View Full Version : The Only Adult In The Room
test
Pages :
1
[
2]
3
4
5
6
7
8
Republicans Down on Palin; Democrats Like Obama
By Patrick O'Connor
Sarah Palin isn’t the fan favorite among Republican voters that she was two years ago, according to a new CNN poll.
Sarah Palin speaks during a trip to Haiti earlier this month. [[Photo by Allison Shelley/Getty Images)
Of the 470 Republicans polled, 51% said they wouldn’t support the former Alaska governor if she runs for president in 2012. That’s an 18-point jump from a similar poll taken two years ago after the last presidential election. That earlier poll, taken in December 2008, showed 67% of the respondents supporting a Palin presidential bid with only 33% saying they weren’t likely to support her.
In contrast, the numbers for two of the three other Republicans CNN used in its poll – former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee – remain largely unchanged from two years ago. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney is down nine percentage points from December 2008, when 61% of Republicans said they’d support him for president.
Mr. Huckabee garnered the most support this year, with 67% of the respondents saying they’d back him [[up from 65% two years earlier), followed by Mr. Gingrich at 54% [[up from 52%) and Mr. Romney at 52%.
Read Full Article Here [[http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2010/12/28/republicans-down-on-palin-democrats-like-obama/)
Obama in the Age of Accommodation
Melissa Harris-Perry
Reposted from The Nation [[http://www.thenation.com/article/157285/obama-age-accommodation)
Barack Obama's candidacy inspired comparisons to change agents like Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., Ella Baker and the Rev. Jesse Jackson. Critics of his presidency have invoked Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton to portray him as weak and to decry his rightward shift. In my circle of African-American progressive academics and advocates, the name hissed with particular derision recently is Booker T. Washington, who at the turn of the twentieth century publicly articulated his acceptance of segregation, brokered compromises on racial disenfranchisement and emphasized individual effort over structural justice. To equate President Obama with Booker T. Washington is to suggest that the president is willingly complicit in atrocities of inequality.
The age of Washington is most frequently remembered as an age of accommodation, when black people, led by Washington, cowered beneath the descending shadow of Jim Crow. But in her brilliant new book, Right to Ride: Streetcar Boycotts and African American Citizenship in the Era of Plessy v. Ferguson, my friend and colleague Blair Kelley alters our understanding of this era. Kelley tells us that the early decades of the twentieth century were not exclusively the story of an accommodating race leader. She details aggressive, organized and courageous protest communities in the South. Far from accepting Jim Crow as a fait accompli, journalists, community leaders, laborers and educators coordinated efforts to resist segregation and disenfranchisement. It turns out that the age of accommodation was not so accommodating after all; these decades are better understood as a time of "thwarted resistance," Kelley tells us, "because their protests ultimately failed, their efforts have not been well remembered."
Kelley's scholarship reminds us that accommodation is not the same as failure. The men and women of the early twentieth century were not cowards but activists who were forced to bow to, as W.E.B. Du Bois described it, "superior brute force."
This rendering of the nadir of American racial history forces progressives to rethink some of our criticism of the president and to reconsider our role in his administration. In American political history, thwarted resistance is more common than sweeping social change. Efforts to effect change are likely to meet with years of failure before experiencing even the glimmers of success. And in every decade, change is as much the work of courageous citizens as it is the responsibility of empowered leaders.
These lessons were readily apparent when the lame-duck Congressional session of 2010 brought with it hard-fought successes, painful losses and the difficult pill of compromise. In a nearly inexplicable bipartisan effort the Senate voted to end the military's homophobic "don't ask, don't tell" policy. Just hours earlier another bipartisan group defeated common-sense immigration policy reform when five Democratic senators joined solid GOP resistance to the DREAM Act. The day before, President Obama simultaneously protected unemployment benefits and likely ensured deepening economic inequality by signing a two-year extension of the Bush tax cuts. The proximity of the win, the loss and the compromise produced whiplash for progressives unsure of whether to applaud or boo the president.
But focusing on the role of President Obama is less important than asking about our own accountability in these outcomes; the real issue is the work of organized citizens. Consider the week's biggest win, the repeal of "don't ask, don't tell." Gay rights activist Frank Kameny led his first protest against the military's exclusion of gay Americans in 1965, so this year's victory was the culmination of forty-five years of struggle. As that battle raged, thousands of soldiers were shamed, silenced, dismissed and disgraced. America lost their talent, skills and contributions. Yet during these years many gay men and lesbians continued to enlist, to shield their identity, to compromise themselves in order to serve. In short, they accommodated to the policy. And even after nearly half a century, repealing "don't ask, don't tell" is an enormous but only a partial win, one that leaves in place discriminatory housing, employment and marriage policies in dozens of states.
These failures and accommodations are not ancillary to struggle; they are the core outcome of struggle. Remember that when Congress passed, and President Johnson signed, the 1964 Civil Rights Act, it was more than fifty years after the protesters Kelley writes about had been repeatedly defeated by the entrenched interests of the segregationist South. The standing ovation belongs less to the legislators of the 1960s than to the crushed movements of the 1900s. These movements failed, but their failures were the groundwork on which the civil rights movement built its success.
The nadir was initiated by the Supreme Court's disastrous decision, in Plessy v. Ferguson [[1896), to uphold the rights of businesses to segregate based on race. This decision revived Confederate dreams of a white supremacist national order and provided the legal tools to enact it. Our moment is marked by the Court's landmark decision to uphold the election spending rights of corporations in Citizens United. In its wake, the next Congress will feature a well-financed Republican House majority buoyed by a vocal right-wing populist movement and a newly emboldened and fiercely obstructionist minority in the Senate. Arguably, progressives are facing a "superior brute force." It is an era that will undoubtedly produce failures and likely require accommodations. But failure is not an excuse to stop struggling or a reason to deride those who must, and who will, sometimes bow to the opposition. Kelley's reassessment of the nadir encourages us to measure accomplishment with a long view, to judge first our willingness to sacrifice and refuse to denounce as cowards those who fail today so that we can win tomorrow.
Obama works around Congress on healthcare, climate change policy
By Jason Millman and Andrew Restuccia - 12/30/10 06:00 AM ET
Republicans are preparing an array of budgetary, legislative and political strategies to fight regulatory action by President Obama.
Without Speaker Nancy Pelosi [[D-Calif.) and a majority in the House, Obama is expected to rely heavily on his executive power to influence policy over the next two years.
To counter that effort, Republicans hope to cut off funding for the new healthcare law and, through legislation, to block efforts by agencies to regulate greenhouse gas emissions and the Internet.
“We will not allow the administration to regulate what they have been unable to legislate,” Rep. Fred Upton [[R-Mich.), the incoming chairman of the House Energy and Natural Resources Committee, said last week.
Read More [[http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/135417-healthcare-climate-change-at-center-of-pending-obama-gop-regulatory-war)
Why so frightened, GOP?
By Eugene Robinson
WASHINGTON -- It's been not quite two months' time since Republicans won a sweeping midterm victory, and already they seem divided, embattled and -- not to mince words -- freaked out. For good reason, I might add.
Sen. Lindsey Graham captured the mood with his mordant assessment of the lame-duck Congress: "Harry Reid has eaten our lunch." Graham's complaint was that the GOP acquiesced to a host of Democratic initiatives -- giving President Obama a better-than-expected deal on taxes, eliminating "don't ask, don't tell," ratifying the New START treaty -- rather than wait for the new, more conservative Congress to arrive.
It was a "capitulation ... of dramatic proportions," Graham said in a radio interview last week. "I can understand the Democrats being afraid of the new Republicans. I can't understand Republicans being afraid of the new Republicans."
Full Article [[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/27/AR2010122703988.html?nav=emailpage)
Who speaks for the Republicans?
By Ezra Klein
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/Pic1-1.gif
When the inevitable showdown between the revived Republican Party and the Obama White House occurs, who will speak for the Republicans? In 1994, they had Bob Dole and Newt Gingrich, both of whom were nationally credible leaders, at least at the time. But looking through Gallup's "most admired" poll, Republicans haven't coalesced around any similarly serious names -- or really anyone at all.
The most admired man in America, by a wide margin, is Barack Obama. Three of the four most-admired women in America are associated with either the Obama campaign or the Obama presidency [[Hillary Clinton clocks in at No. 1, and Oprah Winfrey and Michelle Obama take the third and fourth slots).
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/Pic2-1.gif
The closest thing the GOP has to a Dole or a Gingrich is Sarah Palin, whose interests and messages frequently diverge from those of the Republican Party and who polls very poorly among the broader populace.
Perhaps the idea that you need a leader to deliver your message is outdated in an age when Fox News and other outlets that are willing to create and push the message on their own. But I rather doubt it, particularly as Obama's brand remains surprisingly strong and the Republican brand surprisingly weak despite the results of the 2010 election. One reason for that strength, I think, is the absence of a viable alternative.
It's sort of a shame for the GOP that Mitt Romney turned out to be such an unlikable and untrustworthy candidate. His business experience and executive accomplishments would've made him a good standard-bearer in this political climate. And you could certainly imagine a world in which John McCain had run a different campaign in 2008 and, though he'd lost, remained broadly admired among the public. Add in some savvy positioning during the last two years, and people might have begun wondering whether they'd made the right choice. But in the world we're in, he doesn't even register on the Republican side of the poll.
Repost from The Washington Post [[http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/12/who_speaks_for_the_republicans.html)
Jobless claims drop below 400,000 mark
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/chart_jobless_claimstop.gif
By Hibah Yousuf, staff reporterDecember 30, 2010: 9:36 AM ET
NEW YORK [[CNNMoney.com) -- The number of Americans filing for their first week of unemployment benefits fell below 400,000 for the first time in more than two years, pointing to continued improvement in the job market.
The number of initial claims fell to 388,000 in the week ended Dec. 25, down 34,000 from an upwardly revised 422,000 claims filed the week before, the Labor Department said Thursday. That's the lowest level of claims since the week ending July 12, 2008, when there 385,000 initial filings.
Full Article [[http://money.cnn.com/2010/12/30/news/economy/jobless_claims/)
Four reasons for optimism in the 2011 economy
Posted by Nin-Hai Tseng, writer-reporter
December 30, 2010 5:00 am
There are real signs that the economic recovery will gain strength next year, but that doesn't change the fact that most Americans still won't feel it.
It was around this time last year when it seemed like the U.S. economy was steering into better days. Businesses were investing more on equipment and software and consumer spending was stable. Exports rose at a healthy pace. And after aggressively reducing goods in stores and warehouses amid one of the deepest recessions in recent American history, companies were starting to restock – helping boost GDP during the last quarter of 2009 to a breakneck pace of 5.7%, the economy's largest growth spurt in six years.
Such indicators suggested a brighter outlook, but somehow the momentum abruptly faded as debt problems in parts of Europe escalated and government stimulus spending faded. By mid 2010, many who had thought a real recovery was finally under way were left mystified. They worried the economy might slip back into a recession.
As the New Year approaches, the latest economic indicators have analysts suggesting – again – that things will get better in 2011. But will the outcome really be any different this time around?
A few indicators, according to Lexington, Mass.-based economic forecasting firm IHS Global Insight, have helped build the case that things will improve in the coming year:
Full Article [[http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2010/12/30/four-reasons-for-optimism-in-the-2011-economy/?iid=EAL)
Reasons to cheer a jump in temp hiring
Posted by Nin-Hai Tseng, writer-reporter
December 29, 2010 5:00 am
Companies are hiring, but more often they're bringing on temporary employees to meet their labor needs. Will a rise in temps lead to more permanent hiring?
With more than 15 million people in the U.S. out of work and the latest unemployment rate edging slightly higher, it's hard to see how anyone could build a case proving today's job market isn't all doom and gloom.
Last week, The New York Times chronicled how companies are hiring again -- but this time, they're favoring no-strings, easily fireable temporary workers instead of benefits-earning permanent employees. The rise of temps, the Times suggested, was a bad a thing, putting workers in a tough spot that promised less job security. Since January, employers have added 307,000 temps, which is more than one quarter of the 1.17 million private sector jobs added in total. In November alone, temps made up about 80% of the 50,000 jobs added by private companies.
It's true that most would prefer a permanent job rather than something temporary. But the rise of temps may portend more aggressive hiring trends ahead.
Full Article [[http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2010/12/29/reasons-to-cheer-a-jump-in-temp-hiring/?iid=EAL)
Obama to install deputy attorney general
WASHINGTON [[Reuters) - President Barack Obama plans to install James Cole as the deputy attorney general, the No. 2 position at the Justice Department, after Senate Republican objections stalled his nomination, the White House said on Wednesday.
Obama plans to use a recess appointment to bypass the Senate for Cole, 58, who has been a partner at the law firm Bryan Cave LLP since 1995, the White House said in a statement.
The position has been vacant since February when the previous deputy attorney general, David Ogden, resigned in part because of a rocky relationship with U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder.
The Senate Judiciary Committee approved Cole's nomination in July but Republicans expressed concerns about his approach to terrorism cases and his work for troubled insurer American International Group.
Obama's fellow Democrats in the Senate tried to confirm Cole by unanimous consent but Republicans objected.
Cole's appointment comes as the caseload at the Justice Department has grown significantly this year, particularly in the terrorism area. He is expected to be able to serve until the end of 2011, or longer if the Senate votes to confirm him.
Full Article [[http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6BS3NF20101229)
Obama administration sues BP, others over Gulf spill
By Jeremy Pelofsky and James Vicini
WASHINGTON | Wed Dec 15, 2010 11:16pm EST
WASHINGTON [[Reuters) - The Obama administration on Wednesday launched a legal battle against BP Plc and its partners by suing them for the worst offshore oil spill in U.S. history, which could cost the companies billions of dollars.
The lawsuit seeks damages from the well owners BP, Anadarko Petroleum Corp and Mitsui & Co Ltd unit MOEX, and well driller Transocean Ltd and its insurer QBE Underwriting/Lloyd's Syndicate 1036, part of Lloyds of London, for their roles in the Gulf of Mexico disaster.
"While today's civil action marks a critical step forward, it is not a final step," U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder told reporters at a news conference.
"Both our criminal and civil investigations are continuing, and our work to ensure that the American taxpayers are not forced to bear the costs of restoring the Gulf area -- and its economy -- goes on," he said.
Full Article
[[http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6BE59J20101216)
Obama courts U.S. business to spur hiring
President Obama, trying to improve strained relations with the corporate world, prodded America’s top business executives to spend more money to boost hiring and the economy. “We focused on jobs and investment and they feel optimistic that, by working together, we can get some of the cash off the sidelines,” Obama said after more than four hours with 20 company leaders.
For more of this story by Alister Bull, read here. [[http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1514922520101215)
Production data point to sustained recovery
Industrial production rose at its fastest pace in four months in November, implying a self-sustaining recovery is now entrenched, but a mild gain in consumer prices indicated still abundant slack in the economy.
For more of this story by Lucia Mutikani, read here.
[[http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1512298120101215)
Business Activity in U.S. Grows at Fastest Pace in Two Decades
By Bob Willis - Dec 30, 2010 10:21 AM ET
Businesses in the U.S. expanded in December at the fastest pace in two decades, adding to evidence the world’s largest economy is accelerating heading into 2011.
The Institute for Supply Management-Chicago Inc. said today its business barometer rose to 68.6 this month, exceeding the most optimistic forecast of economists surveyed by Bloomberg News and the highest level since July 1988. Figures greater than 50 signal expansion.
Gains in business investment on new equipment and growing exports to emerging economies will keep factories churning out goods in the coming year, contributing to the recovery. Reports showing consumer spending is also picking up mean retailers will need to restock shelves, giving manufacturing a further lift.
Read Full Article
[[http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-12-30/chicago-purchasing-managers-index-unexpectedly-climbed-to-68-6-this-month.html?t=TOP-OK&pos=1)
Pending Sales of U.S. Existing Homes Rose 3.5% in November
By Bob Willis - Dec 30, 2010 11:20 AM ET
The number of contracts to buy previously owned homes rose more than forecast in November, a sign sales are recovering following a post-tax credit plunge.
The index of pending resales increased 3.5 percent after jumping a record 10 percent in October, the National Association of Realtors said today in Washington. The median forecast in a Bloomberg News survey called for a 0.8 percent rise in November, and the gain was the fourth in five months. The group’s data go back to 2001.
Home demand is stabilizing after sales collapsed to a record low in July, as the effects of a tax incentive worth as much as $8,000 waned. A jobless rate hovering near 10 percent means foreclosures will remain elevated and any recovery in housing, the industry that precipitated the worst recession since the 1930s, will take time to develop.
Read Full Article
[[http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-12-30/pending-sales-of-existing-homes-rose-3-5-in-november-exceeding-forecasts.html)
stephanie
12-31-2010, 11:03 AM
Ms M you will appreciate this it is one of the best essays I have seen written by a medical professional and well to do person.
Steph
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sam-harris/a-new-years-resolution-fo_b_802480.html
MotownSteve
12-31-2010, 04:38 PM
Hi Steph,
Agreed. A very worthwhile read.
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/happy_new_year.jpg
Great article Stephanie.
60-70% is about what many other nations tax their top tier folks.
According to the economist, the next two years without the extra income from the 2% crowd and we will be fine but after that, all bets are off. We shall see how it all plays out.
The Washington Monthly
QUIETLY EXECUTING A NATIONAL SECURITY TRIUMPH....
One of the year's biggest national security developments actually gets overlooked. In April, at the kickoff of the Nuclear Security Summit, the Obama administration reached an agreement with the Ukrainian government on the country giving up its entire stockpile of highly enriched uranium, inherited after the fall of the Soviet Union.
For those concerned about the security of the most dangerous material on the planet, this was quite a breakthrough. What we didn't know until last night is that the process of moving more than 110 pounds of highly enriched uranium -- enough to make two nuclear bombs -- was quietly completed this week.
It sounds like something out of a spy thriller, but this was, by all accounts, an extremely complicated, extremely dangerous, process involving five flights in four countries and 21 specially designed casks carrying previously unsecured uranium to a secure facility. Andrew Bieniawski, the U.S. agency's associate deputy administrator for global threat reduction, said, "This may have been the most complicated operation NNSA has done in recent years."
The result, of course, is a safer world. If you watch one clip today, make it this one from last night, in which Rachel Maddow interviewed Thomas D'Agostino, head of the U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration.
Also note, President Obama established a goal early on of securing all vulnerable nuclear material around the world within four years -- a task that encompasses locking down materials in 35 countries. Less than two years later, the U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration has completed its work in 19 of those countries, and D'Agostino believes the agency is on track to meet the White House's deadline.
The political world covers quite a bit of ground, but arguably nothing is quite as important to global security as this. The developments in Ukraine are a triumph to be celebrated.
Reposted from Washington Monthly/Also see Video Here with Rachel Maddow [[http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_12/027328.php)
Major Health Care Reforms Take Effect January 1
Brian Beutler | December 31, 2010, 11:39AM
Starting Saturday, two of the new health care law's most significant reforms take effect -- or at least begin to take effect.
The first will dramatically clamp down on insurance industry waste, abuse, and excesses. Starting on New Year's Day, insurance companies will have to spend at least 80 percent of the revenues they receive from premiums on actual health care. Not on salaries or overhead.
Like so many of the law's early reforms, the impact of a strict "medical loss ratio" will be invisible to most consumers. But don't mistake that for insignificance. The bill's most strident critics cite this one provision as the basis for the claim that the government is "taking over" the health care system. That's a false claim, no matter how you slice it -- this is about insurance companies, not, say, hospitals or pharmaceuticals, and those insurers are all still private. They'll just have to play by stricter rules.
Read Full Article [[http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/12/major-health-care-reforms-take-effect-january-1.php?ref=fpa)
Op-Ed
Obama's Critics Owe Him a New Years [[Fact-Based) Apology
Frank Schaeffer
New York Times best-selling author
The left of the left -- at least as represented by some of its commentators hovering around the Democratic Party -- has a choice: make a New Years' resolution to rejoin the reality-based community, or head for its own version of Tea Party la-la Land negativity.
Or put it this way: commentators like Paul Krugman owe President Obama an apology, an "I was wrong" about the economy, the direction of our country, the success of President Obama's methods of "compromise" [[as opposed to their's of "bold" ideological intransigence...)
Why? Because 2011 will see the USA rebounding, the Democratic Party doing well in 2012, the country in boom times by 2013 and the President having a great second term.
Full Article Here [[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/frank-schaeffer/obamas-lefty-critics-owe-_b_802911.html)
Tea Party Activists Angry at G.O.P. Leaders
By KATE ZERNIKE
After victories in the midterm elections, resentment over spending, “caving” and leadership choices.
As Tea Party politicians prepare to take their seats when the 112th Congress convenes this week, they are already taking issue with Republicans for failing to hold the line against the flurry of legislation enacted in the waning weeks of Democratic control of the House of Representatives and for not giving some candidates backed by Tea Party groups powerful leadership positions.
Just a month ago, Tea Party leaders were celebrating their movement’s victories in the midterm elections. But as Congress wrapped up an unusually productive lame-duck session last month, those same Tea Party leaders were lamenting that Washington behaved as if it barely noticed that American voters had repudiated the political establishment.
In their final days controlling the House, Democrats succeeded in passing legislation that Tea Party leaders opposed, including a bill to cover the cost of medical care for rescue workers at the site of the World Trade Center attacks, an arms-control treaty with Russia, a food safety bill and a repeal of the ban on gay men and lesbians serving openly in the military.
Full Article [[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/02/us/politics/02teaparty.html?_r=1)
President Obama and Republicans differ on political priorities for 2011
By Nia-Malika Henderson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, January 2, 2011; 12:09 AM
President Obama and Republicans laid out their parties' resolutions for the New Year, pledging in weekly addresses to tackle the economy and cut spending in the new Congress, which convenes Wednesday.
Obama, who during the lame-duck session of Congress touted the passage of major bills along bipartisan lines as a road map for further compromise, said Saturday that his main goal is to "do everything I can to make sure our economy is growing, creating jobs and strengthening our middle class. That's my resolution for the coming year."
He also said he would need help making good on that resolution.
Full Article with Video
[[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/01/AR2011010100877.html?hpid=topnews)
Op-Ed
Obama's recess appointment that makes sense
By Ruth Marcus
I gave President Obama some grief last summer for bypassing the Senate and making a precipitous recess appointment for Donald Berwick, his choice to oversee the Medicare and Medicaid programs.
I have a completely different take on the president's latest such move, to issue a recess appointment for James Cole to serve as deputy attorney general, the No. 2 position at the Justice Department.
This time around, the maneuver was justified.
My assessment has nothing to do with the individuals or positions involved, everything to do with the differences in process. Berwick had been nominated a mere three months before the president chose to appoint him while the Senate was not in session. He had not yet had a committee hearing. His Senate vetting was not complete.
Full Article [[http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2010/12/obamas_recess_appointment_that.html)
Small business borrowing jumps again
By James B. Kelleher James B. Kelleher – Mon Jan 3, 5:27 am ET
CHICAGO [[Reuters) – Borrowing by small U.S. businesses jumped in November to the highest level in more than two years, PayNet Inc reported on Monday, as entrepreneurs invested in their businesses and did a better job of paying existing debts.
The Thomson Reuters/PayNet Small Business Lending Index, which measures the overall volume of financing to U.S. small businesses, rose 17 percent in November from a year earlier, PayNet said.
It was the fourth straight double-digit jump and the ninth consecutive monthly increase of the gauge, which measures the loans, leases and lines of credit that small businesses originate to finance investment in their operations.
The index, which uses January 2005 as its base, rose to 88.3 in November, its best showing since September 2008 and up from 79.8 in October and 75.3 last year.
"This provides definitive proof that the small business economy is continuing to grow and recover," Bill Phelan, PayNet's president, said in an interview. "Everywhere you look at the index, it's very, very positive."
Full Story Here [[http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110103/bs_nm/us_paynet)
Administration Prepares to Defy Efforts to Limit Obama’s Options for Guantanamo
by Dafna Linzer
ProPublica, Jan. 3, 2011, 1:17 p.m.
Obama administration officials say they plan to reject Congressional efforts to limit the president's options on Guantanamo, setting the stage for a confrontation between the president and the new Congress on an issue that has been politically divisive since Inauguration Day.
The Guantanamo provisions, which include limits on where and how prisoners can be tried, were attached to a spending bill for military pay and benefits approved by Congress late last year. Some Administration officials are recommending that President Obama sign the spending bill and then issue a “signing statement” challenging at least some of the Guantanamo provisions as intrusions on his constitutional authority. Others have recommended that he express opposition to the Guantanamo sections without addressing their constitutionality.
