Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Very

6 (50%)

Some

4 (33.3%)

Not sure

0 (0%)

Not really

1 (8.3%)

Not in the slightest

1 (8.3%)

Total Members Voted: 11

Voting closed: February 15, 2022, 10:51:36 AM

[Holly Martins]

Excellent.  Monmouth and Quinnipiac polls in the last month put support for the 3.5 trillion dollar reconciliation infrastructure plan at 62 and 63 percent nationally. So, listen to those polls Manchin and Sinema!

"Oh, those polls!"

Well played,  Boswell.

[REDSTATEWARD]

I didn’t think anyone could annoy me as much as Joe Manchin... then along came Gottheimer.

Damned if these “Moderates” aren’t doing their best to fuck things up.

They won’t succeed but sheesh! At least act like you give a damn about the voters that put you in the majority.

Is Gottheimer one of the Problem Solvers?   

Politicians answer now to their donors,  not their constituents (who usually only are a tiny percent of donors these days).

If that were true( which I doubt)..

Not looking for what people doubt, but some facts.  Here is some indication of what I was actually talking about....

Median percent in-district among current candidates: 28.87%

https://www.opensecrets.org/elections-overview/in-district-vs-out-of-district

(and I've seen analyses that give even lower figures for in-district donation, with the percent of total monetary amount even lower when you compute it that way....)

My point (which was about Congress, specifically, if you read the post) is that outside donors may have different agendas (like the Koch foundation policy papers that Joe Manchin receives along with his bags of money from them...) from the actual constituents.  This is a problem in both parties and all coalitions in those parties, which should concern all of us, regardless of our politics. 

I wasn't, as you allege, "ignoring" smaller donors, but pointing out that, on average, too many of them are from outside that congressional district (or state, in the case of senators).

LOL
You are mad at Manchin and don’t like the Koch Foundation.
Why didn’t you just say that?
All the rest was just bullshit.

My bullshit was backed by the numbers.  Yours by unsupported bluster.   Outside donors gain undue influence on pols who should listen to their constituents.  QED.

If the pols ignore their constituents they don’t win elections.

Excellent.  Monmouth and Quinnipiac polls in the last month put support for the 3.5 trillion dollar reconciliation infrastructure plan at 62 and 63 percent nationally. So, listen to those polls Manchin and Sinema!

"Oh, those polls!"

Spelling must be chalenging  for you.

[kiidcarter8]

I didn’t think anyone could annoy me as much as Joe Manchin... then along came Gottheimer.

Damned if these “Moderates” aren’t doing their best to fuck things up.

They won’t succeed but sheesh! At least act like you give a damn about the voters that put you in the majority.

Is Gottheimer one of the Problem Solvers?   

Politicians answer now to their donors,  not their constituents (who usually only are a tiny percent of donors these days).

If that were true( which I doubt)..

Not looking for what people doubt, but some facts.  Here is some indication of what I was actually talking about....

Median percent in-district among current candidates: 28.87%

https://www.opensecrets.org/elections-overview/in-district-vs-out-of-district

(and I've seen analyses that give even lower figures for in-district donation, with the percent of total monetary amount even lower when you compute it that way....)

My point (which was about Congress, specifically, if you read the post) is that outside donors may have different agendas (like the Koch foundation policy papers that Joe Manchin receives along with his bags of money from them...) from the actual constituents.  This is a problem in both parties and all coalitions in those parties, which should concern all of us, regardless of our politics. 

I wasn't, as you allege, "ignoring" smaller donors, but pointing out that, on average, too many of them are from outside that congressional district (or state, in the case of senators).

LOL
You are mad at Manchin and don’t like the Koch Foundation.
Why didn’t you just say that?
All the rest was just bullshit.

My bullshit was backed by the numbers.  Yours by unsupported bluster.   Outside donors gain undue influence on pols who should listen to their constituents.  QED.

If the pols ignore their constituents they don’t win elections.

Excellent.  Monmouth and Quinnipiac polls in the last month put support for the 3.5 trillion dollar reconciliation infrastructure plan at 62 and 63 percent nationally.

Hahaha...

[Holly Martins]

Werent the business owners, landlords or private home owners compensated under eminent domain?
How would renters be compensated?

You can't be that obtuse.   Cracking a hood in half, dropping in a huge tract of multilane freeway and car fumes,  is massive damage to a walking community (which poorer hoods tend to be), disrupting social and extended family connections,  commerce,  commutes, health,  and of course razing many units of affordable housing.   Massively documented.  Awake,  zombie,  and research.

