<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Just Desserts</title>
	<atom:link href="http://the-american-catholic.com/2009/09/26/just-deserts/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://the-american-catholic.com/2009/09/26/just-deserts/</link>
	<description>Politics and Culture from a Catholic perspective.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 03:10:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Donald R. McClarey</title>
		<link>http://the-american-catholic.com/2009/09/26/just-deserts/#comment-13161</link>
		<dc:creator>Donald R. McClarey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 17:35:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://the-american-catholic.com/?p=12888#comment-13161</guid>
		<description>According to Rasmussen ObamaCare now is at its lowest ebb:  56% oppose-41% in favor.

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/09/28/rasmussen-obamacare-falls-to-lowest-level-of-support/

In regard to Medicare, in order to pay for ObamaCare there are substantial cuts planned in Medicare.

&quot;House Speaker Nancy Pelosi proclaimed her support for this cost-cutting agenda on Thursday. “Half the bill will be paid for by squeezing excesses out of the [Medicare and Medicaid] system,” she said, “and there is $500 billion dollars to do that and we’re looking for more. That can be achieved—waste, fraud, redundancy, obsolescence, whatever it is.”

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/sep2009/heal-s12.shtml

The gentleman yelling at his Congresscritter about Medicare has every right to be concerned.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>According to Rasmussen ObamaCare now is at its lowest ebb:  56% oppose-41% in favor.</p>
<p><a href="http://hotair.com/archives/2009/09/28/rasmussen-obamacare-falls-to-lowest-level-of-support/" rel="nofollow">http://hotair.com/archives/2009/09/28/rasmussen-obamacare-falls-to-lowest-level-of-support/</a></p>
<p>In regard to Medicare, in order to pay for ObamaCare there are substantial cuts planned in Medicare.</p>
<p>&#8220;House Speaker Nancy Pelosi proclaimed her support for this cost-cutting agenda on Thursday. “Half the bill will be paid for by squeezing excesses out of the [Medicare and Medicaid] system,” she said, “and there is $500 billion dollars to do that and we’re looking for more. That can be achieved—waste, fraud, redundancy, obsolescence, whatever it is.”</p>
<p><a href="http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/sep2009/heal-s12.shtml" rel="nofollow">http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/sep2009/heal-s12.shtml</a></p>
<p>The gentleman yelling at his Congresscritter about Medicare has every right to be concerned.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: irish</title>
		<link>http://the-american-catholic.com/2009/09/26/just-deserts/#comment-13160</link>
		<dc:creator>irish</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 17:26:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://the-american-catholic.com/?p=12888#comment-13160</guid>
		<description>First of all, it is silly to predict the impending demise of one political party from the dumbest thing that one of its hundreds of members of Congress did. If that ever happened, we&#039;d have no political parties at all. There is always a Republican or a Democrat doing something utterly stupid.

And this is one of them. As a Democrat and a strong supporter of health care reform, I thank the heavens that town halls WERE videotaped so we can see certain elements of the opposition in all their ugliness. They not only won over no converts, but they gave us priceless moments such as the guy screaming at his Congressperson to keep the government&#039;s hands off Medicare.

But on the other hand, just exactly how far did this attempted ban on recording go? Were TV stations not allowed to videotape? Were print reporters not allowed to use audio recorders? And if you can&#039;t ban all, then how on earth can you try to ban some?