Read More [[http://www.propublica.org/article/administration-prepares-to-defy-efforts-to-limit-obamas-options-for-guantan)
January 3, 2011
Obama Job Approval Reaches 50% for First Time Since Spring
Returns to that level for first time since late May/early June 2010
by Jeffrey M. Jones
PRINCETON, N.J. -- Barack Obama's job approval rating reached the symbolic 50% mark in the latest three-day average from Gallup Daily tracking. Obama's approval rating has been in the mid-40% range for much of the latter half of 2010. He last hit 50% approval in a three-day average near the end of May/beginning of June.
The latest results are based on Gallup Daily tracking conducted Dec. 28-29 and Jan. 2. Gallup did not conduct its daily poll Dec. 30-Jan. 1.
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/tssuk0ljw0mw8wc5wkbv7g.gif
It is not yet clear if Obama's approval rating will stay above 50% in the coming days; his approval rating in each of the individual days comprising the latest three-day average has remained near the 50% mark. The current 50% average over the last three days could reflect a temporary increase in optimism that Gallup sometimes sees at the beginning of a new year. The latest numbers also come at a time when the president was on vacation in Hawaii and out of the political spotlight, following a highly publicized pre-Christmas session with Congress that resulted in the passage of several major pieces of legislation.
Obama's current approval rating is 80% among Democrats, 47% among independents, and 16% among Republicans in the three most recent days of polling. The figures for independents and Republicans are slightly higher than what Gallup has measured for Obama in recent weeks.
Obama reached 50% on several occasions in early 2010, including averaging 50% or better for full weeks in January, February, April, and May. However, he was never able to sustain ratings above that level for more than two weeks at a time. The last time his weekly averages were 50% or higher for three consecutive weeks was at the end of 2009 and beginning of 2010.
More broadly, Obama's three-day approval averages in 2010 ranged between a low of 41% in mid-August and again in late October to a high of 53% in mid-February.
Gallup will have more on Obama's yearly figures once his full second year in office is complete on Jan. 19.
Reposted from Gallup [[http://www.gallup.com/poll/145442/Obama-Job-Approval-Reaches-First-Time-Spring.aspx)
Op-Ed Columnist
Get Ready for a G.O.P. Rerun
By BOB HERBERT
Published: January 3, 2011
You just can’t close the door on this crowd. The party that brought us the worst economy since the Great Depression, that led us into Iraq and the worst foreign policy disaster in American history, that would like to take a hammer to Social Security and a chisel to Medicare, is back in control of the House of Representatives with the expressed mission of undermining all things Obama.
Once we had Dick Cheney telling us that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and belligerently asserting that deficits don’t matter. We had Phil Gramm, Enron’s favorite senator and John McCain’s economic guru, blithely assuring us in 2008 that we were suffering from a “mental recession.”
[[Mr. Gramm was some piece of work. A champion of deregulation, he was disdainful of ordinary people. “We’re the only nation in the world,” he once said, “where all of our poor people are fat.”)
Read More [[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/04/opinion/04herbert.html?_r=1&hp)
"Obamacare" Kicks in Jan. 1
December 31, 2010 3:59 PM
Millions of seniors will get their first taste of President Obama's health care reform beginning Jan. 1, when key provisions of the bill take effect. Sharyl Attkisson previews what patients might expect throughout 2011.
Health Care Reforms Hit Seniors after Ball Drops
Video [[http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7201804n&tag=related;photovideo)
Or Read text here [[http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/12/31/eveningnews/main7201599.shtml?tag=currentVideoInfo;videoMetaIn fo)
Things Obama Has Done For The Poor That Never Gets Highlighted
As part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and the the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the Obama Administration has made a broad and significant investments to help reduce and assist people that have become victims of the increased poverty made worse by economic crisis.
1) A $20 billion increase for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program [[SNAP), formerly known as Food Stamps.
2) A $1 billion in funding for the Community Services Block Grant [[CSBG) that is intended to revitalize low-income communities via "Job training and placement assistance", "Financial literacy programs", et al, to helping families become self-sufficient.
3) A $2 billion in new Neighborhood Stabilization Funds that will allow ailing neighborhoods be kept maintained.
4) A $1.5 billion in Homelessness Prevention Funds to keep people in their homes and prevent homelessness.
5) A $5 billion increase for the Weatherization Assistance Program to help low income families save on their residential energy expenditures by making their homes more energy efficient.
6) A $4 Billion program, The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, "authorizes funding for federal school meal and child nutrition programs and increases access to healthy food for low-income children."
7) As part of the HCR bill, subsidies will be available to the uninsured and families with income between the 133 percent and 400 percent of poverty level[[$14,404 for individuals and $29,326 for a family of four).
8) Estabilished Open Doors to end the 640,000 men, women and children who are homeless in America by 2020.
9) Increased the amount of federal Pell Grant awards so that funds are available to those with less access to have opportunity.
10) Provided $510 Million for the rehabilitation of Native American housing.
11) Expanded eligibility for Medicaid to all individuals under age 65 with incomes up to 133 percent of the federal poverty level [[$14,400 per year for an individual).
12) Providing assistance to low-income workers through the Earned Income Tax Credit giving millions of working families the break they need.
13) Education being the way out of Poverty, kicked off the "Race to the Top", a $4.3 billion program, that rewards via grants to States that meet a few key benchmarks for reform, and states that outperform the rest.
Read Entire Post Here [[http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/01/things-obama-has-done-for-poor-that.html)
ObamaCare? You Bet He Does
Hilary Rosen
Communications, media and political strategist
Posted: January 4, 2011 09:48 AM
Americans have known our health care system was broken for years. During the 2008 Presidential campaign, tragic stories about health care were the number one subject that people talked to then candidate Obama about. So what is the Republican's top agenda now in Congress? To repeal the progress that has been made. Let's take this fight on with relish this time. I am cheering on the House Democrats that will fight this on the floor this week and praying that Democratic Senators don't get cold feet and want to support repeal action if the House passes a repeal bill.
We simply can't run away from a story with so much success and a law that is just now beginning to show some benefits to the American people.
Democrats and Independents need to rally around the president now. We cannot let the Republicans and the tea partiers get away with continuing to lie about the impact of this bill and negating the actual benefits to so many Americans in need.
Let's take the Republican's signature word and wrap it around their ears.
ObamaCare? You BET he does!
Read Full Article Here [[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hilary-rosen/obamacare-you-bet-he-does_b_804073.html)
The White House
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
January 04, 2011
Statement by the Press Secretary
On Tuesday, January 04, 2011, the President signed into law:
H.R. 81, the “Shark Conservation Act of 2010 and International Fisheries Agreement Clarification Act,” which generally prohibits the removal of shark fins at sea and amends certain laws related to international fisheries;
H.R. 628, which establishes a pilot program regarding the adjudication cases where patent or plant variety protection issues are to be decided;
H.R. 1107, which restates and reorganizes the public contract laws of the United States in Title 41, United Sates Code;
H.R. 1746, the “Predisaster Hazard Mitigation Act of 2010,” which authorizes appropriations for the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Pre-Disaster Mitigation [[PDM) program for FYs 2011-2013;
H.R. 2142, the “GPRA Modernization Act of 2010,” which amends the Government Performance and Results Act to establish a Federal government performance plan;
H.R. 2751, the “FDA Food Safety Modernization Act,” which modernizes the food safety system to better prevent food-borne illness and better respond to outbreaks;
H.R. 4445, the “Indian Pueblo Cultural Center Clarification Act,” which repeals a restriction on the treatment of certain lands held in trust for Indian Pueblos in New Mexico;
H.R. 4602, which designates a facility of the United States Postal Service as the Emil Bolas Post Office;
H.R. 4748, the “Northern Border Counternarcotics Strategy Act of 2010,” which requires the Office of National Drug Control Policy to develop a Northern Boarder Counternarcotics Strategy;
H.R. 4973, the “National Wildlife Refuge Volunteer Improvement Act of 2010,” which reauthorizes and amends authorities relating to volunteer programs and community partnerships for national wildlife refuges;
H.R. 5116, the “America Creating Opportunities to Meaningfully Promote Excellence in Technology, Education, and Science [[America COMPETES) Reauthorization Act of 2010,” which reauthorizes various programs intended to strengthen research and education in the United States related to science, technology, engineering, and mathematics;
H.R. 5133, which designates a facility of the United States Postal Service as the Staff Sergeant Frank T. Carvill and Lance Corporal Michael A. Schwarz Post Office Building;
H.R. 5470, which excludes specified external power supplies from certain energy efficiency standards required by the Energy Policy and Conservation Act;
H.R. 5605, which designates a facility of the United States Postal Service as the George C. Marshall Post Office;
H.R. 5606, which designates a facility of the United States Postal Service as the James M. “Jimmy” Stewart Post Office Building;
H.R. 5655, which designates the Little River Branch facility of the United States Postal Service as the Jesse J. McCrary, Jr. Post Office;
H.R. 5809, the “Diesel Emissions Reduction Act of 2010,” which modifies and reauthorizes through FY 2016 the Environmental Protection Agency’s Diesel Emissions Reduction Program;
H.R. 5877, which designates a facility of the United States Postal Service as the Lance Corporal Alexander Scott Arredondo, United States Marine Corps Post Office Building;
H.R. 5901, which authorizes the U.S. Tax Court to appoint employees under a personnel management system that includes the merit system principles and prohibitions on personnel practices;
H.R. 6392, which designates a facility of the United States Postal Service as the Colonel George Juskalian Post Office Building;
H.R. 6400, which designates a facility of the United States Postal Service as the Earl Wilson, Jr. Post Office;
H.R. 6412, the “Access to Criminal History Records for State Sentencing Commissions Act of 2010,” which requires the Department of Justice to exchange records and information with State sentencing commissions;
H.R. 6510, which directs the General Services Administration to convey to the Military Museum of Texas the parcel of real property in Houston, Texas, on which the museum is located;
H.R. 6533, the “Local Community Radio Act of 2010,” which modifies current restrictions on low-power FM radio stations;
S. 118, the “Section 202 Supportive Housing for the Elderly Act of 2010,” which amends financing and project operation requirements for the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s program to allow for increased housing opportunities for low-income seniors;
S. 841, the “Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act of 2010,” regarding pedestrian safety related to motor vehicles;
S. 1481, the “Frank Melville Supportive Housing Investment Act of 2010,” which amends financing and project operation requirements for the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s program for low income individuals with disabilities;
S. 3036, the “National Alzheimer’s Project Act,” which establishes a National Alzheimer’s Project within the Department of Health and Human Services and an advisory council on Alzheimer’s research, care, and services;
S. 3243, the “Anti-Border Corruption Act of 2010,” which requires the Department of Homeland Security to ensure that all applicants for law enforcement positions with U.S. Customs and Border Protection [[CBP) receive polygraph examinations;
S. 3447, the “Post-9/11 Veterans Education Assistance Improvements Act of 2010,” which amends the Post-9/11 GI Bill, and other educational assistance programs for veterans;
S. 3481, which clarifies the Federal Government’s responsibility to pay reasonable service charges to a State or local government to address stormwater pollution from Federal properties;
S. 3592, which designates a facility of the United States Postal Service as the First Lieutenant Robert Wilson Collins Post Office Building;
S. 3874, the “Reduction of Lead in Drinking Water Act,” which modifies the Safe Drinking Water Act definition of “lead free” with regard to pipes, pipe fittings, plumbing fittings, and fixtures;
S. 3903, which authorizes 99-year leases on land held in trust for the Ohkay Owingeh Pueblo in the State of New Mexico; and
S. 4036, which amends authorities of the National Credit Union Administration.
Re posted from WhiteHouse.gov [[http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/01/04/statement-press-secretary)
A Republican ‘plan’
House GOP ready to start new Congress with foolish repeal of health care
Tuesday, Jan. 4, 2011 | 2:01 a.m.
As they prepare to take control of the House of Representatives this week, Republican leaders are pledging a “clean” repeal of the health care law, setting the tone for the next two years.
With Democrats in control of the White House and the Senate, there is no realistic chance of a full repeal measure succeeding. Republicans, however, plan to move ahead. Rep. Fred Upton of Michigan, who will become chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, told Fox News that there would be a vote on the law before the president’s state of the union speech late this month.
But Republicans just don’t get it. Americans largely support the health care law’s key provisions, and a repeal would once again give insurance companies the right to exclude people from coverage because of preexisting conditions and would reinstate the so-called “doughnut hole” in Medicare prescription coverage.
This is foolish, but the Republican desire to press ahead with repealing the health care law only foreshadows what is to come. They’re playing for the 2012 election, no matter what the public wants, and that will lead to a greater partisan divide and less work done in Washington.
For example, Republicans are already intending to stall work in Congress. Eric Cantor, the incoming House majority leader, last month released the calendar for the House of Representatives that appears to leave little time for work.
Las Vegas Sun Editorial [[http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2011/jan/04/republican-plan/)
destruction
01-05-2011, 09:23 PM
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.
I'm heading over to NRC for the first of several visits tomorrow....and was joking with a guy there about where I can find some lead-lined underwear....He threw it back and said, "All we've got are aluminum g-strings....sorry bud". Then, without prompting, he went into a 5 minute tirade about how he's a long time repub.....and doesn't understand this 'let's make life miserable for the dems' by screwing up the fed budget and government. And so on....and on.
He ended it by saying, "It's one thing to screw with my pay.....Don't F with my job and make me really mad......"
He says that's the prevailing feeling at his org.......and it's pretty reflective of what I've been hearing from other agencies.
I feel ya friend Des, especially since this new House is all smoke and mirrors.
It doesn't matter what they do, it STILL has to get passed a Democratic controlled Senate and a Democratic President with VETO power. All "Boner" and his cronies will do for the next two years is gum up the works unless, they FINALLY decide to work for the country and it's people and not their own self interest and ego.
U.S. Companies Added 297,000 Jobs Last Month, More Than Forecast, ADP Says
By Timothy R. Homan - Jan 5, 2011 8:59 AM ET
Companies in the U.S. boosted payrolls in December by the most since records began in 2001, showing a stronger labor-market recovery at the end of last year, data from a private report showed today.
Employment increased by 297,000, exceeding the highest projection in a Bloomberg News survey, after a revised 92,000 rise in November, according to figures from ADP Employer Services. The median estimate in the Bloomberg survey called for a 100,000 gain last month.
Faster job growth will fuel the income gains necessary to further spur consumer spending, which accounts for about 70 percent of the economy. A Labor Department report in two days will show companies added 150,000 workers last month and the unemployment rate eased to 9.7 percent, according to the Bloomberg survey median.
Full Article [[http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-05/u-s-companies-added-297-000-jobs-last-month-more-than-forecast-adp-says.html)
January 6, 2011, 6:05 am
Democrats Plan Attack on Republican Repeal Effort
By MICHAEL D. SHEAR
Democratic leaders in Washington plan to spend the next week doing what they all but refused to do during the 2010 midterm elections: mount a vigorous defense of President Obama’s health care legislation.
The “all fronts” plan is a response to the decision by the new House speaker, John A. Boehner, to schedule a vote next Wednesday on a complete repeal of the health care law that Mr. Obama signed last March.
Senior Democratic officials said their effort will be managed by a rapid response operation modeled after the ones Mr. Obama used during his presidential campaign. That team will monitor Republican claims, send out fact-checks and deploy a team of surrogates to get their views on television.
Read More [[http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/06/democrats-plan-attack-on-republican-repeal-effort/)
January 5, 2011, 9:56 am
Gibbs to Leave as White House Press Secretary
By JEFF ZELENY
10:30 a.m. | Updated Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary and close confidante to President Obama, said Wednesday that he was stepping down to become an outside political adviser to the president and his re-election campaign.
Doug Mills/The New York Times Robert Gibbs during a briefing with reporters at the White House.
Mr. Gibbs said that he intended to leave in early February. His successor has not yet been decided, he said, but will likely be announced within the next two weeks.
President Obama, who is in the middle of making final decisions on the first major reorganization of his administration, said in a brief telephone interview on Wednesday that Mr. Gibbs would remain a close adviser and “will continue to shape the dialogue politically for many years to come.
Read More [[http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/05/gibbs-to-leave-as-white-house-press-secretary/?hp)
Would Republicans Rush to Repeal Health Law If They Could Make It Stick?
Analysis by
Jill Lawrence
Senior Correspondent
Would House Republicans be rushing to repeal the new health law if they thought they might succeed? Forgive me for being skeptical, but I think not. Democrats have already done the dirty work and heavy lifting, and taken the political hits, for things that we all know must happen. It's hard to believe Republicans would want to start all over again.
Oh sure, they'd like you to believe the Affordable Care Act is a 2,000-page crap sandwich, as our incoming House speaker once described the 2008 bank bailout bill [[and that was only 451 pages). It is big, there's no disputing that. It's got many, many new regulations. And there are certainly things about it that are worth debating. The individual mandate requiring most people to buy health insurance is one of them. The impact on business is another.
But is it really debatable that we must find ways to curb health costs? At a time when a couple with average income will draw Medicare benefits that cost three times as much as they paid in, does the GOP want to repeal the law's 10-year plan to cut the growth of Medicare costs by $500 billion? It's got to be done, as many Republicans have recognized in the past. Erasing the Democrats' work just means they'll have to come up with something on their own, with all the political risk that entails.
Full Article [[http://www.politicsdaily.com/2011/01/04/would-republicans-rush-to-repeal-health-law-if-they-could-make-i/)
Republicans Are Given a Price Tag for Health Law Repeal, but Reject It
By DAVID M. HERSZENHORN and ROBERT PEAR
Published: January 6, 2011
WASHINGTON — The nonpartisan budget scorekeepers in Congress said on Thursday that the Republican plan to repeal President Obama’s health care law would add $230 billion to federal budget deficits over the next decade, intensifying the first legislative fight of the new session and highlighting the challenge Republicans face in pursuing their agenda.
The new House speaker, John A. Boehner, flatly rejected the report, saying it was based largely on chicanery by Democrats.
Mr. Boehner’s dismissal of the report by the Congressional Budget Office, at his first formal news conference as speaker, was the latest salvo in the battle over the health care law. White House officials on Thursday said they were stepping up efforts to defend the law, with a new rapid-response operation to rebut Republican claims and to deploy supporters to talk about the benefits of the law.
Read More [[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/07/us/politics/07cong.html?_r=1&ref=politics)
Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords shot in the head and killed
WASHINGTON [[AP) — Police said that Rep. Gabrielle Giffords [[D-Ariz) was shot in the head and killed today by a gunman who sprayed bullets at a grocery store in Tucson.
The Pima Sheriff's Department confirmed that Giffords, 40, and six others were murdered, according to NPR.com.
NPR said the gunman ran up to the crowd "and began firing indiscriminately" from point-blank range.
The suspect is described as someone in his late teens or early 20s. He was tackled by a bystander and then arrested and taken into custody.
Full Article [[http://trentonian.com/articles/2011/01/08/news/doc4d28b551cbe8d148239504.txt)
In Sept of last year, Sarah Palin made the statements below. I don’t think people realize [[or possibly even care) how dangerous their words might be. There are a lot of unstable individuals out here.
Maybe this was a coincidence and I am NOT implying Palin had anything to do with this but one of the people she cavalierly targeted, is now dead.
Sep 24, 2010
Palin targets health care law supporters on site
Former Alaska governor Sarah Palin is targeting 20 House Democrats who voted for the nation's new health care law and who represent districts that Sen. John McCain carried in the 2008 presidential election.
In a website launched on Thursday, the six-month anniversary of the health care law, Palin puts a bull's-eye on 20 House districts under a headline that reads, "We've diagnosed the problem…Help us prescribe the solution."
Included among Palin's Democratic targets: North Dakota's at-large Rep. Earl Pomeroy, Southeast Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and Virginia Rep. Tom Perriello.
"Join me in standing against those who stood with Obama and Pelosi in voting for this disastrous bill," Palin writes on the site. "Let's replace them with good conservatives who will vote to repeal and replace Obamacare."
Full Article [[http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2010/09/palin-targets-health-care-law-supporters-on-site/1)
UPDATE
The President just spoke
http://www.whitehouse.gov/live
According to the President, Rep. Gabrielle Gifford is still alive but fighting for her life.
I was skeptical how the media would spin this story but at least one media outfit is pointing out a few things...
Sarah Palin's Political Career May Be in Peril Over Gunsight Target Map
By Eugene McCormick. Published on 01/08/2011 - 3:30pm
Palin endorsed Jesse Kelly, who ran against Giffords, who used the tagline:
"Get on Target for Victory in November. Help remove Gabrielle Giffords from office. Shoot a fully automatic M16 with Jesse Kelly."
Full Story Here [[http://www.clevelandleader.com/node/15645)
Obama’s Top Aide a Tough, Decisive Negotiator
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG
Published: January 7, 2011
WASHINGTON — Nobody got fired — at least, not outright — when William M. Daley arrived in Nashville in the summer of 2000 to impose order on Al Gore’s foundering presidential campaign. Aides were bickering, the candidate seemed demoralized and strategy sessions had deteriorated into what Chris Lehane, a Gore adviser, called a “salon-like atmosphere” of endless talk and no decisions.
In marched Mr. Daley as campaign chairman, with his crisp suits and management style to match, fresh from Washington, where he had stepped down as commerce secretary to President Bill Clinton. Suddenly, strategy sessions topped out at 30 minutes. Decisions were made, and adhered to. And once Mr. Daley sized people up, some discovered they had, ahem, fresh assignments.
“He was and is a bare-knuckles administrator, and by that I mean someone who not only makes the trains run on time, he makes them run ahead of time,” Mr. Lehane said. “He walked into a situation where there were disparate voices and disparate viewpoints and he quickly brought order to the house. He held people accountable. He was not afraid to make decisions.”
Read Full Article [[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/08/us/politics/08daley.html?src=me&ref=us)
Editorial
The Rule of Law
Published: January 7, 2011
To keep the Defense Department running, President Obama was forced to sign a spending bill on Friday with a particularly harmful provision that bars spending to transfer detainees at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, to the United States for trial. As wrongheaded as this prohibition is, the president was right not to declare his intention to defy it in an accompanying statement. By doing so, he demonstrated a greater respect for the law than did President George W. Bush.
The defense bill passed in the final hours of last year’s lame-duck Congressional session with little objection from most Democrats. Many seemed to have bought into the irrational fear that trying Guantánamo prisoners in the United States is somehow more dangerous than trying other mass murderers, like the scores of terrorists already convicted by the federal courts.
Much of the public and most politicians seem to feel that as long as these suspects are held out of sight on the island of Cuba, they can be held indefinitely without trial, in violation of basic constitutional protections and international treaties.
President Obama could have pushed harder on this issue, but he has at least vowed to close the Guantánamo camp and try some of its inmates in federal courts. In the signing statement, Mr. Obama called the ban “a dangerous and unprecedented challenge” to the executive branch’s authority to decide when and where to prosecute detainees. It could undermine counterterrorism efforts and harm national security, he said.
Despite his objections, Mr. Obama did not say he would defy the law and try to transfer prisoners anyway. That was the right position. As a candidate, he often objected to Mr. Bush’s cavalier use of signing statements to assert that his interpretation of the law trumped that of Congress and the courts. Mr. Bush routinely and contemptuously disregarded laws that he himself signed, most famously stating that he was not bound by the ban on torturing prisoners.
The American Civil Liberties Union argues that the bill only restricts the use of Defense Department money for transferring prisoners to the United States. The administration, it argues, is free to use funds from other departments. But such a cramped reading of the law would be seen by most Americans as a defiance of Congressional intent. Taking the high ground puts President Obama in a better position to argue for the rule of law.
Reposted from New York Times Opinion Pages [[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/08/opinion/08sat3.html?_r=2&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha211)
Historic day arrives after decades of war in Sudan
By the CNN Wire Staff
January 9, 2011 -- Updated 1247 GMT [[2047 HKT)
Several million people began deciding Sunday whether to give birth to the world's newest nation.
They started casting ballots on whether to declare independence at polling stations sprinkled across the vast, flat plains of Southern Sudan, an East African landscape long riven by chaos.
War and famine have ravaged generations in the south for as long as anyone can remember. Fighting forced more people from their homes than in any other nation on earth. Hope remained elusive.
Yet the vote has given many southerners the rare sense of exhilaration that is borne of new beginnings.