[LarryBnDC]

If you are revitalizing infrastructure, and as a small fraction of that investment you can correct engineering decisions that perpetrate immense tragic societal ills, you do it both morally and fiscally. Rebuilding cities to better suit the understood needs of their populations every few generations is a hallmark of civilizations that haven’t collapsed. If rerouting certain roads reduces hospitalization and incarceration in densely populated areas, spend big now so those savings can be realized going forward all the time until you need to do it again.

If you are hiring to revitalize infrastructure, you are managing streams of wealth and income to get it done. If you recognize systemic factors leading to de facto racial preferences in contracting, making it you policy to counteract that in your contracting choices is both good politics and good policy.

Austerity, denial of racism, sexism, insurrection, and anti-vaccine propaganda are all one great circle under Koch.

If one believes in true equality, let the best bid win---don't base it on the race of the bidder, simply because decisions based upon race are inherently racist.

I have no issues with how the roads are built as far as where they go, or how the local neighborhoods that will be effected are compensated for their inconveniences---as traditionally Eminent Domain comes into play.

How.were.the communities and neighborhoods divided by the interstates in the first place compensated for their inconvenience? The owners of the property were compensated, but the neighborhood?

Werent the business owners, landlords or private home owners compensated under eminent domain?
How would renters be compensated?

You’re missing the point.

Across the nation highways were purposefully used to bisect thriving neighborhoods and communities and in essence destroy the community. Businesses fled along with jobs and services.

How to create blight 101.

[REDSTATEWARD]

Werent the business owners, landlords or private home owners compensated under eminent domain?
How would renters be compensated?

You can't be that obtuse.   Cracking a hood in half, dropping in a huge tract of multilane freeway and car fumes,  is massive damage to a walking community (which poorer hoods tend to be), disrupting social and extended family connections,  commerce,  commutes, health,  and of course razing many units of affordable housing.   Massively documented.  Awake,  zombie,  and research.

Try to answer the question.

[Hairy Lime]

If you are revitalizing infrastructure, and as a small fraction of that investment you can correct engineering decisions that perpetrate immense tragic societal ills, you do it both morally and fiscally. Rebuilding cities to better suit the understood needs of their populations every few generations is a hallmark of civilizations that haven’t collapsed. If rerouting certain roads reduces hospitalization and incarceration in densely populated areas, spend big now so those savings can be realized going forward all the time until you need to do it again.

If you are hiring to revitalize infrastructure, you are managing streams of wealth and income to get it done. If you recognize systemic factors leading to de facto racial preferences in contracting, making it you policy to counteract that in your contracting choices is both good politics and good policy.

Austerity, denial of racism, sexism, insurrection, and anti-vaccine propaganda are all one great circle under Koch.

If one believes in true equality, let the best bid win---don't base it on the race of the bidder, simply because decisions based upon race are inherently racist.

I have no issues with how the roads are built as far as where they go, or how the local neighborhoods that will be effected are compensated for their inconveniences---as traditionally Eminent Domain comes into play.

How.were.the communities and neighborhoods divided by the interstates in the first place compensated for their inconvenience? The owners of the property were compensated, but the neighborhood?

Werent the business owners, landlords or private home owners compensated under eminent domain?
How would renters be compensated?

People whose property or property rights were compensated if they were seized. Eminent domain is not designed to compensate for community or neighborhood inconvenience even if that inconvenience has an economic impact. If you cut off half a community from access to the other half - parks and community centers, local businesses, churches synagogues and mosques, that is not a taking.

[LarryBnDC]

Werent the business owners, landlords or private home owners compensated under eminent domain?
How would renters be compensated?

You can't be that obtuse.   Cracking a hood in half, dropping in a huge tract of multilane freeway and car fumes,  is massive damage to a walking community (which poorer hoods tend to be), disrupting social and extended family connections,  commerce,  commutes, health,  and of course razing many units of affordable housing.   Massively documented.  Awake,  zombie,  and research.

Tug those bootstraps, baby.

[Holly Martins]

Hahaha...

Putrefaction gases produce laugh-like noises as they are expelled from the other zombie.   

[Hairy Lime]

I didn’t think anyone could annoy me as much as Joe Manchin... then along came Gottheimer.

Damned if these “Moderates” aren’t doing their best to fuck things up.

They won’t succeed but sheesh! At least act like you give a damn about the voters that put you in the majority.

Is Gottheimer one of the Problem Solvers?   

Politicians answer now to their donors,  not their constituents (who usually only are a tiny percent of donors these days).

If that were true( which I doubt)..

Not looking for what people doubt, but some facts.  Here is some indication of what I was actually talking about....