What next? Granting access to your public &quot;town halls&quot; only to those pre-selected members of the public you like? How George Bush can you get?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>First of all, it is silly to predict the impending demise of one political party from the dumbest thing that one of its hundreds of members of Congress did. If that ever happened, we&#8217;d have no political parties at all. There is always a Republican or a Democrat doing something utterly stupid.</p>
<p>And this is one of them. As a Democrat and a strong supporter of health care reform, I thank the heavens that town halls WERE videotaped so we can see certain elements of the opposition in all their ugliness. They not only won over no converts, but they gave us priceless moments such as the guy screaming at his Congressperson to keep the government&#8217;s hands off Medicare.</p>
<p>But on the other hand, just exactly how far did this attempted ban on recording go? Were TV stations not allowed to videotape? Were print reporters not allowed to use audio recorders? And if you can&#8217;t ban all, then how on earth can you try to ban some?</p>
<p>What next? Granting access to your public &#8220;town halls&#8221; only to those pre-selected members of the public you like? How George Bush can you get?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Privacy and Circumspection in the Age of Blog &#171; Catholic Sensibility</title>
		<link>http://the-american-catholic.com/2009/09/26/just-deserts/#comment-13159</link>
		<dc:creator>Privacy and Circumspection in the Age of Blog &#171; Catholic Sensibility</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Sep 2009 18:31:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://the-american-catholic.com/?p=12888#comment-13159</guid>
		<description>[...] in the Age of&#160;Blog Posted by catholicsensibility under Politics Leave a Comment&#160;  An interesting discussion on the wisdom of Rep. Baron Hill getting slightly testy on his no-record request at a meeting with [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] in the Age of&nbsp;Blog Posted by catholicsensibility under Politics Leave a Comment&nbsp;  An interesting discussion on the wisdom of Rep. Baron Hill getting slightly testy on his no-record request at a meeting with [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cminor</title>
		<link>http://the-american-catholic.com/2009/09/26/just-deserts/#comment-13158</link>
		<dc:creator>cminor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Sep 2009 03:35:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://the-american-catholic.com/?p=12888#comment-13158</guid>
		<description>I wonder how Hill would have reacted to audience members making audio recordings of the meeting?  Or jotting notes of what was said.  While any sort of recording can be used by an opponent against you, it can also be used as verification in your favor if somebody accuses you of an outrageous remark.  It&#039;s easier to misstate when taking written notes than when you have a backup recording.

Hill, and other elected reps, should suck it up and get into the habit of practicing their manners and making sure they know what they&#039;re talking about to minimize the likelihood that they will be filmed looking bad.  It beats having your words misquoted and used against you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wonder how Hill would have reacted to audience members making audio recordings of the meeting?  Or jotting notes of what was said.  While any sort of recording can be used by an opponent against you, it can also be used as verification in your favor if somebody accuses you of an outrageous remark.  It&#8217;s easier to misstate when taking written notes than when you have a backup recording.</p>
<p>Hill, and other elected reps, should suck it up and get into the habit of practicing their manners and making sure they know what they&#8217;re talking about to minimize the likelihood that they will be filmed looking bad.  It beats having your words misquoted and used against you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Donald R. McClarey</title>
		<link>http://the-american-catholic.com/2009/09/26/just-deserts/#comment-13157</link>
		<dc:creator>Donald R. McClarey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Sep 2009 02:31:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://the-american-catholic.com/?p=12888#comment-13157</guid>
		<description>&quot;It’s a good thing for the GOP that in the US, unlike in parliamentary democracies, you can’t sink lower than second place on the political totem pole.&quot;

Todd, there is a political wave building that will relegate the Democrat party to that position.  All the signs are there for a wipeout of the Democrat majority in the House next year and I assume you must not pay much attention to the internal mechanics of politics or you would not make such a silly comment.  The best political prognosticator in the business is Charlie Cook and this is what he wrote earlier this month:

&quot;Clearly, the Obama administration was mindful that in the Clinton era Democratic majorities in Congress spurned the White House&#039;s fully formed proposals. But in trying to avoid a repetition of President Clinton&#039;s mistakes, Obama opened the door to charges that he was outsourcing domestic policy to Democrats on Capitol Hill.

Even in the best of times, Congress is unpopular. And now voters see Obama as having sent suggestions rather than proposals to the Hill, staking his future and reputation on a body that they hold in low regard. (On foreign-policy matters, where Congress plays a small role, Obama&#039;s job-approval ratings remain quite good. It&#039;s on the domestic side that his numbers are dismal.)

