wrote:

threaten to vote against the bill because it was not progressive enough and stall the whole process out for the rest of the year? Because if progressives in congress factionalized right now that is exactly what would happen.

I think that if there were a significant faction of progressives in congress we would have seen a much better bill. I think the existing small bloc could have done better without the outcome you fear.

But the nice thing about the Mac is that the spell check service is available to any application, and many choose to use it. Thus, the user handles text in a uniform way across diverse tasks.

wrote:

I disagree. This is assymetrical warfare the only strength that the Republican's have right now is that they are willing to burn down the world if they don't get what they want.

The repubs were burning down the world when they were in charge. That is how we got here. Their tactic is not one of opposition based on their current minority position, it is just their tactic, period.

because your German half will not let you screw it up badly enough.

When you are a leader there are two ways of being an idiot.

When you are an idiot there is no way to be a leader.

Especially when you have no clue that someone else is setting your agenda for you.

Unfortunately, it is possible for an idiot to be a leader, just a bad leader.

W was not a bad leader; he was not a leader.

...if climate change is really solved, really dealt with, then peak oil disappears as a problem, inevitably.

Not necessarily true. One does not have to reduce the net energy retention very much in order to allow the great burning to continue. Extreme motivation to find an extreme solution to maintain the status quo is all too human.

So in your warped world, people are just trying to get their way? Is it not possible that what they are really doing is stating what they believe is necessary for the common good? All in life is not "I want this, you want that, let's compromise, and who cares if that screws everyone else".

wrote:

I don't think you understand my position at all. My world is not warped. 'My way or no way' does nothing for the common good of all.

Yes it is. It is the members of congress who have to compromise, both in representing their constituents, and in making accommodations with members of their own, and the other, party. You and I are constituents who must continue to express our honest views on what should be done. This does not imply that leaders should not try to convince the people that what they want to do is right. But you should not subvert the democratic process by compromising your own views.

wrote:

Truly solved would indicate we were not in danger of slipping over the line again and the climate is not being anthropogenically altered. That's a bigger agenda than just limiting output to the maximum tolerable.

What I proposed, not very clearly, is that it might be possible to find a way to let energy escape in order to compensate for the increased retention due to the greenhouse effect and consequential feedback. This would meet your definition in only a weak way perhaps, since the net anthropogenic modification would be zero, but modification would still be going on.

wrote:

the US electorate tends not to be as Left as the Democratic Party's Left.

If you look through Glenn's previous posts, you will see polls show that in many cases what you wrote is not correct.

He wrote:

The primary function of a democracy is to achieve a peaceful transition of power. If every time the party in power changes it is to be immediately followed by a round of investigations and prosecutions, it is going to be a lot harder to persuade parties to yield power, to hold fair elections, and accept their results. It is a route to banana republic.

You really think that prosecuting war crimes will lead to an administration refusing to step down? I think if we lock the bastards up, the next set of bastards might just torture cats instead running for office. Letting them go sure has not worked so far.

Of course you might be right. A few that got locked up after Reagan came back to work under Bush 43, sort of. Yeah, come to think of it, we should just let them all go. It really is the best of all possible worlds, and we can only make it worse by trying to make it better. While we are at it, let's bring back slavery, and take away some reservations belonging to Native Americans.

wrote:

it remains unclear to me precisely what Obama can do that Congress cannot also do; albeit, differently.

I was raised to believe that the execution of the law is primarily up to the, you know, executive branch. No lawyer here, but I think it actually is supposed to work that way. Thus, first one ought to expect the Obama justice department to do its job, and only then, if it does not, should one expect the congress to take up the responsibility.