Median percent in-district among current candidates: 28.87%

https://www.opensecrets.org/elections-overview/in-district-vs-out-of-district

(and I've seen analyses that give even lower figures for in-district donation, with the percent of total monetary amount even lower when you compute it that way....)

My point (which was about Congress, specifically, if you read the post) is that outside donors may have different agendas (like the Koch foundation policy papers that Joe Manchin receives along with his bags of money from them...) from the actual constituents.  This is a problem in both parties and all coalitions in those parties, which should concern all of us, regardless of our politics. 

I wasn't, as you allege, "ignoring" smaller donors, but pointing out that, on average, too many of them are from outside that congressional district (or state, in the case of senators).

LOL
You are mad at Manchin and don’t like the Koch Foundation.
Why didn’t you just say that?
All the rest was just bullshit.

My bullshit was backed by the numbers.  Yours by unsupported bluster.   Outside donors gain undue influence on pols who should listen to their constituents.  QED.

If the pols ignore their constituents they don’t win elections.

Excellent.  Monmouth and Quinnipiac polls in the last month put support for the 3.5 trillion dollar reconciliation infrastructure plan at 62 and 63 percent nationally. So, listen to those polls Manchin and Sinema!

"Oh, those polls!"

Spelling must be chalenging  for you.

Nl, but typing with my thumbs is. Espech with the L which tends to take out theater before it as often as it actually appears. And autocorrect turns what remains into an entirely different word. As in especially into Espech, which I cannot figure out, and theater for the letter.

[Hairy Lime]

If you are revitalizing infrastructure, and as a small fraction of that investment you can correct engineering decisions that perpetrate immense tragic societal ills, you do it both morally and fiscally. Rebuilding cities to better suit the understood needs of their populations every few generations is a hallmark of civilizations that haven’t collapsed. If rerouting certain roads reduces hospitalization and incarceration in densely populated areas, spend big now so those savings can be realized going forward all the time until you need to do it again.

If you are hiring to revitalize infrastructure, you are managing streams of wealth and income to get it done. If you recognize systemic factors leading to de facto racial preferences in contracting, making it you policy to counteract that in your contracting choices is both good politics and good policy.

Austerity, denial of racism, sexism, insurrection, and anti-vaccine propaganda are all one great circle under Koch.

If one believes in true equality, let the best bid win---don't base it on the race of the bidder, simply because decisions based upon race are inherently racist.

I have no issues with how the roads are built as far as where they go, or how the local neighborhoods that will be effected are compensated for their inconveniences---as traditionally Eminent Domain comes into play.

How.were.the communities and neighborhoods divided by the interstates in the first place compensated for their inconvenience? The owners of the property were compensated, but the neighborhood?

Werent the business owners, landlords or private home owners compensated under eminent domain?
How would renters be compensated?

You’re missing the point.

Across the nation highways were purposefully used to bisect thriving neighborhoods and communities and in essence destroy the community. Businesses fled along with jobs and services.

How to create blight 101.

Was it purposeful or, they just didn't give a fuck?

[Yankguy1]

If you are revitalizing infrastructure, and as a small fraction of that investment you can correct engineering decisions that perpetrate immense tragic societal ills, you do it both morally and fiscally. Rebuilding cities to better suit the understood needs of their populations every few generations is a hallmark of civilizations that haven’t collapsed. If rerouting certain roads reduces hospitalization and incarceration in densely populated areas, spend big now so those savings can be realized going forward all the time until you need to do it again.

If you are hiring to revitalize infrastructure, you are managing streams of wealth and income to get it done. If you recognize systemic factors leading to de facto racial preferences in contracting, making it you policy to counteract that in your contracting choices is both good politics and good policy.

Austerity, denial of racism, sexism, insurrection, and anti-vaccine propaganda are all one great circle under Koch.

If one believes in true equality, let the best bid win---don't base it on the race of the bidder, simply because decisions based upon race are inherently racist.

I have no issues with how the roads are built as far as where they go, or how the local neighborhoods that will be effected are compensated for their inconveniences---as traditionally Eminent Domain comes into play.

How.were.the communities and neighborhoods divided by the interstates in the first place compensated for their inconvenience? The owners of the property were compensated, but the neighborhood?

Werent the business owners, landlords or private home owners compensated under eminent domain?
How would renters be compensated?

You’re missing the point.

Across the nation highways were purposefully used to bisect thriving neighborhoods and communities and in essence destroy the community. Businesses fled along with jobs and services.

How to create blight 101.

”The Power Broker.”

