Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
15 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

LuvNewcastle

(16,834 posts)
2. You'd think MSNBC would be embarrassed by him.
Fri Nov 8, 2013, 03:22 PM
Nov 2013

I think if I was going to give the kid a job, it would be something out of public view. Maybe he could do the lights or makeup or be a cameraman. Don't they have stuff to type around there?

Gold Metal Flake

(13,805 posts)
3. Yup. Maybe they could teach him to, you know, look shit up.
Fri Nov 8, 2013, 03:26 PM
Nov 2013

I think research skills might be important to someone that works in a reporting environment. Unless it's not.

Gold Metal Flake

(13,805 posts)
5. Unless ass-sourced fact-like nonfacts is the requirement.
Fri Nov 8, 2013, 03:34 PM
Nov 2013

I wonder if it is a % per hour sort of quota. I mean, this guys dad may be a ghost, but Li'l Russert is quite corporeal and could be located (I see him!) and mentored into a fact-seeker if it were required by management.

doc03

(35,296 posts)
6. Wait a f----g minute now, I see comments there about the trillion dollar Stimulus
Fri Nov 8, 2013, 03:37 PM
Nov 2013

remember only like 15% or so was actually spent on infrastructure. The biggest part of that went to extend tax cuts
and other stuff the Republicans demanded. If it was all spent on infrastructure there would still be people working on the projects and
we wouldn't have the unemployment we have now.

JHB

(37,157 posts)
8. Why was a "filibuster proof Congress" even needed, Luke?
Fri Nov 8, 2013, 03:59 PM
Nov 2013
Why was it so important to filibuster? Who though everything had to be filibustered? Exactly how long did that "filibuster proof" majority last for?

The Founders reserved supermajority votes for the biggest of big-ticket items: constitutional amendments, impeachment, etc.


I continue to maintain that Luke's prime qualification for his job is that all Washington agreed he looked just adorable in his footie pajamas when he slipped into cocktail parties to kiss Daddy goodnight.

Tx4obama

(36,974 posts)
11. 72 days or 24 working days, depending on what is counted
Fri Nov 8, 2013, 05:47 PM
Nov 2013

This post says 72 days...
http://www.winningprogressive.org/democrats-had-a-filibuster-proof-senate-majority-for-72-days-during-president-obamas-first-term

But the detailed comment at the bottom of that link says... Total Time of the Democratic Super Majority: 24 Working days



9. High healthcare costs are a major financial crisis that needed addressing.
Fri Nov 8, 2013, 04:17 PM
Nov 2013

Medical costs can't keep going up 10% a year when wages don't. While there are insufficient cost containment measures in ACA, there are some and it should patch the current system well enough to bring the uninsured from >10% of the population to <5%. I actually agree with Luke that we desperately need more infrastructure spending, but I don't understand how he can marry this desire for massive government spending with his man-love for Boehner's merry band of renegades.

JHB

(37,157 posts)
12. I don't think it's a desire, seems more like an "ineffective Democrats" snipe
Fri Nov 8, 2013, 05:53 PM
Nov 2013

That's my take anyway, which I admit is offhand.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Psst DU Tweeps; Luke Russ...