For the next seven days, the black Christians and animists in the autonomous region of Southern Sudan will vote on whether to declare independence from a northern government dominated by Arab Muslims. The two sides fought a war that killed 2 million people from 1983 to 2005, when a peace treaty set the stage for the upcoming vote.
Nearly 4 million have registered to cast ballots. Few doubt the outcome.
Full Article [[http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/01/09/sudan.historic.day.arrives/)
Oil and power at center of vote to split Sudan
By Peter Wilkinson, CNN
January 6, 2011 -- Updated 1753 GMT [[0153 HKT)
Southern Sudan is scheduled to start voting on January 9 on whether to become an independent country or remain part of Sudan, Africa's largest nation which has been wracked by decades of conflict.
So how have the people of Sudan reached the point where the country could split?
Sudan, which is a quarter the size of the United States but home to just 44 million people, was ravaged by civil war even before it gained independence from Britain in 1956. Decades of fighting, famine and factionalism followed with every horror imaginable. The referendum is a key provision of a 2005 peace treaty that ended a bloody north-south civil war in Sudan that killed 2 million people and displaced several million others, mainly from Southern Sudan, from 1983 to 2005. It pitted the powerful northern government of Arab Muslims against blacks in Southern Sudan who practice Christianity and animist religions.
What was the root cause of the conflict?
Southerners rebelled in 1955 against what they saw as domination from the north as the country neared independence. Nearly all jobs in the new national government went to northerners. The northern government later sought to impose sharia, or Islamic law, on the non-Muslim south. That further polarized the two sides. The war has had overtones of religious and racial conflict, but it's also a fight for power. One scholar has described it as a "clash of identities in competition over power and resources." The north-south conflict is separate from violence in the western Sudanese region of Darfur, which has undergone its own tentative peace process.
Full Article [[http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/01/04/sudan.qa/index.html)
Op-Ed Contributor
In Sudan, an Election and a Beginning
By BARACK OBAMA
Published: January 8, 2011
NOT every generation is given the chance to turn the page on the past and write a new chapter in history. Yet today — after 50 years of civil wars that have killed two million people and turned millions more into refugees — this is the opportunity before the people of southern Sudan.
Over the next week, millions of southern Sudanese will vote on whether to remain part of Sudan or to form their own independent nation. This process — and the actions of Sudanese leaders — will help determine whether people who have known so much suffering will move toward peace and prosperity, or slide backward into bloodshed. It will have consequences not only for Sudan, but also for sub-Saharan Africa and the world.
The historic vote is an exercise in self-determination long in the making, and it is a key part of the 2005 peace agreement that ended the civil war in Sudan. Yet just months ago, with preparations behind schedule, it was uncertain whether this referendum would take place at all. It is for this reason that I gathered with leaders from Sudan and around the world in September to make it clear that the international community was united in its belief that this referendum had to take place and that the will of the people of southern Sudan had to be respected, regardless of the outcome.
In an important step forward, leaders from both northern and southern Sudan — backed by more than 40 nations and international organizations — agreed to work together to ensure that the voting would be timely, peaceful, free and credible and would reflect the will of the Sudanese people. The fact that the voting appears to be starting on time is a tribute to those in Sudan who fulfilled their commitments. Most recently, the government of Sudan said that it would be the first to recognize the south if it voted for independence.
Full Article [[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/09/opinion/09obama.html?_r=4)
Shooting throws spotlight on state of U.S. political rhetoric
By Michael Martinez, CNN
January 9, 2011 9:10 a.m. EST
[[CNN) -- The tenor of American political rhetoric became a centerpiece in the national debate over Saturday's attack by a gunman in Tucson, Arizona, that killed six people and left local Democratic congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords with a bullet wound to the brain.
Public leaders and others expressed sorrow about "a tragedy for the entire country," as President Obama put it -- a total of 18 people allegedly shot by 22-year-old Jared Lee Loughner.
But officials also voiced dismay Saturday over the possibility that highly polarized rhetoric in the conservative hotbed of Arizona may have played a role in the assassination attempt of the Democratic congresswoman, who was targeted during a meet-and-greet with constituents in a shopping center. A federal judge, a girl age 9, and four other people died in the mass killing.
While not stating a motive for the shootings, Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik in Tucson used a nationally televised press conference to condemn the tone of political discourse in his state. He charged that public debate is now "vitriolic rhetoric," which has rendered Arizona "the mecca for prejudice and bigotry."
Dupnik suggested that such rhetoric can have deadly consequences.
Full Article [[http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/01/09/arizona.shooting.rhetoric/)
Another Ohio Democrat, Steve Driehaus, clashed repeatedly with Boehner before losing his seat in the midterm elections. After Boehner suggested that by voting for Obamacare, Driehaus "may be a dead man" and "can't go home to the west side of Cincinnati" because "the Catholics will run him out of town," Driehaus began receiving death threats, and a right-wing website published directions to his house. Driehaus says he approached Boehner on the floor and confronted him.
"I didn't think it was funny at all," Driehaus says. "I've got three little kids and a wife. I said to him, 'John, this is bullshit, and way out of bounds. For you to say something like that is wildly irresponsible.'"
Driehaus is quick to point out that he doesn't think Boehner meant to urge anyone to violence. "But it's not about what he intended — it's about how the least rational person in my district takes it. We run into some crazy people in this line of work." [[emphasis mine)
Driehaus says Boehner was "taken aback" when confronted on the floor, but never actually said he was sorry: "He said something along the lines of, 'You know that's not what I meant.' But he didn't apologize."
The Crying Shame of John Boehner
He's a lazy, double-talking shill for corporate interests. So how's he going to fare with the Tea Party?
By Matt Taibbi
January 5, 2011 1:15 PM EDT
John Boehner is the ultimate Beltway hack, a man whose unmatched and self-serving skill at political survival has made him, after two decades in Washington, the hairy blue mold on the American congressional sandwich. The biographer who somewhere down the line tackles the question of Boehner's legacy will do well to simply throw out any references to party affiliation, because the thing that has made Boehner who he is — the thing that has finally lifted him to the apex of legislative power in America — has almost nothing to do with his being a Republican.
The Truth About the Tea Party
The Democrats have plenty of creatures like Boehner. But in the new Speaker of the House, the Republicans own the perfect archetype — the quintessential example of the kind of glad-handing, double-talking, K Street toady who has dominated the politics of both parties for decades. In sports, we talk about athletes who are the "total package," and that term comes close to describing Boehner's talent for perpetuating our corrupt and debt-addled status quo: He's a five-tool insider who can lie, cheat, steal, play golf, change his mind on command and do anything else his lobbyist buddies and campaign contributors require of him to get the job done.
Full Article [[http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/matt-taibbi-the-crying-shame-of-john-boehner-20110105?page=1)
It’s encouraging to see someone in the media taking responsibility for their over the top rhetoric. Everyone needs to sit back and reflect on their words and tone down the violent metaphors. Media and We The People alike.
Freedom of speech comes with responsibility and it's time this nation become more responsible while engaging in political discourse.
Keith Olbermann Issues Special Comment On Arizona Shooting: 'Violence Has No Place In Democracy'
First Posted: 01- 8-11 11:11 PM | Updated: 01- 9-11 05:01 AM
In the wake of Saturday's tragic shootings in Arizona, which have claimed the lives of six individuals and left many more, including Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, critically injured, Keith Olbermann delivered an important message about the place of violence within our democracy.
Appearing on a special edition of "Countdown," Olbermann told his audience that "we need to put the guns down. Just as importantly we need to put the gun metaphors away and permanently."
Olbermann continued, "Left, right, middle - politicians and citizens - sane and insane. This morning in Arizona, this age in which this country would accept "targeting" of political opponents and putting bullseyes over their faces and of the dangerous blurring between political rallies and gun shows, ended."
He concluded his special comment with this powerful statement, including an apology for his own actions: "Violence, or the threat of violence, has no place in our Democracy, and I apologize for and repudiate any act or any thing in my past that may have even inadvertently encouraged violence. Because for whatever else each of us may be, we all are Americans."
Full Article and Video [[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/08/keith-olbermann-arizona-shooting_n_806311.html)
Less worried about layoffs, job-holders spending more
The same amount of people are working this year compared with last year, but they're breathing easier
January 11, 2011
By PAUL WISEMAN
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON — Ninety percent of the work force has a job, the same as a year ago. But last year, people were still worried about getting laid off. Today, they aren't.
The result is a renewed confidence that's boosted retail sales — just what's needed to spark what economists call a "virtuous cycle": Higher consumer spending raises company profits, which spurs hiring, which fuels more spending and growth.
Consumer spending is critical because it powers about 70 percent of the economy. It's risen without interruption since July, and it powered the strongest holiday shopping season since 2006. Many shoppers are showing enough confidence to splurge on new cars: Auto sales rebounded 11 percent in 2010, the first increase since 2005.
"The strongest showing for consumers since the peak years of the last expansion signals that the broader economy is near a threshold of self-sustaining growth," analysts at Citi Investment Research & Analysis wrote last week.
Full Article [[http://www.mailtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110111/BIZ/101110304)
Ford Adding 7,000 New Jobs
January 10, 2011 11:52 AM
Ford Motor Co. is using the North American International Auto Show to announce that it’s adding 7,000 jobs over the next two years.
Ford Exec. Chairman Bill Ford Jr. says the expansion comes as so many people have worked hard to turn the company around.
“We couldn’t be prouder of what we’ve done over the last four years to get through an incredibly difficult time. To keep our independence, and to do it at a time when we’re introducing award-winning products into the marketplace,” he said.
Ford CEO Allen Mulally says it’s a result of profitably growing the business.
Full Article [[http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2011/01/10/ford-adding-7000-new-jobs/)
Obama and Clinton's Iran strategy: More there than meets the eye?
Posted By David Rothkopf Monday, January 10, 2011 - 4:00 PM
From its start, I have viewed the Iran sanctions regime the Obama administration has helped devise with great skepticism. However, if recent reports are to be believed, the sanctions may someday be seen in retrospect as a vital element of an effective strategy to curtail the Iranian nuclear program. In fact, the possibility is beginning to emerge that they could be seen as part of what may someday be seen as one of the signal triumphs of Obama-Clinton foreign policy.
My initial concerns about the sanctions program were several. First, it was my sense that such sanctions programs tend not to be terribly effective where authoritarian regimes are concerned. Next, sanctions tend not to be effective if they do not are not supported globally by all the economies interacting with the country facing sanctions. Third, in the case of these sanctions, the Russians and the Chinese carved out elements that protected important components of their own trade with Iran. Fourth, my sense is that the Iranians are engaged in a cat and mouse game with the international community in which they make a few seemingly constructive moves, even appear to make concessions, and then continue on with their nuclear development work behind the scenes.
My sense was also that international diplomatic and economic pressure would simply not be enough to really impede their program -- especially if the threat of the use of force to punish them if they did not back down was not credible. And the message from the administration was not tough enough on that last point.
However, when last week, the departing boss of Israel's intelligence service, Meir Dagan, stated that in his view the Iranian program had in fact been set back to the point that it would not be able to develop nuclear weapons until 2015 at the earliest, it suggested that whatever was being done was working. No one, for obvious reasons, takes the Iranian threat more seriously than the Israelis [[although WikiLeaks confirmed for all how worried the Iranians make all their neighbors). If they who had been saying two years ago that the Iranian threat would reach a critical level within a matter of a year or so were now saying it has been pushed out several years, it was more than just an interesting sound bite.
Read More
[[http://rothkopf.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/01/10/obama_and_clintons_iran_strategy_more_there_than_m eets_the_eye)
Re-posted in its entirety from: New York Times Opinion Pages [[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/11/opinion/11herbert.html?_r=1&src=ISMR_HP_LO_MST_FB)
Op-Ed Columnist
A Flood Tide of Murder
By BOB HERBERT
Published: January 10, 2011
By all means, condemn the hateful rhetoric that has poured so much poison into our political discourse. The crazies don’t kill in a vacuum, and the vilest of our political leaders and commentators deserve to be called to account for their demagoguery and the danger that comes with it. But that’s the easy part.
If we want to reverse the flood tide of killing in this country, we’ll have to do a hell of a lot more than bad-mouth a few sorry politicians and lame-brained talking heads. We need to face up to the fact that this is an insanely violent society. The vitriol that has become an integral part of our political rhetoric, most egregiously from the right, is just one of the myriad contributing factors in a society saturated in blood.
According to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, more than a million people have been killed with guns in the United States since 1968, when Robert Kennedy and the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. were killed. That figure includes suicides and accidental deaths. But homicides, deliberate killings, are a perennial scourge, and not just with guns.
Excluding the people killed in the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, more than 150,000 Americans have been murdered since the beginning of the 21st century. This endlessly proliferating parade of death, which does not spare women or children, ought to make our knees go weak. But we never even notice most of the killings. Homicide is white noise in this society.
The overwhelming majority of the people who claim to be so outraged by last weekend’s shooting of Representative Gabrielle Giffords and 19 others — six of them fatally — will take absolutely no steps, none whatsoever, to prevent a similar tragedy in the future. And similar tragedies are coming as surely as the sun makes its daily appearance over the eastern horizon because this is an American ritual: the mowing down of the innocents.
On Saturday, the victims happened to be a respected congresswoman, a 9-year-old girl, a federal judge and a number of others gathered at the kind of civic event that is supposed to define a successful democracy. But there are endless horror stories. In April 2007, 32 students and faculty members at the Virginia Polytechnic Institute were shot to death and 17 others were wounded by a student armed with a pair of semiautomatic weapons.
On a cold, rainy afternoon in Pittsburgh in 2009, I came upon a gray-haired woman shivering on a stone step in a residential neighborhood. “I’m the grandmother of the kid that killed those cops,” she whispered. Three police officers had been shot and killed by her 22-year-old grandson, who was armed with a variety of weapons, including an AK-47 assault rifle.
I remember having lunch with Marian Wright Edelman, the president of the Children’s Defense Fund, a few days after the Virginia Tech tragedy. She shook her head at the senseless loss of so many students and teachers, then told me: “We’re losing eight children and teenagers a day to gun violence. As far as young people are concerned, we lose the equivalent of the massacre at Virginia Tech about every four days.”
If we were serious, if we really wanted to cut down on the killings, we’d have to do two things. We’d have to radically restrict the availability of guns while at the same time beginning the very hard work of trying to change a culture that glorifies and embraces violence as entertainment, and views violence as an appropriate and effective response to the things that bother us.
Ordinary citizens interested in a more sane and civilized society would have to insist that their elected representatives take meaningful steps to stem the violence. And they would have to demand, as well, that the government bring an end to the wars overseas, with their terrible human toll, because the wars are part of the same crippling pathology.
Without those very tough steps, the murder of the innocents by the tens of thousands will most assuredly continue.
I wouldn’t hold my breath. The Gabrielle Giffords story is big for the time being, but so were Columbine and Oklahoma City. And so was the anti-white killing spree of John Muhammad and Lee Malvo that took 10 lives in Maryland, Virginia and Washington, D.C., in October 2002. But no amount of killing has prompted any real remedial action.
For whatever reasons, neither the public nor the politicians seem to really care how many Americans are murdered — unless it’s in a terror attack by foreigners. The two most common responses to violence in the U.S. are to ignore it or be entertained by it. The horror prompted by the attack in Tucson on Saturday will pass. The outrage will fade. The murders will continue.
The President and First Lady observe a moment of silence to honor the victims of the shooting in Tucson, Arizona
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/ari21.jpg
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/ari22.jpg
Tom DeLay, former U.S. House leader, sentenced to 3 years in prison
By R. Jeffrey Smith
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, January 10, 2011; 8:45 PM
AUSTIN - Former House majority leader Tom DeLay, the brash Texan who helped build and tightly control a Republican majority in his chamber until resigning in 2005, was sentenced by a state judge on Monday to three years in prison for illegally plotting to funnel corporate contributions to Texas legislative candidates.
State Senior Judge Pat Priest, citing the need for those who write the laws to "be bound by them," rejected DeLay's impassioned argument that he was the victim of political persecution and was improperly accused of breaking the law for doing what "everybody was doing."
Priest said he agreed with a jury's verdict in November that DeLay had committed a felony by conspiring to launder corporate money into the state election, and ordered bailiffs to take DeLay - wearing a navy blue suit and his trademark American-flag lapel pin - to jail immediately. But he was released when DeLay's attorneys quickly posted a $10,000 bond.
Priest also sentenced DeLay to five years in prison on a separate felony conviction of money laundering, but agreed to let him serve 10 years of community service instead of jail time for that charge. Priest acknowledged that DeLay - who said he had already raised and spent $10 million on his defense - would appeal the verdict to higher courts.
Read More [[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/10/AR2011011000557.html)
Obama to attend Arizona service
By Sam Youngman - 01/10/11 08:07 PM ET
President Obama will travel to Arizona on Wednesday to attend a memorial service for those killed in Saturday's shootings that targeted Rep. Gabrielle Giffords [[D-Ariz.) for assassination, according to a White House official.
The news that Obama would visit Tucson, where six people were killed and more than a dozen others were wounded by a gunmen on Saturday, came after a day in which the shootings overshadowed a White House agenda focused on diplomacy and foreign affairs.
For much of the Monday, the president sought to balance the roles of comforter and commander in chief as he shuttled between work on foreign affairs and comments on the shootings.
White House officials said Obama and his staff were going about administration business even as the shooting cast a pall around the building, leaving officials speaking in hushed tones and the president disclosing that his own reflections were those of a president “and also a father.”
Read More [[http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/137131-obama-white-house-grieving-and-in-shock)
Dem planning bill that would outlaw threats to lawmakers
By Peter Schroeder - 01/09/11 04:08 PM ET
Rep. Robert Brady [[D-Pa.) reportedly plans to introduce legislation that would make it a federal crime to use language or symbols that could be perceived as threatening or inciting violence against a federal official or member of Congress.
Brady told CNN that he wants federal lawmakers and officials to have the same protections against threat currently provided to the president. His call comes one day after Rep. Gabrielle Giffords [[D-Ariz.) was shot, along with 19 other people, at a public event in Tucson. A suspect is currently in custody.
"The president is a federal official," Brady told CNN in a telephone interview. "You can't do it to him; you should not be able to do it to a congressman, senator or federal judge."
Full Article Here [[http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/136895-dem-planning-bill-that-would-outlaw-threatening-lawmakers)
Obama to Eulogize Tucson Victims
By LAURA MECKLER
President Barack Obama will eulogize the victims of the Arizona shooting rampage and celebrate those who helped stem the damage as he travels to Tucson today to take up the role as mourner-in-chief.
White House officials said that in preparing his remarks, the president was mindful of staying focused on last Saturday's events in Tucson, where a gunman killed six and wounded 14 others in what authorities say was an attempt to assassinate Rep. Gabrielle Giffords [[D., Ariz.).
The president will meet with some of the families of the weekend tragedy and then address a community memorial service at the University of Arizona.
Full Article Here [[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704803604576077783525050652.html?m od=WSJ_article_MoreIn_US)
Giffords's Outlook Improves
By ANGEL GONZALEZ
TUCSON, Ariz.—U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords remained in critical condition after brain surgery, but doctors said Tuesday that she would survive Saturday's shooting.
"She has a 101% chance of survival," said Peter Rhee, head of the University of Arizona Medical Center's trauma unit, where Ms. Giffords was brought after being shot in the head at point-blank range while meeting constituents near a Tucson supermarket.
Ms. Giffords has shown some slight movement on one side of her body, and there are signs she could open her eyes soon, Dr. Rhee said.
Full Article [[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703791904576075983804081292.html?m od=WSJ_WSJ_US_News_3)
Healthy choice
The new food safety bill's a bargain, despite critics' plans to block funding
Copyright 2011, HOUSTON CHRONICLE
Jan. 11, 2011, 10:34PM
It took more than 70 years to accomplish, but last week, President Barack Obama signed into law a historic and sorely needed piece of legislation: the Food and Drug Administration Food Safety Modernization Act, the first major overhaul of the agency's food safety provisions since 1938.
Critics have long pointed to the FDA's shortcomings in addressing food-borne illnesses, and the resulting economic and health-related costs. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention put those costs at about $152 billion a year, with annual estimates of about 76 million cases of food-borne illness, an average of 325,000 hospitalizations and 5,000 deaths.
And even though some worry that the new regulations don't go far enough, they're still a giant step forward, giving the agency more tools to forestall dangerous situations rather than reacting after the fact, as has been the case until now.
It now can issue mandatory recalls, require more rigorous standards, hire more inspectors and set standards for imported foods.
Read More [[http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/7377302.html)
stephanie
01-12-2011, 08:31 PM
I cant believe they want to block the funding on this food thing I thought that was something everyone agreed on.
MotownSteve
01-12-2011, 11:21 PM
I watched the broadcast from AZ and it seemed the old Obama, the one who won the election, was back. It was also apparent that Obama and Brewer put aside any differences they might have. Acting like they should, as adults.
Funny you brought that up Steve, That is exactly why I logged on.
I just had the opportunity to watch the video of the speech, he was awesome. He was inspiring, he was honest and President Barack H. Obama was sincere, although I'm sure there will be those that try to pretend otherwise.
Earlier today I read some silly statement from Sarah Palin and simply shook my head at her self serving whining and then I get to watch what a true leader looks and sounds like. There are no words....
For anyone that missed it I'll post the video link below. It's worth the 30 or so minutes of your time. The President is right, we CAN NOT continue the way we have been going. Debate is expected and encouraged, and it should be but the way we debate has to change!!!!!
VIDEO [[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/12/obama-arizona-memorial-sp_n_808335.html)
Pundits weigh in on the President's speech
tweet by Glenn Beck:
Friends tell me I will praise Obama tomorrow. Many hardcore friends say he was "their President" tonight.Wow.Good for him!I'll watch in AM.
No comment on this...
Next, I want to share the words of 11 year old Ade Santana who is quoted in the Arizona Republic: [[http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2011/01/12/20110112giffords-shooting-obama-speech-tucson-hope.html)
Ade Santana, an 11-year-old Tucson resident, said she felt that she had to come to ease the sadness and grief she's felt since Saturday's shooting.
"In the sorrow, sadness . . . even anger I've been feeling, this is where I needed to be," Santana said. "This [[shooting) has put Tucson in a very negative light, and this is what we needed to heal ourselves and our community."
What incredible eloquence... Out of the mouths of babes...
Read more: [[http://www.azcentral.com/... http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2011/01/12/20110112giffords-shooting-obama-speech-tucson-hope.html#ixzz1Atym08Ef)
From David Corn: [[http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/01/obama-tucson-right-loses-meme)
President Barack Obama's speech in Tucson was undeniably a high moment of his presidency. But you can judge that for yourself. [[As the father of a nine-year-old daughter, I could not imagine delivering such an address—and keeping it together.) The initial reviews—even among pundits on the right—appeared overwhelmingly positive, proving that most of us can live in a shared reality. But here's what to look for in the coming days: how the die-hard Obama-haters will behave. Since the campaign, this gang has argued one or more of these variants: Obama is anti-America, Obama wants to wreck the economy, Obama wants to weaken America, Obama hates liberty and freedom, Obama is a socialist, Obama is a communist, Obama is not truly [[and literally) an American, Obama is a secret Muslim. After this speech, will they be able to make such claims? [[Rush Limbaugh, I am indeed talking about you.)
From Joan Walsh: [[http://www.salon.com/news/politics/barack_obama/index.html?story=/opinion/walsh/politics/2011/01/12/walsh_obama_speech)
The president's speech was appropriately personal and moving, describing all of those who died, with vivid individual details, as well as the people who risked their lives saving the wounded. But he wrapped the speech around nine-year-old Christina-Taylor Green, and as the father of two young girls, Obama made that move feel more than rhetorical. Michelle Obama, often struggling with tears early in the event, wept openly as he discussed the child who wanted to be the first woman to play Major League Baseball [[fittingly, as the granddaughter of managerial legend Dallas Green), who often remarked to her mother, "We have the best life," who was just elected to student council, and who went out to see her local congresswoman, "who might have been a role model." Giffords's "Congress on the Corner" outside Safeway last Saturday "was just an updated version of 'government by and of and for the people," Obama said. "That quintessentially American scene, that was the scene that was shattered by a gunman's bullets."
From Gail Collins: [[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/13/opinion/13collins.html?hp Maybe President Obama was saving the magic for a time when we really needed it.)
