<?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 for QandO</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.qando.net/index.php?feed=comments-rss2" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.qando.net</link>
	<description>Free Markets, Free People</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 19:16:34 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on &#8220;Bi-Partisan Health Care Summit&#8221; Or Political Theater? (Update) by looker</title>
		<link>http://www.qando.net/?p=7011&#038;cpage=1#comment-27115</link>
		<dc:creator>looker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 19:16:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qando.net/?p=7011#comment-27115</guid>
		<description>This whole thing has a simple analogy - dinner out.  The Republicans can&#039;t even help pick the type of food, or the restaurant, they must pick from the menu offered in a place they don&#039;t even want to be.
 </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This whole thing has a simple analogy &#8211; dinner out.  The Republicans can&#8217;t even help pick the type of food, or the restaurant, they must pick from the menu offered in a place they don&#8217;t even want to be.<br />
 </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Musings, Rants and Links over the 18th Fairway:02/09/2010 by Neo</title>
		<link>http://www.qando.net/?p=7010&#038;cpage=1#comment-27114</link>
		<dc:creator>Neo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 19:03:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qando.net/?p=7010#comment-27114</guid>
		<description>It is looking more and more like the original option of just having the government, that helped create these toxic assets,  merely just buy them all at 100% on the dollar and squirrel them away at the re-governmentized Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, was the better, or at least cheaper, of the possible options.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is looking more and more like the original option of just having the government, that helped create these toxic assets,  merely just buy them all at 100% on the dollar and squirrel them away at the re-governmentized Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, was the better, or at least cheaper, of the possible options.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Time Lapse &#8220;Snowmageddon&#8221; by TomD</title>
		<link>http://www.qando.net/?p=7019&#038;cpage=1#comment-27113</link>
		<dc:creator>TomD</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 19:00:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qando.net/?p=7019#comment-27113</guid>
		<description>&quot;Snowgate&quot; disproves once and for all the myth of Global Warming!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Snowgate&#8221; disproves once and for all the myth of Global Warming!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Destroying The &#8220;Ungovernable&#8221; Canard by Neo</title>
		<link>http://www.qando.net/?p=7023&#038;cpage=1#comment-27111</link>
		<dc:creator>Neo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 18:34:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qando.net/?p=7023#comment-27111</guid>
		<description>The current maneuvering of the White House on health care reform continues the &quot;urge to rule.&quot; Clearly there is no attempt to find consensus or build alliances, but rather to draw the appearance of such and then &quot;spin&quot; the result.
The paradox is that when government is divided, the urge to &quot;buy votes&quot; seems worse.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The current maneuvering of the White House on health care reform continues the &#8220;urge to rule.&#8221; Clearly there is no attempt to find consensus or build alliances, but rather to draw the appearance of such and then &#8220;spin&#8221; the result.<br />
The paradox is that when government is divided, the urge to &#8220;buy votes&#8221; seems worse.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Destroying The &#8220;Ungovernable&#8221; Canard by Destroying The “Ungovernable” Canard &#124; Liberal Whoppers</title>
		<link>http://www.qando.net/?p=7023&#038;cpage=1#comment-27110</link>
		<dc:creator>Destroying The “Ungovernable” Canard &#124; Liberal Whoppers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 18:29:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qando.net/?p=7023#comment-27110</guid>
		<description>[...] more here: Destroying The “Ungovernable” Canard [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] more here: Destroying The “Ungovernable” Canard [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on &#8220;Bi-Partisan Health Care Summit&#8221; Or Political Theater? (Update) by Views of the &#8220;Health Care Reform Summit&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.qando.net/?p=7011&#038;cpage=1#comment-27108</link>
		<dc:creator>Views of the &#8220;Health Care Reform Summit&#8221;</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 18:16:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qando.net/?p=7011#comment-27108</guid>
		<description>[...] Bruce McQuain of QandO sees it as a somewhat different sort of political theater:  After months of behind closed door [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Bruce McQuain of QandO sees it as a somewhat different sort of political theater:  After months of behind closed door [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on &#8220;Bi-Partisan Health Care Summit&#8221; Or Political Theater? (Update) by Dave H</title>
		<link>http://www.qando.net/?p=7011&#038;cpage=1#comment-27107</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave H</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 17:57:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qando.net/?p=7011#comment-27107</guid>
		<description>The liberals dictionary:  &quot;Bipartisanship&quot; = I want you to agree with me.  &quot;Obstructionism&quot; = You want me to agree with you.  Illustration:  &quot;In the spirit of &lt;em&gt;bipartisanship&lt;/em&gt;, we&#039;re asking the Republicans which of the Democratic health care proposals they want to  agree with.  Their insistence on starting over to allow their ideas to be considered is typical Washington &lt;em&gt;obstructionism&lt;/em&gt; from the party of &#039;no&#039;.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The liberals dictionary:  &#8220;Bipartisanship&#8221; = I want you to agree with me.  &#8220;Obstructionism&#8221; = You want me to agree with you.  Illustration:  &#8220;In the spirit of <em>bipartisanship</em>, we&#8217;re asking the Republicans which of the Democratic health care proposals they want to  agree with.  Their insistence on starting over to allow their ideas to be considered is typical Washington <em>obstructionism</em> from the party of &#8216;no&#8217;.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on &#8220;Bi-Partisan Health Care Summit&#8221; Or Political Theater? (Update) by Tonus</title>
		<link>http://www.qando.net/?p=7011&#038;cpage=1#comment-27106</link>
		<dc:creator>Tonus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 17:52:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qando.net/?p=7011#comment-27106</guid>
		<description>Wasn&#039;t Bush pilloried for having a &quot;&lt;em&gt;if you&#039;re not with us, you&#039;re with the terrorists&lt;/em&gt;&quot; approach?  As with so many other things, the reaction to this sort of demagoguery changes drastically when &lt;em&gt;the other guy&lt;/em&gt; says it...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wasn&#8217;t Bush pilloried for having a &#8220;<em>if you&#8217;re not with us, you&#8217;re with the terrorists</em>&#8221; approach?  As with so many other things, the reaction to this sort of demagoguery changes drastically when <em>the other guy</em> says it&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on &#8220;Bi-Partisan Health Care Summit&#8221; Or Political Theater? (Update) by Billy Hollis</title>
		<link>http://www.qando.net/?p=7011&#038;cpage=1#comment-27104</link>
		<dc:creator>Billy Hollis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 17:09:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qando.net/?p=7011#comment-27104</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;
If Republicans prepare for that, they should be in a good position to clearly and articulately explain why their proposals are better for Americans and better for America.
&lt;/blockquote&gt;
The Republicans can explain their proposals till the cows come home, but that does not mean those explanations will ever be heard in any objective retelling from CBS, NBC, ABC, NYT, Washington Post, CNN, LA Times, and certainly not from media outlets such as MSNBC. 

