Who says there’s no common ground in Washington anymore?
Tonight, President Obama will try to kick-start his legislative priorities for his second term in his State of the Union address to Congress. Much is being made, as is the case every year, of what the president is likely to say. Most of the guesses so far have him focused on the economy, while also mentioning gun control, immigration reform and climate change. There are bound to be a surprise or two, and I’ll have it covered for you here tomorrow morning.
Much less effort is given to predicting what the Republican response from Sen. Marco Rubio will be — or, for that matter, the “tea party response” from Sen. Rand Paul. But Ira Stoll has taken a crack at writing what he thinks Rubio ought to say, and I think it’s rather clever on his part.
Because “our nation’s challenges are too great” for partisanship, Stoll advises Rubio to say, “first thing tomorrow, I will introduce legislation in the Senate called the Barack Obama Campaign Promise Implementation Act of 2013.”
That legislation and its companion bill in the House, in Stoll’s imagination, would include five specific proposals covering corporate and individual tax reform, energy, immigration, and policy toward Iran. All five, he writes, have GOP support and “one thing in common — they’ve all been endorsed already by President Obama.”
I’ll let you read Stoll’s suggestions for yourself, but I’d add a couple of other promises the GOP could insist that Obama fulfill. One is support for more charter schools across the nation. Another is that, “if you like your health care plan, you can keep it” even under Obamacare — a notion the Congressional Budget Office finds increasingly unlikely for millions of Americans.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
212 comments Add your comment
md
February 12th, 2013
4:40 pm
“its only madness to some, its survivial for the others.”
Actually, it’s survival for all of us if certain situations occur, then those really poor folks won’t stand a chance.
indigo
February 12th, 2013
4:47 pm
md
Every living recipient of the Nobel Prize in the sciences believes in Evolution. This goes far beyond “educated guess”
Evolution is not a theory. It is a fact. If your Christian Academy teachers tell you otherwise, they are WRONG.
Hillbilly D
February 12th, 2013
4:49 pm
Evolution is not a theory. It is a fact.
You can’t prove it; you believe it on faith, same as everybody else believes what they believe, on faith.
Dusty
February 12th, 2013
4:58 pm
Well,KYLE, I hate to complain but my most meritous post just took off into nowhere and I can’t find it. It has happened before. Is evolution taking place or could my lovely words be lost in space? What a terrible fate!! Is there no justice………..???
JDW
February 12th, 2013
5:00 pm
@Tiberius…”JDW forgets that in response to lower revenues , the common-sense approach would have been to spend less.”
Surprise, surprise you are behind the times…as I pointed out earlier…
Discretionary spending was $1.3 trillion in 2009 and was projected to be $1.289 in 2012. That means that the part of spending Obama actually impacts has been REDUCED in the last 4 years.
The rest of the federal budget is on auto pilot and requires The House to get involved and as you might have noticed they are AWOL.
JDW
February 12th, 2013
5:02 pm
As for the Theory of Evolution…that is theory as in the scientific sense which has nothing to do with faith…
A scientific theory is “a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment.”[
Much like the Theory of Gravity
Dusty
February 12th, 2013
5:04 pm
I want my post back!
Hillbilly D
February 12th, 2013
5:05 pm
Where’s the “well-substantiated”?
Dusty
February 12th, 2013
5:10 pm
Where’s my post?
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 12th, 2013
5:14 pm
It won’t be a hard act for Rubio to follow.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 12th, 2013
5:16 pm
Since when did the nobel peace prize mean anything? When arafat got his? Just when I thought indigo was somewhat normal, here he is with the idol worship.
CC
February 12th, 2013
5:16 pm
indigo:
A woodpecker uses its beak to secure its food. Can you explain to me how the woodpecker survived all those years of evolution to aquire the necessary beak, tongue and very odd toe arrangement that allows it to get the food necessary for life?
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right
February 12th, 2013
5:19 pm
Really, JDW? Your argument is going to be when revenues tank by hundreds of billions, your answer is to spend a few million less?
And you wonder why you have zero credibility among the people with working brains?
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 12th, 2013
5:20 pm
Dusty – Next time a comment gets ate, mash the browser back button and look in the comment box, it should still be there. When you place the cursor in the comment box your words will disappear again, but unlike the ajc blogs, there’s still hope. Click on edit/ undo and it will reappear. Now go through the comment and hyphenate or break up all the big words. Or you could try posting parts of it until you isolate the offending words.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 12th, 2013
5:24 pm
CC – The woodpecker began it’s life as a liberal, lying on the ground beneath the tree whining and moaning, waiting for the government to bring insects and such and place them in it’s mouth. Then some Repugs got elected and the woodpecker had to get up and forage itself.
I’m pretty sure it always had the beak though.
md
February 12th, 2013
5:24 pm
“Every living recipient of the Nobel Prize in the sciences believes in Evolution. This goes far beyond “educated guess””
Indigo…..read what YOU wrote…..”believes” being the operative word.
As for evolution, again what was the beginning?