We’ve been complaining for two years about the lack of music and passion in his big speeches. But if he’d moved the country when he was talking about health care or bailing out the auto industry, perhaps his words wouldn’t have been as powerful as they were when he was trying to lift the country up after the tragedy in Tucson.
"Our hearts are broken, and yet our hearts also have reason for fullness," he said, in a call to action that finally moved the nation’s focus forward.
From Joe Klein: [[http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2011/01/12/the-presidents-speech-2/)
It was a remarkably personal speech, effortlessly sweeping away any notion of pomposity, over-intellectuality or distance. It was written and delivered in plain English. It summoned images, and emotions, that every American--even those who cannot countenance his legitimacy--could relate to and be moved by. His description of the victims was at the heart of it: Judge Roll went to mass every day. George and Dot Morris had a 50-year honeymoon. Dorwan and Mavy Stoddard lost their teenaged love and then regained it many years later. Phyllis Schneck sat quilting under her favorite tree. We all know them--and we know people like Daniel Hernandez, big and loyal and kindly, who would have stopped a bullet to save his boss, but saved her instead by tending to her wounds and begging her to hold on. Their ordinary decency, simply evoked, made the tragedy our own. Their simple nobility beggared the absurd screech of the debate surrounding this terrible event. His appreciation of their humanity was an appreciation of our own.
From Michael Crowley: [[http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2011/01/12/obamas-triumph-in-tucson/)
These calls to our better angels--directed less at the secondary issue of public discourse and more at the first principles of what we value as a society and the nobility of public service--perfectly matched the heartbreaking occasion. All the better that Obama delivered these words with both lyrical eloquence and moral authority. It was certainly the finest rhetorical moment of his presidency--and perhaps of his life.
to be continued...
Taegard Goddard: [[http://politicalwire.com/archives/2011/01/12/reactions_to_obamas_speech.html#039047a)
President Obama gave one of his best speeches tonight -- one that was much more emotional and cathartic than anyone could expect. He rose above the bickering and finger pointing of the last few days and spoke to our higher values.
Most impressively, Obama walked a very delicate line of remembering the fallen while trying to draw broader lessons for the country. Referring to nine year old Christina Taylor Green, who was killed by the gunman last Saturday, Obama noted she "was off to meet her congresswoman, someone she was sure was good and important and might be a role model. She saw all this through the eyes of a child, undimmed by the cynicism or vitriol that we adults all too often just take for granted."
From James Fallows: [[http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/01/why-the-tucson-speech-succeeded/69469/)
The standard comparisons of the past four days have been to Ronald Reagan after the Challenger disaster and Bill Clinton after Oklahoma City. Tonight's speech matched those as a demonstration of "head of state" presence, and far exceeded them as oratory -- while being completely different in tone and nature. They, in retrospect, were mainly -- and effectively -- designed to note tragic loss. Obama turned this into a celebration -- of the people who were killed, of the values they lived by, and of the way their example could bring out the better in all of us and in our country.
That is to Obama's imaginative credit. [[Even as the event began, I was wondering how he would find a way to match to somber tone of Reagan and Clinton.) More later, but a performance to remember -- this will be, along with his 2004 Convention speech and his March, 2008 "meaning of race" speech in Philadelphia, one of the speeches he is lastingly known for -- and to add to the list of daunting political/oratorical challenges Obama has not merely met but mastered.
From Marc Ambinder: [[http://nationaljournal.com/whitehouse/through-christina-s-eyes-20110112)
By using the youngest victim of last week's rampage as his focal point, Obama made her America's cause and asked the nation to live lives as compassionate and caring as those felled by the gunman's bullets. Without wading into the who-coarsened-our-culture debate, he overshadowed it with a call to the better angels of our nature.
From Andrew Sullivan: http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2011/01/live-blogging-tucson.html
To rate this address on any political meter would be to demean it. The president wrested free of politics tonight and spoke of greater things. I pledge myself to try and follow his advice and debate with vigor and spirit and candor and bluntness, but with more civility, more empathy, and, yes, more love.
From Jacob Heilbrunn: [[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jacob-heilbrunn/obamas-speech-tucson_b_808351.html)
President Obama's speech in Tucson will trigger much commentary, but in speaking many words, he really uttered the last one. There was a finality to Obama's speech, a lapidary effect that endowed it with humility and gravity. It would be hard to think of a more moving and dignified speech, particularly when set against the foil of Sarah Palin's creepy and self-absorbed effusions earlier today.
In essence, Obama returned to his earliest and most deeply felt theme, which is that optimism, not hatred, civility, not rancor, hope, not despair, should guide and elevate America, no matter how heated or turbulent political issues may become.
From Sam Stein: [[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sam-stein/obama-reintroduces-the-hu_b_808366.html)
It is when there is a human element to his presidency that Barack Obama tends to stand the tallest. And on Wednesday evening, as he spoke to 20,000-plus at a memorial service at the University of Arizona, there was, if nothing else, an emotional honesty to what he had to say.
To a nation looking for clarity, Obama didn't pretend to have all the answers. There is, he noted, a tendency to demand "order" from "chaos," to try and "make sense out of that which seems senseless." Life doesn't always comply.
From Eugene Robinson: [[http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2011/01/obama_consoler_in_chief.html?hpid=opinionsbox1)
The most touching parts of the speech, for me, came near the end, when he talked about how families react on losing a parent or a spouse -- when he said that "in the fleeting time we have on this earth, what matters is not wealth, or status, or power, or fame -- but rather, how well we have loved, and what small part we have played in making the lives of other people better."
From Jonathan Capehart: [[http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2011/01/heroes_humility_and_healing_in.html)
In paying tribute to those who lost their lives and who were wounded on that awful Saturday, Obama, with the permission of Giffords's husband, Mark Kelly, delivered the blockbuster news that Giffords opened her eyes for the first time this afternoon. Then, rising to the occasion as adult in chief, Obama reflected on the debate roiling the nation for the last four days. And in doing so he soared above it.
more to come...
From Stephen Stromberg: [[http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2011/01/obama_saves_tucson_memorial_fr.html)
As jarring as the applause was at times, Obama's words and demeanor were reasonable and beyond appropriate, the president smiling only as he described the heroism of those who wrestled the shooter to the ground. The speech is among the few things I've read or heard since Saturday about which I can say that, and all the more necessary after the grotesque "blood libel" rage that dominated the news most of Wednesday.
From Marc Thiessen: [[http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2011/01/obama_in_tucson_brilliant_and.html)
In the first, Obama delivered a traditional memorial address, and did so with elegance and eloquence. He shined a light on the victims and the heroes and told their stories, which had been lost amid the shameful debate that erupted following the attack. In so doing, he gave voice to their courage and sacrifice -- and reclaimed the narrative of the day for them. "These men and women remind us that heroism is found not only on the fields of battle," Obama said. "They remind us that heroism does not require special training or physical strength. Heroism is here, all around us, in the hearts of so many of our fellow citizens, just waiting to be summoned -- as it was on Saturday morning."
Then Thiessen goes off the deep end saying that Obama was rebuking the left... WHAT???? I am not quoting that.
From E.J. Dionne: [[http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2011/01/the_president_as_preacher.html)
His address in Tucson was highly personal, rooted in the biographies of the victims and in scripture, more about the country as a family than about government. It was neither therapeutic nor political and dealt only in passing with the roiling controversies that have divided left from right.
He spoke movingly about Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and her struggle for life. But the figure at the center of the speech, to whom he came back again and again, was nine-year old Christina Taylor Green, "an A student, a dancer, a gymnast and a swimmer."
From Garance Franke-Ruta: [[http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/01/obamas-speech-a-memorial-that-will-live-in-memory/69471/)
President Obama tonight in Arizona not only did what he needed to do, he did what the nation need him to do, which is to let its members -- like members of a dysfunctional family whose brittle cousins spent the last five days snapping at each other -- finally break down and feel, together, what they were really feeling, the full weight of awfulness of the national tragedy and crimes that were committed in Arizona.
And the value and values of the lives that were lost.
He began his speech, as he so often has begun speeches in the past, in a dry voice whose flat tone failed to fully communicate the import of the weighty words he spoke. And, then, toward the final third of his speech, his chin wobbled, his voice changed and he resonantly inhabited each word he relayed. He moved from professorial Obama to Obama the orator, the man who won America's vote and has too often been hidden of late behind the face of Barack
Obama, worried head of state and hard-charging bureaucrat.
From Joshua Green: [[http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/11/01/obamas-speech-in-tucson/69470/)
My own impression is that he provided what had so far been missing from this tragedy: a response that dignified the memories of the victims and properly placed them at the forefront of public attention. The rousing, celebratory tenor of the remarks took me by surprise, though this did not seem the least bit inappropriate. Whether or not his speech will reorient the national conversation along healthier, more productive lines--whether people will heed his call to demonstrate "our good example"--is something that will become clear soon enough. But it's hard to think of a more compelling argument for why we ought to do so than the one he put forward: "Only a more civil and honest public discourse can help us face up to the challenges of our nation in a way that would make them proud."
From Trey Ellis: [[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/trey-ellis/the-president-has-come-of_b_808361.html)
Tonight in Tucson the president's strength, compassion and wisdom reminded us all of what we first saw in him, what can get lost in the day-to-day legislative sausage-making. More gray-haired and somber, he brilliantly and so presidentially rose above the clutter, the chatter. I keep thinking about his oft-repeated line, "our better angels," and today he inspired us all, on all sides, to really hear those words.
From Jill Lawrence: [[http://www.politicsdaily.com/2011/01/13/obamas-call-for-renewal-democracy-as-good-as-christina-imagin/)
The speech was inspirational in a way that held echoes of Abraham Lincoln's words in a far more desperate, polarized time. His first Inaugural Address in 1861, when he appealed to "the better angels of our nature" and urged his countrymen to "think calmly and well." The Gettysburg Address, when he said: "We here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain."
As eloquent as he was, Obama did not neglect politics. It's all to the good, he said, that we've already begun a national conversation about the motivations behind the killings, the merits of gun safety laws and the adequacy of our mental health system. Then he beamed a series of messages to various points on the political spectrum.
more...
From David Frum: [[http://www.frumforum.com/the-presidents-speech)
What a terrible assignment, especially for a father of young daughters. The president did the job he needed to do, struck the appropriate notes in the appropriate way. He conspicuously forbore to make political points, quite the contrary: he urged against finger-pointing, in this sense agreeing with Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh. "But what we can’t do is use this tragedy as one more occasion to turn on one another. As we discuss these issues, let each of us do so with a good dose of humility. "
The president’s challenge, as so often, was to make a human connection. In that, he succeeded tonight. He paid tribute to the individuality of the lost, honored the pain of the bereaved, and was crucial in bringing together the collective community acknowledgment of grief that is the only available comfort to those who mourn
.
From Eleanor Clift: [[http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2011-01-13/the-obama-of-old-returns-with-arizona-speech/)
Barack Obama found his voice Wednesday night, the one the country fell in love with in ’08. Gone was the stiff, sober professor, and here was the president we’ve been yearning for, a man who understands the cadences of the heart along with the complexities of the tragedy that brought him to the stadium at the University of Arizona. The memorial service at times seemed more like a pep rally, and as the president invoked the lives of each of the fallen along with the many heroes that emerged from the shooting, smiles soon overtook the tears, and a spirit of unity and optimism took hold.
From Ari Berman: [[http://www.thenation.com/blog/157703/arizona-obama-appeals-our-better-angels)
Perhaps the most memorable part of the speech came when Obama disclosed that he’d just visited Gabrielle Giffords in the hospital and "Gabby opened her eyes for the first time." There were wild cheers inside the auditorium, accompanied by a stream of tears from those watching at home.
Credit for all the research goes to Daily Kos diarist “mka193’s” [[http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/1/13/935867/-Compilation-of-Reactions-to-Pres.-Obamas-Speech)
Please let me know if you have problems with any of the links and I'll correct them. Thanks
For anyone who may have had problems with the video here is the President's speech in text form.
Remarks by the President at Memorial Service for the Victims of the Shooting in Tucson, Arizona [[http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/01/12/remarks-president-barack-obama-memorial-service-victims-shooting-tucson)
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. [[Applause.) Thank you very much. Please, please be seated. [[Applause.)
To the families of those we’ve lost; to all who called them friends; to the students of this university, the public servants who are gathered here, the people of Tucson and the people of Arizona: I have come here tonight as an American who, like all Americans, kneels to pray with you today and will stand by you tomorrow. [[Applause.)
There is nothing I can say that will fill the sudden hole torn in your hearts. But know this: The hopes of a nation are here tonight. We mourn with you for the fallen. We join you in your grief. And we add our faith to yours that Representative Gabrielle Giffords and the other living victims of this tragedy will pull through. [[Applause.)
Scripture tells us:
There is a river whose streams make glad the city of God,
the holy place where the Most High dwells.
God is within her, she will not fall;
God will help her at break of day.
On Saturday morning, Gabby, her staff and many of her constituents gathered outside a supermarket to exercise their right to peaceful assembly and free speech. [[Applause.) They were fulfilling a central tenet of the democracy envisioned by our founders –- representatives of the people answering questions to their constituents, so as to carry their concerns back to our nation’s capital. Gabby called it "Congress on Your Corner" -– just an updated version of government of and by and for the people. [[Applause.)
And that quintessentially American scene, that was the scene that was shattered by a gunman’s bullets. And the six people who lost their lives on Saturday –- they, too, represented what is best in us, what is best in America. [[Applause.)
Judge John Roll served our legal system for nearly 40 years. [[Applause.) A graduate of this university and a graduate of this law school -- [[applause) -- Judge Roll was recommended for the federal bench by John McCain 20 years ago -- [[applause) -- appointed by President George H.W. Bush and rose to become Arizona’s chief federal judge. [[Applause.)
His colleagues described him as the hardest-working judge within the Ninth Circuit. He was on his way back from attending Mass, as he did every day, when he decided to stop by and say hi to his representative. John is survived by his loving wife, Maureen, his three sons and his five beautiful grandchildren. [[Applause.)
George and Dorothy Morris -– "Dot" to her friends -– were high school sweethearts who got married and had two daughters. They did everything together -- traveling the open road in their RV, enjoying what their friends called a 50-year honeymoon. Saturday morning, they went by the Safeway to hear what their congresswoman had to say. When gunfire rang out, George, a former Marine, instinctively tried to shield his wife. [[Applause.) Both were shot. Dot passed away.
A New Jersey native, Phyllis Schneck retired to Tucson to beat the snow. But in the summer, she would return East, where her world revolved around her three children, her seven grandchildren and 2-year-old great-granddaughter. A gifted quilter, she’d often work under a favorite tree, or sometimes she'd sew aprons with the logos of the Jets and the Giants -- [[laughter) -- to give out at the church where she volunteered. A Republican, she took a liking to Gabby, and wanted to get to know her better. [[Applause.)
Dorwan and Mavy Stoddard grew up in Tucson together -– about 70 years ago. They moved apart and started their own respective families. But after both were widowed they found their way back here, to, as one of Mavy’s daughters put it, "be boyfriend and girlfriend again." [[Laughter.)
When they weren’t out on the road in their motor home, you could find them just up the road, helping folks in need at the Mountain Avenue Church of Christ. A retired construction worker, Dorwan spent his spare time fixing up the church along with his dog, Tux. His final act of selflessness was to dive on top of his wife, sacrificing his life for hers. [[Applause.)
Everything -- everything -- Gabe Zimmerman did, he did with passion. [[Applause.) But his true passion was helping people. As Gabby’s outreach director, he made the cares of thousands of her constituents his own, seeing to it that seniors got the Medicare benefits that they had earned, that veterans got the medals and the care that they deserved, that government was working for ordinary folks. He died doing what he loved -– talking with people and seeing how he could help. And Gabe is survived by his parents, Ross and Emily, his brother, Ben, and his fiancée, Kelly, who he planned to marry next year. [[Applause.)
And then there is nine-year-old Christina Taylor Green. Christina was an A student; she was a dancer; she was a gymnast; she was a swimmer. She decided that she wanted to be the first woman to play in the Major Leagues, and as the only girl on her Little League team, no one put it past her. [[Applause.)
She showed an appreciation for life uncommon for a girl her age. She’d remind her mother, "We are so blessed. We have the best life." And she’d pay those blessings back by participating in a charity that helped children who were less fortunate.
Our hearts are broken by their sudden passing. Our hearts are broken -– and yet, our hearts also have reason for fullness.
Our hearts are full of hope and thanks for the 13 Americans who survived the shooting, including the congresswoman many of them went to see on Saturday.
I have just come from the University Medical Center, just a mile from here, where our friend Gabby courageously fights to recover even as we speak. And I want to tell you -- her husband Mark is here and he allows me to share this with you -- right after we went to visit, a few minutes after we left her room and some of her colleagues in Congress were in the room, Gabby opened her eyes for the first time. [[Applause.) Gabby opened her eyes for the first time. [[Applause.)
Gabby opened her eyes. Gabby opened her eyes, so I can tell you she knows we are here. She knows we love her. And she knows that we are rooting for her through what is undoubtedly going to be a difficult journey. We are there for her. [[Applause.)
Our hearts are full of thanks for that good news, and our hearts are full of gratitude for those who saved others. We are grateful to Daniel Hernandez -- [[applause) -- a volunteer in Gabby’s office. [[Applause.)
And, Daniel, I’m sorry, you may deny it, but we’ve decided you are a hero because -- [[applause) -- you ran through the chaos to minister to your boss, and tended to her wounds and helped keep her alive. [[Applause.)
We are grateful to the men who tackled the gunman as he stopped to reload. [[Applause.) Right over there. [[Applause.) We are grateful for petite Patricia Maisch, who wrestled away the killer’s ammunition, and undoubtedly saved some lives. [[Applause.) And we are grateful for the doctors and nurses and first responders who worked wonders to heal those who’d been hurt. We are grateful to them. [[Applause.)
These men and women remind us that heroism is found not only on the fields of battle. They remind us that heroism does not require special training or physical strength. Heroism is here, in the hearts of so many of our fellow citizens, all around us, just waiting to be summoned -– as it was on Saturday morning. Their actions, their selflessness poses a challenge to each of us. It raises a question of what, beyond prayers and expressions of concern, is required of us going forward. How can we honor the fallen? How can we be true to their memory?
You see, when a tragedy like this strikes, it is part of our nature to demand explanations –- to try and pose some order on the chaos and make sense out of that which seems senseless. Already we’ve seen a national conversation commence, not only about the motivations behind these killings, but about everything from the merits of gun safety laws to the adequacy of our mental health system. And much of this process, of debating what might be done to prevent such tragedies in the future, is an essential ingredient in our exercise of self-government.
continued on next page....
But at a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized -– at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who happen to think differently than we do -– it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we’re talking with each other in a way that heals, not in a way that wounds. [[Applause.)
Scripture tells us that there is evil in the world, and that terrible things happen for reasons that defy human understanding. In the words of Job, "When I looked for light, then came darkness." Bad things happen, and we have to guard against simple explanations in the aftermath.
For the truth is none of us can know exactly what triggered this vicious attack. None of us can know with any certainty what might have stopped these shots from being fired, or what thoughts lurked in the inner recesses of a violent man’s mind. Yes, we have to examine all the facts behind this tragedy. We cannot and will not be passive in the face of such violence. We should be willing to challenge old assumptions in order to lessen the prospects of such violence in the future. [[Applause.) But what we cannot do is use this tragedy as one more occasion to turn on each other. [[Applause.) That we cannot do. [[Applause.) That we cannot do.
As we discuss these issues, let each of us do so with a good dose of humility. Rather than pointing fingers or assigning blame, let’s use this occasion to expand our moral imaginations, to listen to each other more carefully, to sharpen our instincts for empathy and remind ourselves of all the ways that our hopes and dreams are bound together. [[Applause.)
After all, that’s what most of us do when we lose somebody in our family -– especially if the loss is unexpected. We’re shaken out of our routines. We’re forced to look inward. We reflect on the past: Did we spend enough time with an aging parent, we wonder. Did we express our gratitude for all the sacrifices that they made for us? Did we tell a spouse just how desperately we loved them, not just once in a while but every single day?
So sudden loss causes us to look backward -– but it also forces us to look forward; to reflect on the present and the future, on the manner in which we live our lives and nurture our relationships with those who are still with us. [[Applause.)
We may ask ourselves if we’ve shown enough kindness and generosity and compassion to the people in our lives. Perhaps we question whether we're doing right by our children, or our community, whether our priorities are in order.
We recognize our own mortality, and we are reminded that in the fleeting time we have on this Earth, what matters is not wealth, or status, or power, or fame -– but rather, how well we have loved -- [[applause)-- and what small part we have played in making the lives of other people better. [[Applause.)
And that process -- that process of reflection, of making sure we align our values with our actions –- that, I believe, is what a tragedy like this requires.
For those who were harmed, those who were killed –- they are part of our family, an American family 300 million strong. [[Applause.) We may not have known them personally, but surely we see ourselves in them. In George and Dot, in Dorwan and Mavy, we sense the abiding love we have for our own husbands, our own wives, our own life partners. Phyllis –- she’s our mom or our grandma; Gabe our brother or son. [[Applause.) In Judge Roll, we recognize not only a man who prized his family and doing his job well, but also a man who embodied America’s fidelity to the law. [[Applause.)
And in Gabby -- in Gabby, we see a reflection of our public-spiritedness; that desire to participate in that sometimes frustrating, sometimes contentious, but always necessary and never-ending process to form a more perfect union. [[Applause.)
And in Christina -- in Christina we see all of our children. So curious, so trusting, so energetic, so full of magic. So deserving of our love. And so deserving of our good example.
If this tragedy prompts reflection and debate -- as it should -- let’s make sure it’s worthy of those we have lost. [[Applause.) Let’s make sure it’s not on the usual plane of politics and point-scoring and pettiness that drifts away in the next news cycle.
The loss of these wonderful people should make every one of us strive to be better. To be better in our private lives, to be better friends and neighbors and coworkers and parents. And if, as has been discussed in recent days, their death helps usher in more civility in our public discourse, let us remember it is not because a simple lack of civility caused this tragedy -- it did not -- but rather because only a more civil and honest public discourse can help us face up to the challenges of our nation in a way that would make them proud. [[Applause.)
We should be civil because we want to live up to the example of public servants like John Roll and Gabby Giffords, who knew first and foremost that we are all Americans, and that we can question each other’s ideas without questioning each other’s love of country and that our task, working together, is to constantly widen the circle of our concern so that we bequeath the American Dream to future generations. [[Applause.)
They believed -- they believed, and I believe that we can be better. Those who died here, those who saved life here –- they help me believe. We may not be able to stop all evil in the world, but I know that how we treat one another, that’s entirely up to us. [[Applause.)
And I believe that for all our imperfections, we are full of decency and goodness, and that the forces that divide us are not as strong as those that unite us. [[Applause.)
That’s what I believe, in part because that’s what a child like Christina Taylor Green believed. [[Applause.)
Imagine -- imagine for a moment, here was a young girl who was just becoming aware of our democracy; just beginning to understand the obligations of citizenship; just starting to glimpse the fact that some day she, too, might play a part in shaping her nation’s future. She had been elected to her student council. She saw public service as something exciting and hopeful. She was off to meet her congresswoman, someone she was sure was good and important and might be a role model. She saw all this through the eyes of a child, undimmed by the cynicism or vitriol that we adults all too often just take for granted.
I want to live up to her expectations. [[Applause.) I want our democracy to be as good as Christina imagined it. I want America to be as good as she imagined it. [[Applause.) All of us -– we should do everything we can to make sure this country lives up to our children’s expectations. [[Applause.)
As has already been mentioned, Christina was given to us on September 11th, 2001, one of 50 babies born that day to be pictured in a book called "Faces of Hope." On either side of her photo in that book were simple wishes for a child’s life. "I hope you help those in need," read one. "I hope you know all the words to the National Anthem and sing it with your hand over your heart." [[Applause.) "I hope you jump in rain puddles."
If there are rain puddles in Heaven, Christina is jumping in them today. [[Applause.) And here on this Earth -- here on this Earth, we place our hands over our hearts, and we commit ourselves as Americans to forging a country that is forever worthy of her gentle, happy spirit.
May God bless and keep those we’ve lost in restful and eternal peace. May He love and watch over the survivors. And may He bless the United States of America. [[Applause.)
Sorry Stephanie, I didn't mean to ignore your comment. My mind was on the speech.
