Anyone else almost throw up with the GOP's Reagan love-fest last night?

[Cym Jim]

Originally Posted by kaiserpete

Glad somebody noticed that. I'm wasted on these people I tell you.

[trash]

Originally Posted by wingfanjim

Then why was it such a big deal when he endorsed Obama? If other Dems avoid him in public, why did Obama have him in a rally the next day? Why did Kennedy have such an advertised speech at the convention?

If I were to pick a prominent Democrat who has lost his relevance within the party I would say it is Jimmy Carter. He's a surviving president who was completely absent from any of the precedings, and is basically ignored by current dem politicians.

It wasn't a big deal. Look at where he was placed. Obama simply punched a ticket, albeit a wishful ticket. The pubs do the same thing. And Kennedy is a sitting Senator. Carter is, well, you know.

Re: the media -I don't know where you live, but my local news was most peoples national news. The political reality inside the beltway is horribly different than what people generally think. Prior to Watergate, more accuracy was available via the media. Watergate changed all that. If the "old" rules were still in play, I would totally agree with you that kennedys influence would parlay into relevance.

[wingfanjim]

Originally Posted by trash

It wasn't a big deal. Look at where he was placed. Obama simply punched a ticket, albeit a wishful ticket. The pubs do the same thing. And Kennedy is a sitting Senator. Carter is, well, you know.

Re: the media -I don't know where you live, but my local news was most peoples national news. The political reality inside the beltway is horribly different than what people generally think. Prior to Watergate, more accuracy was available via the media. Watergate changed all that. If the "old" rules were still in play, I would totally agree with you that kennedys influence would parlay into relevance.

Ok. Fair enough. Let me ask this question. For those of us not in the beltway, how do we tell who the movers and shakers are if the people that are publicly portrayed as the movers and shakers really aren't?

[trash]

Originally Posted by wingfanjim

Ok. Fair enough. Let me ask this question. For those of us not in the beltway, how do we tell who the movers and shakers are if the people that are publicly portrayed as the movers and shakers really aren't?

It is almost impossible.

One key is examining the inter-party wars for leadership. Not necessarily who gets picked to lead, but rather, who is behind the push. The Dem power struggle between Hoyer and Pelosi for the House Speakerhsip is a great example.

A second key is to identify who gets things killed in Committee. Subsequently, these bills rarely get a media hearing. Also, when a hot item doesn't reach the floor fo a vote - someone is swinging a big stick. These pols are not interested in visibility, hence an outside the beltway viewer will, quite often, not see them - but will hear their name.

It all really quite convoluted.

The behind the scenes activity is so politically warped, you would be quite disappointed. Ted Stevens and Robert Byrd are great evidences of that actuality. FYI,the part I am most familiar with is the budget hearings.

[wingfanjim]

Originally Posted by trash

It is almost impossible.

One key is examining the inter-party wars for leadership. Not necessarily who gets picked to lead, but rather, who is behind the push. The Dem power struggle between Hoyer and Pelosi for the House Speakerhsip is a great example.

A second key is to identify who gets things killed in Committee. Subsequently, these bills rarely get a media hearing. Also, when a hot item doesn't reach the floor fo a vote - someone is swinging a big stick. These pols are not interested in visibility, hence an outside the beltway viewer will, quite often, not see them - but will hear their name.

It all really quite convoluted.

The behind the scenes activity is so politically warped, you would be quite disappointed. Ted Stevens and Robert Byrd are great evidences of that actuality. FYI,the part I am most familiar with is the budget hearings.

Is there a website or some other resource where we could see who is killing what and other things like that?

[Bullwrinkle]

Originally Posted by TK421

Nope, you offer benefits because it's what you have to do to keep good employees. Take them away, and your workforce would disappear. If Unions hadn't strongarmed better benefits for thier workers, smaller non-union employers like yourself wouldn't offer anything better than the bigger firms. Don't act like you give benefits out of the kindness of your own heart. You have to so that you can compete for talented employees.

That's exactly what I said. Reread what I posted and see where I said anything about kindness.

It's just the idea that somehow Ted Kennedy has somehow forced us to offer benefits is just ludicrous.

[trash]

Originally Posted by wingfanjim

Is there a website or some other resource where we could see who is killing what and other things like that?

Well, the Government Printing Office publishes The Congressional Record. It is quite revealing IF you have the time to scrutinize it and put 2 & 2 together. It is a prodigious set of documents, and hence, a prodigious task.

The House and Senate official sites are good for tracking the literal disposition of bills, but not the info you are referring to.

You ask a darn good question and, frankly, I don't think I've given you a particularly good answer. I never needed a site because I was there. But I will look. It is a great question.

Edit: Just found this site: http://www.govtrack.us/about.xpd

I'll keep looking.

[kaiserpete]

Allow me to interrupt the thread hijack by trash and wingfanjim:

Reagan =