&quot;With 14 months to go before the 2010 midterm election, something could happen to improve the outlook for Democrats. However, wave elections, more often than not, start just like this: The president&#039;s ratings plummet; his party loses its advantage on the generic congressional ballot test; the intensity of opposition-party voters skyrockets; his own party&#039;s voters become complacent or even depressed; and independent voters move lopsidedly away. These were the early-warning signs of past wave elections. Seeing them now should terrify Democrats.&quot;

http://www.cookpolitical.com/node/4828</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;It’s a good thing for the GOP that in the US, unlike in parliamentary democracies, you can’t sink lower than second place on the political totem pole.&#8221;</p>
<p>Todd, there is a political wave building that will relegate the Democrat party to that position.  All the signs are there for a wipeout of the Democrat majority in the House next year and I assume you must not pay much attention to the internal mechanics of politics or you would not make such a silly comment.  The best political prognosticator in the business is Charlie Cook and this is what he wrote earlier this month:</p>
<p>&#8220;Clearly, the Obama administration was mindful that in the Clinton era Democratic majorities in Congress spurned the White House&#8217;s fully formed proposals. But in trying to avoid a repetition of President Clinton&#8217;s mistakes, Obama opened the door to charges that he was outsourcing domestic policy to Democrats on Capitol Hill.</p>
<p>Even in the best of times, Congress is unpopular. And now voters see Obama as having sent suggestions rather than proposals to the Hill, staking his future and reputation on a body that they hold in low regard. (On foreign-policy matters, where Congress plays a small role, Obama&#8217;s job-approval ratings remain quite good. It&#8217;s on the domestic side that his numbers are dismal.)</p>
<p>&#8220;With 14 months to go before the 2010 midterm election, something could happen to improve the outlook for Democrats. However, wave elections, more often than not, start just like this: The president&#8217;s ratings plummet; his party loses its advantage on the generic congressional ballot test; the intensity of opposition-party voters skyrockets; his own party&#8217;s voters become complacent or even depressed; and independent voters move lopsidedly away. These were the early-warning signs of past wave elections. Seeing them now should terrify Democrats.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.cookpolitical.com/node/4828" rel="nofollow">http://www.cookpolitical.com/node/4828</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Todd</title>
		<link>http://the-american-catholic.com/2009/09/26/just-deserts/#comment-13156</link>
		<dc:creator>Todd</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Sep 2009 02:14:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://the-american-catholic.com/?p=12888#comment-13156</guid>
		<description>&quot;Last I checked the YouTube video has had 170,000 views and over 1000 comments, almost all of them scathingly against Hill.&quot;

Well, Donald, you&#039;re already batting .350 on this comment thread. At that rate, you&#039;d have posted almost thirty dozen times on YouTube.

&quot;Is this a desperate times call for desperate measures sort of argument, or are you trying to keep us all entertained?&quot;

Well I&#039;m not part of your echo chamber, if that&#039;s what you mean. It&#039;s a good thing for the GOP that in the US, unlike in parliamentary democracies, you can&#039;t sink lower than second place on the political totem pole. At least nobody has in nearly a century.

&quot;This act was clearly an attempt to control the press.&quot;

Right. Everybody with a cell phone and an internet connection is a member of the press. I&#039;d stick with &quot;peaceable assembly&quot; instead.

Take the last word, Donald. Three-fifty is worth another plate appearance ... or seven.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Last I checked the YouTube video has had 170,000 views and over 1000 comments, almost all of them scathingly against Hill.&#8221;</p>
<p>Well, Donald, you&#8217;re already batting .350 on this comment thread. At that rate, you&#8217;d have posted almost thirty dozen times on YouTube.</p>
<p>&#8220;Is this a desperate times call for desperate measures sort of argument, or are you trying to keep us all entertained?&#8221;</p>
<p>Well I&#8217;m not part of your echo chamber, if that&#8217;s what you mean. It&#8217;s a good thing for the GOP that in the US, unlike in parliamentary democracies, you can&#8217;t sink lower than second place on the political totem pole. At least nobody has in nearly a century.</p>
<p>&#8220;This act was clearly an attempt to control the press.&#8221;</p>
<p>Right. Everybody with a cell phone and an internet connection is a member of the press. I&#8217;d stick with &#8220;peaceable assembly&#8221; instead.</p>
<p>Take the last word, Donald. Three-fifty is worth another plate appearance &#8230; or seven.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