Those outlets will be looking for the soundbite from Obama sounding presidential and concilatory, and will cast any Republican resistance as churlish and partisan. 

I really don&#039;t see any upside for Republicans on this unless they get a quid pro quo just for appearing, namely that the current bill is dead and Obama is willing to start over.

Having the Democrats get to sit in backrooms excluding Republicans for over a year writing a 2700 page bill, and then magnanimously offer to insert a few minor Republican things here and there, is not being bipartisan. It&#039;s playing to a compliant media. From what I&#039;ve heard, even McConnell has figured this out.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>
If Republicans prepare for that, they should be in a good position to clearly and articulately explain why their proposals are better for Americans and better for America.
</p></blockquote>
<p>The Republicans can explain their proposals till the cows come home, but that does not mean those explanations will ever be heard in any objective retelling from CBS, NBC, ABC, NYT, Washington Post, CNN, LA Times, and certainly not from media outlets such as MSNBC. </p>
<p>Those outlets will be looking for the soundbite from Obama sounding presidential and concilatory, and will cast any Republican resistance as churlish and partisan. </p>
<p>I really don&#8217;t see any upside for Republicans on this unless they get a quid pro quo just for appearing, namely that the current bill is dead and Obama is willing to start over.</p>
<p>Having the Democrats get to sit in backrooms excluding Republicans for over a year writing a 2700 page bill, and then magnanimously offer to insert a few minor Republican things here and there, is not being bipartisan. It&#8217;s playing to a compliant media. From what I&#8217;ve heard, even McConnell has figured this out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on New Cold War?  About Those Improving Relations With China &#8230; by Martin McPhillips</title>
		<link>http://www.qando.net/?p=6975&#038;cpage=1#comment-27102</link>
		<dc:creator>Martin McPhillips</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 16:37:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qando.net/?p=6975#comment-27102</guid>
		<description>One of the most amusing things about you, Scott (aside from the fact that without looking at the name it&#039;s almost impossible to tell your comments from Ott Scerb&#039;s), is that of all the things you know almost nothing about, your own field is what you know least about. That&#039;s got to be because there is where your indoctrination is the highest and tightest. So, your arguments, which show cyclical motion but no development, are just as well made by Ott, who actually does a little better than you at getting your core points across.

