Sunday, April 1, 2012

What Mattered This Week?

Well, there was that thing with ACA and the Supremes.

Syria again, and I guess the Iran sanctions.

For the new regulations on coal, see here. Not sure whether that means it matters or not.

The House budget vote was this week...certainly doesn't have any substantive importance (although I guess it does tell us what Appropriations will be doing on the House side), but it's another vote that people are going to be attacking this fall.

What else? What do you think mattered this week?


  1. Olbermann out at Current TV (/sarcasm).

    Not to steal the thunder of the "Sunday Question for Liberals", but were you all comfortable with him as a spokesperson for the left? I obviously wasn't his target audience, but I could never get past the excruciating schmaltz of the 'Worst Person in the World' bit.

    1. Don't know if that was intended for me or the group at large -- but yeah, that would have been a good Sunday Question. I like Dan Patrick, but I've never been an Olbermann fan.

    2. My favorite Olbermann story was when he wrote a piece for DailyKos criticizing President Obama's handling of the oil spill. After a couple of commenters attacked him for taking this position, he announced he was so offended by those comments that he was quitting DailyKos permanently. (He was back a few weeks later.)

    3. Thanks for the comments, guys, to your question Jonathan I feared that it may have been dirty pool to ask a question other than the official weekend question.

      Olbermann's interesting because, while it seems like any failed Royals executive or Inside Edition host can shout "DFH" and become a spokesperson for the right, the left is a bit more circumspect about its mouthpieces. Olbermann would seem to be something of an exception.

  2. Yep, Jonathan, I agree on your two domestic issues. One might add the microphone comment of Obama (supposed to be off-mike) and asking Medvedev to give him until after the election. The latter was amusing partly because Romney was a bit too eager to exploit it by suggesting that the Russians are our greatest adversary (and getting lectured by the Russians as a consequence).

    I think the Supreme Court story, if anything, could be bigger than it appears to be. If they throw out the law I think they will further subtract from people's confidence in their collective institutions. Putting aside how one might feel about the law, the effort already put into its implementation versus the seeming technicality if its ruled unconstitutional will be, well, unsettling. Even if the law is unpopular, I think it will look very different if its thrown out. On the other hand, in a sense, its an opportunity for Justice Roberts to legitimize his role if its ruled constitutional and particularly if he plays a hand in this ruling. For doing so will buffer him on so many other decisions from seeming super-partisan. Thanks.

  3. Elections in Myanmar.

    Scotus hearings on ACA, and their vote on it, though we won't hear the decision for two or three months. But the rumor is out there that they've already voted on it.

    Republicans beginning to embrace Romney.

    The furor over Trayvon Martin's death might matter, though I'm not sure how yet. Lot of folk out demonstrating; and it's adoption as a political issue by Republicans seems to reaffirm the whole charge of racial bias within the party, feeding that outrage.

    1. Zic,

      It really is not rumor, but rather standard SCOTUS practice. My understanding is that the first vote is taken within a couple of days of oral argument. There then follows the period of opinion writing, during which the justices can change their votes if they wish. Evidently, Kennedy has a minor reputation for switching sides during the extended process, whereas most judges reach a firm conclusion pretty quickly.

    2. Media spin is giving a lot of people the idea that the case against Zimmerman is stronger than it is. It's another Duke Lacrosse case.

      Zimmerman is likely to walk, by No True Bill, acquittal, or hung jury. Or there may be a plea bargain to the lowest possible offense, negligent homicide or the like.

      There's already talk of civil disorder. I wouldn't say it's likely, but it's not extremely unlikely either. When civil disorder does happen, it's usually because of some law-enforcement related outrage, as for example Rodney King.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Who links to my website?