Comments on: Spanking Jumbo* http://politicsandpress.com/2006/spanking-jumbo/ The interaction of the press and politics; public diplomacy, and daily absurdities. Tue, 06 Jan 2009 03:59:16 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.3 by: Kiwi http://politicsandpress.com/2006/spanking-jumbo/#comment-42 Fri, 10 Nov 2006 06:34:22 +0000 http://politicsandpress.com/2006/spanking-jumbo/#comment-42 Hey, cool, a dialog. Well, a triolog. Excellent. The States are doin\' it, I say, doin\' for themselves. As provided by the 10th Amendment. What\'sa matter with the Bill o\' Rights? Its finishing lines are the words of 10th amendment which sets up the States as the labratory of Democracy where the cutting edge of the new \" popular experiment \" can be tested and freedom\'s envelope presssed. (Ok,that last part is not expressly stated in exactly those words but that\'s the common law gist of it.) HoooRaaay!!! What I say is let the States compete. Competion grows strong bodies 12 ways. Let \'em compete for my participation in their jurisdictions. Offer to tax me less or pay me more. I am open to inticement. Maybe I\'ll know where best to find my place, my tribe. Why not? Why make \'em compete on their natural--- and unfairly distributed--- attributes? All the States are not \"created equal\". They don\'t all have lobsters nor the seductive attractions of sand dunes and salty air, quaint little villages here and there. Perhaps, more importantly, the government closest to the people is most likely to reflect thier citizens\' best interests and is certainly more responsive to their desires. Small is beautiful. The Feds are distant,insular, unresponsive, unavailable and inaccessible. Like husbands and fathers, in the currently accepted politics. Let the States compete. Let them offer incentives and freedoms. California won\'t let its public investment--pension funds and such--finance the genocide in Darfur. I\'ll work there. If they add to that a promise to pay better than the national slave labour wage, well,cool. The 10th Amendment is under-appreciated. Let\'s give it meaning. Let the States compete for the labor. Labour will be better off for the competition. Hey, cool, a dialog. Well, a triolog.
Excellent.
The States are doin\’ it, I say, doin\’ for themselves. As provided by the 10th Amendment.
What\’sa matter with the Bill o\’ Rights? Its finishing lines are the words of 10th amendment which sets up the States as the labratory of Democracy where the cutting edge of the new \” popular experiment \” can be tested and freedom\’s envelope presssed. (Ok,that last part is not expressly stated in exactly those words but that\’s the common law gist of it.)
HoooRaaay!!!
What I say is let the States compete. Competion grows strong bodies 12 ways.
Let \’em compete for my participation in their jurisdictions. Offer to tax me less or pay me more. I am open to inticement. Maybe I\’ll know where best to find my place, my tribe. Why not? Why make \’em compete on their natural— and unfairly distributed— attributes? All the States are not \”created equal\”. They don\’t all have lobsters nor the seductive attractions of sand dunes and salty air, quaint little villages here and there.
Perhaps, more importantly, the government closest to the people is most likely to reflect thier citizens\’ best interests and is certainly more responsive to their desires. Small is beautiful.
The Feds are distant,insular, unresponsive, unavailable and inaccessible. Like husbands and fathers, in the currently accepted politics.
Let the States compete. Let them offer incentives and freedoms.
California won\’t let its public investment–pension funds and such–finance the genocide in Darfur. I\’ll work there. If they add to that a promise to pay better than the national slave labour wage, well,cool.
The 10th Amendment is under-appreciated. Let\’s give it meaning. Let the States compete for the labor. Labour will be better off for the competition.

]]> by: Allison http://politicsandpress.com/2006/spanking-jumbo/#comment-41 Thu, 09 Nov 2006 22:22:35 +0000 http://politicsandpress.com/2006/spanking-jumbo/#comment-41 To add to the comments in paragraph 3 (not to suggest we start listing all the important activities Congress should address, but this is of critical importance): the raising of the minimum wage. How awful that individual states have had to do this individually in order to move toward a fair wage. To add to the comments in paragraph 3 (not to suggest we start listing all the important activities Congress should address, but this is of critical importance): the raising of the minimum wage. How awful that individual states have had to do this individually in order to move toward a fair wage.

