Daily Kos crashes Microsoft’s gate

Tamara Pesik has the coolest job at Microsoft. She arranges for cool speakers to come on campus as part of her efforts over in Microsoft Research. Today she had Jerome Armstrong and Markos Moulitsas Zuniga over to talk to Microsoft employees (here's a picture of her introducing Markos, left, and Jerome, middle). They wrote an excellent book (yes, I have read it, thanks to Raines Cohen for giving it to me at SXSW) about the state of politics (from the progressive view) in America. Those who don't recognize these names might not know that Markos started the "Daily Kos" site. Very popular. Gets half a million visits per day. Jerome started MyDD political site that gets more than 50,000 visits a day and they both worked on Howard Dean's campaign.

I didn't realize that many of these talks are put onto the "ResearchChannel" site. If you visit there you'll see all sorts of technical talks given by leading experts around the world with a few business and political talks (Malcolm Gladwell has a talk up there, for instance) interspersed. There's a ton of talks there done by computer scientists (most of whom don't work for Microsoft) that you might find interesting too.

Tamara says that the talk today should be on the site in a few weeks, so I'll point that out when it appears. In the meantime there's a treasure trove of good stuff to watch.

Oh, and if you want to see Jerome or Markos, they'll be giving two more talks in the Seattle area. One tonight, one tomorrow. Details are on their book site.

They worked on Howard Dean's campaign and have many interesting insights about the state of American politics. If you care about that topic, this is a "don't miss."

Markos was on the Colbert Report last night, the CrooksAndLiars blog has links to the video.

65 thoughts on “Daily Kos crashes Microsoft’s gate

  1. Wow… such language agentcooper! Did we hit a nerve?

    Face it, the only reason Billy Boy Clinton snuck into office was because of a third party candidate. He NEVER got a majority – and he ran from every terrorist that went after us for 8 solid years. If that isnt spineless I dont know what is.

    At least Bush takes the fight to the people who want it. And he’s a Texan to boot which is my native state – so, he’s A OK with me and the majority of Americans who voted for him!

    Dems dont have anything to offer, and if you believe those “polls” that say the GOP is running away from Bush? Youre quite naive. This country is conservative thru and thru – and Dems are far too marginalized to realize that yet.

    As for Canada? Quebec is the King County of that entire country. What Quebec wants, washes over the whole populace. Try talking to ANY Canadian between Vancouver and the east coast and they are all conservative and getting more so. They now see what cradle to grave socialism looks like – and they dont like it anymore. They’d rather keep their money than give it away.

    I have a LOT of family up there – I think I’m fairly in touch with what they think.

    As for national health care in the US? I think Hillary tried that (who voted her in back in??) and it was roundly dismissed, as it should have been.

    Bring in socialized medicine and watch America’s best and brightest doctors flee this country. America is THE tops for a reason, agentcooper. And its because of our capitolism and competitiveness, whether you agree with it or not.

    Take out the need to strive or dream and watch this country fall apart fast.

    No thanks ..

  2. Wow… such language agentcooper! Did we hit a nerve?

    Face it, the only reason Billy Boy Clinton snuck into office was because of a third party candidate. He NEVER got a majority – and he ran from every terrorist that went after us for 8 solid years. If that isnt spineless I dont know what is.

    At least Bush takes the fight to the people who want it. And he’s a Texan to boot which is my native state – so, he’s A OK with me and the majority of Americans who voted for him!

    Dems dont have anything to offer, and if you believe those “polls” that say the GOP is running away from Bush? Youre quite naive. This country is conservative thru and thru – and Dems are far too marginalized to realize that yet.

    As for Canada? Quebec is the King County of that entire country. What Quebec wants, washes over the whole populace. Try talking to ANY Canadian between Vancouver and the east coast and they are all conservative and getting more so. They now see what cradle to grave socialism looks like – and they dont like it anymore. They’d rather keep their money than give it away.

