wnyc.org / 93.9fm / am 820

Comments

• [1] Sara Cone from Columbia University January 13, 2009 - 10:31AM

  Thank you Brian for having the courage to have Steve Israel on as your guest, Steve Israel along with Senator Schumer participated in the Support Israel and Zionism Rally this past weekend. I support his candidacy for Hilary's Senate seat.

  Thank you!

  
  
• [2] Susan January 13, 2009 - 10:33AM

  Haven't we proven that just throwing money doesn't work? The banks are sitting on hundreds of billions of our money, lending nothing and continuing to pay out huge bonuses to the chinless aristocrats who caused this debacle, while the (relatively) modest bailout to the auto industry cracks down on the workers to bring labor in line with third world wages and benefits. We should not be terrorized again into giving up rational decision-making. How much per person is this new bailout? By my back-of-the-envelope calculation, it's $2500 for every man, woman, and child in the country. If this were passed on directly to the people in the form of vouchers with expiration dates that must be spent in the US, I suspect it would be a better, faster stimulus than filtering it through the corrupt revolving door government and private sectors that will skim off much of the proposed money. The lobbyists and lawyers are already shoving up to the trough. If you need evidence of another boondoggle in the making, observe what has happened to the $trillion given to the banks, AIG, etc. They just lined their pockets, while arrogantly refusing (with the complicity of Treasury, Paulson, et al.) to account for their take. No more “emergency” bailouts without thoughtful consideration (and hearings) and built-in accountability with teeth. Not one more cent should be authorized until there is a full accounting of what has already been paid out and there is an ironclad oversight system in place. ENOUGH!

  
  
• [3] seth from Long Island January 13, 2009 - 10:36AM

  Rep Israel and the rest of the members of NY's congressional delegation are head and shoulders more qualified than Caroline Kennedy to be a US senator.

  Hopefully Gov Patterson will have the guts to pick competence (Rep Israel or another one of his colleagues from the NY delegation) over celebrity (Caroline Kennedy).

  I'm sure Caroline Kennedy's heart is in the right place, but NY needs someone who can hit the ground running like Rep Israel.

  
  
• [4] Daniel Simon from NYC January 13, 2009 - 10:37AM

  I'd just like to point out in reference to the first comment that one can support Israel and still oppose the present military operation as not being in Israel's best interests. It's no different than opposing Bush and being pro-American.

  People may have different opinions as to what is or is not in a nation's best interest. That's no reason to tag people who disagree with those assessments as pro- or anti- that nation.

  
  
• [5] Erika Muller from NYC January 13, 2009 - 10:38AM

  I went all through school with Steve Israel and I know he will be an excellent choice as Senator.

  I wish him the best!

  
  
• [6] Tom from Toronto January 13, 2009 - 10:41AM

  Why wasn't Govenor Patterson ever brought up on drug charges? I guess its one rule for the rich and well connected, and another for the rest of us bums.

  To hear him fawning over Israel the other day was pathetic.

  
  
• [7] ann from nyc January 13, 2009 - 10:43AM

  Once again the politicians are lining their friends pockets while duping the public and NO ONE is accountable. TARP has consolidated the Banking industry. We need old-fashioned small banking where mortgages are NOT SECURITIZED into bits,and where you can negotiate with a banker in your own community who holds your mortgage.

  
  
• [8] caroline from Manhattan January 13, 2009 - 10:43AM

  Third world wages and benefits for auto workers? Are you kidding me? That caller was right about accounting for the TARP $ but the autoworkers??? Since when is $80,000 third world???

  
  
• [9] John Celardo from Fanwood, NJ January 13, 2009 - 10:45AM

  Paulson got free reign to spend the money as he saw fit. At first I thought he was the right guy to do the job, but as time passed, his initial forceful demeanor disappeared, and he spread the cash around to organizations that were unreliable.

  
  
• [10] William O'Leary from EAstchester, NY January 13, 2009 - 10:46AM

  I am against TARP 2 plans for bailing out homeowners facing foreclosure carte blanche. I do not accept the argument that all these people were innocents, duped by unscrupulous mortgage brokers. I believe far more were simply living beyond their means and it has caught up with them. Yet, I do see the need to act to forestall economic disaster. Therefore, I'd suggest that some form of "payback" be attached to any homeowner's bailout, perhaps through an agreement to take a reduced social security payment upon retirement.

  
  
• [11] Susan from Kingston, New York January 13, 2009 - 10:46AM

  I don't think that we need another Senator in lock stop with the interests of the State of Israel. We need a senator that represents all of the people of New York State. Support of the State of Israel should have nothing to do the choice of a Senator. Many of us have very different opinions about what's wrong with US policy towards the Middle East.

  
  
• [12] Peter from Sunset Park January 13, 2009 - 11:29AM

  Wow,

  Israel sure does seem to get drawn into many conversations around here. I guess I will follow the example being set here today and the interests of the listeners.

