SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: goldworldnet who wrote (404082)1/14/2011 3:10:20 AM
From: Jorj X Mckie9 Recommendations  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 793990
 
Lawmakers begin to rally for bipartisan seating plan

news.yahoo.com

I love the appeals for bipartisanship now that the democrats can't shove crappy legislation down our throat. I totally object to all of the symbolic demonstrations of bipartisanship. They are manipulative attempts to make the democrats look like they are compromising. They should have compromised once or twice in the past two years. They should have included Republicans in the discussions before the legislation was a fete accompli.

As Obama pointed out, we are enemies. Sun Tzu would suggest that we should not do what our enemy wants us to do. Screw symbolic bipartisan BS.


Washington is buzzing today over a proposal to shake up tradition and get members of Congress to adopt a bipartisan seating plan for the upcoming State of the Union address.
Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) is leading the charge to get members of opposite parties to sit together in a symbolic show of unity during the president's Jan. 25 speech -- and the White House is on board:
"Maybe not having a physical aisle separate us would be a good thing as we talk about the state of our union," White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said Thursday in response to a question about Udall's proposal. Traditionally, each party sits together separated by the House aisle during the president's speech.
[Video: Roadblock for Obamacare repeal effort]
Now, the new proposal is gaining steam just one day after Barack Obama called for the nation to come together and bridge partisan divides in the wake of the Tucson, Ariz. shooting.
Udall released a letter Wednesday proposing the idea to his colleagues, saying "beyond custom, there is no rule or reason that on this night we should emphasize divided government, separated by party, instead of being seen united as a country." The seating arrangement was first floated this week by the think tank Third Way, which penned a letter to congressional leaders urging this and other unifying actions.
An aide with Udall's office told The Ticket that as of 3:30 pm Thursday, eight senators and four House members had signed on to the letter. And it's not only Democrats voicing support -- Republican Sens. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and John McCain (Ariz.) both signed the proposal, Udall's office confirmed.
[Related: Obama takes opportunity Palin missed]
Other members also unofficially expressed support Thursday. Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) told The Plum Line's Greg Sargent: "This would be a great way to start off the new session in a bipartisan way following up on the cooperation during the lame duck and the President's speech urging all Americans to come together."
But amid all this unity and symbolism, Dan Amira argues over at Daily Intel that changing the seating arrangement would actually do a disservice to the American people:
A neat separation of the parties allows the American people to see, in real time, their positions on the president's agenda and the issues of the day. It's actually very informative and helpful to be able to easily assess which proposals the Republicans and Democrats support, respectively, through the decision to applaud. It also allows us to identify the few party-bucking independent thinkers who, every so often, stand up to clap while the rest of their colleagues remain seated.
(Photo of Congress at the 2009 State of the Union: AP/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)
Other popular Yahoo! stories:
• The 10 best values in public colleges
• When to take a 'technology detox'
• Golden-voiced homeless man going to rehab



To: goldworldnet who wrote (404082)1/14/2011 3:58:01 AM
From: LindyBill  Respond to of 793990
 
28% of affected homeowners are age 50 and up

That sounds more realistic. Since 28% of homeowners are probably 50 and up.