A repository for Marcospinelli's comments and essays published at other websites.

Energy Secretary Steven Chu Resigns, Chastises Climate Deniers And Clean-Energy Critics

Sunday, February 3, 2013


Seriously?

Seriously??

If you have to ask, you need to get out more, read a little.  Start with these:

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2013/02/matt-taibbi-on-big-banks-lack-of-accountability/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeremy-scahill/will-obama-block-release_b_187245.html

http://www.alternet.org/story/137056/it's_official%3A_obama_will_not_prosecute_cia_torturers

http://www.democracynow.org/2011/7/13/jeremy_scahill_reveals_cia_facility_prison
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Energy Secretary Steven Chu Resigns, Chastises Climate Deniers And Clean-Energy Critics

Saturday, February 2, 2013


Cabinet secretaries do no manage the day-to-day operations of the agencies under them.  Their job is the politics of their agencies.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Energy Secretary Steven Chu Resigns, Chastises Climate Deniers And Clean-Energy Critics


At every turn, the media has gone out of its way to highlight the scandal and not the successes,

======================

The media loves controversy.  If they were given alternatives to report, they'd do it.  The media doesn't see it as their job to beat the bushes for the other side's argument, for or against.

It's the job of the administration to provide spokesmen for policies, as it has done whenever it sincerely wants some policy (ACA, is one example, and most recently gun control advocates).
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Energy Secretary Steven Chu Resigns, Chastises Climate Deniers And Clean-Energy Critics


That's what cabinet secretaries do, friend; engage in the politics of the division of government they oversee.  They further the agenda and the policies of the administration that it serves. They do not manage the day-to-day operations of their agencies.  That's the role of the government's permanent employees.  In Chu's case, his job was to further government investment in clean energy, reduce our dependence on foreign oil, address the global climate crisis, and create millions of new jobs.  

Keeping the public informed about what the government is doing and what's been accomplished isn't the job of the media.  There are publicity departments in just about every agency in government that interface with the White House's own publicity (media) department for the express purpose of influencing public opinion.  And when the Obama administration wants to do it, they do it expertly.   

The 68 responses to my comment proves my point.  See how the political arm of the government springs into action when it wants to?  Many, if not all, of the responses here are sock puppets, people/software programs, paid to comment, to lend the impression of support for Obama's policies.   Your tax dollars at work.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Energy Secretary Steven Chu Resigns, Chastises Climate Deniers And Clean-Energy Critics


You mean "covering" up.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Paul Krugman: Obama Won't Be Able To Pass Major Legislation In His Second Term

Tuesday, January 29, 2013


Flg away.  

And I did answer, but it went elsewhere.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Paul Krugman: Obama Won't Be Able To Pass Major Legislation In His Second Term

Monday, January 28, 2013


If JoeLieberman couldn't be counted on to vote with the DemocraticCaucus in lockstep on cloture and filibuster­s when the Republican­s voted in lockstep (particula­rly when it came to domestic issues, the only area of legislatio­n where Lieberman's vaguely progressiv­e), what possible purpose did it solve to have him in the DemocraticCaucus (and hand him the much coveted plum of a committee chair)? 

http://www­.nytimes.c­om/2008/11­/07/us/pol­itics/07co­ng.html?_r­=3&ref=pol­itics&oref­=slogin&or­ef=slogin


http://thi­nkprogress­.org/liebe­rman-not-p­rogressive­/


http://www­.dailykos.­com/story/­2008/11/8/­17349/2244


For his treachery against Democrats going back years (at least as far as the 2000 presidenti­al campaign, when he conceded absentee military ballots), Lieberman got everything out of that deal, and Democrats got what?

Without 60, without his voting on cloture/fi­libusters, on the legislatio­n that Obama and Democrats had planned to put on the floor in the coming 2-4 years (which has all been what Lieberman would be expected to vote in the same way as the rest of the Democrats)­, what is Lieberman needed for that you'd bring him into the DemocraticCaucus (make him privvy to your strategizi­ng) and reward him with a plum chairmansh­ip, where he buried investigat­ing the BushCheney administra­tion over their failures during HurricaneKatrina? 

For both the short term, immediate problem of advancing Democratic legislatio­n, and the long term effort to expand Democratic influence, rewarding treachery and expanding JoeLieberm­an's power wasn't in the interests of the Democratic­Party or the People's. 

Do you really believe that Obama got nothing for that concession­? No agreement that Lieberman would vote as Obama told him to vote? No agreement from Lieberman that he wouldn't join Republican­s in cloture/fi­libusterin­g, or an ultimatum that he couldn't join Republican­s in cloture/filibusterin­g?? No agreement that he'd sign on to a PublicOption?

Joe Lieberman has done Obama's bidding, done exactly what Obama wanted done.  Lieberman is in the Democratic Caucus because of Obama, and has performed exactly as Obama wanted.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

About This Blog

  © Blogger templates Newspaper by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP