« Jet Blue Is Sorry | Main | Anti-Family Liberals »

February 21, 2007

Candidates Clash!

According to MyDD's wrap-up of the candidate's forum, Tom Vilsack wants to drastically cut benefits in Social Security and Medicare by deindexing them from wages, Richardson sucks on health care and is sort of a wanker besides (#$^&@ positivity, Democrats will win when they stop taking shit), Hillary Clinton doesn't like closing statements, Joe Biden bangs a teacher and has learned to stop taking so long, and this dude named Mike Gravel is running who wants to repeal the national income tax. Wacky.

February 21, 2007 | Permalink

Comments

Vlisack just lost about 90% of the chance he'd ever get my vote. There's no problem with Social Security, and there's no problem with Medicare that isn't a problem with US health care in general (i.e. don't 'fix' Medicare, fix health care). Yet he's trying to sell himself to Democrats with this?

I'd like to defy Yglesias and like Richardson despite his lack of celebrity, but I am so tired of conciliatory candidates. Nobody believes that you think Bush sucks and Republicans suck if you still talk as if they're your 'friends across the aisle'.

Posted by: NBarnes | Feb 21, 2007 6:34:32 PM

"Joe Biden bangs a teacher and has learned to stop taking so long." I'll admit to being very confused, Ezra.

Posted by: Sam L. | Feb 21, 2007 6:36:55 PM

I think that's a reference to the following in the MyDD wrapup:

Biden notes that the woman he's slept with for the last 30 years is a teacher.

I also wondered, when I read the short version, why it was not all over news.google, but then saw the original and realized it was a candidate admitting to sleeping with his wife. While it may be newsworthy in today's Washington, is not yet seen as extremely unusual in the rest of the country.

Posted by: BruceMcF | Feb 21, 2007 6:51:36 PM

"Joe Biden bangs a teacher and has learned to stop taking so long." Heck, this should be the subject of a whole post analyzing Biden's former tantric sexual dalliances and how his new teacher-lover has taught him the ways of the quickie.

Posted by: JP | Feb 21, 2007 7:25:11 PM

Perhaps another whole blog-post on sexual compatibility is in order?

Posted by: Sam L. | Feb 21, 2007 8:08:53 PM

Ezra's phrasing did make it sound like teacher-banging was going on in the course of the debate. While amending debate formats to allow this would probably increase interest in the political process, I can see it coarsening our political culture over the long term.

Posted by: Neil the Ethical Werewolf | Feb 21, 2007 8:36:16 PM

It's a great juxtaposition: banging a teacher and learning not to take so long. Considering that the stereotypic problem with men is that they don't take long enough, it conjures up so many delightful possibilities. Like, is Biden as prolix in bed as he is out of it? Does he go on and on with the dirty-talk until his wife, waiting for the main act, gives up and falls asleep?

Inquiring minds want to know...

Posted by: CaseyL | Feb 21, 2007 8:54:22 PM

Gravel's plan to introduce a national sales tax as a replacement for the income tax isn't really a bad concept, but would be very problematical to implement. Creating a system that would be neither regressive nor easily evaded by the wealthy would be exceedingly difficult and contentious. There is also the possibility of unintended consequences from the added nuisance of figuring federal sales tax into prices along with any state and local ones and what is in essence an increase in the price of goods.

Richardson's, whom I prefer in general (and my rather farther left father does as well), take on health care was unimpressive. I imagine that he's trying to play the part of realist by pursuing an unambitious model that seems, foremost, possible to his mind. John Edwards seems to be the only candidate trying to seize the initiative on the issue, which isn't necessarily an advantage and summons up memories of his awkard exhortations of, "I have a plan; I've written it down," from the 2003-2004 nomination campaign.

In the end, I'm still left wondering what the next president's role will be, which is admittedly a hopelessly speculative question, but whether whoever is elected in 2008 is somehow the last, wheezing gasp of Reagan's economic liberalism (international definition) or the beginning of some new trend won't leave my mind, even though it is better suited for judgement after the fact.

What I really want to hear is someone who'll talk about the power of the executive and the current disarray of the separation of powers, but that's really too boring and inevitably hollow a subject to enter the campaign. I doubt that any pledges to reign the power of the presidency in would be more sincere or better kept than promises of fiscal restraint or ethical government.

Posted by: Paludicola | Feb 21, 2007 9:11:33 PM

I doubt that any pledges to reign the power of the presidency in would be more sincere or better kept than promises of fiscal restraint or ethical government.

That's a good point. I hear a lot of people on the left agitating for reining in the power of the presidency, as well they should. But it's hard to trust anyone's promises or plans on that score. I think you're better off looking at people's temperament and how they've used power in the past to determine how they'd act as president.

Posted by: Neil the Ethical Werewolf | Feb 21, 2007 10:28:18 PM

Kucinich spinning around like a top with his arms out, shouting "No strings! No strings!" during his closing statement was a brilliant strategy to change his image problems.

Posted by: Chris | Feb 21, 2007 10:57:49 PM

Congrats Ezra on making RNC talking points! :)

http://www.rnc.org/News/Read.aspx?ID=6803

Posted by: Ross | Feb 21, 2007 11:39:56 PM

Hey, I read those "talking points" and Obama is what he is.....inexperienced.

Posted by: Fred Jones | Feb 22, 2007 8:28:59 AM

That's a mistatement of Vilsack's position; it's absurd to suggest that Vilsack is in favor of reducing social security benefits. In terms of Medicare and NBarnes's point, Vilsack supports universal health care, meaning that he agrees with your point about fixing health care. Not saying you should support him (I don't), but his positions should at least be accurately portrayed.

Posted by: PW | Feb 22, 2007 9:30:47 AM

Kos had a good point about Vilsack the other day...

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/2/21/154743/918

Vilsack has gained some attention by his strong stance against the occupation and the need to get out now. But he was very recently a leader of the DLC when they were still putting out pro-Iraq/pro-Bush statements and undercutting those Dems who were getting it right. And not talking about 2003, this was as recent as June 2006! Why oh why can't we have a serious and experienced progressive like Feingold running (or any of the Dems who voted against the Bush authorization) instead of Kucinich or Obama?

Posted by: [email protected] | Feb 22, 2007 10:57:17 AM

1) The piling on Vilsack is interesting. It really shows why politicians don't release many policy statements. You've said blandly good but half-hearted things about policy proposals you do like, whereas the partisans will eviscerate anyone who says a policy they don't like (without regard to how likely it would be to actually implement). I mean I don't like price-indexing either, but it's easy to see why pols keep their mouths shut.

2) The reason a "serious and experienced progressive" won't run is because it's a waste of their time and effort. Some extremists have time to waste, so they run. But the ones who are actually accomplishing something have no desire to waste their time or image.

Posted by: Tony V | Feb 22, 2007 11:40:21 AM

PW, if it's a misstatement, maybe Vilsack was the one who misstated. The exact quote is in Hilzoy's post about it. At any rate, correcting the misunderstanding, if there is one, is going to require an explanation of what his real position is, not just a claim that people's understanding of his statement is absurd.

Posted by: KCinDC | Feb 22, 2007 3:23:02 PM

The reason a "serious and experienced progressive" won't run is because it's a waste of their time and effort. Some extremists have time to waste, so they run. But the ones who are actually accomplishing something have no desire to waste their time or image.

Shorter Tony V: "serious and experienced progressive" candidates are seen by the voters for what they are and are soundly rejected by the people.

Posted by: Fred Jones | Feb 23, 2007 9:46:53 AM

Hey, I read those "talking points" and Obama is what he is.....inexperienced.

The stink of your fear of Obama The Candidate is quite strong, sir.

Posted by: Adrock | Feb 23, 2007 11:09:26 AM

托盘
托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
木制托盘
纸托盘
木塑托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
钢托盘
木托盘
钢制托盘
托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
南京托盘
南京钢托盘
上海托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
南京托盘
南京钢托盘
上海托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
纸托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘
杭州托盘
成都托盘
武汉托盘
长沙托盘
合肥托盘
苏州托盘
无锡托盘
昆山托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
纸托盘
南京托盘
南京钢制托盘
南京钢托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘

托盘
托盘
托盘
托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
塑料托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
塑料托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
托盘
钢托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
托盘
托盘
托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
木制托盘
纸托盘
木塑托盘
柱式托盘
波纹托盘
镀锌托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘
托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
木制托盘
纸托盘
木塑托盘
柱式托盘
波纹板托盘
镀锌托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
木制托盘
纸托盘
木塑托盘
柱式托盘
波纹托盘
镀锌托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘
托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
木托盘
塑料托盘
木塑托盘
柱式托盘
波纹板托盘
镀锌托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
木制托盘
纸托盘
木塑托盘
柱式托盘
波纹托盘
镀锌托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘
托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
纸托盘
木塑托盘
柱式托盘
波纹板托盘
镀锌托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘


托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
托盘
塑料托盘

Posted by: judy | Sep 26, 2007 11:51:07 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.