[REDSTATEWARD]

If you are revitalizing infrastructure, and as a small fraction of that investment you can correct engineering decisions that perpetrate immense tragic societal ills, you do it both morally and fiscally. Rebuilding cities to better suit the understood needs of their populations every few generations is a hallmark of civilizations that haven’t collapsed. If rerouting certain roads reduces hospitalization and incarceration in densely populated areas, spend big now so those savings can be realized going forward all the time until you need to do it again.

If you are hiring to revitalize infrastructure, you are managing streams of wealth and income to get it done. If you recognize systemic factors leading to de facto racial preferences in contracting, making it you policy to counteract that in your contracting choices is both good politics and good policy.

Austerity, denial of racism, sexism, insurrection, and anti-vaccine propaganda are all one great circle under Koch.

If one believes in true equality, let the best bid win---don't base it on the race of the bidder, simply because decisions based upon race are inherently racist.

I have no issues with how the roads are built as far as where they go, or how the local neighborhoods that will be effected are compensated for their inconveniences---as traditionally Eminent Domain comes into play.

How.were.the communities and neighborhoods divided by the interstates in the first place compensated for their inconvenience? The owners of the property were compensated, but the neighborhood?

Werent the business owners, landlords or private home owners compensated under eminent domain?
How would renters be compensated?

People whose property or property rights were compensated if they were seized. Eminent domain is not designed to compensate for community or neighborhood inconvenience even if that inconvenience has an economic impact. If you cut off half a community from access to the other half - parks and community centers, local businesses, churches synagogues and mosques, that is not a taking.

OK 
So who was responsible for routing the interstates through metropolitan areas?

[LarryBnDC]

If you are revitalizing infrastructure, and as a small fraction of that investment you can correct engineering decisions that perpetrate immense tragic societal ills, you do it both morally and fiscally. Rebuilding cities to better suit the understood needs of their populations every few generations is a hallmark of civilizations that haven’t collapsed. If rerouting certain roads reduces hospitalization and incarceration in densely populated areas, spend big now so those savings can be realized going forward all the time until you need to do it again.

If you are hiring to revitalize infrastructure, you are managing streams of wealth and income to get it done. If you recognize systemic factors leading to de facto racial preferences in contracting, making it you policy to counteract that in your contracting choices is both good politics and good policy.

Austerity, denial of racism, sexism, insurrection, and anti-vaccine propaganda are all one great circle under Koch.

If one believes in true equality, let the best bid win---don't base it on the race of the bidder, simply because decisions based upon race are inherently racist.

I have no issues with how the roads are built as far as where they go, or how the local neighborhoods that will be effected are compensated for their inconveniences---as traditionally Eminent Domain comes into play.

How.were.the communities and neighborhoods divided by the interstates in the first place compensated for their inconvenience? The owners of the property were compensated, but the neighborhood?

Werent the business owners, landlords or private home owners compensated under eminent domain?
How would renters be compensated?

You’re missing the point.

Across the nation highways were purposefully used to bisect thriving neighborhoods and communities and in essence destroy the community. Businesses fled along with jobs and services.

How to create blight 101.

Was it purposeful or, they just didn't give a fuck?

Both

[LarryBnDC]

If you are revitalizing infrastructure, and as a small fraction of that investment you can correct engineering decisions that perpetrate immense tragic societal ills, you do it both morally and fiscally. Rebuilding cities to better suit the understood needs of their populations every few generations is a hallmark of civilizations that haven’t collapsed. If rerouting certain roads reduces hospitalization and incarceration in densely populated areas, spend big now so those savings can be realized going forward all the time until you need to do it again.

If you are hiring to revitalize infrastructure, you are managing streams of wealth and income to get it done. If you recognize systemic factors leading to de facto racial preferences in contracting, making it you policy to counteract that in your contracting choices is both good politics and good policy.

Austerity, denial of racism, sexism, insurrection, and anti-vaccine propaganda are all one great circle under Koch.

If one believes in true equality, let the best bid win---don't base it on the race of the bidder, simply because decisions based upon race are inherently racist.

I have no issues with how the roads are built as far as where they go, or how the local neighborhoods that will be effected are compensated for their inconveniences---as traditionally Eminent Domain comes into play.

How.were.the communities and neighborhoods divided by the interstates in the first place compensated for their inconvenience? The owners of the property were compensated, but the neighborhood?

Werent the business owners, landlords or private home owners compensated under eminent domain?
How would renters be compensated?

You’re missing the point.

Across the nation highways were purposefully used to bisect thriving neighborhoods and communities and in essence destroy the community. Businesses fled along with jobs and services.

How to create blight 101.

”The Power Broker.”

I grew up riding the Causeway to the State Park named for that motherfucker.