Jefferson
February 12th, 2013
5:27 pm
As shown in the elections, the GOP has lost the credibility and losing ground since then, hey but that’s evolution eh ?
md
February 12th, 2013
5:27 pm
And indigo and others…..scientist of the various generations all had beliefs (guesses) that turned out to be wrong…..the days of the flat earth were a consensus among the believers…..
If you want one a wee bit closer in time, go back to the discovery of aids…..do the research and one will see that once upon a time it could only be contracted through sexual contact……sure isn’t the case now is it?
Science is what we THINK we know as of today…….
CC
February 12th, 2013
5:30 pm
Aesop:
I agree with most of your answer, but the woodpecker has a beak that is very specific to its task and is unlike the beaks of other birds.
Of course, there is always the possibility that Obama ‘redistributed’ it to the species . . .
JDW
February 12th, 2013
5:33 pm
@Hillbilly…”Where’s the “well-substantiated”?”
Might I suggest On the Origin of Species, published on 24 November 1859, by Charles Darwin.
$7.15 at Amazon…
http://www.amazon.com/Origin-Species-Barnes-Noble-Classics/dp/1593080778
JDW
February 12th, 2013
5:35 pm
@Tiberus…”Really, JDW? Your argument is going to be when revenues tank by hundreds of billions, your answer is to spend a few million less? And you wonder why you have zero credibility among the people with working brains?”
Bit lacking in reading comprehension are we…my argument was that Obama has not dramatically increased spending and he has not. You want to talk solving the problem that is another discussion and until Republicans get thier arms around the concept of revenue one that likely won’t be resolved until 2014 at the earliest.
md
February 12th, 2013
5:37 pm
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/02/08/1972-cru-director-predicted-a-new-ice-age/
Hillbilly D
February 12th, 2013
5:38 pm
JDW
You say,confirmed through observation and experiment. When has one species been observed changing into another or what experiment has produced that result? Where are the “missing links”.
“Gravity explains the motions of the planets, but it cannot explain who sets the planets in motion.” -Isaac Newton
md
February 12th, 2013
5:39 pm
Finally let it through. Some of you may want to read that 1972 article and pay close attention to the place it originated……
After all, scientists need to be right or they lose their crown of King guesser…….
md
February 12th, 2013
5:45 pm
Evolution is a theory from somewhere to another, where did it originate?
Where is the substantiated evidence of it’s beginning?
Most of us know there isn’t any, so all possibilities are on the table.
One could even go as far as saying a creator created it…….and that would be a possibility.
JDW
February 12th, 2013
5:46 pm
@hillbilly…I am not answering the question of how the environment that created the ability for evolution to do its work was created. Just pointing out that it is not a faith based theory. It is grounded in repeatable and observed experimentation. To answer the question of how the environment was created we need moe data points…I.e. repeatable and observed experimentation. I am guessing a spacecraft would helpful and until we have one that particular question will have to wait.
Michael H. Smith
February 12th, 2013
5:48 pm
Hooey brucie! Obama most certainly has increased spending dramatically.
JDW
February 12th, 2013
5:51 pm
@mks…
In the absence of all evidence you still cling to myth…give your brain a break…turn Rush off
saywhat?
February 12th, 2013
5:52 pm
md- I “believe” I just typed a response to you on a computer. I would be fairly certain that everybody who reads this response will also “believe” the same thing. They will “believe” it for a great number of reasons, including a knowledge of how online forums work, the ability to experiment and get appropriate responses from me when they direct questions to me, etc.
Whether YOU personally believe the statement or not does not diminish at all the factuality of the statement. Sure, maybe I used mental telepathy to post online, or magic, or maybe I ate a box of Alpha-bits and crapped my response through the series of tubes that is the internet. Somehow I doubt that overwhelming evidence will come to light supporting any of those notions.
Hillbilly D
February 12th, 2013
5:54 pm
JDW
Face it, you believe what you believe and I believe what I believe and we both believe it on faith. I’ll admit and you won’t. Simple as that.
md
February 12th, 2013
5:54 pm
Another one, this one the NY Times 1975…..and notice the first paragraph:
“The world’s climate is changing. Of that scientists are firmly convinced.”
2nd paragraph – “There are specialists who say that a new ice age is on the way”
http://www.wmconnolley.org.uk/sci/iceage/ny-times-1975-05-21.pdf
Now Indigo, please explain to us why those scientists should be any different than the ones we have today? The ones we have today also use models and plug in assumptions and are certain of their conclusions…….what’s the difference since nothing can be proven?
JDW
February 12th, 2013
5:56 pm
@md…”Most of us know there isn’t any, so all possibilities are on the table”
It’s even more overwhelming than global warming…only 98 percent of scientists buy in to that one. Of course there are still folks that believe the world is flat and Apollo was a farce. Should I sign you up for those as well?
md
February 12th, 2013
5:57 pm
Saywhat….and which belief are you referring to?
MarkV
February 12th, 2013
6:00 pm
I can’t believe Dusty had written any offensive words that would have proscribed her post. She is saving them for after the State of the Union speech.
md
February 12th, 2013
6:00 pm
JDW….you are making no sense. Is there concrete evidence about the beginning of evolution? It’s a yes, no answer.