    I have a LOT of family up there – I think I’m fairly in touch with what they think.

    As for national health care in the US? I think Hillary tried that (who voted her in back in??) and it was roundly dismissed, as it should have been.

    Bring in socialized medicine and watch America’s best and brightest doctors flee this country. America is THE tops for a reason, agentcooper. And its because of our capitolism and competitiveness, whether you agree with it or not.

    Take out the need to strive or dream and watch this country fall apart fast.

    No thanks ..

  3. if it wasn’t for strawmen you conservatives would truly have nothing to knockdown.

    (paraphrasing) “You liberals only want socialism”, “you Dems want a French (or Canadian, or Swedish, or British, etc.) healthcare system”

    The problem is that no liberal/Dem/progressive has ever said that. We may say, “hey they have a universal health care, their people like it, let’s see what they are doing right” but it stops there. The beauty of our country is that there are fifty, mostly autonomous, states. That means there are lots of places to experiment with wage laws, environmental regulations, healthcare, zoning laws, whatever. Even more if you count individual cities. We have a way to ask: within the confines of our laws and within the spirit of our National identity and character what can we do for [insert issue] that may be adopted nationwide?

    And we do that all the time. This is how it will be done with universal health-care. And I don’t think it will be a nationalized *plan* but rather a nationalized *mandate* that would require each state to find the best way to cover all their residents. It will happen and it will work because 1) we want it, and 2) we can achieve anything we want if we are serious about it.

    As for Canada, they overwhelmingly want univeral coverage. They will not give it up. Their long waits to treatment are a significant problem, yes. But the main problems are that they’ve banned private insurance and don’t have co-pays. Do you honestly think that is what Dems/Libs want in this country? Don’t be so transparently stupid. And don’t for a second think that because the Canadian government is turning a little more conservative that that signals a desire to move away from universal healthcare. That’s what Bush thought about Social Security. Idiot.

    BTW – I’m no fan of Randi Rhodes. AND don’t you EVER think that because I support universal health care and minimm wage laws that I’m against protecting this country! Your slander and bullshit has served you sycophants longer than it should have and I won’t stand for it. So fuck you now and fuck you in the future if you keep thinking that. Your Dear Leader has done more to undermine the security of this country than anyone in our history. You should be running FROM him…oh wait, people are. What was the latest polling, 32-36% approval? 55% plan on voting for the Democrat (whoever it is) over the Repub. Etc, etc. Oh yes. Get use to hearing from us.

  4. if it wasn’t for strawmen you conservatives would truly have nothing to knockdown.

    (paraphrasing) “You liberals only want socialism”, “you Dems want a French (or Canadian, or Swedish, or British, etc.) healthcare system”

    The problem is that no liberal/Dem/progressive has ever said that. We may say, “hey they have a universal health care, their people like it, let’s see what they are doing right” but it stops there. The beauty of our country is that there are fifty, mostly autonomous, states. That means there are lots of places to experiment with wage laws, environmental regulations, healthcare, zoning laws, whatever. Even more if you count individual cities. We have a way to ask: within the confines of our laws and within the spirit of our National identity and character what can we do for [insert issue] that may be adopted nationwide?

    And we do that all the time. This is how it will be done with universal health-care. And I don’t think it will be a nationalized *plan* but rather a nationalized *mandate* that would require each state to find the best way to cover all their residents. It will happen and it will work because 1) we want it, and 2) we can achieve anything we want if we are serious about it.

    As for Canada, they overwhelmingly want univeral coverage. They will not give it up. Their long waits to treatment are a significant problem, yes. But the main problems are that they’ve banned private insurance and don’t have co-pays. Do you honestly think that is what Dems/Libs want in this country? Don’t be so transparently stupid. And don’t for a second think that because the Canadian government is turning a little more conservative that that signals a desire to move away from universal healthcare. That’s what Bush thought about Social Security. Idiot.