Sadly the only time I'm surprised by Republicans is when they do the right thing. I personally believe in fiscal responsibility and if they were sincere about it, would listen to what they have to say. However, they [[and some Blue Dog Dems) only push spending cuts when cutting back a program will affect all Americans in a negative way but don't have a problem protecting 1% of Americans who need to be contributing more in taxes. The hypocrisy would be astounding if it weren't so predictable.
This is a big deal and environmentally, great news. Mountaintop removal has been known to release toxins in the air and that's one of many negative aspects of this practice.
Agency Revokes Permit for Major Coal Mining Project
By JOHN M. BRODER
Published: January 13, 2011
WASHINGTON — The Environmental Protection Agency revoked the permit for one of the nation’s largest mountaintop-removal coal mining projects on Thursday, saying the mine would have done unacceptable damage to rivers, wildlife and communities in West Virginia.
Arch Coal’s proposed Spruce No. 1 Mine in Logan County has been the subject of controversy since the Bush administration approved its construction in 2007, issuing a permit required under the Clean Water Act. Environmentalists and local residents strongly opposed the sprawling project, and the Obama administration moved last year to rescind the permit, prompting lawsuits by West Virginia and the coal company.
The agency’s action on Thursday is certain to provoke an outcry from West Virginia politicians, the coal industry and other businesses that have raised objections to what they consider economically damaging regulatory overreach by the E.P.A.
Full Article [[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/14/science/earth/14coal.html?hp)
MotownSteve
01-13-2011, 03:01 PM
Hi ms_m,
I just wanted to thank you for the postings.
destruction
01-13-2011, 04:15 PM
After listening to POTUS last night......and Palin's remarks earlier......for the first time, i began to feel sympathy for the people who think Palin is presidential material.....
MotownSteve
01-13-2011, 05:40 PM
Sarah's speech and some comments: http://www.examiner.com/political-buzz-in-national/sarah-palin-says-that-she-is-also-a-victim-of-the-giffords-shootings
You're welcomed Steve and thanks for adding your links.
Des, I'm about to post another article that I think would be of interest but some of the comments to the article were startling. I plan to post more on that though.
It does occur to me that Palin will have to be the one to change the rhetoric and tone in order for her followers to change. Unfortunately, I'm not sure if she's capable.
Not sure if boosting herself as the perpetual victim is an act, or what she really believes but I simply don't see her pulling back from it. I could be wrong, I hope I'm wrong.
How Obama's Tucson Speech Elevated the Political Debate
Posted by John Dickerson
This post [[http://www.slate.com/id/2281092/) originally appeared on Slate.
In Tucson Wednesday night, it sounded like a campaign rally. A memorial service is no place for the cheers and applause. But the noise was perfect. Not because the president's words were powerful, though they were, but because the scene matched this moment of noisy distractions. The solemnity of the event was interrupted in the same way the period after the shooting has been interrupted by the political debate. [[watch a clip at left)
The president's job was to move past both--to get a message out and through the noise so the country could hear. If it can be done, he did it.
The president memorialized the dead and celebrated the heroes. He could have stopped there. He could have decided not to tarnish their memory with politics. He made another decision, using just enough politics and the power of his office to build a memorial to their lives by calling the rest of us to live up to their example. That they are deserving of our good example. That was the message. He used that expression when talking about our children but it was his request of the country. "What, beyond prayers and expressions of concern, is required of us going forward? How can we honor the fallen? How can we be true to their memory?"
Special Section: Tragedy in Tucson
The president did not ask us to put away passion but to act with restraint. It was not a call to stop fighting but to stop fighting dirty. He didn't just issue orders. By holding up the examples of the lives well lived--and worthy of the applause they received--he hoped to draw us to the lesson. The president was a speaker, but he was also a participant. "They help me believe," he said. Later, referring to Christina Taylor Green, he said: "I want to live up to her expectations. I want our democracy to be as good as Christina imagined it. I want America to be as good as she imagined it."
Full Article [[http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20028462-503544.html)
The Video at the bottom of this article has some very interesting and in depth commentary on the speech, The President and even Sarah Palin, which apparently and judging by some of the comments to this article, upset her fans.
Just for the record, the President and his staff didn’t have anything to do with the Tee-shirts that were draped on the back of some of the chairs. The University used the logo on their stationary, fliers, invitations, etc. for the event and also used it for the tee-shirts which they distributed.
Rev. Gaddy on Rachel Maddow said the following:
If Gabby Giffords can open her eyes tonight, maybe we can too.
there is now an email setup for sending well wishes to Gabby Giffords:
giffordswellwishes@gmail.com
Here's a link to a brief story in The Hill about it [[http://thehill.com/blogs/twitter-room/other-news/136961-illinois-goper-promotes-well-wishes-email-address-for-giffords)
Senator Gillibrand's office has verified it.
MotownSteve
01-13-2011, 08:18 PM
The funeral for Christina Taylor Green: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/politics/
juicefree20
01-13-2011, 08:36 PM
Ms M...
Keep on doin' the damn thing!
MotownSteve...
Thanks for your contributions!
I thought that President Obama gave one hell of a speech last night. And only an idiot would hope to try to spin it into some political b.s.
He was on-point when he said that WE need to be better, to make America what WE ALL have been told that it was, since the days that we first read 'Fun With Dick And Jane", 'Green Light Go' & 'On Cherry Street', back in grade school.
He didn't say that REPUBLICANS had to live up to these promises, he didn't say that DEMOCRATS had to live up to these promises. He didn't say that the WHIGS had to live up to these promises. He said that WE...a COLLECTIVE WE, needed to do better & that crosses ALL party lines.
And the truth is, these kinds of horrible events occur, because a whole bunch of idiots continue to push for the rights for citizens to have access to assault weapons...LEGALLY PURCHASED WEAPONS, which always seem to find themselves into the hands of 'UPSTANDING' citizens, only to be misused in this fashion.
If you're not fighting in a war, than there's no justification of the sales, nor ownership of weapons that can cause such massive destruction, in what amounts to the blink of an eye.
But, I'm sure that the NRA, as well as gun dealers, who don't seem to care that their, ummm...'STOLEN' products, always seem to find their way onto urban streets [[and killing thousands of innocents), will continue to invoke their constitutional 'rights' & continue to lobby so that the mayhem may continue unabated.
The spectre of Palin, is disgusting & I don't understand how any self-respecting America DOES NOT feel embarrassed over her, much less the idea that she could actually ascend to the highest office in our land. Proof-positive that the dumbing-down of America is now in its final trimester.
Her continual predisposition to faux pas, has me studying pictures & videos, in order to discover exactly where the ventriloquist has his hand up her butt.
Pictures revealed nothing, as did the doppler & e-ray of her cranial cavity.
Great post Juice and thanks.
Here is my take on Palin. First of all, the very first day I said I didn't blame her for this tragedy and I do think it's unfair that she has been blamed for it. What I don't think is unfair is blaming her for adding to the hate and vitriolic rhetoric that has become part of the political debate in this country. Does that mean people on both sides are not doing the same, no but it doesn't change the fact she's all in the mix with a very high profile. The fact she can't or refuses to accept that is beyond reprehensible in my eyes.
Palin either has poor handlers, she doesn't take their advice or she really doesn't have any intentions of running for higher office, and it's simply about the fame and or notoriety and money for her. I'm inclined to believe the latter. She seeks the attention and seems to be willing to do or say anything to get it. Then she gets the attention which more often than not is negative and she whines, poor, poor pitiful me. She runs towards the heat and then cries foul when she is burned.
She makes for an extremely intriguing case study in human nature and the same could be said about her supporters. As I said earlier, the key to her supporters is Palin herself. Because they are the ones helping her achieve the fame, money and notoriety, she will continue to play to them for all it's worth. Although the word is, that last book of hers tanked so maybe the well is running dry, who knows. shrugs
This was written several years ago but I think it's timeless and on point too.
Saturday, August 19, 2006
Joe Republican: A Day in the Life of a Conservative
Re-posted by Frank J. Ranelli
Thanks to; John Gray, Cincinnati, Ohio
Like the Way You Live? Thank a Liberal! [[http://ranellirants.blogspot.com/2006/08/joe-republican-day-in-life-of.html)
A DAY IN THE LIFE OF A CONSERVATIVE
Joe gets up at 6:00am to prepare his morning coffee. He fills his pot
full of good clean drinking water because some democrat fought for
minimum water quality standards.
He takes his daily medication with his first swallow of coffee. His
medications are safe to take because some democrat fought to insure
their safety and for them to work as advertised.
All but $10.00 of his medications are paid for by his employer's
medical plan because some democrat union workers fought their
employers for paid medical insurance, and now Joe gets it too. He prepares
his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs this day. Joe's bacon is safe to
eat because some democrat fought for laws to regulate the meat-packing
industry.
Joe takes his morning shower, reaching for his shampoo; His bottle is
properly labeled with every ingredient and the amount of its contents
because some democrat fought for his right to know what he was putting
on his body and how much it contained. Joe dresses, walks outside and
takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because some tree-
hugging democrat fought for laws to stop industries from polluting our
air.
He walks to the subway station for his government-subsidized ride to
work; it saves him considerable money in parking and transportation
fees. You see, some democrat fought for affordable public
transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a
contributor.
Joe begins his work day; he has a good job with excellent pay,
medicals benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some
democrat union members fought and died for these working standards.
Joe's employer pays these standards because Joe's employer doesn't
want his employees to call the union.
If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed he'll get a worker
compensation or unemployment check because some democrat didn't think
he should lose his home because of his temporary misfortune.
It's noon time. Joe needs to make a bank deposit so he can pay some
bills. Joe's deposit is federally insured by the FDIC because some
democrat wanted to protect Joe's money from unscrupulous bankers who
ruined the banking system before the depression.
Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae underwritten Mortgage and his below-market federal student loan because some stupid democrat decided that Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and
earned more money over his lifetime.
Joe is home from work. He plans to visit his father this evening at
his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive to dad's; his car is among the safest in the world because some democrat fought for car safety standards.
He arrives at his boyhood home. He was the third generation to live
in the house financed by Farmers Home Administration because bankers
didn't want to make rural loans. The house didn't have electricity until
some big government democrat stuck his nose where it didn't belong and
demanded rural electrification. [[Those rural Republicans would still
be sitting in the dark)
He is happy to see his dad who is now retired. His dad lives on Social
Security and his union pension because some democrat made sure he could
take care of himself so Joe wouldn't have to. After his visit with dad
he gets back in his car for the ride home.
He turns on a radio talk show. The host keeps saying that democrats
are bad and conservatives are good [[He doesn't tell Joe that his
beloved Republicans have fought against every protection and benefit
Joe enjoys throughout his day). Joe agrees, "We don't need those big
government democrats ruining our lives; after all, I'm a self-made man
who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I
have."
Doctors Call Giffords’s Progress Remarkable
By MARC LACEY and TIMOTHY WILLIAMS
Published: January 13, 2011
TUCSON — Five days after she was shot in the head at close range, Representative Gabrielle Giffords is able to keep her eyes open for as long as 15 minutes and can move her legs and hands, although her right hand has only slight movement, doctors at University Medical Center here said on Thursday.
Doctors called her progress “a major leap forward” but expressed caution, saying that for now, they would not upgrade Ms. Giffords, an Arizona Democrat, from critical condition. Dr. Peter Rhee, head of trauma at the hospital, said in an interview that the team planned to bring an expert neuro-ophthalmologist and oculoplastic surgeon to help assess the injuries to the bones around Ms. Giffords’s eyes. The damage to the area could have damaged her vision, Dr. Rhee said.
“I believe one day she will be able to think,” Dr. Rhee said. “What she will be able to do physically, it is too early to say.”
Full Article [[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/14/us/14giffords.html?_r=1&hp)
From the First Lady, Advice for Parents
By HELENE COOPER
First Lady Michelle Obama on Thursday urged parents to hold up the lives of Christina Taylor Green and other victims of the Tucson shooting as examples for their children, and to speak with their children about tolerance in wake of the tragedy.
In an open letter to parents, Mrs. Obama said that her own daughters, like many other children around the country, are struggling to make sense of what happened. “The questions my daughters have asked are the same ones that many of your children will have – and they don’t lend themselves to easy answers,” Mrs. Obama said in the letter. “But they will provide an opportunity for us as parents to teach some valuable lessons – about the character of our country, about the values we hold dear, and about finding hope at a time when it seems far away.”
Mrs. Obama does not often wade into the major issues of the day, but in her letter she said that the Tucson shooting has left both herself and her husband “shocked and heartbroken.”
Full Article [[http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/13/from-the-first-lady-advice-for-parents/?ref=politics)
Democrats Embrace Mixed-Party Seating for State of the Union
By MICHAEL D. SHEAR
Democratic leaders in the House and Senate are embracing the idea of seating lawmakers without regard to party for this month’s State of the Union address, officials said on Thursday.
The idea, proposed by Senator Mark Udall of Colorado, would end more than 200 years of tradition in which lawmakers are almost exclusively seated with members of their own party to listen to the president’s annual address.
Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, issued the following statement Thursday afternoon:
“I appreciate Senator Udall’s thoughtful suggestion and believe it is worth serious consideration. We need to look for more ways to be bipartisan. This morning I spoke with Democratic Whip Hoyer and Senator McConnell about the proposal and we will discuss it further next week. After this tragedy, it’s important for our country to see that we all stand together as Americans and this could be one way to demonstrate that.”
Read More [[http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/13/dems-embrace-mixed-party-seating-for-state-of-the-union/)
Most Americans Want Obama, GOP to Work Together but Partisan Split Remains
Bruce Drake
Contributing Editor
A big majority of Americans want President Obama and GOP congressional leaders to work together to solve the nation's problems, but an equally large percentage of Republicans -- particularly those who say they agree with the tea party movement -- want their leaders to stand up to Obama rather than compromise, according to a Pew Research Center poll conducted Jan. 5-9.
The survey was largely completed before the tragic shootings in Arizona and the subsequent calls by Obama and other political leaders for unity and a restoration of civility in public life.
Sixty-one percent of those surveyed said they wanted to see Republicans work with Obama while 33 percent believe GOP leaders should stand up to the president, with 6 percent undecided. Sixty-five percent want Obama to work with the Republicans while 28 percent say he should stand up to them, with 7 percent undecided.
Read More [[http://www.politicsdaily.com/2011/01/13/most-americans-want-obama-gop-to-work-together-but-partisan-spl/)
House Republicans Edge Back to Business as Usual
By CARL HULSE
Published: January 13, 2011
WASHINGTON — Republicans are carefully trying to return to normal business in the House, announcing on Thursday that lawmakers will next week consider the effort to repeal the health care law that was pulled from the agenda after the Saturday shooting rampage in Arizona.
In a statement, Brad Dayspring, a spokesman for the office of the majority leader, Eric Cantor of Virginia, said, “It is important for Congress to get back to work, and to that end we will resume thoughtful consideration of the health care bill next week.”
To pre-empt any suggestion that Republicans were rushing things, Mr. Dayspring noted that earlier on Thursday the White House spokesman, Robert Gibbs, said that addressing national problems would be one way to live up “to the thoughts and aspirations of those that were involved in this tragic event.”
Full Article [[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/14/health/policy/14cong.html?_r=1&hp)
A vote to repeal would be mainly a symbolic victory for House Republicans because the Democratic Senate does not intend to consider the repeal.
So basically what we’re looking at from the Republican controlled House, for the next 2 years are symbolic victories?
A Clamor for Gun Limits, but Few Expect Real Changes [[http://www.nytimes.com/pages/national/index.html)
By ADAM NAGOURNEY and JENNIFER STEINHAUER
Gun rights advocates said that there was little chance the attack would produce new legislation or a change in the national culture.
Defiant members continue district meet-and-greets after shooting
By Mike Lillis - 01/13/11 04:43 PM ET
Saturday's tragic shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords [[D-Ariz.) at a meet-and-greet with constituents has done little to discourage other members from staging similar events.
Instead, a number of lawmakers in both chambers are pushing ahead defiantly with public gatherings designed to demonstrate that the attempted assassination of a colleague will be no deterrent from public interaction with voters.
Full Article [[http://thehill.com/homenews/house/137879-defiant-members-continue-community-meet-and-greets-after-shooting)
Pawlenty would support reinstating 'Don't ask, don't tell'
By Michael O'Brien - 01/13/11 12:44 PM ET
Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty [[R) would seek to reinstate the military's ban on openly gay and lesbian service members, he said Wednesday.
Pawlenty, a possible candidate for president in 2012, said that he would favor reinstating the military's "Don't ask, don't tell" policy.
"I have been a public supporter of maintaining "Don’t ask, don’t tell" and I would support reinstating it as well," Pawlenty told radio host Bryan Fischer in an interview.
Read More [[http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/137771-pawlenty-would-support-reinstating-dont-ask-dont-tell)
Looking to 2012, G.O.P. Is Set to Select a New Leader
By JEFF ZELENY
Published: January 13, 2011
OXON HILL, Md. — The Republican National Committee was poised to select a new leader on Friday to prepare for the 2012 presidential election, a challenge that begins by paying off a $20 million debt and navigating divisions between the party’s establishment and a newly invigorated grass-roots movement.
On the eve of the election for the Republican national chairman, five contenders made their closing arguments on Thursday to party officials from across the country who gathered here at the National Harbor resort outside Washington. The secret balloting, set to begin Friday afternoon, goes round after round until someone wins 85 votes from the 168-member committee.
While there was no preordained winner, a daylong series of interviews suggested that one point was clear: Michael Steele, the embattled chairman, has most likely not gained enough support to win a second term. He flashed a wide smile as he breezed through the hallways, saying he was confident of re-election, but party leaders said a consensus had emerged that it was time for a new direction.
Read More [[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/14/us/politics/14repubs.html?hp)
You often hear people mention the President should execute an EO for one thing or the other.
In some cases they may be good, in other cases something more permanent is in order since an EO can be overturned when a new administration is in place.
Below are the EO’s that President Obama has signed since he’s been in office. [[with a link to all)
Executive Orders
• December 27, 2010
Executive Order - Recruiting and Hiring Students and Recent Graduates
________________________________________
• December 22, 2010
Executive Order -- Adjustments of Certain Rates of Pay
________________________________________
• December 14, 2010
Executive Order--White House Council for Community Solutions
________________________________________
• November 17, 2010
Executive Order -- Fundamental Principles and Policymaking Criteria for Partnerships with Faith-Based and Other Neighborhood Organizations
________________________________________
• November 09, 2010
Executive Order -- Export Coordination Enforcement Center
________________________________________
• November 04, 2010
Executive Order -- Controlled Unclassified Information
________________________________________
• November 04, 2010
Executive Order--Order of Succession Within the Department of Justice
________________________________________
• October 19, 2010
Executive Order--White House Initiative On Educational Excellence For Hispanics
________________________________________
• October 05, 2010
Executive Order--Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Task Force
________________________________________
• September 29, 2010
Executive Order Designating Iranian Officials Responsible for or Complicit in Serious Human Rights Abuses
Full List
http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/executive-orders
Although there is no Constitutional provision or statute that explicitly permits Executive Orders, there is a vague grant of "executive power" given in Article II, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution, and furthered by the declaration "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed" made in Article II, Section 3, Clause 4, that has been construed as justification for the legal weight of Executive orders. Presidents have used this Constitutional reasoning as a basis for an authorization that allows for the issuance of Executive orders as part of carrying out the President's sworn duties,[1] the intent typically being to help direct officers of the US Executive carry out their delegated duties as well as for compliance with current statute in the regulating of normal operations of the Federal Government -- in spite of the fact, Article I, Clause 1 specifically grants all federal legislative authority to the United States Congress:
Source [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_order_%28United_States%29)
MotownSteve
01-14-2011, 03:10 PM
ms_m
Senior Member
Join Date
Aug 2010
Posts
11,166
House Republicans Edge Back to Business as Usual
By CARL HULSE
Published: January 13, 2011
WASHINGTON — Republicans are carefully trying to return to normal business in the House, announcing on Thursday that lawmakers will next week consider the effort to repeal the health care law that was pulled from the agenda after the Saturday shooting rampage in Arizona.
In a statement, Brad Dayspring, a spokesman for the office of the majority leader, Eric Cantor of Virginia, said, “It is important for Congress to get back to work, and to that end we will resume thoughtful consideration of the health care bill next week.”
To pre-empt any suggestion that Republicans were rushing things, Mr. Dayspring noted that earlier on Thursday the White House spokesman, Robert Gibbs, said that addressing national problems would be one way to live up “to the thoughts and aspirations of those that were involved in this tragic event.”
Full Article
A vote to repeal would be mainly a symbolic victory for House Republicans because the Democratic Senate does not intend to consider the repeal.
So basically what we’re looking at from the Republican controlled House, for the next 2 years are symbolic victories?
Sort of makes me wish the representatives from my state were republicans so I could tell them to grow up. But the more I think about it for the vast majority of republicans growing up and republican are completely incompatible.
Steele Abandons Bid for Re-election as G.O.P. Chairman
By JEFF ZELENY
Published: January 14, 2011
OXON HILL, Md. — Michael Steele, the embattled chairman of the Republican National Committee, conceded to political reality on Friday and dropped his bid for a second term, saying “I will step aside because I think the party is ready for something different.”
The support for Mr. Steele slipped through each of the first four rounds of secret ballots, as the Republican National Committee began the process of selecting someone to lead the party into the 2012 presidential election.
But even in his departure, Mr. Steele sought to have an influence on the race, endorsing the candidacy of Maria Cino, a longtime Bush administration official.
Full Article [[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/15/us/politics/15repubs.html?_r=1&hp)
House Republican aims to put brakes on repeal of 'Don't ask, don't tell'
By John T. Bennett - 01/14/11 02:43 PM ET
A member of the House Armed Services Committee plans to introduce legislation next week designed to put the brakes on repeal of the military’s ban on openly gay troops.
The measure by Rep. Duncan Hunter [[R-Calif.) would add the four military service chiefs to the list of those who must sign off on repealing the policy before it can be officially scrapped.
Hunter, an Iraq and Afghanistan war veteran, is concerned that the bill passed in December repealing the “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy “excluded the service chiefs from the certification process,” said one congressional aide.
The repeal bill, signed into law Dec. 22 by President Obama, requires only the OK of the president, defense secretary and Joint Chiefs chairman.
Full Story [[http://thehill.com/homenews/house/138037-house-republican-aims-to-put-brakes-on-dont-ask-repeal-)
Hi Steve
What irks me the most, the House Members should be spending the next two years doing something productive that would help the American people as oppose to symbolic tearing down legislation that would harm them if they were to actually succeed.
I will forever be amazed how voters are willing to vote against their own best interest because of political ideology.....but they do it time and time again.
MotownSteve
01-14-2011, 05:56 PM
Maybe this would work. This has been around the net a bit but I think it is worth posting here.
Congressional Reform Act of 2011
The 26th amendment [[granting the right to vote for 18 year-olds) took only 3 months & 8 days to be ratified!* Why?* Simple!* The people demanded it.* That was in 1971...before computers, before e-mail, before cell phones, etc.
Of the 27 amendments to the Constitution, seven [[7) took 1 year or less to become the law of the land...all because of public pressure.
I'm asking each addressee to forward this email to a minimum of twenty people on their address list; in turn ask each of those to do likewise.
In three days, most people in The United States of America will have the message.* This is one idea that really should be passed around.
Congressional Reform Act of 2011
1. Term Limits.
* 12 years only, one of the possible options below..
* A. Two Six-year Senate terms
* B. Six Two-year House terms
* C. One Six-year Senate term and three Two-Year House terms
2.* No Tenure / No Pension.*
A Congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office.**
3.* Congress [[past, present & future) participates in Social Security.
All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security system immediately.* All future funds flow into the Social Security system, and Congress participates with the American people
4. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans do.
5. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise.* Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.
6. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people.
7. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people.
8. All contracts with past and present Congressmen are void effective 1/1/11.**
The American people did not make this contract with Congressmen.* Congressmen made all these contracts for themselves.
Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career.* The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, so ours should serve their term[[s), then go home and back to work.*
If each person contacts a minimum of twenty people then it will only take three days for most people [[in the U.S. ) to receive the message.* Maybe it is time.*
THIS IS HOW YOU FIX CONGRESS!!!!! If you agree with the above, pass it on.