  Brian, check out this link detailing how the elected Palestinian government is officially calling on Palestinian children to be used as human shields. Its one thing for Zev Chafets to say it, but it is something else when you see and hear Palestinian officials saying it on official Palestinian government TV.

  http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-+Obstacle+to+Peace/Hamas+war+against+Israel/Hamas+exploitation+of+civilians+as+human+shields+-+Photographic+evidence.htm

  
  
• [13] mc from Brooklyn January 13, 2009 - 11:31AM

  seth;

  I agree. All other candidates better postioned to hit the ground running than C. Kennedy.

  
  
• [14] Peter from Sunset Park January 13, 2009 - 11:36AM

  Isn't Kennedy just the Sarah Palin of the left? Oh wait, Palin actually has been elected to public office.

  BTW - I am no Palin supporter, it just makes no sense to me why Democrats aren't enraged over liberal loyalty being handed such an important position.

  Thanks for the segment Brian, good stuff.

  
  
• [15] Peter from Sunset Park January 13, 2009 - 11:40AM

  of course, that should have read, "liberal royalty", but loyalty works too.

  
  
• [16] Susan from Kingston, New York January 13, 2009 - 11:41AM

  Peter:

  Kennedy=Palin, just on the left is way off the mark. Kennedy has a hell of a lot more class. I find your comparison extremely insulting!

  
  
• [17] seth from Long Island January 13, 2009 - 11:52AM

  Caroline Kennedy vs Sarah Palin

  Caroline Kennedy has infinitely more gravitas than Sarah Palin.

  Caroline Kennedy is vastly unqualified to be a senator in the same way Sarah Palin was vastly unqualified to be VP.

  
  
• [18] Peter from Sunset Park January 13, 2009 - 11:54AM

  I wasn't aware that liberal "class" qualified one to be appointed Senator.

  If Patterson does so, he will be selling the seat Chicago style. He will get paid with campaign contributions and help getting elected himself.

  New York is the new Chicago, just with class. oh brother.

  
  
• [19] seth from Long Island January 13, 2009 - 12:07PM

  If Patterson picks Caroline Kennedy it would be for all the wrong reasons:

  She has instant name recognition and she can raise millions of dollars.

  On a personal level, I find Caroline Kennedy much more likable than Sarah Palin. I still strongly prefer Patterson pick someone other than Caroline to fill Hill's senate seat.

  Sarah Palin wears her ignorance with a badge of honor and quoted anti-semite Westbrook Pegler at her convention speech. "We grow good people in our small towns" is Pegler's line.

  Pegler also wrote that he hoped FDR and RFK would both be assassinated.

  
  
• [20] Peter from Sunset Park January 13, 2009 - 12:11PM

  Caroline Kennedy is very likable. She would be great to drink tea with and count her money. But Senator, what a crime.

  
  
• [21] seth from Long Island January 13, 2009 - 12:15PM

  When I wrote that Caroline Kennedy had more gravitas than Sarah Palin, it had nothing at all to do with class.

  I think Caroline has more gravitas than Palin because Palin revealed a snarling, bullying, demogogic side to her personality during the campaign. Palin's bullying, snarling persona was best demonstrated in her nauseating convention speech.

  
  
• [22] mc from Brooklyn January 13, 2009 - 12:19PM

  I think "class" is in the eye of the beholder. If you like Kennedy she has "class." If you don't like Palin she doesn't. Both are unprepared for different reasons. Sarah Palin was totally our of her depth when talking about the issues. Caroline Kennedy's stance on issues is mostly unknown because she has been so disengaged up to now. Bottom line, Palin held elective office and was engaged but was ignorant. Kennedy has never even held a full time job and was not engaged until she jumped on the Obama bandwagon earlier this year. Both are bad choices.

  
  
• [23] seth from Long Island January 13, 2009 - 12:34PM

  mc ,

  I respectfully disagree with your assertion that class is in the eye of the beholder.

  I think any politician who refers to his/her opponent in terms of ridicule or sarcasm has zero class. To me, Palin and Giuliani have zero class because their speeches ridiculed Obama. They also ridiculed community organizers. The lines where Palin and Giuliani drew roars of laughter from the convention audience with their sarcastic references to Obama marked one of the lowest points of the campaign for me.

  
  
• [24] mc from Brooklyn January 13, 2009 - 12:40PM

  seth,

  I think that was probably a response to all of the fawning that was going on during the Dem convention about community organizing and also the unfortunate slip Obama had (which I think was unintentional, but not apologized for) when he said he thought she was the mayor of "Wasilly" or something. Look, I am not a supporter of Palin, but I think that the emotional response that either side draws in speeches and conventions is really subjective. I prefer to look at what candidates have done in office and what they say they will do and how fluent they are on the issues. Sarah Palin and Caroline Kennedy both come up short for me. That's enough.