Is there concrete evidence that man caused global warming? Not contributed to, but caused? And, is there a possibility other factors we are unaware of may also be contributing factors?
md
February 12th, 2013
6:02 pm
Let me ask it this way, is there a possibility that a god or creator made evolution possible with a beginning?
saywhat?
February 12th, 2013
6:03 pm
“When has one species been observed changing into another or what experiment has produced that result?”
—————————————————————
http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2010/03/10/2820949.htm
MarkV
February 12th, 2013
6:03 pm
Another one, this one the NY Times 1975…..and notice the first paragraph:
“The world’s climate is changing. Of that scientists are firmly convinced.”
2nd paragraph – “There are specialists who say that a new ice age is on the way”
NY Times, a scientific journal?
saywhat?
February 12th, 2013
6:06 pm
md
February 12th, 2013
6:02 pm
Let me ask it this way, is there a possibility that a god or creator made evolution possible with a beginning?
_______________________________________________________
Sure it is possible, but it doesn’t in any way make the general theory of evolution any less factual.
MarkV
February 12th, 2013
6:09 pm
“Is there concrete evidence that man caused global warming? Not contributed to, but caused? And, is there a possibility other factors we are unaware of may also be contributing factors?”
The point is that scientists have concluded that the mankind activity is the MAIN factor in the global warming. It makes little difference that there are other contributing factors. Other factors always are present, which is the reason why the temperature increase is not a smooth line exactly following the increase in CO2 in the atmosphere.
md
February 12th, 2013
6:09 pm
“NY Times, a scientific journal?”
Come on mark, you can do better than that.
There are several examples on the net about this period in time when the consensus from the “experts” seemed to indicate a coming ice age……40 years later and they were quite wrong.
Just as the scientists working on aids were wrong. just as the scientists developing our drugs have been wrong. Just as the scientists that thought the earth was flat were wrong.
There is well documented history that shows numerous examples of scientists being wrong yet all of a sudden they can’t be wrong? That is illogical…….
Attack Dog
February 12th, 2013
6:11 pm
Obama and Boehner were on common ground, but Boehner got stuck in the muddy mess called the GOP majority.
Attack Dog
February 12th, 2013
6:13 pm
Breaking Bass-Aackward News: the sequestration was Obama’s idea!
JDW
February 12th, 2013
6:14 pm
@md…”There is well documented history that shows numerous examples of scientists being wrong yet all of a sudden they can’t be wrong? That is illogical…….”
You are confusing debate with consensus. Prior to 1988 there was a lot of debate. In 1988 research proved warming to be a fact and consensus has been achieved followed by agreement of 98 percent of scientists. Ther was never a consensus on a new ice age it was a competing hypothesis that has been disproved.
md
February 12th, 2013
6:15 pm
“Sure it is possible, but it doesn’t in any way make the general theory of evolution any less factual.”
You are basically referring to a given period of time which can not be extended further back without assumptions.
So in reality you form a belief based on what you think you know today…
md
February 12th, 2013
6:17 pm
JDW…warming can be measured, that isn’t necessarily the debate. The debate is what is causing the warming….that is where the belief comes into play.
MarkV
February 12th, 2013
6:19 pm
md @ 6:09 pm
“NY Times, a scientific journal?”
“Come on mark, you can do better than that.”
Yes, I can. There was no consensus in 1975 about global cooling. A report in NYT about some scientists predicting ice age has virtually no scientific value.
saywhat?
February 12th, 2013
6:19 pm
md
February 12th, 2013
5:57 pm
Saywhat….and which belief are you referring to?
——————————————————–
Your belief(or not) in evolution vs. the “belief” of scientists all over the world. Just because one of our posters used the word “believe” to describe those scientists views, does not equate the validity of their beliefs with your own. As you well know, a single word can have multiple definitions. So while it is easier to say scientists “believe” in evolution, it would far more accurate to say that scientists hold with absolute certainty, based on decades of reliable and repeatable experiment and observation, that evolution occurred in the past and is occurring now, and will continue to occur as long as life exists.
Clear?
Dusty
February 12th, 2013
6:28 pm
Thank you, Aesop,
I think it is too late to try but maybe next time. Your plan might work. Kyle’s picture slipped on the screen right after I submitted my comment. There was no words of moderation. Nothing important just a bit frustrating.
—————–
Thank you, MarkV
My lost comment was very mild. I think it was some kind of technical glitch. But I will give you the last line as i remember it..
“The good news is the BRAVES have started spring training. It’s going to be dancing in the daffodils!”
Maybe the daffodils got stuck somewhere. You think so?
MarkV
February 12th, 2013
6:29 pm
What is most disturbing about the global warming/climate change issue is the way politics has distorted the opinions about the state of knowledge. I am sure that without the political implications there would be no doubts about the changes happening and the mankind role. Then people could concentrate on the real issues, which is the best ways to deal with the changes, rather than fighting with those who deny that they are happening.