Re: State Of Denial

1

Go read it.

I take this to mean that you know him personally. Is that true, Ms. Becks? Have all y'all "gone DC?" For the record, I only link to people I can't stand personally.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 1:32 PM
horizontal rule
2

1 - I do, in fact, know Ryan, you little shit. I told you to go read him not because I'm pimping my friend but because otherwise I'd be excerpting his entire post. And I'm busy yelling at people at work.


Posted by: Becks | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 1:34 PM
horizontal rule
3

not because I'm pimping my friend but because otherwise I'd be excerpting his entire post

We're supposed to trust your introspective report? No, I don't think so. I don't think so at all.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 1:35 PM
horizontal rule
4

I love the Becks 'n' Ogged Show.

I can't wait for LB's walk-on as the cranky neighbor.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 1:36 PM
horizontal rule
5

Wait, I'm Kramer? Damn. I've got to speak to my agent.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 1:38 PM
horizontal rule
6

Racist.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 1:39 PM
horizontal rule
7

I think he meant Newman


Posted by: will | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 1:39 PM
horizontal rule
8

More like Millie Helper.


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 1:39 PM
horizontal rule
9

LizardBreath


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 1:42 PM
horizontal rule
10

Man. That's eerie.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 1:46 PM
horizontal rule
11

has a good post up about how geographic divisions in Congress led to the fall of SCHIP. Go read it.

He does? That didn't really seem to be the topic of the linked post.


Posted by: Brock Landers | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 1:53 PM
horizontal rule
12

Brock is correct, the topic of the linked post is Senator John Thune pretending that he voted against the bill because he is an idiot who doesn't understand that different places have different costs of living.


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 1:54 PM
horizontal rule
13

The Senate was also not the problem- they have enough votes to override the veto. It's the house, which is somewhat more representative, where they're about 20 votes short- but that's because they need 2/3 to override, it still has a significant majority.


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 1:56 PM
horizontal rule
14

Read the MSNBC article linked in the linked post for more details on geographic divisions.


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 1:59 PM
horizontal rule
15

That's an interesting post. Full disclosure: I have met Ryan, and he seemed like a nice guy.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 2:04 PM
horizontal rule
16

God, Thune is an embarassment.


Posted by: Chopper | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 2:08 PM
horizontal rule
17

The MSNBC article doesn't say anything non-obvious; urban districts have higher incomes; urban districts are represented by Democrats. Did poor districts vote against it because they're represented by people in the same party as Bush, or because they suddenly care about controlling spending? The instructive comparison is between Republicans who voted for and against- is the split there by income level of their district?
There is one example of this given, but even that isn't clear, because the R is from a likely contested seat (Brooklyn)- safe R seats are also more rural, etc...


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 2:12 PM
horizontal rule
18

The MSNBC story is where the interesting material is. I don't entirely get what Roy Blunt is saying to reporters there. He admits that he is voting against it because $61K is a lot in his district, even though it isn't a lot in the district of his fellow Republican from Staten Island.

So does he think that children in Staten Island have good access to health care because if they lived in Missouri, they'd be rich? That's like saying its fine to parade around outdoors nude in Antarctica because if you were in Hawai'i, it'd be warm.

Is he just saying that needs that aren't readily apparent to my constituents don't count?


Posted by: rob helpy-chalk | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 2:13 PM
horizontal rule
19

Is he just saying that needs that aren't readily apparent to my constituents don't count?

Sounds like a pretty fair summary of the basic Congresscritter business model.


Posted by: Not Prince Hamlet | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 2:16 PM
horizontal rule
20

But they aren't supposed to actually *say* it!


Posted by: rob helpy-chalk | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 2:27 PM
horizontal rule
21

No, they're allowed to say that. What they're not allowed to say is that they believe that whatever's best for monopolistic industry in its war against the consumer and the worker is good for America. Unless they're from Texas, then they can say it.


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 2:31 PM
horizontal rule
22

My congressman (Dem) voted against SCHIP, saying that it's not necessary since children in his state at that income level are already covered. (Which they are.)


Posted by: neil | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 2:45 PM
horizontal rule
23

A factor I haven't seen mentioned about the thinly populated, Republican Plains and Rocky Mountain states is that they're cheap to buy. Media costs are low, many of them are poor states, and they have a certain small range of key economic players. So a Wyoming Senator (**Dick Cheney**) is a lot cheaper than a NY Senator, not only in election costs but also in vote-buying costs (a measly twenty million bucks goes a long way in Wyoming, whereas in NY that's just pocket change).