  
  
• [25] Peter from Sunset Park January 13, 2009 - 12:45PM

  Seth,

  Appointing Kennedy because she has deep pockets is the greatest ridicule of all.

  New York – the new Chicago

  
  
• [26] seth from Long Island January 13, 2009 - 12:53PM

  mc,

  I prefer politicians who use their speeches to appeal to the better angels of our nature rather than appeal to the worst aspects of our nature.

  Agree with you that Palin and Kennedy were both unprepared and unqualified for the Vice Presidency and the US Senate.

  Because I don't drink beer, I'll substitute "who would you rather have dinner with?" In a heartbeat, my answer would be Caroline Kennedy.

  
  
• [27] seth from Long Island January 13, 2009 - 01:09PM

  Peter,

  I agree with you, but unfortunately most politicians are incredibly shortsighted. Like the saying goes "money talks..."

  I'm keeping my fingers crossed that Patterson does not appoint Caroline, but I'm not confident he can resist the temptation of her extremely deep pockets.

  
  
• [28] Peter from Sunset Park January 13, 2009 - 02:10PM

  Yeah Seth,

  My fingers are crossed too. I said a few weeks ago on these boards that the Chicago governor wasn't acting much different then anyone else. Paterson proves that just by considering this senate seat buyout.

  
  
• [29] mc from Brooklyn January 13, 2009 - 02:15PM

  seth,

  Oh, I don't know. I think either one might be an amusing dinner companion ;-)

  Re: Better angels and worst aspects: just speaking as a devil's advocate, Palin made the point that a mayor has "actual responsibilities" to quote her. Now, I happen to think that community organizers have responsibilities too, but they don't have to submit a balanced public budget or do a lot of other things that an elected executive has to do. Again, just playing devil's advocate. I think the reason we all felt such distaste for her speech was that we see value in community organizing and we supported Obama and we didn't like seeing either one attacked. By the same token, supporters of Palin and McCain probably didn't appreciate the "bimbo alert" and charges of senility put out by Barack's supporters.

  
  
• [30] seth from Long Island January 13, 2009 - 02:59PM

  mc,

  For me, the most offensive line in Palin's convention speech was "we grow good people in our small towns". I don't think small towns have a monopoly on producing citizens with high moral character.

  I think SF, NY, LA, Chicago, Newark, Detroit, Cleveland, and Wash DC grow plenty of good people. I didn't accuse of McCain of being senile, but I thought and still believe that he was too old to be President. I think age is a valid issue in a campaign because I want a President who has the physical stamina and mental acuity to do the job.

  I rejected bimbo alert charges against Palin, but I think it's pretty clear that her selection was based in part on her alleged sex appeal.

  
  
• [31] seth from Long Island January 13, 2009 - 03:03PM

  Peter,

  It won't ever happen, but I'd prefer these open Sen seats be filled by people chosen in special elections. There's too much temptation on the part of any governor to fill the post with someone based on political considerations.

  
  
• [32] mc from Brooklyn January 13, 2009 - 03:11PM

  seth,

  Again, perception. Good people are grown in small towns as they are in big cities and in jungles and deserts. There are probably some in the convention you are talking about that get tired of the "liberal elite" talking about the "flyover zone." That is the flip side of "growing good people in small towns."

  I am not accusing you, seth, of saying that McCain is senile or that Palin is a bimbo. I am saying is that it was part of the chatter coming from Barack supporters and that some of the people on the other side were probably reacting to it during her speech.

  Palin's selection was, along with a lot of other things that happened in '08 a grave setback for women in politics.

  
  
• [33] seth from Long Island January 13, 2009 - 03:34PM

  mc,

  I wish we had a better caliber of candidate who would chastise his supporters whenever they crossed the line and denounced categories of other people with sweeping generalizations.

  There are great people, great communities, great institutions and organizations in all 50 states. I wish there could be a moratorium on the use of phrases like "flyover country", SF Democrat, and Chicago politican.

  
  
• [34] Daniel Simon from NYC January 13, 2009 - 04:55PM

  I am confident that Congressman Israel would be a good senator. But I do want to address the Kennedy-Palin comparisons.

  The biggest difference between Kennedy and Palin is that Kennedy actually knows things (things like the Constitution). I also think Kennedy bases her opinions in fact and reason. I'm not at all sure that Palin knows much about anything (for instance, if she read the papers she would know that Kennedy is being given tremendous scrutiny by the press). And in her campaign, she seemed more focused on demagoguery than on a reasoned debate based on facts.

  I'm not saying that Kennedy would not make a good senator. But she has no political track record, so I think we just don't know.

  
  
• [35] mc from Brooklyn January 13, 2009 - 04:55PM

  seth,

  Sigh! Agreed. I am so sick of the level of discourse. Unfortunately, many seem to thrive on it. At least we can be giddy about actually inaugurating a person of color on Tuesday. That is something I really was not sure I would ever see. This tells us something great about the electorate for a change.