Ichingcarpenter Sep 2013 #32
Actually it is a school yard chant after the Lizzy Borden trial and acquittal. zeemike Sep 2013 #15
In her short time as a Senator Iwillnevergiveup Sep 2013 #13
Love it First Way Manny. zeemike Sep 2013 #19
... you do realize though that now Wall Street is going to get who it wanted IN THE FIRST PLACE? Myrina Sep 2013 #20
Who do they want, and how do you know it? nt MannyGoldstein Sep 2013 #24
link: Myrina Sep 2013 #25
I've seen that before, but they don't seem to disclose MannyGoldstein Sep 2013 #27
Ok, well for what it's worth, here's another: Myrina Sep 2013 #53
Non-optimal, to be sure MannyGoldstein Sep 2013 #56
Are they behind Yellen, or do they simply prefer Yellen to Summers? merrily Sep 2013 #80
See ... THIS is why we can't have nice things!!! JoePhilly Sep 2013 #28
She should be thrown under the bus for supporting treestar Sep 2013 #78
The DLC got to her. JoePhilly Sep 2013 #102
Wall Street actually WANTS there to be job growth. It's Republicans that don't. Spitfire of ATJ Sep 2013 #55
comment 90-percent Sep 2013 #21
Elizabeth homegirl Sep 2013 #38
She had the good company of 4 other Democrats on the Banking Committee alone Bluenorthwest Sep 2013 #45
Plus one, Jimmy! Enthusiast Sep 2013 #85
I promise I won't ask anymore if someone explains first way, third way... MrMickeysMom Sep 2013 #22
I will try - but this is what I have been able to glean rurallib Sep 2013 #29
Thank you, rural lib! MrMickeysMom Sep 2013 #31
"if they want to stay in the House of Representatives" - Plus the Senate. Kerry lost to Bush-II, in AnotherMcIntosh Sep 2013 #66
The DLC disbanded a couple of years ago hootinholler Sep 2013 #35
Like a snake shedding its skin, the DLC morphed into "3rd Way". bvar22 Sep 2013 #43
They will morph again. Enthusiast Sep 2013 #87
The term "Third Way" was around since at least the 1930s. merrily Sep 2013 #95
Meet the new bosses... worse than the old bosses... MrMickeysMom Sep 2013 #118
Interesting... MrMickeysMom Sep 2013 #48
I actually don't think the First Way is few & far between when it comes to economic justice. CrispyQ Sep 2013 #52
Essentially the same philosophy: 3rd Way, DLC, Progressive, New Democrat, Centrist, No Labels. merrily Sep 2013 #88
Obama making the Bush tax cuts for the rich permanent RandiFan1290 Sep 2013 #74
The origin story is a bit too complex for a concise post Democracyinkind Sep 2013 #91
I gave a little bit of info and several links in Reply 43. merrily Sep 2013 #96
Now that the progressive left appears to have some momentum 90-percent Sep 2013 #23
"Progressive left" merrily Sep 2013 #93
Summers was a walking rejection. Fuddnik Sep 2013 #34
Damn. For a minute there I thought you said Jackpine Radical Sep 2013 #40
Well, Summers is a dickhead. Fuddnik Sep 2013 #42
Third Way is the Democratic version of the Tea Party Bluenorthwest Sep 2013 #44
I hope you are correct, but it's too soon for me to reach the conclusion merrily Sep 2013 #90
K&R n/t lupinella Sep 2013 #46
If there is any hope for our nation Aerows Sep 2013 #47
Proud to be rec# 100 pscot Sep 2013 #57
lol...knr nt Zorra Sep 2013 #60
chop away! nt Deep13 Sep 2013 #67
149th rec. merrily Sep 2013 #97
Lol! NealK Sep 2013 #99
 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
11. This is another glorious victory for President Obama
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 08:37 AM
Sep 2013

A triumph over the EmoProg Firebaggers that have nearly destroyed this great nation. Fortunately only a few of these dead-enders remain, their relevance decreasing daily.