So I think you have a triangular relationship between the rural locals with their specific beliefs, the medium sized local interests who want grease, and the big money people who are buying budget Senate votes for reasons completely unrelated to the belief or needs of the local communities or even the "big" local interest groups. (Of course this triangle is everywhere, but for the reasons I've said the outside big money is probably more important in the chickenshit little yahoo states.)


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 2:51 PM
horizontal rule
24

I'm often appalled by just how inexpensive our congress is. Shouldn't legislation that affects the whole land be worth something? It is some kind of market failure.


Posted by: rob helpy-chalk | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 3:19 PM
horizontal rule
25

That's why Emerson keeps trying to sell us houses in North Dakota.


Posted by: Not Prince Hamlet | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 3:27 PM
horizontal rule
26

Once you've gotten used to living in a chickenshit little yahoo state, you love it.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 3:32 PM
horizontal rule
27

yahoo states vs. google states: alert the media on this emerging trend!


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 3:36 PM
horizontal rule
28

Also, people don't buy votes. They establish long term relationships with friends in which they invest heavily.


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 3:37 PM
horizontal rule
29

28 is right. You don't buy votes. You buy congressmen. And they're cheap. Hookers are more expensive.

I bet if someone did a long term cost benefit analysis on a paid relationship with a congressman and a relationship with paid relationship with a hooker, the congressman would be far cheaper in terms of initial outlay and much richer in terms of reward.


Posted by: rob helpy-chalk | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 3:41 PM
horizontal rule
30

But surely there must be a more attractive chickenshit little yahoo state than North Dakota. If we're going to try to start our own little Rajneeshpuram, let's at least make it somewhere pleasant.


Posted by: Not Prince Hamlet | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 3:42 PM
horizontal rule
31

29: For the price of an Idaho Senator you can get a two-fer.


Posted by: Not Prince Hamlet | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 3:43 PM
horizontal rule
32

What the hell? Chinese subtitles? Or Kanji?

Is he doing an ad for MANDOM?


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 3:45 PM
horizontal rule
33

But surely there must be a more attractive chickenshit little yahoo state than North Dakota.

There is.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 3:51 PM
horizontal rule
34

Chinese. I think he's threatening someone.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 3:54 PM
horizontal rule
35

29 28 is right. You don't buy votes. You buy congressmen. And they're cheap. Hookers are more expensive.

I often imagine the contempt that the big money guys must have for people like Delay and Bob Ney et al. One little golfing trip to Scotland and you can have your way with them. Pathetic bounders.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 3:56 PM
horizontal rule
36

Wee sleekit timorous cowering beasties.

Seriously, I am going on the assumptiont that William H. Macy is the new spokesman for MANDOM, unless someone tells me what this clip is from.


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 4:04 PM
horizontal rule
37

Most players in those sorts of games are too busy worrying about their own status to be properly comtemptuous of the others.


Posted by: Not Prince Hamlet | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 4:08 PM
horizontal rule
38

36 is wrong. The new spokesman is Victor Davis "MANDOM!" Hanson.


Posted by: Not Prince Hamlet | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 4:09 PM
horizontal rule
39

Er, I seem to have posted in the wrong thread, and nobody noticed.

MANDOM!


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 4:15 PM
horizontal rule
40

I noticed, I just didn't care.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 4:22 PM
horizontal rule
41

You don't buy votes. You buy congressmen. And they're cheap.

I suspect that someone has studied this issue. But, I agree with you. It doesnt cost much to have some influence with your elected representative.


Posted by: will | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 4:29 PM
horizontal rule
42

39: it confused the hell out of me you'll be happy to know, Ned.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 4:36 PM
horizontal rule
43

I don't think that anything makes me more upset than how cheaply our Congressional Representatives can be bought. Of course, pace Cunningham et al, they don't see themselves as bought, which is the biggest part of the problem. I believe that those seeking rent can do better than 10x their investment in Congress.


Posted by: tassled loafered leech | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 4:36 PM
horizontal rule
44

A member of the California state assembly (the lower house there) represents something like five times as many constituents as a U.S. Senator from Wyoming. Pretty amazing if you think about it.

In that sense the Senate is an amazingly undemocratic institution. I guess you could argue for it on the same basis as holding early primaries in New Hampshire -- it allows for more face to face politics.


Posted by: marcus | Link to this comment | 10- 3-07 9:53 PM
horizontal rule