That brings me to your character, which is just an abyss of deceit and ten other awful things, some of which I&#039;m not sure there are words for, yet.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One of the most amusing things about you, Scott (aside from the fact that without looking at the name it&#8217;s almost impossible to tell your comments from Ott Scerb&#8217;s), is that of all the things you know almost nothing about, your own field is what you know least about. That&#8217;s got to be because there is where your indoctrination is the highest and tightest. So, your arguments, which show cyclical motion but no development, are just as well made by Ott, who actually does a little better than you at getting your core points across.</p>
<p>That brings me to your character, which is just an abyss of deceit and ten other awful things, some of which I&#8217;m not sure there are words for, yet.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on &#8220;Bi-Partisan Health Care Summit&#8221; Or Political Theater? (Update) by timactual</title>
		<link>http://www.qando.net/?p=7011&#038;cpage=1#comment-27100</link>
		<dc:creator>timactual</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 16:17:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qando.net/?p=7011#comment-27100</guid>
		<description>Looker is right, it is theater. Bad theater at that. Predictable plot, predictable uninspired dialogue, shallow and ludicrous characters, bad acting by bad actors, etc. ad nauseum. Instead of the usual television commentators they hould have theatre critics doing the live commentary and post-game analysis and &#039;highlights&#039;. Or comedians. If they had Jon Stewart and Dennis Miller doing the commentary it might be fun to watch. Otherwise, reruns of Gilligan&#039;s Island . 

I</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Looker is right, it is theater. Bad theater at that. Predictable plot, predictable uninspired dialogue, shallow and ludicrous characters, bad acting by bad actors, etc. ad nauseum. Instead of the usual television commentators they hould have theatre critics doing the live commentary and post-game analysis and &#8216;highlights&#8217;. Or comedians. If they had Jon Stewart and Dennis Miller doing the commentary it might be fun to watch. Otherwise, reruns of Gilligan&#8217;s Island . </p>
<p>I</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on &#8220;Bi-Partisan Health Care Summit&#8221; Or Political Theater? (Update) by timactual</title>
		<link>http://www.qando.net/?p=7011&#038;cpage=1#comment-27099</link>
		<dc:creator>timactual</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 16:08:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qando.net/?p=7011#comment-27099</guid>
		<description>After a year of discussions, arguments, speeches, meetings, etc. the problem is now going to be solved by a couple of hours of a staged and scripted live television spectacle. 