Regards,

Third-Way Manny

Jackpine Radical

(45,274 posts)
14. Promoting Summers for the Fed was just a diversionary tactic
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 08:51 AM
Sep 2013

in Obama's n-dimensional chess game that focused the Republicans on the wrong target and cleared the way for him to appoint a real liberal to the post.


Obama is now in negotiations with the Easter Bunny in a devious plot to block Keystone.

Cryptoad

(8,254 posts)
26. How funny
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 09:25 AM
Sep 2013

If Obama had wanted Summers , he would have nominated him,,,,,

Obama has more sense than that!

 

AgingAmerican

(12,958 posts)
70. How a small team of Democrats
Wed Sep 18, 2013, 01:35 AM
Sep 2013
...defeated Larry Summers....and Obama.

"Perhaps even more surprising is who did Obama in: a small team of Democrats on the Senate Banking Committee. On Friday, Montana's Jon Tester announced he would not back a Summers nomination. That followed similar comments, via aides, by Sherrod Brown of Ohio and Jeff Merkley of Oregon. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, the progressive icon and former Obama aide, was also thought to be reluctant. That meant Summers would have required at least four Republican votes to clear the Senate Banking Committee, and around 10 from the wider Senate to reach the 60-vote threshold likely needed to overcome GOP procedural obstruction."

Cryptoad

(8,254 posts)
83. Amazing you know who runnings who up whose flag pole,,,! nt
Wed Sep 18, 2013, 06:06 AM
Sep 2013

Good speculative conjecture but that about as much as you know.!

Cryptoad

(8,254 posts)
108. but the trouble lies in fact
Wed Sep 18, 2013, 10:47 AM
Sep 2013

that you think Obama is playing by your rules......

Many have underestimated him!
Many have been punked!

Thank you Mr President!

merrily

(45,251 posts)
113. You have no clue what I think or what my rules are.
Wed Sep 18, 2013, 03:01 PM
Sep 2013

Obama has his staff, aka "White House sources" float things to see what reactions are. Most modern Presidents have. If you've missed that very obvious reality, I don't know what to tell you.

Cryptoad

(8,254 posts)
111. ummmm
Wed Sep 18, 2013, 10:54 AM
Sep 2013

TRUE,,,,, Obama is POTUS and can appoint who he wants
True,,,,,, Obama has not appointed Summers



All elements of my preposition are true
therefore my preposition is true.

Proof


btw the part about is having "more sense" is an opinion not requiring proof but it seems to be true.

Jackpine Radical

(45,274 posts)
33. Well, nobody's gonna appoint Stiglitz or Robert Reich, after all.
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 10:02 AM
Sep 2013

While I have no particular illusions about Yellen, she does have 2 traits I favor: First, she's concerned about unemployment, which Summers never was, and second, she actually understands market dynamics better than most--having, for example, seen the bubbles coming.

And of course the thrid thing in her favor is what she did NOT do--she didn't write the "End Game Memo."

progressoid

(49,988 posts)
49. I don't think we're supposed to talk about Yellen yet.
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 02:39 PM
Sep 2013

We should dutifully stay quiet until she has been nominated. Then we can discuss her, but only in supportive way.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
73. Or Krugman.
Wed Sep 18, 2013, 05:43 AM
Sep 2013

Does it really matter, anyway?

Reich did work in the Ford, Carter and Clinton administrations.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
41. Isnt there a rule about one Manny posting in another Manny threads? How about if one Manny alerts
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 12:08 PM
Sep 2013

on the other Manny? Just sayin.

 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
54. I think I saw that rule too
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 06:53 PM
Sep 2013

It's really unfortunate that these people break the rules just to be negative about our president. President Obama has been the best president in my lifetime, but Hillary should be just as good or better. I hope people aren't mean to her, too.

Regards,

Government-Sock-Puppet Manny

merrily

(45,251 posts)
92. The victory was in confining to two the universe of possibilities.
Wed Sep 18, 2013, 06:41 AM
Sep 2013

In floating two names, the debate became who is preferable, Yellen or Summers?


That backed many of the more left types into backing either Yellen or Summers .

The real debate should have been, of all the eligible people in the U.S., who should have the position?

