More actual "Talking Points Memos" please, Joshua
JMM,
I am lucky to have the luxury of a good amount of the time to devote to grokking the crucial issues of the day, and I still have a great deal of difficulty keeping up. I need more specific talking point help from TPM.
Here's the example which prompted this plea: I was watching the MMFA clip featuring the FOX morning clowns pushing disinformation about the effect on small business' of the House's new proposal, and I realized that I could not--with certainty--accurately refute their BS.
Even after going directly to the bill... I remained fairly confused. What are their financial options and responsibilities under the new bill? To what degree will tax breaks or other considerations mitigate those costs? What percentage of small business' have payrolls under 250, 300, 350 & 400k? Are we talking about 20% or 80% of all small business'? And so on.
Same thing with Cap & Trade, EFCA and countless other issues.
I don't need to be told what to say, but I would sure appreciate some factual guidance from a pro organization whose name suggests they live for this stuff, and have the professionals to do the digging and write up a clean, no crap ongoing primer.
I'll take it from there - talking with co-workers and friends, arguing online and pressuring my representatives. AND I'll support your advertisers - FOR REAL; and let them know why I'm doing so.
So help me out TPM; I have a feeling I'm not alone.
I am lucky to have the luxury of a good amount of the time to devote to grokking the crucial issues of the day, and I still have a great deal of difficulty keeping up. I need more specific talking point help from TPM.
Here's the example which prompted this plea: I was watching the MMFA clip featuring the FOX morning clowns pushing disinformation about the effect on small business' of the House's new proposal, and I realized that I could not--with certainty--accurately refute their BS.
Even after going directly to the bill... I remained fairly confused. What are their financial options and responsibilities under the new bill? To what degree will tax breaks or other considerations mitigate those costs? What percentage of small business' have payrolls under 250, 300, 350 & 400k? Are we talking about 20% or 80% of all small business'? And so on.
Same thing with Cap & Trade, EFCA and countless other issues.
I don't need to be told what to say, but I would sure appreciate some factual guidance from a pro organization whose name suggests they live for this stuff, and have the professionals to do the digging and write up a clean, no crap ongoing primer.
I'll take it from there - talking with co-workers and friends, arguing online and pressuring my representatives. AND I'll support your advertisers - FOR REAL; and let them know why I'm doing so.
So help me out TPM; I have a feeling I'm not alone.
Advertisement
















Once they're done with their "objective reporting" on Ensign, Sanford, Palin, et al, then they will post WH talking points for the faithful to internalize.
Or maybe not. Haven't you noticed how any activist site that sells itself to venture capitalists becomes a HuffPo wannabe?
July 17, 2009 8:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
If I had as little respect for this site as you do, Lalo, I certainly wouldn't visit, and opine, and complain, and whine, and carp about it --- I would just leave and find a place that deserved my brilliant mind. I'm sure if you start your own site you will be happy there, all by yourself.
July 17, 2009 6:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, and Lalo needs to lose the racist hat/sarcasm. It's offensive.
July 17, 2009 9:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Lalo's existence is based on being offensive. Why else would he have that avatar? He will only be happy when the Lincoln/Obama connection is complete.
July 17, 2009 10:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sometimes objective reporting seems so slanted because the object in the sights is so very, very BENT.
July 17, 2009 9:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Lalo doesn't do nuance.
July 17, 2009 6:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good luck with this. I imagine the things you want more clarity about are things that are over Josh's head too, and he is so busy with Dumpster diving, it's impossible to keep up with the high-research/low-snark-potential projects you describe.
July 17, 2009 10:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/kurtismae/2009/07/more-actual-talking-points-mem.php#comment-3530294
July 17, 2009 6:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL! Not surprisingly, CVille Dem proves there's always a loyal audience for prurient stories!
Alas, you humble me, CVille: I am not creative enough to insult you more than you just insulted yourself.
July 18, 2009 9:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
Non-sequitur much? I guess you need to look that up just like you should check out "prurient," since you obviously don't even know what it means, based on your "zingy" but meaningless reply.
July 18, 2009 8:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
I understand what you're saying and perhaps with the influx of new staff there can be a larger concentration on the sort of info that you're talking about.
For more "wonkish" stuff than is generally available here, I usually check in with Matthew Yglesias and Ezra Klein.
July 17, 2009 1:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'll check over there. Thx
July 17, 2009 5:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
If it's as Cat says, perhaps this would be the sort of thing we could all crowd-source?
Thoughts on starting a political non-profit(?)site, Mr. Marshall?
July 17, 2009 5:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
There are so many times that I say "I'm pretty sure their facts or conclusions are wrong, but I can't find the data to prove it".
It would be very helpful to have a site that just picked up false statements and gave the facts to disprove them.
There is something like that for Israel at camera.org. Is there a progressive analog?
July 17, 2009 8:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
What about www.factcheck.org?
July 18, 2009 2:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
Velcro,
I'm right there with you.
Ive been thinking about exactly that for some time now, and I believe a crowd-sourced site could do it.
Perhaps the user would cut & paste the offending URL into the site's search box, and--if the corrections for that page had been done--up it would pop. There might be several different takes on the "correct" info.
Like Wikipedia, trusted sources would emerge over time.
July 17, 2009 10:28 PM | Reply | Permalink