Sure, go for it you Republicans! What could go wrong?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>After a year of discussions, arguments, speeches, meetings, etc. the problem is now going to be solved by a couple of hours of a staged and scripted live television spectacle. </p>
<p>Sure, go for it you Republicans! What could go wrong?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Counting Unemployment by Dale Franks</title>
		<link>http://www.qando.net/?p=7002&#038;cpage=1#comment-27098</link>
		<dc:creator>Dale Franks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 16:04:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qando.net/?p=7002#comment-27098</guid>
		<description>
You misunderstand my point.
In normal economic conditions, these people DO participate in the labor force. So my quibble isn&#039;t that the labor force is evaporating according to the BLS definition of the labor force. My quibble is with the definition of the labor force.
The decline in the labor force is essentially people who would have a job if it was available. So, magically removing them from the labor force simply hides real unemployment.
The real question is not haw many people are participating in the labor force right now. It&#039;s how many people normally participate in the labor force.
Theoretically, according to the BLS definition, you could lose 9 million payroll jobs, and 9 million people could become discouraged and drop out of the labor force. In that case, the unemployment rate would remain essentially unchanged. But, of course, that can&#039;t possibly be an accurate measure of the unemployment rate, can it?
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You misunderstand my point.<br />
In normal economic conditions, these people DO participate in the labor force. So my quibble isn&#8217;t that the labor force is evaporating according to the BLS definition of the labor force. My quibble is with the definition of the labor force.<br />
The decline in the labor force is essentially people who would have a job if it was available. So, magically removing them from the labor force simply hides real unemployment.<br />
The real question is not haw many people are participating in the labor force right now. It&#8217;s how many people normally participate in the labor force.<br />
Theoretically, according to the BLS definition, you could lose 9 million payroll jobs, and 9 million people could become discouraged and drop out of the labor force. In that case, the unemployment rate would remain essentially unchanged. But, of course, that can&#8217;t possibly be an accurate measure of the unemployment rate, can it?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on &#8220;Bi-Partisan Health Care Summit&#8221; Or Political Theater? (Update) by timactual</title>
		<link>http://www.qando.net/?p=7011&#038;cpage=1#comment-27097</link>
		<dc:creator>timactual</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 16:02:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qando.net/?p=7011#comment-27097</guid>
		<description>&quot; If they get someone who knows the Republican proposals well enough...&quot;

Ay, there&#039;s the rub.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220; If they get someone who knows the Republican proposals well enough&#8230;&#8221;</p>
<p>Ay, there&#8217;s the rub.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Musings, Rants and Links over the 18th Fairway:02/09/2010 by Sharpshooter</title>
		<link>http://www.qando.net/?p=7010&#038;cpage=1#comment-27096</link>
		<dc:creator>Sharpshooter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 15:46:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qando.net/?p=7010#comment-27096</guid>
		<description>Oh...POOP!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh&#8230;POOP!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Musings, Rants and Links over the 18th Fairway:02/09/2010 by Sharpshooter</title>
		<link>http://www.qando.net/?p=7010&#038;cpage=1#comment-27095</link>
		<dc:creator>Sharpshooter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 15:45:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qando.net/?p=7010#comment-27095</guid>
		<description>&lt;!-- F: NAV --&gt; &lt;!-- B: CONTENT --&gt; &lt;!-- B: TOP MODULE --&gt;
&lt;a href=&quot;http://blogs.investors.com/capitalhill&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;






// &lt;![CDATA[
if (typeof ord==&#039;undefined&#039;) {ord=Math.random()*10000000000000000;}
document.write(&#039;&#039;);
if (navigator.userAgent.indexOf(&quot;Gecko&quot;)==-1)
{document.write(&#039;&#039;);
}
document.write(&#039;&#039;);
]]&gt;
&lt;a href=&quot;http://ad.doubleclick.net/jump/ibd.capitalhill/;pos=sponsorbtn1;tile=2;sz=130x30;ord=123456789?&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;