Jackpine Radical

(45,274 posts)
106. "The real debate should have been, of all the eligible people in the U.S., who should…"
Wed Sep 18, 2013, 09:39 AM
Sep 2013

Maybe. But I declined.

Jackpine Radical

(45,274 posts)
50. Right. Captain Obvious was aping a certain poster
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 02:44 PM
Sep 2013

who justified the whole Summers fiasco with her insistence that "SUMMERS WAS NOT THE NOMINEE."

Thus the comment has a contextual history, but if you missed a couple of the wrong threads the point is lost.

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
62. We could only hope!
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 09:41 PM
Sep 2013

God bless the woman. Some days it seems like she is the only person in DC that gives a crap about anyone but themselves.

11 Bravo

(23,926 posts)
6. But she supports Janet Yellen! Doesn't that make her some kind of a lickspittle ...
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 08:20 AM
Sep 2013

running dog lackey for our corporate masters? Damn it, DU can be so confusing!

Divernan

(15,480 posts)
10. DU has always liked Elizabeth Warren and for damn good reasons.
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 08:36 AM
Sep 2013

I take it from your cynical comment that you supported Summers. And on a separate note, why cynical about Warren? Some specifics please? Other than that she successfully beat Obama on this issue?

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
61. I was speaking to ...
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 09:40 PM
Sep 2013

DUer's penchent to loving someone ... until they hear that they might have done something that they may not like.

 

Maedhros

(10,007 posts)
68. Some of us are concerned with actions rather than with personalities.
Wed Sep 18, 2013, 12:20 AM
Sep 2013

If a politician acts to further Liberal and Progressive policies, I approve of the action and will praise the politician.

If a politician acts to thwart Liberal and Progressive policies, I disapprove of the action and will criticize the politician.

Whether I "love" or "hate" the politicians themselves is irrelevant.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
101. And others ...
Wed Sep 18, 2013, 08:31 AM
Sep 2013

are happily concerned with what they think the actions of others MIGHT be.

BTW, I largely agree with your "if" statements; though I rarely make the support/thwart decision until the actual vote ... and then, after seeing the votes out come. Politics has too many moving parts to make judges on a single vote/proposal.

I, also, agree with your "Love/Hate" statement ... though I can't think of a single politician that I love or hate ... well maybe a couple from texas get pretty close to the hate category.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
103. Okay ...
Wed Sep 18, 2013, 08:35 AM
Sep 2013

Question: Why did you waste the time thinking up and posting that pithy response? You know, you will never have that 2 hours, again.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
75. I've learned to reserve judgment until I see actions.
Wed Sep 18, 2013, 05:52 AM
Sep 2013

However, I see nothing wrong in turning against people who do things I don't like.

If I don't apply my standards, what is the point in having them?

Of course, everything is relative.

Drop a nuclear bomb on people and I'm going to turn against you.

Prefer Yellen to Summers? Meh.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
104. Again ...
Wed Sep 18, 2013, 08:41 AM
Sep 2013

I was commenting on the apparent hot or cold/on or off attitude that seems to exist in this politlical space where folks support a politician until that one particular vote they disagree with; then, the body of that politician's work is forgotten/ignored.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
116. Again, that was not how you set up the hypothetical.
Wed Sep 18, 2013, 03:08 PM
Sep 2013

I responded to what you posted.

However, you are only assuming that "the body" of a politician's work is forgotten or ignored.

If you are hinting about Obama, the reality is that his supporters see his alleged accomplishments much differently from the way that his critics see them. It's not a matter of amnesia, but a matter of very different perceptions.

Autumn

(45,065 posts)
63. I like EW every day. Not in a romantic way, in the
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 09:55 PM
Sep 2013

shes a hell of a good Democrat way and she seems to give a shit about the people and put them first over the banks. Oh hell, maybe I love EW ...every day.

Autumn

(45,065 posts)
65. I don't mind compromise votes. Sometimes they are necessary.
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 10:05 PM
Sep 2013

It just all depends on where you start the bargaining.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
77. Exaggerate much?
Wed Sep 18, 2013, 05:54 AM
Sep 2013

BTW, how can you tell the difference between a compromise vote and any other kind of vote?