    BTW – I’m no fan of Randi Rhodes. AND don’t you EVER think that because I support universal health care and minimm wage laws that I’m against protecting this country! Your slander and bullshit has served you sycophants longer than it should have and I won’t stand for it. So fuck you now and fuck you in the future if you keep thinking that. Your Dear Leader has done more to undermine the security of this country than anyone in our history. You should be running FROM him…oh wait, people are. What was the latest polling, 32-36% approval? 55% plan on voting for the Democrat (whoever it is) over the Repub. Etc, etc. Oh yes. Get use to hearing from us.

  5. J. Random Poster..

    dont tell agentcooper, but there is pretty much zero unemployment in the US today.

    *gasp* .. how did that happen??

    and thanks for using that word “moonbat” .. I thought I was the only one who knew about that word around here..
    :-P

  6. J. Random Poster..

    dont tell agentcooper, but there is pretty much zero unemployment in the US today.

    *gasp* .. how did that happen??

    and thanks for using that word “moonbat” .. I thought I was the only one who knew about that word around here..
    :-P

  7. agentcooper,

    as someone who actuaqlly lived in Canada, and married a Canadian who couldnt wait to escape that “socialist utopia” you are dead wrong.

    why dont you read up on the stats of Canadians who come to America for their healthcare, because they die waiting inline up there? (did you forget a conservative PM just got voted in?)

    as for Kos, and Randi Rhodes and all the rest of the Deaniacs – PLEASE keep speaking up! You will assure the GOP stays in power for a long, long time to come. Those of us on the right get a LOT of entertainment from those guys and gals :-)

    Dems dont seem to have the stomach of protecting this country – but trying to turn it into a socialized nightmare that has failed everywhere else in the world. No thanks.

    And for the record, Bush isnt running again. Time to get something new to bitch about kids!

  8. agentcooper,

    as someone who actuaqlly lived in Canada, and married a Canadian who couldnt wait to escape that “socialist utopia” you are dead wrong.

    why dont you read up on the stats of Canadians who come to America for their healthcare, because they die waiting inline up there? (did you forget a conservative PM just got voted in?)

    as for Kos, and Randi Rhodes and all the rest of the Deaniacs – PLEASE keep speaking up! You will assure the GOP stays in power for a long, long time to come. Those of us on the right get a LOT of entertainment from those guys and gals :-)

    Dems dont seem to have the stomach of protecting this country – but trying to turn it into a socialized nightmare that has failed everywhere else in the world. No thanks.

    And for the record, Bush isnt running again. Time to get something new to bitch about kids!

  9. @28 J. Random Wingnut. It’s EXACTLY that attitude from people EXACTLY like you that fought against minimunm wage laws to begin with. It’s EXACTLY people like you who fought against child labor laws. It is EXACTLY people like you who fought against women’s rights. It is EXACTLY people like you who fought against anti-slavery laws. You are an anachronism. Attempting to lecture someone on the theories of economics that you express flies completely in the face of what has ACTUALLY happened.

    If we left it up to employers to pay people what they decided upon, and I’m specifically referrring to the low-end unskilled labor, which are the people affected by living-wages, then the gap between rich and poor would be more hideous than it is now. Poverty, homelessness, perhaps even lawlessness would make the US more like Brasil or Mexico. It would concentrate more wealth among the already rich and do nothing for the lower classes.

    Maybe you all should do what Barbara Ehrenreich did and go live on $6/hour for a while and THEN tell us what you think about minimum and, gasp!, living wages.

    “Every time you raise the minimum wage, you price the poorest people out of the market altogether.”

    Utter B.S. and you know it. http://www.epinet.org/content.cfm/issueguides_minwage_minwagefacts

    Look at the minimum wage increase over time http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/chart.htm

    In 30 years it slightly more than doubled from $2.30 to $5.15. Then, take for instance the average price of a car in the mid 70s: ~$4400 (import), ~$5000 (domestic). Now, ~ $27,000 (import); ~$20,000 (domestic). A 4-6 fold increase in price. And it’s like that across the board. So when you hear that the minimum wage isn’t keeping up with the cost of living this is one example. Of course the wealthy either don’t care or don’t know about this. Which one are you?