&lt;!-- FINISH: TOP MODULE --&gt; &lt;!-- BREADCRUMB

END BREADCRUMB  --&gt;
&lt;a href=&quot;http://blogs.investors.com/capitalhill/index.php/home/35-politics/1360-zero-private-sector-jobs-created-since-1998&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt; Zero Private-Sector Jobs Created Since 1998&lt;/a&gt;
IOW, all the jobs created from 1998 to about 1007 were dumped in the past 2 1/2 years...roughly, since the Dem&#039;s regained Congress.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- F: NAV --> <!-- B: CONTENT --> <!-- B: TOP MODULE --><br />
<a href="http://blogs.investors.com/capitalhill" rel="nofollow"></a></p>
<p>// &lt;![CDATA[<br />
if (typeof ord==&#039;undefined&#039;) {ord=Math.random()*10000000000000000;}<br />
document.write(&#039;');<br />
if (navigator.userAgent.indexOf("Gecko")==-1)<br />
{document.write('');<br />
}<br />
document.write('');<br />
]]&gt;<br />
<a href="http://ad.doubleclick.net/jump/ibd.capitalhill/;pos=sponsorbtn1;tile=2;sz=130x30;ord=123456789?" rel="nofollow"></a></p>
<p><!-- FINISH: TOP MODULE --> &lt;!&#8211; BREADCRUMB</p>
<p>END BREADCRUMB  &#8211;&gt;<br />
<a href="http://blogs.investors.com/capitalhill/index.php/home/35-politics/1360-zero-private-sector-jobs-created-since-1998" rel="nofollow"> Zero Private-Sector Jobs Created Since 1998</a><br />
IOW, all the jobs created from 1998 to about 1007 were dumped in the past 2 1/2 years&#8230;roughly, since the Dem&#8217;s regained Congress.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Counting Unemployment by Scott</title>
		<link>http://www.qando.net/?p=7002&#038;cpage=1#comment-27094</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 15:36:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qando.net/?p=7002#comment-27094</guid>
		<description>Darn it, it dropped part of my statement, the second paragraph should start,
If you&#039;ll look at the breakdowns for the participation rates (Men 16 yrs and Older, Men 20 yrs and Older, ...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Darn it, it dropped part of my statement, the second paragraph should start,<br />
If you&#8217;ll look at the breakdowns for the participation rates (Men 16 yrs and Older, Men 20 yrs and Older, &#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Counting Unemployment by Scott</title>
		<link>http://www.qando.net/?p=7002&#038;cpage=1#comment-27093</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 15:34:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qando.net/?p=7002#comment-27093</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t think you&#039;ve got a good enough reason not to trust their 64.6% Participation rate.  There is more to reducing that number than retirees.  The participation rate starts at 16 years of age and goes up from there.
Women 16 and Older, Women 20 and Older, and Both 16-19) you&#039;ll see that there has been a very significant drop in the workforce participation of of 16 to 19 year olds, from 48.2 % in Jan of 2000 to 32.4% in Jan of 2010.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t think you&#8217;ve got a good enough reason not to trust their 64.6% Participation rate.  There is more to reducing that number than retirees.  The participation rate starts at 16 years of age and goes up from there.<br />
Women 16 and Older, Women 20 and Older, and Both 16-19) you&#8217;ll see that there has been a very significant drop in the workforce participation of of 16 to 19 year olds, from 48.2 % in Jan of 2000 to 32.4% in Jan of 2010.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Counting Unemployment by docjim505</title>
		<link>http://www.qando.net/?p=7002&#038;cpage=1#comment-27092</link>
		<dc:creator>docjim505</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 15:32:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qando.net/?p=7002#comment-27092</guid>
		<description>Through this in with that whole &quot;deficit of trust&quot; meme.  I know that politicians lie and cheat and steal, but it seems that we&#039;ve been getting a good, hard look at just &lt;em&gt;how much&lt;/em&gt; they do it over the past few years.  What DOESN&#039;T the government lie about?  What numbers DOESN&#039;T the government twist, cook, or flat make up?