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
100. Probably so ...
Wed Sep 18, 2013, 08:23 AM
Sep 2013

So make that until the first care about. vote, on a single issue, that I disagree with; regardless of the balance of her work product on other issues that I agree with or otherwise don't care about. Then EW will join the under the bus gang, as a 3rd way, corporate sell-out.

BTW, how can you tell the difference between a compromise vote and any other kind of vote?



Simple ... by considering whether I agree withe that particular issue or not; failing that, by considering the volume producted of those in disagreement with that particular vote. Then the vote is just another vote by a 3rd way, corporate sell-out.

Note to reader: I am being facticious ... but only barely.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
117. "Note to reader: I am being facticious ... but only barely."
Wed Sep 18, 2013, 03:13 PM
Sep 2013

No, you are stating the position of those with whom you disagree in a very exaggerated way. However, that seems to be the U.S. culture anymore.

Divernan

(15,480 posts)
8. Harvard women get the last laugh - all too delicious for words!
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 08:33 AM
Sep 2013

Too bad, so sad for Larry and his bff's, Barry, Bill & Hilary. Anybody got a pic of the world's smallest violin, playing the world's saddest song? This may be the long overdue beginning of Wall Street reform and it certainly is the hand-writing n the wall to Washington - NO MORE BANK BAILOUTS! WE DON'T WANT TO HEAR ANYMORE TOO BIG TO FAIL BULLSHIT!

When Summers was president of Harvard, he got in trouble for suggesting that women like Liz Warren might be innately deficient in science and math. But I guess she has Larry’s number, because she just made her first kill. And it’s Larry.

She may be only a fresh-faced senator, while he’s the genius economist and hugely powerful former Clinton Treasury secretary who was supposed to be Obama’s pick as the next chairman of the Federal Reserve.

But Liz objected, and took him out, making way for the Fed to promote current Vice Chairwoman Janet Yellen, a girl.

Liz was on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” with the words beneath her “David” (that’s Liz) vs. “Goliath” (the big banks). She was alternately described as “the reform renegade,” the “populist scourge of Wall Street” and “ the darling of the rising left” that’s finally going after Occupy Wall Street’s 1 percenters.



- See more at: http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/columnists/margery_eagan/2013/09/eagan_elizabeth_warren_bounces_larry_summers_as_stock#sthash.6z7tCiFt.dpuf





http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/columnists/margery_eagan/2013/09/eagan_elizabeth_warren_bounces
 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
12. Full disclosure: I ripped it off
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 08:39 AM
Sep 2013

It's an adaptation of this:

Lizzie Borden took an axe
And gave her mother forty whacks.
When she saw what she had done
She gave her father forty-one.

Jackpine Radical

(45,274 posts)
18. I know the original and was thinking yours doesn't scan very well--
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 08:58 AM
Sep 2013

even Gus

thinks it's doggerel.

How 'bout "and gave the Banksters 40 whacks?"

zeemike

(18,998 posts)
15. Actually it is a school yard chant after the Lizzy Borden trial and acquittal.
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 08:57 AM
Sep 2013

And Manny has cleverly adapted it.

Iwillnevergiveup

(9,298 posts)
13. In her short time as a Senator
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 08:43 AM
Sep 2013

Elizabeth has demonstrated what leadership looks like. More and more she's becoming the champion I long for.

Thanks for posting, First-Way Manny.

Myrina

(12,296 posts)
20. ... you do realize though that now Wall Street is going to get who it wanted IN THE FIRST PLACE?
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 09:09 AM
Sep 2013

They're only going to allow Warren to do 'cosmetic damage' to them, to make the sheeple think they're "taking back democracy" when in fact, we're being screwn harder than ever by TPTB.

 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
27. I've seen that before, but they don't seem to disclose
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 09:29 AM
Sep 2013

their methodology.

In any case, I trust Liz.

Myrina

(12,296 posts)
53. Ok, well for what it's worth, here's another:
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 03:41 PM
Sep 2013
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/17/janet-yellen-glass-steagall_n_3940730.html


"Yellen's reputation as a more consumer-friendly economist than Summers rests largely on her tenure as president of the San Francisco Federal Reserve during the Bush years, when she identified the emerging housing bubble and called for deploying stronger regulation to limit its damage.