]]> by: Jeff http://politicsandpress.com/2006/spanking-jumbo/#comment-40 Thu, 09 Nov 2006 20:35:16 +0000 http://politicsandpress.com/2006/spanking-jumbo/#comment-40 Right. My only additional thought regards the role of the press and the need for both print and broadcast press to explain how things work, where accountability lies, and who is doing what to whom for whatever political gain might be out there. Actually, I am not hopeful about the mainstream press and media and God knows that the cable junk dealers will continue to deliver... On a positive note, the FCC ruled today that it was OK to use the word "bullshit" on a news program. Too late for the campaign but there is always 2008. Right. My only additional thought regards the role of the press and the need for both print and broadcast press to explain how things work, where accountability lies, and who is doing what to whom for whatever political gain might be out there.

Actually, I am not hopeful about the mainstream press and media and God knows that the cable junk dealers will continue to deliver…

On a positive note, the FCC ruled today that it was OK to use the word “bullshit” on a news program. Too late for the campaign but there is always 2008.

]]> by: Kiwi http://politicsandpress.com/2006/spanking-jumbo/#comment-39 Thu, 09 Nov 2006 20:12:46 +0000 http://politicsandpress.com/2006/spanking-jumbo/#comment-39 You are absolutely right Jeff. Particularly about the need to rebuild alliances. That is going to require better understanding of the meaning of these congressional election results. In the West Minster system --that is repeated in various adaptations among the US's Commonwealth allies-- an election result such as this one would hail a complete change of government. Here in NZ it is accepted on one level that the American system "is a bit different". Still there is a growing belief that Bush will now--in the next 3 months or so--withdraw from Iraq. I venture to say that won't happen and when it doesn't the "new regime" in Congress is going to be suspect. Expectations need to be realistic for the sake of sustained renewal among our traditional alliances. Congress can either contribute to that realism or aggravate American public diplomacy failures. One important contribution could be made during the Democratic Senate's confirmation process preparing to deal with Gates' nomination. As you have noted the US Constitution vests foreign policy responsibility with the Executive. Authorization and appropriations processes as well as laws like the War Powers Act claw some of that responsibility back to the legislature. Most significant,however, is the Senate's Advise and Consent constitutional authority. That is a fundamental influencing tool even in foreign policy. No one seriously doubts that Gates will be confirmed. The process is not just a vote on Gates suitability for service. Done constructively the process of confirming him will be important to establishing Congressional influence over his objectives and the strategy for achieving them. The world will be watching that process and will be learning what to expect and why. The new Democratic leadership is facing the first test of its governance of a co-equal branch of government. Let's hope we don't get fooled again and that we don't mislead our allies about our intentions. You are absolutely right Jeff. Particularly about the need to rebuild alliances. That is going to require better understanding of the meaning of these congressional election results. In the West Minster system –that is repeated in various adaptations among the US’s Commonwealth allies– an election result such as this one would hail a complete change of government. Here in NZ it is accepted on one level that the American system “is a bit different”. Still there is a growing belief that Bush will now–in the next 3 months or so–withdraw from Iraq. I venture to say that won’t happen and when it doesn’t the “new regime” in Congress is going to be suspect.

Expectations need to be realistic for the sake of sustained renewal among our traditional alliances. Congress can either contribute to that realism or aggravate American public diplomacy failures. One important contribution could be made during the Democratic Senate’s confirmation process preparing to deal with Gates’ nomination. As you have noted the US Constitution vests foreign policy responsibility with the Executive. Authorization and appropriations processes as well as laws like the War Powers Act claw some of that responsibility back to the legislature. Most significant,however, is the Senate’s Advise and Consent constitutional authority. That is a fundamental influencing tool even in foreign policy.

No one seriously doubts that Gates will be confirmed. The process is not just a vote on Gates suitability for service. Done constructively the process of confirming him will be important to establishing Congressional influence over his objectives and the strategy for achieving them. The world will be watching that process and will be learning what to expect and why. The new Democratic leadership is facing the first test of its governance of a co-equal branch of government. Let’s hope we don’t get fooled again and that we don’t mislead our allies about our intentions.

]]>