Breaking News Alert
The New York Times
Fri, January 14, 2011 -- 5:25 PM ET
-----
Republican National Committee Selects Reince Priebus of Wisconsin as Chairman
The Republican National Committee selected a new chairman on
Friday, with Reince Priebus of Wisconsin surviving seven
contentious rounds of balloting to succeed Michael Steele as
party officials expressed a desire for new leadership to
prepare for the 2012 presidential election.
Mr. Priebus, who broke away from Mr. Steele's inner circle to
run against him, pledged to pay off the committee's $21
million debt and strengthen state parties across the country
to build upon the Republican victories in the midterm
elections. Mr. Priebus received 97 votes from the committee.
Read More:
http://www.nytimes.com?emc=na
Steve, after the 2008 election, many people went back to being complacent. Find a way to change that and you can probably find a way to change Congress and how it works.
Republican Governors Attack Obama Policies at House Retreat
By CARL HULSE
January 14, 2011, 4:38 pm
BALTIMORE, Md. – Three Republican governors who spoke at their party’s House retreat Friday couldn’t seem happier to have some of their ideological allies controlling at least one part of government in the nation’s capital.
Governors Rick Perry of Texas, Haley Barbour of Mississippi and Bob McDonnell of Virginia all complained of the Obama administration running roughshod, in the words of Mr. Perry, over them and stifling the economy and job growth with intrusive and ill-conceived policies.
Environmental restrictions and the health care legislation that House Republicans will vote to repeal next Wednesday were a special target of what the state executives decried as overreaching by the Obama administration and Congressional Democrats.
Full Story [[http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/14/republican-governors-attack-obama-policies-at-house-retreat/?ref=politics)
MissLish
01-14-2011, 07:52 PM
Thank you ms_m! These sites will come in handy the next time I enter into a debate the the Teabaggers or with one of their sympathizers.
stephanie
01-14-2011, 07:55 PM
Ms M when I have more time tonight I will read your links [[thanks keep them coming). In response to your posting about Sarah Palin. I dont like the way the media has laid blame on her as well I think the Dems were looking for a scapegoat and it makes sense that they would use her as a target. Now we all know that Beck, Oreilly, Hannity and the rest of them will always distort the facts and try to shame Obama [[except for in this recent speech they know better you just cant find fault with it). Here are some reasons I dont think Palin will be a respected candidate for anything at this point
1) Have you noticed ever since she came out in 2008 this chick runs from the press OR she always has a rebuttle placing herself as the victim in any situation she is in.
2) Big mistake by not finishing her term as a Governor. If she couldnt to that what makes people think she has the balls to be a president or VP.
3) When the campaign was over she complained about what the McCain press machine wanted her to do on Oprah and in her memoirs. Revelations like this should have come out years later not so soon she appears not to be a team player.
4) Troopergate and misappropriation of funds will come back to haunt her if she decides to run
5) She is not very internet friendly instead of using Sarahpac and her Facebook to raise republican awareness she uses it to tell people not to listen to the media and defend her daughter instead of bringing her party together.
6) Because of her Miss America type background she is a hound for publicity and money and frankly Im glad because this type of attitude dwindles with the public pretty soon and she may have millions in the bank but people are beginning to see her for what she is a cute Republican who wants to make money and not take a political office seriously.
7) Unfortunately she will have her believers in redneck states who will stick by her rhetoric but there are not enough of them to make a major dent in the voting booth IMO I think Team Sarah will always exist but it will be in the form of having a cute face for fundraisers nothing more nothing less. She will wind up like her daughters boyfriend Levi but with more money in the bank and a decent job behind the scenes or on tv a la fox news.
Can't argue with much of what you say Stephanie although I do have two things,
1. It's not only the Dems that laid the blame at her feet and again, I think it's completely fair to blame her for contributing to the hateful rhetoric and tone in politics these days.
2. I disagree about her being internet friendly, she has mastered networking in a way no politician today has. Can it carry her through a presidential nomination and presidential bid....I doubt it but she has used it quite effectively to the chagrin of her critics and the media.
I really believe she suffers from a narcissistic personality and that alone may propel her to try for the top spot and to that I say
run Sarah, run!!!!!!!!!
I would love to see her be the Republican nominee in 2012.
MotownSteve
01-14-2011, 11:31 PM
I think she wants everyone to wonder of she is going to run that keeps her in the public eye and the money rolls in. That is it, in a nut shell.
Also, I think the Dems would love it if she ran.
McCain lauds Obama as a 'patriot'
By Jordan Fabian - 01/14/11 02:52 PM ET
Sen. John McCain [[R-Ariz.) — one of President Obama's most strident critics — praised the president's speech in Arizona at a memorial service for the victims of the Tucson shooting spree.
The Arizona senator and Obama's 2008 opponent penned an op-ed in the Washington Post, saying Obama "comforted and inspired the country" by calling for greater civility in the nation's political discourse.
"I disagree with many of the president's policies, but I believe he is a patriot sincerely intent on using his time in office to advance our country's cause," McCain wrote. "I reject accusations that his policies and beliefs make him unworthy to lead America or opposed to its founding ideals. And I reject accusations that Americans who vigorously oppose his policies are less intelligent, compassionate or just than those who support them."
Full Article [[http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/138041-mccain-lauds-obama-after-arizona-memorial-speech)
Gov. to critics of MLK no-shows: 'Kiss my butt'
PORTLAND, Maine [[AP) — Maine's governor told critics Friday to "kiss my butt" over his decision not to attend the state NAACP's annual Martin Luther King Jr. Day celebrations over the holiday weekend. Gov. Paul LePage declined the organization's invitations to a dinner in Portland on Sunday night and a breakfast in Orono on Monday because of prior commitments. The NAACP's state director said the group felt it was being neglected by the new governor, who was elected in November. The head of a Portland immigration group said it would have been nice if he'd at least send a representative from his office to attend. When asked by a reporter Friday to respond, LePage said: "Tell them to kiss my butt."
"If they want to play the race card, come to dinner and my son will talk to them," LePage said, referring to Devon Richard, a 25-year-old black Jamaican whom LePage took into his home at the age of 17.
After LePage declined the invitations, NAACP state director Rachel Talbot Ross told the Portland Press Herald the group was beginning to feel "we're not welcome, we're not part of the Maine he's preparing to lead for the next four years." A phone call to Ross was from The Associated Press was not immediately returned.
Beth Stickney, executive director of the Immigrant Legal Advocacy Project in Portland, said LePage's remarks are discouraging given that the NAACP events are about unity.
Read More [[http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5grVG6cwRfe2_GXpr4Ftn3j5iOTng?docId=e1cafb36f 7cf48c488be7bc74b14021e)
Things that make you go, hmmmmmmmmm
This guy’s campaign slogan was “People Before Politics”
I guess that doesn’t apply to his own family???????
There is so much more about this guy that is ignorant and over the top but I refuse to waste any more space on him ....for now.
Thank you ms_m! These sites will come in handy the next time I enter into a debate the the Teabaggers or with one of their sympathizers.
Sorry I missed this post MissLish and you're welcome. Hope they help. Debating a TP can make you feel as if you've fallen down a rabbit hole.
Good Luck;)
Obama administration readying education overhaul push ahead of State of the Union
By Erica Werner [[CP) – 1 hour ago
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama is putting education overhaul at the forefront of his agenda as he prepares for his annual State of the Union address and adjusts to the new reality of a divided government. But trouble signs are already emerging.
Despite a bipartisan consensus in favour of reforming requirements for students and teachers, political pressures from the coming 2012 presidential campaign and disputes over timing, money and scope loom over a debate affecting millions of Americans — the overdue renewal of the federal education law known as No Child Left Behind.
For all the talk in Washington that education might offer the best chance for the White House to work with Republicans, any consensus could swiftly evaporate in the capital's pitiless political crosscurrents, leaving the debate for another day, perhaps even another presidency.
Full Article [[http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5jBsnUYvtHz_ZNB1P2kop9mVO7CHQ?docId=5658673)
The Plum Line
Conservatives and Obama's speech
Sunday, January 16, 2011
The Tucson speech may go down as one of the most important of Barack Obama's presidency, so it's worth nailing down its most important accomplishment: He finally got conservatives to listen to what he had to say - about them.
Conservatives have widely hailed Obama's speech, primarily because they think he "rebuked" the left when he said that our overheated discourse didn't cause the Arizona shootings. This line was important but not for the reasons conservatives think it was. By absolving the right from blame, he made it impossible for them to shut out his larger message.
Obama's statement that rhetoric didn't cause the massacre is best understood as a set-up to the larger point that followed: that the bloodshed confers a moral obligation upon all of us to improve the tone and integrity of our discourse. If Obama had delivered this latter message without the set-up, conservatives would have had an opening to reject it as political.
Read Full Article [[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/14/AR2011011406766.html?referrer=emailarticle)
Exports Boost Offers Economic Bright Spot
by Marilyn Geewax
January 16, 2011
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/gr-exports-300.gif
While the housing sector's troubles continue to drag down the U.S. economy, manufacturing is doing well, largely because of strong sales overseas.
The exports boom has helped the manufacturing sector grow at a pace three times faster than the rest of the economy. According to federal data released last week, exports rose for the third straight month in November to nearly $160 billion.
Overseas customers are buying more U.S. airplanes, pharmaceuticals, foods, industrial supplies, cotton, computers and more.
Read More [[http://www.npr.org/2011/01/16/132965349/exports-boost-u-s-manufacturing-sector)
or listen to the story [[http://www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=132965349&m=132975229)
Economic View
What Obama Should Say About the Deficit
By CHRISTINA D. ROMER
Published: January 15, 201
BY the time President Obama gave his State of the Union address last year, the speech felt like an old friend. It had been part of my life — from the brainstorming sessions in late November 2009 to the last minute fact-checking. I knew when all of my favorite lines were coming. That led to an awkward moment during the address when I sprang to my feet, applauding the president’s tacit endorsement of the free-trade agreement with South Korea, before noticing that the only other person cheering seemed to be Ron Kirk, the special trade representative.
This year, instead of being on the floor of Congress with the rest of the cabinet, I will be watching on television with the rest of the country. Instead of knowing what is coming, I can write about what I hope the president will say. My hope is that the centerpiece of the speech will be a comprehensive plan for dealing with the long-run budget deficit.
I am not talking about two paragraphs lamenting the problem and vowing to fix it. I am looking for pages and pages of concrete proposals that the administration is ready to fight for. The recommendations of the bipartisan National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform that the president created are a very good place to start.
The need for such a bold plan is urgent — both politically and economically. Voters made it clear last November that they were fed up with red ink. President Obama should embrace the reality that his re-election may depend on facing up to the budget problem.
Full Article [[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/16/business/16view.html?_r=1&src=busln)
Editorial
The Truth and Consequences of Repeal
Published: January 15, 2011
Get ready for more theater on Capitol Hill. House Republicans plan to push through legislation this week to repeal the health care reform law.
In deference to the new vows of civility, the tone of the debate may be a bit more restrained. But Republicans have already said that they will not strip the word “killing” from the bill — which is titled, “Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act.” Civility apparently goes only so far.
While repeal will certainly pass the House, it has no chance in the Senate. So House Republicans are already planning other ways to undermine the reforms, like denying agencies enough money to hire personnel to carry out the program.
Americans will pay a high price if opponents get their way. Reform means that tens of millions of uninsured people will get a chance at security; and many millions more who have coverage can be sure they can keep or replace it, even if they get sick or lose their jobs.
Full Article [[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/16/opinion/16sun1.html?ref=opinion)
MotownSteve
01-16-2011, 07:02 PM
I'm really getting fed up with the republicans. They are showing less maturity, as a group, than first graders playing football. Their idea of what to do if they don't like the way things are going is take the ball and then somehow fix the field so you can't play there. I can't remember the last time they had a constructive idea; not including tax cuts for the rich. From where I sit when Mitch McConnell said he is not going to to anything, he should have resigned and gone home. As for Sarah, that comment that the targets on her map were surveyors targets, sure. I spent 28 years listening to criminals telling lies. That one is so weak could not hold a q-tip. They can't even admit their mistakes. Oh, wait a second, they don't make any.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbUtL_0vAJk
Weekly Address: President Obama: Before We are Democrats or Republicans, We are Americans
[[http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/01/15/weekly-address-president-obama-we-are-democrats-or-republicans-we-are-am)
It’s been one week since tragedy visited Tucson, Arizona.
We properly spent much of the week mourning the victims and remembering their lives. We also discovered stories that serve to lift us up – stories of heroism and bravery, of courage and community – stories that remind us that we are one American family, 300 million strong.
One of the places we saw that sense of community on display was on the floor of Congress, where Gabby Giffords, who inspires us with her recovery, is deeply missed by her colleagues. One by one, Representatives from all parts of the country and all points of view rose in common cause to honor Gabby and the other victims, and to reflect on our shared hopes for this country.
As shrill and discordant as our politics can be at times, it was a moment that reminded us of who we really are – and how much we depend on one another.
While we can’t escape our grief for those we’ve lost, we carry on now, mindful of those truths.
We carry on because we have to. After all, this is still a time of great challenges for us to solve. We’ve got to grow jobs faster, and forge a stronger, more competitive economy. We’ve got to shore up our budget, and bring down our deficits. We’ve got to keep our people safe, and see to it that the American Dream remains vibrant and alive for our children and grandchildren.
These are challenges I believe we can meet. And I believe we can do it in a way worthy of those who sent us here to serve. So as business resumes, I look forward to working together in that same spirit of common cause with members of Congress from both parties – because before we are Democrats or Republicans, we are Americans.
And as we perform the work of this nation, my prayer is that we stay true to our words, and turn to those examples of heroism, and courage, and perseverance, to bring out the better in all of us.
Thanks for listening, and have a great weekend.
MotownSteve
...based on your last comment I thought you would find this diary/essay interesting, enjoy.
Thoughts on Anger and Washington’s Toxic Atmosphere
Everyone gets angry. It’s a universal human emotion. Newborns express frustration and anger. Three-year old children express anger, as do teenagers and fully-grown adults.
Psychology and child development studies show that each age and developmental stage has is own characteristic way of expressing anger. We even know what these behaviors look like, because they’ve been described in countless psychology, child development, and education books and periodicals. Dr. Spock and Jean Piaget are often quoted in this regard.
If we take a close look at the way some members of the present Congress have expressed their anger, we will see that their behavior, that is to say the manner in which they express their anger, does not match the adult behavioral model. There it is! The toxic and hostile atmosphere in Washington is the direct result of the inability of some members of Congress to express their anger and frustration as a normal, healthy adult. So . . . .
Full Essay [[http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/1/17/936965/-Thoughts-on-Anger-and-Washingtons-Toxic-Atmosphere)
MotownSteve
01-17-2011, 10:07 PM
Hi ms_m,
Thanks. Seems to say what I said in a more appropriate manner. :-D
LOL
The way you expressed it worked for me Steve but when I saw this I thought of your comment. Glad you liked it.
stephanie
01-18-2011, 11:42 AM
Ms M and all I hope that the Arizona tragedy will not be forgotten in the sense that it brought politicians together for a moment and hopefully will keep them together. I dont like to see tragedies like this harped on everyday but if it keeps the congress civil I am all for it. Oh happy MLK day.
I dont like to see tragedies like this harped on everyday but if it keeps the congress civil I am all for it.
Stephanie, there isn't any doubt in my mind whatsoever you didn't mean this the way it came out but sweetie, seeing people die and injured is NOT the way I want this country to come together. That's too high of a price for anyone to have to pay for civility.
stephanie
01-18-2011, 03:09 PM
Ms M you are right that didnt come out the right way. What I meant to say was [[and 9-11) is a good example of this. I dont like to see tragedies harped on add I dont think its a good thing to see people die or even become matrys over things like this. If one must be reminded of past tragedies to get things right I am all for it. If I had the power to make things like this stop believe me I would. The only way I can describe it is like a Scared Straight situation [[remember those). We should not have to have those moments as adults but we have children in some of these political positions. Most of them need to be reminded of the past.
MotownSteve
01-18-2011, 03:28 PM
Hi Stephanie,
If you did not look at the article ms_m posted above, Thoughts on Anger and Washington’s Toxic Atmosphere, I suggest you do. It is a very worthwhile read.
I think what you mean Stephanie is we should look at tragedies such as these as teachable moments and I agree but people have to be open to that idea. They have to own up to their insecurities and let go of the defensive posturing. They have to accept responsibility for the words and rhetoric they use that create toxic environments and more than anything as far as I'm concern, they have to learn to separate their political ideology from their authentic selves.
Politics doesn't make us who we are, what's in our hearts and minds determines that, our actions and reaction determine that. We need to put aside that us against them mindset and understand we are all in this together and if you must think in terms of a them....it's not your political opposite that's harming you but the top tier 1% that are causing you the real problems in this country.
Understand that's not to say all rich people are evil but there is more a class war going on than anything else and we need to recognize our personal agendas, no matter how right and noble they are, are the things these people use to keep us divided.
This is also [[IMO) a call to alms to start paying more attention to mental health issues. Something that has been sadly neglected over the years. The large percentage of people diagnosed with mental health issues are not violent, their issues are also treatable if they stay on their meds but that small percentage that don't fit in that category, are the ones that commit these types of acts.
Politicians are backing away from the violent rhetoric and threats but only beacuse it's in the National spotlight right now. It's up to us to make sure they understand we are not going to continue to accept it as status quo, or an acceptable way to express a difference of opinion. That goes for politicians and the media.
I could care less about the views of Beck or anyone like him but when he starts talking about wanting to kill another human being [[ Michael Moore), poisoning Nancy Pelosi or put a bullet through someones head or even his own and he's using a national platform to say all these things, he has crossed the line.
Promoting his CT theories and speaking in dog whistles do nothing but frighten people and make them paranoid and that's irresponsible and dangerous. Doesn't absolve the actual person that commits a crime but it doesn't make the person promoting BS and violence above the criticism either.
We all play a role in this society, we all have to accept and be responsible for the role we play.
stephanie
01-18-2011, 07:18 PM
Ok I read the article above and I have to remember although people are adults these attitudes start at home. Bravo about the mental health issues! If we have lingering thoughts that make us the way we are and we are normal I can imagine what is going on in the mind of the mentally ill who for some reason [[lack of judgement, brain dysfunction, schizophrenia, depression) cant control their emotions or put them in check. I have a confession to make when I was in my 20s I didnt believe people who suffered from depression I thought it was over a love affair, losing a job, puberty, etc.......then I found out there were people who really had a chemical imbalance and really suffered from depression no matter how great things were going. I even put it on well they have accomplished so much there is nothing more for them to do [[the rich) but the rich and poor have issues with depression and its just as serious as anything else. Dick Cavett years ago brought it to the forefront for me and also Patty Duke with Dont Call me Anna. I wish I had not been so ignorant in my 20s regarding this but thank god I learned in my 30s.
MotownSteve
01-18-2011, 07:32 PM
Let's hope we all keep learning. One thing I have learned is that the more I learn and the more I know, the more I realize how much I don't know.
What a tangle web we weave when first we practice to deceive…
FACT CHECK: Shaky health care job loss estimate
WASHINGTON — Republicans pushing to repeal President Barack Obama's health care overhaul warn that 650,000 jobs will be lost if the law is allowed to stand.
But the widely cited estimate by House GOP leaders is shaky. It's the latest creative use of statistics in the health care debate, which has seen plenty of examples from both sides.
Republicans are calling their thumbs-down legislation the "Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act." Postponed after the mass shootings in Tucson, a House vote on the divisive issue is now expected Wednesday, although Democrats promise they'll block repeal in the Senate.
A recent report by House GOP leaders says "independent analyses have determined that the health care law will cause significant job losses for the U.S. economy."
It cites the 650,000 lost jobs as Exhibit A, and the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office as the source of the original analysis behind that estimate. But the budget office, which referees the costs and consequences of legislation, never produced the number.
What follows is a story of how statistics get used and abused in Washington.
What CBO actually said is that the impact of the health care law on supply and demand for labor would be small. Most of it would come from people who no longer have to work, or can downshift to less demanding employment, because insurance will be available outside the job.
Full Article [[http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110118/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_care_repeal_fact_check)
CBO ANALYSIS
________________________________________
Preliminary Analysis of H.R. 2, the Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act
January 6, 2011
Letter to the Honorable John Boehner
http://www.cbo.gov/publications/collections/collections.cfm?collect=10
MotownSteve
01-19-2011, 12:12 AM
As I learned in statistics, figures don't lie. Liars figure.
LOL...Good one Steve but many people will never take the time to research those lies and "Boner," Cantor and all the Repubs know it. This is how they get over, say a lie, repeat a lie, wash, rinse and repeat...after awhile that lie turns into the truth [[in the minds of folks too busy to bother to find out for themselves)
When you have people like Michelle Bachmann, Sarah Palin, Beck, Limbaugh, etc pushing those same lies and more all over talk radio and Fox Fake and BS News the base eats it up....and then their heroes turn on them.
Oh yeah a 3rd political party for the people and by the people will always work for the people…oh wait…
Maybe this article should be called, real Washington politics 101 [[when campaign finance reform is nowhere in sight)
Tea Party Senators Ignore Tea Party Base, Reject Timetable For Withdrawal From Afghanistan
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/notea.jpg
In November, President Obama and NATO proposed a new timetable for the end of combat missions in Afghanistan. The White House has said it will begin a gradual withdrawal starting in in July of this year. According to an Afghanistan Study Group survey, two-thirds of Tea Party voters believe that “Washington should reduce troop levels in Afghanistan or withdraw from the region altogether as soon as possible.” 67 percent of Tea Party supporters worried that the war would hamper deficit reduction.
However, after a weekend trip in Afghanistan to be wooed “away from the Tea Party” by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell [[R-KY), Tea Party victors Sens. Pat Toomey [[R-PA), Kelly Ayotte [[R-NH), Ron Johnson [[R-WI), and Marco
Rubio [[R-FL) have all decided to ignore the Tea Party and rebuke the idea of any timetable for withdrawal as “artificial”:
– Toomey: Though a “budget hawk” elected on platform of less wasteful spending, Toomey said that, “despite record budget deficits, a skeptical public and corruption within the Afghanistan’s government, the United States can’t afford to shortchange the war effort.” “This is the country from which al-Qaida launched the most devastating attack on America since World War II. The Taliban wants to take control again. Al-Qaida wants to have a safe haven. And that’s what would happen, I’m afraid, if we had a precipitous withdrawal,” Toomey said in Kabul.
Full Article [[http://thinkprogress.org/)
Op-Ed Columnist
No One Listened to Gabrielle Giffords
By FRANK RICH
Published: January 15, 2011
OF the many truths in President Obama’s powerful Tucson speech, none was more indisputable than his statement that no one can know what is in a killer’s mind. So why have we spent so much time debating exactly that?
The answer is classic American denial. It was easier to endlessly parse Jared Lee Loughner’s lunatic library — did he favor “The Communist Manifesto” or Ayn Rand? — than confront the larger and harsher snapshot of our current landscape that emerged after his massacre. A week on, that denial is becoming even more entrenched. As soon as the president left the podium Wednesday night, we started shifting into our familiar spin-dry post-tragedy cycle of the modern era — speedy “closure,” followed by a return to business as usual, followed by national amnesia.
If we learn nothing from this tragedy, we are back where we started. And where we started was with two years of accelerating political violence — actual violence, not to be confused with violent language — that struck fear into many, not the least of whom was Gabrielle Giffords.
Read More [[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/16/opinion/16rich.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss)
Opinion Column
Moving past right-wing rhetoric
By JOE SCARBOROUGH | 1/18/11 4:45 AM EST Updated: 1/18/11 10:00 AM EST
We get it, Sarah Palin. You’re not morally culpable for the tragic shooting in Tucson, Ariz. All of us around the “Morning Joe” table agree, even if we were stunned that you would whine about yourself on Facebook as a shattered family prepared to bury their 9-year-old girl.
The same goes for you, Glenn Beck. You’ve attacked your political opponents with words designed to inspire hatred and mind-bending conspiracy theories from fans. Calling the president a racist, Marxist and fascist may be reprehensible, but it did not lead a mentally disturbed man to take a Glock to Rep. Gabrielle Giffords’s “Congress on Your Corner” event.
Good on ya, buddy. You weren’t personally responsible for the slaughter at the Safeway. Maybe you can put it on a poster at the next “Talkers” convention.
But before you and the pack of right-wing polemicists who make big bucks spewing rage on a daily basis congratulate yourselves for not being responsible for Jared Lee Loughner’s rampage, I recommend taking a deep breath. Just because the dots between violent rhetoric and violent actions don’t connect in this case doesn’t mean you can afford to ignore the possibility — or, as many fear, the inevitability — that someone else will soon draw the line between them.