But in the 1990s, Yellen and Summers both served in the Clinton administration, and pursued many of the same policies. Yellen began serving as Chair of President Bill Clinton's Council of Economic Advisers in 1997, and publicly endorsed repealing Glass-Steagall's separation between traditional bank lending and riskier securities trading during her Senate confirmation hearing. Yellen referred to deregulating banking as a way to "modernize" the financial system, and indicated that breaking down Glass-Steagall could be the beginning of a process allowing banks to merge with other commercial and industrial firms. A full transcript of Yellen's Feb. 5, 1997 confirmation hearing is available here.

At the same event, Yellen endorsed establishing a new statistical metric that would allow the federal government to reduce Social Security payments over time, by revising the consumer price index, or CPI, the government's standard measurement for inflation.
"I agree with the principle that Social Security and the tax system should be appropriately indexed to take account of movements in the cost of living. I believe we need as accurate a measure as we can possibly have of the cost of living," Yellen said. "I believe that we are now obtaining broad agreement among professionals that the CPI does overstate the actual increase, properly measured, in the cost of living."

Once in office, Yellen put that belief into action, writing a letter to the Bureau of Labor Statistics encouraging it to devise a cheaper inflation metric. BLS Commissioner Katharine Abraham responded that the agency had been testing the new measure in an experimental mode, and planned to deploy it in 1998.

At the time, this new metric, known as chained CPI, was being aggressively pursued by House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.), following then-Fed Chair Alan Greenspan's criticism of the existing cost-of-living calculations. Greenspan and other economists had argued that the consumer price index overstated cost-of-living changes by failing to calculate the way that households substitute different goods for each other when prices rise. While BLS developed the statistic, it has not been applied to Social Security. Some economists argue that a more appropriate inflation measure for Social Security would look at price changes for elderly people, and the BLS does track an experimental metric addressing inflation for older Americans. Such a metric is not useful for politicians looking to cut Social Security spending, however, as it shows that living expenses tend to go up more for older people, driven in part by health care spending.



.... more at link ...
 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
56. Non-optimal, to be sure
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 07:04 PM
Sep 2013

But if Warren and Krugman are both behind her, there's probably a good reason.

JoePhilly

(27,787 posts)
28. See ... THIS is why we can't have nice things!!!
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 09:34 AM
Sep 2013

Manny finds the one totally pure candidate ... and you're ruining it!!!!

90-percent

(6,829 posts)
21. comment
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 09:13 AM
Sep 2013

Elizabeth is the kind of public servant that should be the rule, rather than the exception.

How novel, a politician who's duty is to serve their voters instead of their donors. Would there were fifty more like her in the Senate!

I supported her run and I'm glad she's just one blue state over from Connecticut.

-90% Jimmy

homegirl

(1,428 posts)
38. Elizabeth
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 10:47 AM
Sep 2013

Thank you for putting your money where your mouth is. I too supported Sen. Warren, all the way from California.

 

Bluenorthwest

(45,319 posts)
45. She had the good company of 4 other Democrats on the Banking Committee alone
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 01:04 PM
Sep 2013

Jeff Merkley being the point man through most of it. Warren is not alone.

MrMickeysMom

(20,453 posts)
22. I promise I won't ask anymore if someone explains first way, third way...
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 09:17 AM
Sep 2013

I can't keep up with my party, I swear to Goodness. Maybe it's because of what I do on the local end of govt.

How did the "way" nomenclature come to be again?

rurallib

(62,411 posts)
29. I will try - but this is what I have been able to glean
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 09:41 AM
Sep 2013

First way is a liberal (I'd say New Deal Democratic) way
I guess a second way would be the regressive republican way
The third way then is a combination of the two and leans republican.
- avoid real issues
- compromise quickly without negotiation
- give away the house to get a compromise.
- NAFTA was a third way bill IMHO

I will say here that I could easily be wrong and welcome correction (without name calling)

MrMickeysMom

(20,453 posts)
31. Thank you, rural lib!
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 09:48 AM
Sep 2013

I guess these terms develop legs of their own, but I'd agree that NAFTA (and thus Clinton) would be third way, which is how most of the den of whores abide if they want to stay in the House of Representatives!