&lt;em&gt;But actually, he thought as he re-adjusted the Ministry of Plenty&#039;s figures, it was not even forgery. It was merely the substitution of one piece of nonsense for another. Most of the material that you were dealing with had no connexion with anything in the real world, not even the kind of connexion that is contained in a direct lie. Statistics were just as much a fantasy in their original version as in their rectified version. A great deal of the time you were expected to make them up out of your head. For example, the Ministry of Plenty&#039;s forecast had estimated the output of boots for the quarter at one-hundred-and-forty-five million pairs. The actual output was given as sixty-two millions. Winston, however, in rewriting the forecast, marked the figure down to fifty-seven millions, so as to allow for the usual claim that the quota had been overfulfilled. In any case, sixty-two millions was no nearer the truth than fifty-seven millions, or than one-hundred-and-forty-five millions. Very likely no boots had been produced at all. Likelier still, nobody knew how many had been produced, much less cared. All one knew was that every quarter astronomical numbers of boots were produced on paper, while perhaps half the population of Oceania went barefoot. And so it was with every class of recorded fact, great or small. Everything faded away into a shadow-world in which, finally, even the date of the year had become uncertain.
&lt;/em&gt;
George Orwell
&lt;em&gt;1984&lt;/em&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Through this in with that whole &#8220;deficit of trust&#8221; meme.  I know that politicians lie and cheat and steal, but it seems that we&#8217;ve been getting a good, hard look at just <em>how much</em> they do it over the past few years.  What DOESN&#8217;T the government lie about?  What numbers DOESN&#8217;T the government twist, cook, or flat make up?</p>
<p><em>But actually, he thought as he re-adjusted the Ministry of Plenty&#8217;s figures, it was not even forgery. It was merely the substitution of one piece of nonsense for another. Most of the material that you were dealing with had no connexion with anything in the real world, not even the kind of connexion that is contained in a direct lie. Statistics were just as much a fantasy in their original version as in their rectified version. A great deal of the time you were expected to make them up out of your head. For example, the Ministry of Plenty&#8217;s forecast had estimated the output of boots for the quarter at one-hundred-and-forty-five million pairs. The actual output was given as sixty-two millions. Winston, however, in rewriting the forecast, marked the figure down to fifty-seven millions, so as to allow for the usual claim that the quota had been overfulfilled. In any case, sixty-two millions was no nearer the truth than fifty-seven millions, or than one-hundred-and-forty-five millions. Very likely no boots had been produced at all. Likelier still, nobody knew how many had been produced, much less cared. All one knew was that every quarter astronomical numbers of boots were produced on paper, while perhaps half the population of Oceania went barefoot. And so it was with every class of recorded fact, great or small. Everything faded away into a shadow-world in which, finally, even the date of the year had become uncertain.<br />
</em><br />
George Orwell<br />
<em>1984</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on &#8220;Bi-Partisan Health Care Summit&#8221; Or Political Theater? (Update) by looker</title>
		<link>http://www.qando.net/?p=7011&#038;cpage=1#comment-27091</link>
		<dc:creator>looker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 15:26:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qando.net/?p=7011#comment-27091</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s theater, and the media is framing it properly for the Democrats.  Now, suddenly, they no longer have a bullet proof ability to prevent a filibuster, this one magic extra vote that allows for things to be delayed, not stopped, requires that the Democrats suddenly listen to the Republicans (tacit admission that was NOT a requirement at all before, but move along folks nothing to see, the body is gone....).
 
So NOW, when they continue to flail ineffectively the fact that they can accomplish nothing, will be only because Scott Brown, 41&#039;st vote, and the mere possibility of filibuster, is stopping them from all the good and wonderful legislation they were going to pass.   Now we can move on to a constantly framed situation where anytime they get nothing done, Republican input, argument or not, it&#039;s the Republican&#039;s fault.  Don&#039;t bother to consider the implications of how a 41st vote stopped them, don&#039;t bother to consider the effectively stated sentiment that, like Red China, it would really be better if we only had ONE party.
 
And the media is right there with their megaphone parroting all of it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s theater, and the media is framing it properly for the Democrats.  Now, suddenly, they no longer have a bullet proof ability to prevent a filibuster, this one magic extra vote that allows for things to be delayed, not stopped, requires that the Democrats suddenly listen to the Republicans (tacit admission that was NOT a requirement at all before, but move along folks nothing to see, the body is gone&#8230;.).<br />
<br />
So NOW, when they continue to flail ineffectively the fact that they can accomplish nothing, will be only because Scott Brown, 41&#8217;st vote, and the mere possibility of filibuster, is stopping them from all the good and wonderful legislation they were going to pass.   Now we can move on to a constantly framed situation where anytime they get nothing done, Republican input, argument or not, it&#8217;s the Republican&#8217;s fault.  Don&#8217;t bother to consider the implications of how a 41st vote stopped them, don&#8217;t bother to consider the effectively stated sentiment that, like Red China, it would really be better if we only had ONE party.<br />
<br />
And the media is right there with their megaphone parroting all of it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on &#8220;Bi-Partisan Health Care Summit&#8221; Or Political Theater? (Update) by Neo</title>
		<link>http://www.qando.net/?p=7011&#038;cpage=1#comment-27090</link>
		<dc:creator>Neo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 15:14:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qando.net/?p=7011#comment-27090</guid>
		<description>Coming on the heels of ...
&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&quot;Politically motivated criticism and unfounded fear-mongering only serve the goals of al-Qaeda.&quot;&lt;/strong&gt; -- &lt;a href=&quot;http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2010/02/opposing-view-we-need-no-lectures.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;John Brennan&lt;/a&gt; -- Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism&lt;/blockquote&gt;
If the Bush Administration had said this the “Press Corpse” would have laugh out loud.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Coming on the heels of &#8230;</p>
<blockquote><p><strong>&#8220;Politically motivated criticism and unfounded fear-mongering only serve the goals of al-Qaeda.&#8221;</strong> &#8212; <a href="http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2010/02/opposing-view-we-need-no-lectures.html" rel="nofollow">John Brennan</a> &#8212; Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism</p></blockquote>
<p>If the Bush Administration had said this the “Press Corpse” would have laugh out loud.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on &#8220;Bi-Partisan Health Care Summit&#8221; Or Political Theater? (Update) by docjim505</title>
		<link>http://www.qando.net/?p=7011&#038;cpage=1#comment-27089</link>
		<dc:creator>docjim505</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 14:58:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qando.net/?p=7011#comment-27089</guid>
		<description>The GOP is playing against a stacked deck (not that their natural stupidity isn&#039;t plenty disadvantage enough): MiniTru will dutifully caste ANYTHING they do as obstructionist, partisan, and just downright mean.  After all, this has been the meme since Porkulus was up for debate; why should MiniTru start telling the truth now?