    BTW it’s typical of the right-wingers like yourself to assume that when someone thinks having a minimum or even living wage is a good thing that makes them a French-loving socialist. What an idiot. That may fly among your crowd but it sure as hell doesn’t among the majority of Americans. Thanks for the stupidity.

  10. @28 J. Random Wingnut. It’s EXACTLY that attitude from people EXACTLY like you that fought against minimunm wage laws to begin with. It’s EXACTLY people like you who fought against child labor laws. It is EXACTLY people like you who fought against women’s rights. It is EXACTLY people like you who fought against anti-slavery laws. You are an anachronism. Attempting to lecture someone on the theories of economics that you express flies completely in the face of what has ACTUALLY happened.

    If we left it up to employers to pay people what they decided upon, and I’m specifically referrring to the low-end unskilled labor, which are the people affected by living-wages, then the gap between rich and poor would be more hideous than it is now. Poverty, homelessness, perhaps even lawlessness would make the US more like Brasil or Mexico. It would concentrate more wealth among the already rich and do nothing for the lower classes.

    Maybe you all should do what Barbara Ehrenreich did and go live on $6/hour for a while and THEN tell us what you think about minimum and, gasp!, living wages.

    “Every time you raise the minimum wage, you price the poorest people out of the market altogether.”

    Utter B.S. and you know it. http://www.epinet.org/content.cfm/issueguides_minwage_minwagefacts

    Look at the minimum wage increase over time http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/chart.htm

    In 30 years it slightly more than doubled from $2.30 to $5.15. Then, take for instance the average price of a car in the mid 70s: ~$4400 (import), ~$5000 (domestic). Now, ~ $27,000 (import); ~$20,000 (domestic). A 4-6 fold increase in price. And it’s like that across the board. So when you hear that the minimum wage isn’t keeping up with the cost of living this is one example. Of course the wealthy either don’t care or don’t know about this. Which one are you?

    BTW it’s typical of the right-wingers like yourself to assume that when someone thinks having a minimum or even living wage is a good thing that makes them a French-loving socialist. What an idiot. That may fly among your crowd but it sure as hell doesn’t among the majority of Americans. Thanks for the stupidity.

  11. Cooper,

    You ignorant little moonbat.

    Anytime you intervene in a market to set a price, you will either cause a glut or a shortage. In the case of setting minimum wages according to your knee-jerk impulses, you don’t raise anyone’s pay, you simply make it illegal to employ anyone whose labor isn’t worth the price that you’ve decided upon. Every time you raise the minimum wage, you price the poorest people out of the market altogether. Thanks a lot, asshole.

    Go take a look at the socialist worker’s paradise in France, and tell us how they could possibly have 25% unemployment among entry-level workers, when their government is made up of people with your same mind-set.

  12. Cooper,

    You ignorant little moonbat.

    Anytime you intervene in a market to set a price, you will either cause a glut or a shortage. In the case of setting minimum wages according to your knee-jerk impulses, you don’t raise anyone’s pay, you simply make it illegal to employ anyone whose labor isn’t worth the price that you’ve decided upon. Every time you raise the minimum wage, you price the poorest people out of the market altogether. Thanks a lot, asshole.

    Go take a look at the socialist worker’s paradise in France, and tell us how they could possibly have 25% unemployment among entry-level workers, when their government is made up of people with your same mind-set.

  13. @26 I left out nothing. Because I was not quoting anything!! I was simply responding to you asking “where does it say the govt has the authority…” Don’t try to misrepresent what I said.

    Where in the Federalist papers does it say that “general welfare” does NOT mean food stamps or home heating assistance? Illuminate the audience to which essay and the first few words of the first sentence to support your claim.