Thanks!

 

AnotherMcIntosh

(11,064 posts)
66. "if they want to stay in the House of Representatives" - Plus the Senate. Kerry lost to Bush-II, in
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 10:24 PM
Sep 2013

part, because he was a NAFTA supporter. Not enough FDR-type Democrats showed up to vote for 3rd-Way Democrats.

hootinholler

(26,449 posts)
35. The DLC disbanded a couple of years ago
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 10:27 AM
Sep 2013

They rebranded as the Third Way, which will bring back into the fold those who were disgusted with the DLC. They are the right wing of the democratic party.

Manny has coined the First Way to refer to New Deal Democrats, which are few and far between, but hopefully growing in numbers as people like Senator Warren have some success.

Personally I think it should be second way because the Democratic party was pretty damned conservative until Teddy R. split the republicans and the progressives there left with him.

bvar22

(39,909 posts)
43. Like a snake shedding its skin, the DLC morphed into "3rd Way".
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 12:39 PM
Sep 2013

The DLC (fundeed by Koch Bros.) was a vehicle for the BIG MONEY Takeover of the Democratic Party and the marginalization of the Pro Working Class Democratic Party,
so that they could tilt the Table in favor of the Ownership CLass.

They were VERY successful,
and the Powers behind the DLC are still very much in control of the Democratic Party.


Enthusiast

(50,983 posts)
87. They will morph again.
Wed Sep 18, 2013, 06:20 AM
Sep 2013

They will morph again once the people get to know where they really stand. Subterfuge.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
95. The term "Third Way" was around since at least the 1930s.
Wed Sep 18, 2013, 07:19 AM
Sep 2013
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Way



The general political philosophy of centrism in one form or another has been around for as long as there have been political parties.

However, if we are talking very specifically about a think tank named Third Way, as opposed to the Third Way political philosophy, that think tank was one of several successors to the DLC.

The Progressive Policy Institute ("PPI&quot , having been started by an original employee of the DLC, is probably the most direct successor to the DLC. When the DLC was still active, the DLC and PPI often re-published each other's articles at their respective websites.



1985 DLC think tank

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Leadership_Council


1989 Progressive Policy Institute think tank

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Policy_Institute


2003 Center for American Progress think tank

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_American_Progress


2005 Third Way think tank

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Way_%28think_tank%29

MrMickeysMom

(20,453 posts)
118. Meet the new bosses... worse than the old bosses...
Wed Sep 18, 2013, 05:09 PM
Sep 2013


I'm especially disappointed with Vilsac, since the USDA gets lots of "people's garden" enthusiasts like me actually thinking that what we're doing is a GOOD thing for America, Michelle Obama, and all of that reaching out to kids...

But, the mixed message is his interests to play to big aggri-business and GMOs don't raise an eyebrow. Big business with these folks trump anything good coming out of the slow food movement. It's all about turning farm land and farmers into growling animals pulling at the same piece of non-GMO commodity.

"The DLC (fundeed by Koch Bros.) was a vehicle for the BIG MONEY Takeover of the Democratic Party "... enough said right there.

MrMickeysMom

(20,453 posts)
48. Interesting...
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 02:23 PM
Sep 2013

I wonder where Howard Dean's "democratic wing of the Democratic party" would fall in? I'm thinking "first", as that is what should unite many of us. I don't know how we could have ever strayed away from those values, if you ask me.

Thanks!

CrispyQ

(36,461 posts)
52. I actually don't think the First Way is few & far between when it comes to economic justice.
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 03:01 PM
Sep 2013

There are millions who feel neither party represents them, especially the last 30 years as both parties have drifted to the right, hence the huge numbers of non-voters.

There are also a lot of right wingers, who I am certain are more aligned with the left on economic issues, but TPTB have wedged social issues between us. When I have given conservatives that Joe Conservative essay to read, they all say about the same things: 1) I'm in favor of these things & 2) why do liberals take credit for them?