It would be nice to see the GOP leaders hold their own primetime presser to explain how they&#039;ve been systematically cut out of negotiations from the beginning, how their own proposals and amendments have never seen the light of day, and how they have made their own proposals for a bipartisan &quot;summit&quot;.  However, I&#039;m not sure they&#039;d get the air time, and even if they did, who the hell wants to listen to Mitch McConnell, chief loser in a pack of losers?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The GOP is playing against a stacked deck (not that their natural stupidity isn&#8217;t plenty disadvantage enough): MiniTru will dutifully caste ANYTHING they do as obstructionist, partisan, and just downright mean.  After all, this has been the meme since Porkulus was up for debate; why should MiniTru start telling the truth now?</p>
<p>It would be nice to see the GOP leaders hold their own primetime presser to explain how they&#8217;ve been systematically cut out of negotiations from the beginning, how their own proposals and amendments have never seen the light of day, and how they have made their own proposals for a bipartisan &#8220;summit&#8221;.  However, I&#8217;m not sure they&#8217;d get the air time, and even if they did, who the hell wants to listen to Mitch McConnell, chief loser in a pack of losers?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Bernanke’s Plan To Drain The Monetary Swamp by kyle8</title>
		<link>http://www.qando.net/?p=6993&#038;cpage=1#comment-27087</link>
		<dc:creator>kyle8</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 14:39:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qando.net/?p=6993#comment-27087</guid>
		<description>It is not going to work, well, that is my vote, it will fail.  Whether it fails up or down, (inflation or deflation) I can&#039;t tell, but I am tending toward inflation.
Remember that the 1970&#039;s proved that you could have low and even negative growth along with high inflation. It is possible.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is not going to work, well, that is my vote, it will fail.  Whether it fails up or down, (inflation or deflation) I can&#8217;t tell, but I am tending toward inflation.<br />
Remember that the 1970&#8217;s proved that you could have low and even negative growth along with high inflation. It is possible.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Musings, Rants and Links over the 18th Fairway:02/09/2010 by Tonus</title>
		<link>http://www.qando.net/?p=7010&#038;cpage=1#comment-27086</link>
		<dc:creator>Tonus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 14:38:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qando.net/?p=7010#comment-27086</guid>
		<description>Actually, now that I look at it again, the lines in the second chart &lt;strong&gt;do&lt;/strong&gt; match, but like the first one, the current trend is much worse.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually, now that I look at it again, the lines in the second chart <strong>do</strong> match, but like the first one, the current trend is much worse.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Musings, Rants and Links over the 18th Fairway:02/09/2010 by Tonus</title>
		<link>http://www.qando.net/?p=7010&#038;cpage=1#comment-27085</link>
		<dc:creator>Tonus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 14:36:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qando.net/?p=7010#comment-27085</guid>
		<description>Potentially good news: from the first chart, it seems as if we may have hit the bottom of the jobless curve.  If it continues to mimic the 2001 curve, employment should stabilize for a few months and then finally begin to increase.
 