Read More [[http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/47705.html)
Scarborough mentions Byron Williams in his op-ed. For those that may not be familiar with the story see link below.
"Progressive Hunter" [[http://mediamatters.org/research/201010110002)
Jailhouse Confession: How the right-wing media and Glenn Beck's chalkboard drove Byron Williams to plot assassination
No Fifth Term for Lieberman
By DAVID M. HALBFINGER and RAYMOND HERNANDEZ
Published: January 18, 2011
Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, the Democratic vice-presidential candidate in 2000 who later became deeply alienated from his party, will announce on Wednesday that he will not seek a fifth term, according to people he told of the decision.
Mr. Lieberman, 68, whose term is up in January 2013, has chosen to retire rather than face a difficult campaign for re-election, according to aides and others who spoke to the senator on Tuesday.
“He believes that if he were to run for re-election it’d be a tough fight,” said Marshall Wittmann, a member of Mr.
Lieberman’s Senate staff. “He’s confident he could’ve won that fight. He’s had tough fights before. But he wants to have a new chapter in his life.”
Read More [[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/19/nyregion/19lieberman.html?ref=us)
The President's Photographer: 50 Years in the Oval Office
For 50 years, presidential photographers have covered it all: upheaval, tragedy, joy — often developing friendships with the presidents they serve. Acting as both visual historians and key links between the public and the presidents, for these photographers no day is the same — whether they are aboard Air Force One, backstage at the State of the Union or in the heart of the West Wing.
As the 44th president's chief photographer, Pete Souza is never far behind President Obama. Now in the National Geographic Special, The President's Photographer: 50 Years in the Oval Office, viewers can follow Souza, and those who came before him, for a behind-the-scenes look at the everyday grit of the American presidency. Offering a chance to see what it's like to cover the most powerful man in the world, for history.
The presidential photographer's job is two-fold: one, taking photographs of the president greeting dignitaries, visitors and guests; and two, perhaps more challenging and gratifying: documenting for history every possible aspect of the presidency, both official events, backstage happenings and "off-duty" private moments. "Creating a good photographic archive for history is the most important part of my job, creating this archive that will live on," says Souza. "This is not so much photojournalism as photo-history." Souza and his staff produce up to 20,000 pictures a week.
Video [[http://www.pbs.org/the-presidents-photographer/)
FYI: This video is almost an hour long but fascinating.
Warning: Video Footage of 9/11 present
Op-Ed
Yes, repeal health-care reform -- on one condition
By Matt Miller
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
Republicans need to pass a law that the Congressional Budget Office certifies will cover the same number of uninsured as the Democratic health reform does - 30 million. And it has to do it at lower cost.
If I were President Obama, this is what I would be saying this week. And in the State of the Union address next week. And every time the question comes up.
The logic is simple. If Republicans are serious, they have to accept that it's a national priority to make sure that every American has basic health coverage. Thirty million isn't enough, of course, because the ranks of the uninsured still hover around 50 million. But since Democrats could only muster the will to cover 30 million, that's all we can expect the GOP to match as a measure of seriousness. [[Though I'd be happy to see them shame Democrats with a plan to cover more).
Full Article [[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/19/AR2011011902438.html)
Or, as the GOP lobbyist and former Minnesota congressman Vin Weber once explained to me: "Do we care? Yeah. But politics trumps that conviction."
My translation, oh sure we care about the American people but we care about winning the game of politics [[and money) more...
This was such a waste of time. The Repubs criticized the Dems for focusing on the Health Care Bill instead of Jobs and the first thing they do is concentrate on repeal of the heath care bill as a symbolic gesture.:rolleyes:
House Repeals Obama Health Care Law in Symbolic Act
By DAVID M. HERSZENHORN
Published: January 19, 2011
WASHINGTON – The House on Wednesday voted to repeal the Democrats’ landmark health care overhaul, in a largely symbolic step that the new Republican majority said marked the beginning of an all-out effort to dismantle President Obama’s signature domestic policy achievement.
Leaders of the Democratic-controlled Senate have said that they will not act on the repeal measure, effectively scuttling it.
The House vote was 245 to 189 to repeal the law, with three Democrats joining all Republicans in the majority.
While conceding the reality that the measure would not advance in the Senate, House Republicans said they would still press ahead with their “repeal and replace” strategy. The next steps, however, will be much more difficult, as they try to forge consensus on alternatives to the new law emphasizing “free market solutions” to control health costs and expand coverage.
Read More [[http://www.nytimes.com/)
MotownSteve
01-19-2011, 10:37 PM
What else would they do. BTW, I heard today that 18% of the population is against the healthcare bill. So it was rammed down their throats. The republicans continue to basically be the party of no and nothing.
Not sure how anyone would conclude a bill that seem to take a million years to pass was rammed down their throat but ok. LOL
You know Steve, the one thing that has always perplexed me about people who don't like the bill, I don't remember seeing thousands protesting in front of the WH or Capitol. I guess couch potato protesting is the new "it" thing. LOL
There was an article either in the Times or Post that had a survey that many people didn't like the bill but they didn't want to see the entire thing repealed. Then there were those that didn't like it because it didn't go far enough. Sometimes I don't think the American people have a clue what they really want. shrugs
As far as the Repubs, I think that quote above says it all...
Or, as the GOP lobbyist and former Minnesota congressman Vin Weber once explained to me: "Do we care? Yeah. But politics trumps that conviction."
CRITICAL MISS
Many College Students Failing To Learn Critical Thinking Skills
45% Of Students Don't Learn Much In College
A new study provides disturbing answers to questions about how much students actually learn in college – for many, not much – and has inflamed a debate about the value of an American higher education.
The research of more than 2,300 undergraduates found 45 percent of students show no significant improvement in the key measures of critical thinking, complex reasoning and writing by the end of their sophomore years.
One problem is that students just aren't asked to do much, according to findings in a new book, "Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses." Half of students did not take a single course requiring 20 pages of writing during their prior semester, and one-third did not take a single course requiring even 40 pages of reading per week.
Full Article [[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/18/45-of-students-dont-learn_n_810224.html)
I'm not sure what's more disturbing, people walking around without critical thinking skills or the need for a study to state the obvious.:confused:
MotownSteve
01-20-2011, 10:55 AM
Sounds like 'w' succeeded in dumbing down this country.
It started long before W Steve.
the deliberate dumbing down of america [[www.deliberatedumbingdown.com)
Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt, former Senior Policy Advisor in the U.S. Department of Education, blew the whistle on government activities.
PDF
Steve this is a perfect example of lack of critical thinking skills
Mike Lee: Federal Disaster Relief Is Unconstitutional [[VIDEO) [[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/19/mike-lee-fema-disaster-poverty-relief_n_811288.html)
Now he's part of that new crop of politicians that scream about States rights and the Feds getting out of their way.
There are voters out here cheering him on. I wonder how long their state would last without Federal money? How would the states make up for the loss of revenue and who would they look to, to pay more????????? The same fools agreeing with this twit that's who.
When the Feds leave these states alone, who is going to pay for the cost of protecting their water, their food, their environment? Where is the money coming from to maintain their roads and bridges? Who is going to pay for their precious Social Security and [[don't touch my) Medicare?
....and before we get all sanctimonious about these folks, lets not forget about the people that wanted to teach the Dems and President Obama a lesson so they sat on their butts during the midterm and didn't come out to vote....and as a result...welcome to the world of Mike Lee, the new kid on the political block.:mad:
U.S. Jobless Claims Fall More Than Forecast
By REUTERS
Published: January 20, 2011
Economic data released Thursday provided the latest signs that the economy was recovering in fits and starts.
The resale of existing homes jumped more than expected in December despite bad weather as sellers cut prices, but factory activity growth in the mid-Atlantic region fell in January from December’s level.
The economy has been growing for over a year, having emerged from its deepest recession in generations in the summer of 2009. Gross domestic product expanded 2.6 percent in the third quarter, not enough to put a significant dent on the nation’s elevated 9.4 percent jobless rate.
More [[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/21/business/economy/21econ.html?hp)
Sales of U.S. Existing Homes Jump More Than Estimated to Seven-Month High
By Shobhana Chandra - Jan 20, 2011 10:32 AM ET
Sales of U.S. previously owned homes jumped more than forecast in December as buyers tried to lock in low mortgage rates before the economic recovery pushed borrowing up further.
Purchases of existing houses, which are tabulated when a contract closes, increased 12 percent to a 5.28 million annual rate, the most since May and exceeding the highest estimate of economists surveyed by Bloomberg News, figures from the National Association of Realtors showed today in Washington. The median price dropped 1 percent from a year earlier, and the share of sales represented by foreclosures climbed.
Buyers are returning to the housing market after a government tax credit expired in the middle of 2010, indicating the drop in prices and cheap lending rates are making homes more affordable. At the same time, unemployment in excess of 9 percent and record foreclosures are among concerns that have prompted Federal Reserve policy makers to follow through with a second round of quantitative easing.
Read More [[http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-20/existing-u-s-home-sales-jump-to-seven-month-high-as-buyers-lock-in-rates.html)
Leading Indicators Index in U.S. Increases More Than Forecast
By Bob Willis - Jan 20, 2011 10:00 AM ET
The index of U.S. leading economic indicators increased in December more than forecast, a sign the recovery will gather steam in the new year.
The Conference Board’s gauge of the outlook for the next three to six months rose 1.0 percent after a 1.1 percent gain in November, the New York-based group said today. The December reading, the sixth consecutive monthly increase, exceeded the 0.6 percent gain in the median forecast of economists surveyed by Bloomberg News.
Improved consumer expectations, fewer firings and rising stock prices are boosting the outlook for household spending, the biggest part of the economy. Even so, Federal Reserve policy makers have indicated that until faster economic growth fuels bigger job gains, they will stick to their plan to pump $600 billion into the economy through June.
Read More [[http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-20/leading-indicators-gain-more-than-forecast-in-sign-recovery-gaining-steam.html)
Doug-Morgan
01-20-2011, 10:29 PM
I heard an interesting analysis the other day that it appears that employed people are beginning to open up their wallets because they appear to be less fearful of losing their jobs. With less fear, they are buying more consumer goods. This doesn't help the unemployment picture in the short term [[the percent of people unemployed hasn't budged much, but being a lagging indicator it probably won't for a while), but long term prospects are good.
The current thing that's worrying me a bit is the necessity of cutting government spending. In the little town I'm a councilman in, our revenues have fallen, and although we've managed to come up with a budget that has not grown in 3 years, this year it's $40,000 out of wack. To us, $40,000 is the salary of one of our 4 employees, and had a state initiative passed, we would have lost another $60k in state matching revenue which would have come close to killing our payroll. Thankfully, we've got good reserves.
Alas, the state of Washington does not. They're looking at a $4.6 billion hole in the next 2 year budget. Programs are going to be cut, and when you cut programs, you also cut employees, thus adding to the unemployment roles. I can't for the life of me, figure a way out of that one.....
Doug when you say government spending are your referring to State or Federal Government spending? I know a lot of states are getting hit hard and cutting back on services. Not to mention there are new breed and crop of govs taking over right now that don't seem to be thinking straight because in their mind, if it's coming from the Feds it's bad.
The other thing that concerns me are the employers that refuse to hire even though their profit margins are rising. I agree it's getting better but the last thing we need is for things to slip backwards.
Back in 2009 The Department of Homeland Security issued a statement about the rise in rightwing extremist activity [[http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/14/federal-agency-warns-of-radicals-on-right/) and the possibility of domestic terrorist attacks.
I still remember how the Right [[politicians and citizens) went into vapors and were outraged feeling their character was being unfairly demeaned and, they demanded an apology from Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano .
Will be interesting to find out who is behind this very recent discovery...
Device Found Along MLK Parade Route Credible Threat
FBI Offers $20K Reward For Information On Attempted Bombing
Rob Kauder | Internet Content Manager, KXLY.com
Posted: 11:45 am PST January 18, 2011Updated: 7:06 am PST January 19, 2011
SPOKANE, Wash. -- The Spokane office of the FBI confirmed late Tuesday morning that a suspicious package found along the route of the Unity Parade on Monday morning was a credible threat that had the potential to cause "multiple casualties."
On Tuesday morning the FBI released a statement confirming that following the successful disruption of the device by the Explosives Disposal Unit, “preliminary analysis revealed the backpack contained a potentially deadly destructive device, likely capable of inflicting multiple casualties.”
The backpack, a black Swiss Army pack, was found by a city employee Monday morning at approximately 9:30 a.m. in a parking lot across from the INB Performing Arts Center. After it was reported, authorities shut down several blocks in the vicinity of the intersection of Main Avenue and Washington Street.
Full Article [[http://www.kxly.com/news/26530294/detail.html)
...and this little diddy was kept under wraps because it was/is an ongoing investigation
April 8, 2010
Bomb found at U.S. Courthouse
Federal officials kept discovery secret
The Spokesman-Review
At a time of heightened concerns over threats to government officials, federal authorities in Spokane kept quiet about the discovery of a bomb found alongside the Thomas S. Foley U.S. Courthouse last week.
They acknowledged the investigation Wednesday, however, after the latest edition of Newsweek magazine disclosed the March 28 discovery as part of an article examining increasing anti-government threats and violence spreading across the nation.
U.S. Attorney Jim McDevitt defended the decision to try keeping the case under wraps.
Read More [[http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/apr/08/bomb-found-at-us-courthouse/)
Picture it....
Republican/Tea Party candidates sweep into the House after promising to repeal Health Care, or as they call it, "ObamaCare," and cut back on federal [[non defense) spending. So, they fulfill their promises KNOWING a Democratic controlled Senate will not go for it which makes their gestures nothing more than symbolism....but, they get to tell their constituents they fulfilled their promises and it's the Dems fault the laws were not passed and enacted.
AND....the voters that put them there, will probably be duped by this meaningless gesture, fall for their crap and spin, cheer them on and vote them back in office even though in actuality they didn't do squat?:rolleyes:
GOP bloc in House calls for deep cuts
By Lori Montgomery
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, January 21, 2011
Congressional conservatives on Thursday demanded far more dramatic reductions in government spending than House GOP leaders have recently proposed, in the first sign of a fissure between old-guard Republicans and tea-party-backed newcomers.
Members of the conservative Republican Study Committee said the GOP must keep its campaign pledge to immediately slice at least $100 billion from non-defense programs, an effort that would require lawmakers to reduce funding for most federal agencies by a third over the next seven months. And the group called for even deeper cuts over the next decade to return non-defense spending to 2006 levels.
"One hundred billion dollars is the number the American people heard last fall. And, frankly, when you look at it in the context that there's a $14 trillion debt, it seems to me we should be able to find $100 billion," said Rep. Jim Jordan [[Ohio), chairman of the study committee, a group of economic and social conservatives whose ranks have swelled since the GOP won back control of the House in the November midterm elections.
Read More [[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/20/AR2011012006144.html)
Doug, this could be the answer you’re looking for...
Path Is Sought for States to Escape Debt Burdens
By MARY WILLIAMS WALSH
Published: January 20, 2011
Policy makers are working behind the scenes to come up with a way to let states declare bankruptcy and get out from under crushing debts, including the pensions they have promised to retired public workers.
Unlike cities, the states are barred from seeking protection in federal bankruptcy court. Any effort to change that status would have to clear high constitutional hurdles because the states are considered sovereign.
But proponents say some states are so burdened that the only feasible way out may be bankruptcy, giving Illinois, for example, the opportunity to do what General Motors did with the federal government’s aid.
Full Article [[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/21/business/economy/21bankruptcy.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha2)
If this starts getting traction, political posturing is about to become quite interesting:)
Ok Doug, you're the econ expert:)
The more I think about this the more fascinating it becomes.
Obviously it's a complex undertaking because of Constitutional laws but how will the House Republicans begin to even approach this while using the raising [[or not raising) of the "debt ceiling" hostage?
I don't buy into the hysterical notion that government will shut down or stiff it's vendors but I can see the bond market getting antsy....if you throw something like State bankruptcy in the mix, wouldn't that make the bond market even more vulnerable, or would one not have any direct affect on the other?
.......or do you think this is nothing more than Gingrich's way of trying to up his political cred, to help with a run for the presidency?
Doug-Morgan
01-21-2011, 10:21 AM
Yup. The minute you welch on your debt [[like personal bankruptcy) your ability to get credit goes out the window. I don't deal much with the feds [[except that they're financing our new sewer---it's half done, thank you),s but many states require a balanced budget by law and that's where they're getting into trouble. This is what's tripping up Washington state. When times are good, there is the tendency for spending to rise to use the available money. When revenues are down and you can't pay for the projects, they get cut.
As to re-employment, as I have said before, it's a lagging indicator. In general, companies are not shoveling out profits to their shareholders, they're hanging on to them as reserves, which is a smart move. They're not hiring new employees for a good reason, they don't need them.......yet.
Company X produces widgets, and is running at half capacity and a work force of 1,000. The company feels that they can run as low as 40% without having to lay off anyone, and as high as 60% without having to hire. So the company announces they have a 15% increase in sales and revenues, and the commentators start saying....
".......Company X had a 15% spike in sales, yet they're not hiring anyone!! What the hell is going on? They're scared of [[fill in your excuse here)!! We've got to [[repeal/pass) the [[job killing/job creating pet project of the week) now!"
Bull. Company X isn't hiring because they don't need to yet. A 15% increase in sales for a company that's running at half capacity only brings them up to 57.5% of capacity, or 2.5% lower than the production rate that would make new hires economically viable.
So when you look at numbers, keep in mind lagging and leading indicators. The Dow/S&P indexs tend to be leading, unemployment lagging.
Yeah for the sewer, I've been meaning to ask you about that.
Wasn't aware of the balanced budget requirement for some states but there suddenly seems to be a certain irony to budgetary laws that are passed [[Fed or States) that seem, and I 'm sure are a great idea at the time but once you face a "perfect storm" scenario, come back to bite you in the rear. At least I hope it's nothing more than irony.:eek:
Thanks for the conversation Doug.
MotownSteve
01-21-2011, 05:14 PM
I was just thinking how w dumbed the country down and spent money on war. Where would we be if the money had been spent on education and/or health? Just some food for thought.
Doug-Morgan
01-21-2011, 05:49 PM
Don't know Steve. That would be pure speculation. It probably would be better "spent" if it were not but used to pay down the deficit. Although I'm not a deficit hawk by any means, a lower deficit would allow you room to borrow money to cover holes like what we have now.
Ms. M.....
......balanced budgets are requirements in many state constitutions, others have been enacted into law. That doesn't mean outflow has to match income, you can borrow to make up the difference in many cases, but here, with a $4.8b hole in the budget and limited reserves already spent over the last 3 or 4 years to maintain services, borrowing is not an option.
One thing people forget sometimes is that state budgets get "bloated" because of changing times. My mother in law recently lost her state supported in-home care due to budget cutbacks and had to move out of the family home into an assisted living facility [[which she absolutely hates). 50 or 60 years ago, this wouldn't even have been an issue....or a budget item....because the family would in many cases take care of elderly reletives. You'd find examples like this all through federal, state and local budgets.
I did want to make one other point on my earlier post about percentages. When you hear something like "GE reported earnings 25% higher than last year", it helps to know what last years earnings were. If earnings were $4.98 billion, that's an increase of $1.25b, a pretty hefty sum. On the other hand, if last year's earnings were $4.98, a 25% gain would be just under a buck and a quarter. When someone quotes statistics, it helps to know what they're based on. Statistics don't lie. Sometimes though, they don't tell the whole truth.
Doug it sounds like what you're saying, they are bringing in more money but still shelling it out and the margin between the two isn't enough to cover the cost of additional workers?
Doug-Morgan
01-21-2011, 06:57 PM
WERE bringing in more money and still shelling it out. I wonder sometimes if most government spending on the state and local level is administrative, for example enforcement of state and local regulations as opposed to brick and morter projects like fixing roads and building buildings.
Remember, you don't unfund a program overnight. Look at the problems Arizona is facing by cutting funds for transplants. If the feds had stopped funding the stimulus program, we'd be sitting here with a fully installed sewer collection system with no plant to process the waste. That is one problem all governments face in a downturn. They've committed to spending based on projected revenues, and when the bottom dropped out suddenly, you can't just turn off the spout without consequences.
[[Right now Pandora is playing Judy Collins' version of "I Think It's Going To Rain Today". Seems fitting to this discussion)
[[Right now Pandora is playing Judy Collins' version of "I Think It's Going To Rain Today". Seems fitting to this discussion)
I'm glad you are only talking rain, most of the time when I talk to people about these things you would think they were chicken little and the sky was falling. Your approach is more laid back and comforting although very serious....but if you see a monsoon approaching, don't forget to give a "sista" a heads up. :)
This article is Fed related but I'm wondering if there are any parallels on the State level. Any assets that can be leased or sold?
Economist's View
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
"Don't Believe What's Said About the Debt Ceiling"
Stan Collender argues that we are too worried about what might happen if Congress refuses to increase the debt limit:
Don’t Believe What’s Said About Debt Ceiling, by Stan Collender [CC]: There is so much misinformation and grossly misleading talk about what will happen if the federal debt ceiling isn’t increased...
First, not raising the current federal debt limit absolutely will not immediately shut down the federal government. ... Government shutdowns occur when the appropriation that funds a department or agency isn’t enacted. ...
Second, and again contrary to what some have stated as gospel, reaching the debt ceiling will not automatically lead to a federal default on the nation’s existing debt. That will only stop the government from borrowing more than the current limit and force it to rely on other ways to finance its activities.
Although the comparison isn’t perfect, the situation is similar to what happens when individuals max out credit cards. They don’t stay home with the lights off, gently rocking back and forth in a corner; they find other sources of money or change their activities to match the cash available. That could mean delaying paying a bill, taking cash from a savings account, getting a loan from a family member or friend, waiting for the next paycheck, or selling a car or some other possession. ...
Full Article [[http://capitalgainsandgames.com/blog/stan-collender/2104/dont-believe-scary-words-you-hear-about-debt-ceiling/)
MotownSteve
01-21-2011, 07:33 PM
In NJ, where I am, some local congress woman is saying there should be $15,000 cap on payment for unused sick/vacation time for state employees. I'd say part of the problem in this country is the law makers are not too bright. There is a $15,000 [[before taxes) cap on state employees retiring. However, county, municipal employees in the state pension system don't have that cap. Why not? All they have to do is enforce current policies.
To be in the state pension system you have to be employed full time. The state legislature is in the system. But by law they are part time.
A year ago two people with the Hudson County Water Commission retired. One got $250,000 and the other only $125,000. [[BTW, after retirement they were hired as consultants doing their old jobs) A woman in the education system retired and got $185,000 for unused six and vacation.
There is something rotten going on here. But being in NJ, maybe that is redundant. [[Just kidding on the last point)
BTW, after retirement they were hired as consultants doing their old jobs
Holy crap, at what rate of pay, do you know?
Didn't know much about Christie in the beginning but the more I discover, the more you have my sympathy Steve.
MotownSteve
01-21-2011, 07:46 PM
I don't know the rate of pay for any of them. What I find fascinating is Christie takes over a mess from Corzine who as far as I can tell did nothing while in office. Christie gets lauded. Obama, well, you know where I'm going.
Obama to Push New Spending
State of Union Speech to Call for Boosting 'Competitiveness' While Nodding to Need for Budget Cuts
By DAMIAN PALETTA, JONATHAN WEISMAN and LAURA MECKLER
President Barack Obama will call for new government spending on infrastructure, education and research in his State of the Union address Tuesday, sharpening his response to Republicans in Congress who are demanding deep budget cuts, people familiar with the speech said.
Mr. Obama will argue that the U.S., even while trying to reduce its budget deficit, must make targeted investments to foster job growth and boost U.S. competitiveness in the world economy. The new spending could include initiatives aimed at building the renewable-energy sector—which received billions of dollars in stimulus funding—and rebuilding roads to improve transportation, people familiar with the matter said. Money to restructure the No Child Left Behind law's testing mandates and institute more competitive grants also could be included.
While proposing new spending, Mr. Obama also will lay out significant budget cuts elsewhere, people familiar with the plans say, though they will likely fall short of what Republican lawmakers have requested.