Their lack of understanding aside - they don't seem to see that they have voted against these things by voting republican - they relate to the essay. How to get through to them? I don't know.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
88. Essentially the same philosophy: 3rd Way, DLC, Progressive, New Democrat, Centrist, No Labels.
Wed Sep 18, 2013, 06:30 AM
Sep 2013

The term "Third Way" has been kicking around since at least the 1930s.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Way

.





Democracyinkind

(4,015 posts)
91. The origin story is a bit too complex for a concise post
Wed Sep 18, 2013, 06:39 AM
Sep 2013

But generally, the third way is a transnational reaction among leftists and socialists to a perceived loss of power (that happened at different stages in different countries but is generally associated with the Reagan/Tatcher revolution).

Bluntly stated, the political philosophy of Third Wayers is a combination of right wing economic policies and left wing social policies (although the second part is mostly only found in rhetoric while the firs part has been very successfully implemented).

That's why you can't tell a neoconservative from a neoliberal, and that's why you can't tell most democrats from republicans. (Although many people argue that the neocon and neolib are distinct from third wayers, I've yet to see a practical, as opposed to a rhetorical difference - they're all selling the same pack of stale ideas with different marketing strategies.)

Bulding a narrative that coherently deals with the origins of the term is a complex task, as the term was in use among (mostly german) political scientists even before the Second World War and had a slightly different connotation, and often was applied only to economic positions.
The clearest example of a traditionally left wing party transforming itself along the third way is British Labor under the "Blair revolution" (or was it Blair "turn"?), although I think that an unbiased view does suggests that the very same thing happened to the Democratic Party in the US as well. But it gets murky when applied to administrations that pre-date Reagan. Arguably attempts at implementing some kind of third-wayish philosophy among leftists goes back way further than Reagan, but it seems that the era of Reagan and Thatcher were instrumental in shaping the Third Way into a coherent philosphy.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
96. I gave a little bit of info and several links in Reply 43.
Wed Sep 18, 2013, 07:32 AM
Sep 2013

Regardless of the technicalities, though, IMO, in practical reality, it boils down to mostly Republican fiscal policies and a mid way position on social issues, "mid way" meaning somewhere between batshit rightwing crazy and f liberal. In the old days, it might have been called socially moderate Republican. (By old days, I mean before moderate Republicans vanished.)

90-percent

(6,829 posts)
23. Now that the progressive left appears to have some momentum
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 09:20 AM
Sep 2013

It's time to focus our righteous might on that heinous TPP deal.

What will the PTB think of next to make even more money by taking it from the bottom 99%;

"The legalize human trafficking act"?

"The minimum 80 hour work week act"?

"The make the employees pay their own salaries act"?

"The make working people suffer even more act"?

"The make people earning less than 25K per year donate a kidney to a corporate executive act"?

"The serfs don't deserve weekends act"?

-90% Jimmy

Fuddnik

(8,846 posts)
34. Summers was a walking rejection.
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 10:18 AM
Sep 2013

That's why he was never formally nominated.

There were enough Democratic Senators who came out strongly opposing his nomination that Obama told him to withdraw from the process. They saved Obama some face.

That's the ONLY reason HE WAS NOT THE NOMINEE!!!!!

Good riddance to bad rubbish.

 

Bluenorthwest

(45,319 posts)
44. Third Way is the Democratic version of the Tea Party
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 01:02 PM
Sep 2013

The Democratic wing of the Democratic Party is taking over again. Not a moment too soon.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
90. I hope you are correct, but it's too soon for me to reach the conclusion
Wed Sep 18, 2013, 06:37 AM
Sep 2013

that the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party is taking over.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
97. 149th rec.
Wed Sep 18, 2013, 07:35 AM
Sep 2013

I like what I have seen so far of Warren in office. However, I will reserve judgment until I have seen more of her actions in office.

NealK

(1,867 posts)
99. Lol!
Wed Sep 18, 2013, 07:45 AM
Sep 2013

At first I thought that it was a song parody:

Lizzie Warren had an axe, EE-I-EE-I-O.
And gave Republicans forty whacks, EE-I-EE-I-O.


Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Lizzie Warren had an axe,