Potentially bad news: that second chart looks very bad.  That trend line doesn&#039;t match the 2001 line at all, and I wonder how much of an effect it will have on a recovery.  It&#039;s interesting to note that the highest point on it is in the mid-80s.  You can see one of the reasons why Reagan crushed Mondale in the 1984 election.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Potentially good news: from the first chart, it seems as if we may have hit the bottom of the jobless curve.  If it continues to mimic the 2001 curve, employment should stabilize for a few months and then finally begin to increase.<br />
<br />
Potentially bad news: that second chart looks very bad.  That trend line doesn&#8217;t match the 2001 line at all, and I wonder how much of an effect it will have on a recovery.  It&#8217;s interesting to note that the highest point on it is in the mid-80s.  You can see one of the reasons why Reagan crushed Mondale in the 1984 election.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on &#8220;Bi-Partisan Health Care Summit&#8221; Or Political Theater? (Update) by kyle8</title>
		<link>http://www.qando.net/?p=7011&#038;cpage=1#comment-27084</link>
		<dc:creator>kyle8</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 14:33:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qando.net/?p=7011#comment-27084</guid>
		<description>Obama has one card trick he plays over and over again, (1) He says something vaguely conciliatory, (2) he talks about bi-partisanship, (3) then he bashes Republicans in the most vile and hateful way.
I hope they don&#039;t fall for that crap again.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Obama has one card trick he plays over and over again, (1) He says something vaguely conciliatory, (2) he talks about bi-partisanship, (3) then he bashes Republicans in the most vile and hateful way.<br />
I hope they don&#8217;t fall for that crap again.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on &#8220;Bi-Partisan Health Care Summit&#8221; Or Political Theater? (Update) by Scott Jacobs</title>
		<link>http://www.qando.net/?p=7011&#038;cpage=1#comment-27083</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott Jacobs</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 14:33:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qando.net/?p=7011#comment-27083</guid>
		<description>Someone like a Reagan (&quot;I paid for this microphone&quot;) or a Scott Brown (&quot;Its the people&#039;s seat&quot;) is needed.
 
Sadly, we&#039;ll get someone who will say nothing, will nod their head, and screw it all up.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Someone like a Reagan (&#8220;I paid for this microphone&#8221;) or a Scott Brown (&#8220;Its the people&#8217;s seat&#8221;) is needed.<br />
<br />
Sadly, we&#8217;ll get someone who will say nothing, will nod their head, and screw it all up.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on &#8220;Bi-Partisan Health Care Summit&#8221; Or Political Theater? (Update) by Scott Jacobs</title>
		<link>http://www.qando.net/?p=7011&#038;cpage=1#comment-27082</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott Jacobs</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 14:31:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qando.net/?p=7011#comment-27082</guid>
		<description>To that letter in response from the White House, I would send yet another letter.  It would read, in its entirety, &quot;Yes, that&#039;s very nice...  Were you going to actually address the points and questions we raised, or should we take your non-answer as &lt;em&gt;the&lt;/em&gt; answer?&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To that letter in response from the White House, I would send yet another letter.  It would read, in its entirety, &#8220;Yes, that&#8217;s very nice&#8230;  Were you going to actually address the points and questions we raised, or should we take your non-answer as <em>the</em> answer?&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Musings, Rants and Links over the 18th Fairway:02/09/2010 by kyle8</title>
		<link>http://www.qando.net/?p=7010&#038;cpage=1#comment-27081</link>
		<dc:creator>kyle8</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 14:29:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qando.net/?p=7010#comment-27081</guid>
		<description>I know that Portugal Ireland Greece and Spain are called the PIGS, but you had two I&#039;s, which nation is the second I ?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I know that Portugal Ireland Greece and Spain are called the PIGS, but you had two I&#8217;s, which nation is the second I ?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Musings, Rants and Links over the 18th Fairway:02/09/2010 by Musings, Rants and Links over the 18th Fairway:02/09/2010 &#124; Liberal Whoppers</title>
		<link>http://www.qando.net/?p=7010&#038;cpage=1#comment-27080</link>
		<dc:creator>Musings, Rants and Links over the 18th Fairway:02/09/2010 &#124; Liberal Whoppers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 14:26:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qando.net/?p=7010#comment-27080</guid>
		<description>[...] original here: Musings, Rants and Links over the 18th Fairway:02/09/2010 [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] original here: Musings, Rants and Links over the 18th Fairway:02/09/2010 [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