    I’m pretty certain that if it was as you put it “the framers were pretty clear about that.”, that there would be no “welfare” as we are referring to in the first place.

    Read this, for a start, on living wage impact of economies http://www.epi.org/content.cfm/bp170

    As you will read your prediction from “simple economics”, while accurate, will certainly fail to prove that a living wage is a massive burden on the economy.

    MY healthcare plan? LOL. You silly conservatives. Go back and read what I said.

    Yes. The US has some awesome healthcare. No, universal healthcare would probably not cover some of the things that RICH foreigners come here for but it would likely cover most basic services, which would cover the overwhelming majority of all visits to the hospital/clinic. That’s an important distinction. BUT since there is no plan or bill written to dissect it’s all speculation.

    “Can you point me to the Article and section that grants the Fed Govt that authority?”

    Is that a serious question? I’m not sure you’ve ever read the document or even taken a government class. Let me help you out. Article 1 Section 7 and 8 to begin with outlay the the basics for enacting laws and such. Laws that can expand or limit lots of things, yes, even on what private businesses can do. Oh and Article 5 which you may remember led to Amendment 13. OMG!!! The federal goverment abolishing an entire PRIVATE industry!?!?!

  14. @26 I left out nothing. Because I was not quoting anything!! I was simply responding to you asking “where does it say the govt has the authority…” Don’t try to misrepresent what I said.

    Where in the Federalist papers does it say that “general welfare” does NOT mean food stamps or home heating assistance? Illuminate the audience to which essay and the first few words of the first sentence to support your claim.

    I’m pretty certain that if it was as you put it “the framers were pretty clear about that.”, that there would be no “welfare” as we are referring to in the first place.

    Read this, for a start, on living wage impact of economies http://www.epi.org/content.cfm/bp170

    As you will read your prediction from “simple economics”, while accurate, will certainly fail to prove that a living wage is a massive burden on the economy.

    MY healthcare plan? LOL. You silly conservatives. Go back and read what I said.

    Yes. The US has some awesome healthcare. No, universal healthcare would probably not cover some of the things that RICH foreigners come here for but it would likely cover most basic services, which would cover the overwhelming majority of all visits to the hospital/clinic. That’s an important distinction. BUT since there is no plan or bill written to dissect it’s all speculation.

    “Can you point me to the Article and section that grants the Fed Govt that authority?”

    Is that a serious question? I’m not sure you’ve ever read the document or even taken a government class. Let me help you out. Article 1 Section 7 and 8 to begin with outlay the the basics for enacting laws and such. Laws that can expand or limit lots of things, yes, even on what private businesses can do. Oh and Article 5 which you may remember led to Amendment 13. OMG!!! The federal goverment abolishing an entire PRIVATE industry!?!?!

  15. @25. you conveniently left out the why: “to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States” The “general welfare” was not intended to mean create a welfare state. In the Federalist Papers the framers were pretty clear about that. As I’m sure you know.

    As for your healthcare plan, I think P.J. O’Rourke said it best: “If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait until you see how much it costs when it’s free”

    And it curious how many Canadians come to the US when they need major, quality healthcare. Nothing incents like the free market.

    Again, define “living wage”. Because whatever figure you come up with, I can pretty much guarantee it will be too low. It’s not the job of the federal govt (let alone a state, or local govt) to dictate to private businesses how they should be run. Of course you know that, because you have the Constitution sitting on your desk. Can you point me to the Article and section that grants the Fed Govt that authority?
    I saw the press release in the Hartford Courant on the “positive effects” of their living wage law. I’ve not seen many others. And simple economics would tell you it would have a negative affect on labor and prices. The costs have to be absorbed somewhere.

    Also, please explain how unemployment amongst black teens (and teens and low skilled workers in general) has risen steadily since the implementation of minimum wage laws.
    Again, TNSTAAFL.

Comments are closed.