Full Article [[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704754304576096171216582908.html?m od=WSJ_hp_LEFTTopStories)
Republican Mayor: The Stimulus Package ‘Worked,’ It’s ‘Unfair’ For House GOP To Attack It
By Tanya Somanader on Jan 21st, 2011
Yesterday, the House GOP lawmakers quickly manufactured an unwieldy proposal to axe $2.5 trillion from the federal budget. In a tribute to zeal, Rep. Jim Jordan’s [[R-OH) new Spending Reduction Act not only scraps 15 percent of federal jobs but also eliminates “all remaining stimulus funding.” Because, as they say, this is what the American people want.
Unfortunately for Republicans, the American people don’t live in their delusion. They live in states and cities — both of which depend on the Recovery Act and will get hosed by this repeal. Bristling under the GOP’s out-of-touch demonization of the Recovery Act, even Republican mayors like Tulsa, OK Mayor Dewey Bartlett are pointing out just how “unfair” a repeal of the Act would be. Speaking at the U.S. Conference of Mayors in DC yesterday, Bartlett”it worked“:
“I would prefer them to at least give us an opportunity to use them for another reasonably supportive project,” Bartlett said.
In Washington for the U.S. Conference of Mayors, Bartlett again made positive comments about the impact of the 2009 stimulus package, which was opposed by every Oklahoma Republican in Congress.
Full Article [[http://thinkprogress.org/2011/01/21/tulsa-mayor-stimulus/)
Doug-Morgan
01-22-2011, 12:51 PM
In as much as our sewer system is being partially funded by stimulus money, I'm in full agreement with the position of Mayor Bartlett, but I'm going to use the above post as a chance to make a point I haven't yet made on the Oberman posting. Ready?
"Think Progress" is a liberal blog, and as such is coming at the issue from a perticular point of view. No problem with that. Here's my problem.
1) why waste time with a bill like Represenative Jordan's which most likely is going nowhere. Idiot legislation is introduced every day by both sides, and every time it is respoded to, credence and publicity is given to the position. Fox the other day spent about 6 hours lambasting a stupid comment made by a Democrat on the House floor. Why waste the time giving the guy the publicity? BOTH SIDES OF THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM ARE GUILTY OF THIS.
2) I liked the writing in the blog above and [[like I said) agree with the position BUT if you're of a liberal persuation and all you read is liberal blogs, you're contributing to the dumming down of political discourse. The fact that someone disagrees with you doesn't mean their positions aren't valid or have some merit. I've found that it is advantageous to understand where the other side is coming from, why they think the way they do. Sometimes it strengthens my argument, sometimes I find holes in my argument that cause me to either do more research in order to strengthen my position, or rethink it all together. Again, BOTH SIDES ARE GUILTY OF WEARING BLINDERS. Resonable political dialog requires understanding of where your oposition is coming from and I find this desturbingly lacking in today's political discourse.
End of rant.
On the House floor on Thursday, Democrats said it was bizarre to see Republicans praising consumer protections in a law they had just voted to dismantle.
“It’s like Alice in Wonderland,” said Representative John Garamendi of California, a former state insurance commissioner.
House Republicans Plan Their Own Health Bills
By ROBERT PEAR
Published: January 20, 2011
WASHINGTON — Less than 24 hours after voting to repeal the new health care law, House Republicans said Thursday that they would pass discrete bills to achieve some of the same goals, but with more restraint in the use of federal power.
At the same time, the speaker, John A. Boehner, said House Republicans would push for much stricter limits on abortion in federal programs, including those created by the new law.
By a vote of 253 to 175, the House on Thursday directed four committees to draft legislation that would replace the health care law. The directive sets forth 13 objectives.
Full Article [[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/21/health/policy/21health.html?ref=politics)
Nice rant Doug:)
I even agree with some of it.
Personally, I refuse to watch Fox although I am willing to listen to informed and accurate opinions that are different than my own and as far as Olbermann, check out my comment in the the Olbermann thread.
I don't care for ideology of any kind, political or otherwise but I am, and have always been an Independent voter who more often than not, leans to the left. If that upsets anyone, they are always welcome to challenge my views. I simply ask they use substantiated facts to do so.
When all is said and done though, I think too many people define themselves by politics. That causes me more concern than their actual opinions and as I said to a friend last night, everyone wants to be heard, but no one wants to listen. shrugs.....and the band played on...
A few more things on my mind Doug. There is a political blog I belong to that has an annoying habit of using the phrase, “false equivalence.” It drives me up the wall every time I hear it.
Like you Doug, I agree both sides are guilty of many of the things they accuse the other side of doing and saying but, as much as I dislike the phrase, I do admit it has a certain amount of validity…
Be that as it may and in my minds eye, it’s not really about who does and or says what more, it’s about what’s being said or done.
Politics is a part of our culture and always has been. Somewhere along the line it became the focal point of our society [[along with reality shows and gossip) with the act of governing being a distant second. [[or in many instances not at all)
I think doing away with the Fair and Balance Doctrine may have played a major role in this phenomenon and in retrospect, I don’t remember any major public outcry when it happened.
Many valid actions can be attributed to the dumbing down of our society but when we start to be honest with ourselves, we the people, have to take the brunt of the responsibility.
No rant, just an observation.;)
Oh and one more thing. One of the most responsible and informed [[imo) right leaning people that I enjoyed talking to on this forum, no longer post here. I miss him and our conversations/debates. [[and his pics of hot hair balloons:)) I didn't always agree with his politics but I appreciated and learned a lot from his comments.
You and I can agree that this type of back and forth doesn't happen enough in political discourse these days but we seem to take our cues from politicians and the media. When we start demanding more honest, factual and civil debate from our elected officials [[they are after all civil servants) as well as the media, maybe things will change.
It’s events like this [[that are far from isolated) that temper my annoyance with the “false equivalence” meme.
It will be discussed, blogged, debated and argued about but will these same people make a concerted effort to do anything about it or make a change?
Beck has lost a lot of advertising revenue so that tells us there are people working behind the scenes to make a difference but there have to be more willing to take a stand. If that doesn't happen, whose fault is it...the media, politicians, Beck?
Spotlight From Glenn Beck Brings a CUNY Professor Threats
By BRIAN STELTER
Published: January 21, 2011
On his daily radio and television shows, Glenn Beck has elevated once-obscure conservative thinkers onto best-seller lists. Recently, he has elevated a 78-year-old liberal academic to celebrity of a different sort, in a way that some say is endangering her life.
Frances Fox Piven, a City University of New York professor, has been a primary character in Mr. Beck’s warnings about a progressive take-down of America. Ms. Piven, Mr. Beck says, is responsible for a plan to “intentionally collapse our economic system.”
Her name has become a kind of shorthand for “enemy” on Mr. Beck’s Fox News Channel program, which is watched by more than 2 million people, and on one of his Web sites, The Blaze. This week, Mr. Beck suggested on television that she was an enemy of the Constitution.
Full Article [[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/22/business/media/22beck.html?adxnnl=1&src=ISMR_HP_LO_MST_FB&adxnnlx=1295726885-bJBIc4oADEZWdxIAZNhDHQ)
MotownSteve
01-22-2011, 05:30 PM
And if something happens to her he will immediately do the old Mission Impossible routine and 'Disavow any responsibility'. [[I think I got it right.)
And if something happens to her he will immediately do the old Mission Impossible routine and 'Disavow any responsibility'. [[I think I got it right.)
Probably but we need to focus more on getting people like Beck to become more responsible in their speech, not limiting their right to speak. That's why people like Beck keep pushing back as well as pushing it to the limits.
Their POV[[ point of view)... the "liberal left," wants to take away their Freedom of Speech. [[well Beck probably has a totally different agenda but generally speaking I think my point stands)
That means the left has to be just as responsible and cognizant of the way they react and object to these types of things.
As I said Steve everyone wants to be heard, no one wants to listen.
I posted a link to the PBS documentary on Pete Souza, Whitehouse Photographer the other day. If you haven’t seen it, check it out.
PBS Pete Souza Documentary
http://www.pbs.org/the-presidents-photographer/
In the meantime, here are a few new Souza pics.
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/pete100.jpg
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/pete109.jpg
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/pete105.jpg
Sasha and her classmates are learning Mandarin Chinese in school. She had the opportunity to try out her skills:D
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/pete104.jpg
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/pete102.jpg
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/pete107.jpg
Dee Dee Bridgewater
As State of the Union Nears, Congress Plays Musical Chairs
By JENNIFER STEINHAUER and CARL HULSE
Published: January 22, 2011
WASHINGTON — Mary from Louisiana asked Olympia from Maine because they are BFFs, but had a backup in Bob from Tennessee in case she was rebuffed. Kirsten from New York went the Sadie Hawkins route and asked John from South Dakota, and thus the deal between two members of the Senate with seriously good hair was sealed.
The talk in the West Wing may center on what President Obama plans to say on Tuesday in his State of the Union address to Congress about the still-ailing economy, or United States-China relations, or his education agenda. But here on Capitol Hill, the talk for the last few days has been all about the seating for the president’s speech and just who will be next to whom.
Ever since Senator Mark Udall, Democrat of Colorado, pushed for lawmakers of both parties to mix it up rather than sit among their own in the House chamber as if the other side has cooties, there has been a mad scramble among lawmakers for just the right partner.
Full Article [[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/23/us/politics/23seats.html?_r=1&hp)
I think this is cute. I realize this may seem trivial to many people but beyond the chatter of the media and blogs there is a large group of people who are tired of the partisan divide. They simply want their elected representatives to work at passing laws that will benefit the American people.
The seating will make for a great visual for people watching at home and from around the world and I’m sure the media will give as much attention to the seating, as they will the President’s speech. This will help to keep the topic of civility and bi-partisanship in the forefront. Plus, when sitting next to your opposition, it could be intimidating, and make you think, before loudly opening mouth and inserting foot.
I guess that’s why the dissenters aren’t happy. Although, the seating arrangement doesn’t seem as childish [[and disrespectful) as a member of congress and grown man yelling, “you lie,” at the President of the United States, during the State of the Union Address.
It should be noted, Representative Joe Wilson [[SC-R) later apologized to the president for his emotional outburst.
OOPS...how's that radical, Republican/Tea Party "repealy" thing working out for ya?:rolleyes:
It’s Repeal That’s Ailing
Posted on Jan 21, 2011
By Eugene Robinson
This whole health care thing isn’t quite working out the way Republicans planned. My guess is that they’ll soon try to change the subject—but I’m afraid they’re already in too deep.
Wednesday’s vote to repeal President Obama’s health insurance reform law was supposed to be a crowning triumph. We heard confident GOP predictions that cowed Democrats would defect in droves, generating unstoppable momentum that forced the Senate to obey “the will of the people” and follow suit. The Democrats’ biggest domestic accomplishment would be in ruins and Obama’s political standing would be damaged, perhaps irreparably.
What actually happened, though, is that the Republican majority managed to win the votes of just three Democrats—all of them Blue Dogs who have been consistent opponents of the reform package anyway. In terms of actual defectors, meaning Democrats who changed sides on the issue, there were none. This is momentum?
Full Editorial [[http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/its_repeal_thats_ailing_20110121)
President Obama’s poll numbers started showing an uptick before his speech in Tucson.
Consensus at 53 percent
Pre-Ariz. poll reflects Obama gains
By MJ LEE | 01/21/11 7:17 AM Updated: 01/21/11 7:22 AM
Another poll released Friday shows President Obama’s approval rating at 53 percent, the highest it’s been in months, ending a week in which several surveys reflected an uptick in public opinion for the president.
The figure, in the latest AP-GfK poll, is the same number that a Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll and a CNN/Opinion Research survey reported this week, and it’s one point lower than the 54 percent approval rating cited by an ABC News poll.
But unlike those surveys, the AP-GfK poll was conducted between Jan. 5 and 10, ending just two days after the shooting in Tucson, and a couple of days before Obama gave a speech in Arizona that was praised across the political spectrum.
More [[http://www.politico.com/politico44/perm/0111/consensus_at_53_percent_c2afd11f-eb08-48e3-9abc-e42477eb33e3.html)
Ahead of his second State of the Union address next week, President Obama has recorded a short video to give supporters a preview of his vision for winning the future.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=lX2lf4B1CaM
Three days from now, on Tuesday, January 25th, I will stand before Congress and the country to discuss the State of the Union.
Two years ago, when I first addressed a joint session of Congress, this country faced a crisis unlike anything since the Great Depression—an economy that had spiraled out of control, putting millions out of work.
Today, we're in a different place. An economy that was shrinking is now growing again. But across the country, millions are struggling every day—to find work, to pay their bills, to provide for their families.
It is clear that the moment we now face demands a vision for how we as a people will win the future.
And that vision—that agenda—will be the topic of my State of the Union address.
As the messengers, volunteers, and organizers of this movement, you will play a critical role in carrying out that agenda. Because of that, I want you to have an advance look at what I'll ask of Congress on Tuesday.
I've recorded a short video to share that message with you. Please click here to watch it.
I will talk to the nation about how we can win the future by out-innovating, out-educating, and out-building the rest of the world. By dealing with our deficits and our debt in a responsible way, and reforming government so that it's leaner and smarter for the 21st century. How we continue to keep America safe and advance our interests around the world.
But we can do it only if we all work together.
I've recorded this video so that we all know what's at stake and we're ready for the work to come.
Will you take a minute to watch it?
Thank you,
Barack
Murkowski Breaks With McConnell: GOP Should Focus On Economy, Not ‘Messaging’ Health Repeal
Yesterday, after the House repealed the Affordable Care Act, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell [[R-KY) said he would “assure” a Senate vote on the legislation, despite Senate Democrats’ opposition to holding such a vote. “The Democratic leadership in the Senate doesn’t want to vote on this bill,” McConnell said. “But I assure you, we will.”
During an appearance on Alaska’s KTVA just moments after McConnell made his remarks, Sen. Lisa Murkowski [[R-AK) broke with her party leadership and said that even though she would vote to repeal the law, the Senate should not spend its time on “messaging” and should instead focus on more pressing economic issues:
MURKOWSKI: I don’t believe that there are votes sufficient in the Senate to repeal health care reform….We’re in this situation where there is some messaging going on…The real question is how much time do we as a Congress spend on this messaging? We’ve got a situation where our economy continues to be in the tank, the longest extended period of high unemployment since World War II….As important as making sure that we’re reigning in our health care costs — spending a lot of time on the messaging vote? I don’t think that’s what the American public wants us to do. …I don’t think what people want is kind of the messaging that’s going on.
Watch it: [[http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2011/01/20/murkowski-messaging-hcr/)
Senate Republicans to Oppose Obama’s Spending Plans
By JOSEPH BERGER
Published: January 23, 201
The Senate’s top Republican, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, said on Sunday that his party will vigorously oppose the spending initiatives President Obama plans to include in his State of the Union address on Tuesday because “it’s not a time to be looking at pumping up government spending.”
And the number two Republican in the House, Representative Eric Cantor of Virginia, said that his party would press ahead with its plans for immediate cuts in spending, including in the defense budget. “Every dollar should be on the table,” he said.
In a video Mr. Obama sent to supporters on Saturday that gave a preview of the speech, the president indicated that he would seek to balance an attack on the deficit with increased spending in fields like education, research and technological innovation that he called crucial to long-term job growth.
Full Article [[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/24/us/politics/24repubs.html?ref=politics)
Tea partiers say defense in mix for budget cuts
By DONNA CASSATA
The Associated Press
Monday, January 24, 2011; 2:18 AM
WASHINGTON -- Back home, tea partiers clamoring for the debt-ridden government to slash spending say nothing should be off limits. Tea party-backed lawmakers echo that argument, and they're not exempting the military's multibillion-dollar budget in a time of war.
That demand is creating hard choices for the newest members of Congress, especially Republicans who owe their elections and solid House majority to the influential grass-roots movement. Cutting defense and canceling weapons could mean deep spending reductions and high marks from tea partiers as the nation wrestles with a $1.3 trillion deficit. Yet it also could jeopardize thousands of jobs when unemployment is running high
Proponents of the cuts could face criticism that they're trying to weaken national security in a post-Sept. 11 world.
More [[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/23/AR2011012300943.html)
Romney keeps away from Tea Party
Possible presidential contender isn’t courting activists
By Matt Viser
Globe Staff / January 21, 2011
WASHINGTON — New Hampshire Tea Party movement activist Andrew Hemingway is not lacking in contact with likely presidential candidates. He’s talked hockey with Tim Pawlenty. He sat down with former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum at the Concord Country Club. And plans are in the works for Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour to appear before a group of Hemingway’s fellow conservatives.
A notable exception among the field of would-be GOP presidential contenders? Mitt Romney.
“Romney for the most part is inaccessible,’’ said Hemingway, a Bristol resident who is chairman of the state’s Republican Liberty Caucus. “Pawlenty, I could call him right now and say, ‘Let’s have coffee.’ ’’
Full Article [[http://www.boston.com/news/politics/articles/2011/01/21/mitt_romney_keeps_away_from_tea_party/)
Obama Plans To Hit Education Hard In 2011
Callie Schweitzer | January 24, 2011
Editor-in-Chief
One thing President Barack Obama made abundantly clear in his first two years as president is that he is at his best when speaking about the issues facing future generations of American voters, now too young to follow the vitriol of most political debates.
For all of the flack he gets for sounding like a “Harvard professor,” Obama appeared quite the opposite in Tucson when he eulogized 9-year-old shooting victim Christina-Taylor Green and put the discussion of America’s future in human terms.
He knows this young generation well, living with two of its most famous members—daughters Sasha and Malia, 12 and 9, whom he often mentions in his speeches and weekly addresses.
Full Article [[http://www.neontommy.com/news/2011/01/obama-plans-hit-education-hard-2011)
Obama's Economic Recovery In Review
Ryan Faughnder | January 24, 2011
Senior News Editor
Even before his term began two years ago, Barack Obama tried to lower expectations for economic recovery, telling ABC
News that his $775 billion stimulus package wouldn’t solve everything immediately.
"Whether it's retail sales, manufacturing – all of the indicators show that we are in the worst recession since the Great Depression," Obama said. "And it's going to take some time to fix it."
That now seems like an understatement. Two years after Obama took office, the economy is growing, but unemployment is stuck at around 9.4 percent. Obama is expected to speak at length about the economy, focusing on jobs and the U.S.’s global competitiveness, at the State of the Union Address Tuesday night.
Read More [[http://www.neontommy.com/news/2011/01/obamas-economic-recovery-review)
I ran across this site and organization and thought it was interesting. On a personal tip, I would suggest using an alternative email address if you prefer not being bombarded with a lot of email in your primary email account. [[Donations are optional, NOT required) Other than that, it seems like a great way to add your voice to other Americans who prefer seeing our elected officials getting constructive things done, to talking points, rhetoric and fighting.
Since it’s new, can’t say how affective it will be but grassroots efforts have to start somewhere. The more people involved, the better the chances of building a successful coalition.
THE NO LABELS approach
Hyper-partisanship is one of the greatest domestic challenges our nation faces. It divides America and derails our ability to solve our shared challenges. Rather than focusing on solving problems, hyper-partisans use labels to demonize their opponents, enforce orthodoxy within their own ranks, and marginalize sensible compromises.
Putting aside our labels can offer a hopeful alternative, grounded in an approach that brings people together to develop practical solutions to common problems. That doesn't mean that we forget about our differences. It does mean that we regard those with whom we disagree as legitimate voices in the dialogue of democracy, as citizens who might have a piece of the answer to tough questions.
In this spirit, No Labels will bring together leading thinkers from the left, right, and all points in between. We will work to break down false divisions and lift up the common ground on which we can build solutions. Real differences of principle will remain, of course. But we believe that as Americans, more unites us than divides us. Simply put, we all love our country and seek to better it. The examples below offer illustrations of the policy thinking we support – highlighting the problem, identifying the dysfunction we seek to correct, and then presenting the No Labels approach to finding solutions.
More [[http://nolabels.org/home/)
Obama won't endorse raising retirement age or reducing Social Security benefits
By Lori Montgomery
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, January 24, 2011; 1:31 PM
President Obama has decided not to endorse his deficit commission's recommendation to raise the retirement age, and otherwise reduce Social Security benefits, in Tuesday's State of the Union address, cheering liberals and drawing a stark line between the White House and key Republicans in Congress.
Over the weekend, the White House informed Democratic lawmakers and advocates for seniors that Obama will emphasize the need to reduce record deficits in the speech, but that he will not call for reducing spending on Social Security - the single largest federal program - as part of that effort.
Liberals, who have been alarmed by Obama's recent to shift to the center and his effort to court the nation's business community, applauded the decision, arguing that Social Security cuts are neither necessary to reduce current deficits nor a wise move politically. Polls show that large majorities of Americans in both parties - even in households that identify themselves as part of the tea party movement - oppose cuts to Social Security.
Full Article [[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/24/AR2011012403472.html?hpid=topnews)
…and in wtf? news
Bachmann: America Was Founded On Diversity [[VIDEO)
Jillian Rayfield | January 24, 2011, 11:39AM
Rep. Michele Bachmann [[R-MN) had an interesting take this weekend on America's first European settlers, who she said "had different cultures, different backgrounds, different traditions."
"How unique in all of the world, that one nation that was the resting point from people groups all across the world," she said. "It didn't matter the color of their skin, it didn't matter their language, it didn't matter their economic status."
"Once you got here, we were all the same. Isn't that remarkable?" she asked.
Speaking at an Iowans For Tax Relief event, Bachmann [[R-MN) also noted how slavery was a "scourge" on American history, but added that "we also know that the very founders that wrote those documents worked tirelessly until slavery was no more in the United States."
"And," she continued, "I think it is high time that we recognize the contribution of our forbearers who worked tirelessly -- men like John Quincy Adams, who would not rest until slavery was extinguished in the country."
It's true -- Adams became a vocal opponent of slavery, especially during his time in the House of Representatives. But Adams was not one of the founders, nor did he live to see the Emancipation Proclamation signed in 1863 [[he died in 1848).
Here's a portion of the speech. The above comments come in at the 9:00 minute mark:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hGSCF712FCA&feature=player_embedded
Re-posted from TPM [[http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/01/bachmann-america-was-founded-on-diversity-video.php)
There are some people on this planet that are so breathtakingly ignorant, they leave you speechless.
tamla617
01-24-2011, 07:26 PM
she was doing ok 'till she started talking
Thomas Cites Failure to Disclose Wife’s Job
By ERIC LICHTBLAU
Published: January 24, 2011
WASHINGTON — Under pressure from liberal critics, Justice Clarence Thomas of the Supreme Court acknowledged in filings released on Monday that he erred by not disclosing his wife’s past employment as required by federal law.
Justice Thomas said that in his annual financial disclosure statements over the last six years, the employment of his wife, Virginia Thomas, was “inadvertently omitted due to a misunderstanding of the filing instructions.”
To rectify that situation, Justice Thomas filed seven pages of amended disclosures listing Mrs. Thomas’s employment in that time with the Heritage Foundation, a conservative policy group, and Hillsdale College in Michigan, for which she ran a constitutional law center in Washington.
Full Article [[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/25/us/politics/25thomas.html?ref=politics)
" … Even less known is that in the 221 yrs since the court was established, not a single sitting judge has been removed from the bench.
The term of a sitting judge ends one of four ways; retirement, resignation, impeachment conviction, or death. However, only one Supreme Court justice has been impeached, Samuel
Chase. Although impeached in 1804, Chase was acquitted and remained on the bench until his death in 1811. So, to sum it up, if one were to rely on history to forecast the future, the likelihood of a justice being impeached and removed is slim to none."
Excerpt from: The Supreme Court Unveiled
by Sharon Kyle posted on Tuesday, 26 October 2010
[[http://www.laprogressive.com/law-and-the-justice-system/clarence-thomas/)
MotownSteve
01-25-2011, 01:45 PM
Sounds like a judge in the highest court in the land can't follow instructions. Oh, yeah, who was it that appointed him. Duh!
MotownSteve
01-25-2011, 01:47 PM
Re Michelle Bachman: how does the quote go: Better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool that to open and be proven you are a fool. Something like that. BTW, this is the same woman who called on residents of her state to be 'armed and dangerous'.
Sounds like a judge in the highest court in the land can't follow instructions. Oh, yeah, who was it that appointed him. Duh!
Things that make you go hmmmmm
Unfortunately based on history, the reality is, he keeps his job and continues to operate in the same manner if he chooses. The only way to counter people like Thomas is to make sure you balance out the court. Can't do that with a Republican President.....people need to keep that in mind. Life's not always perfect but it sure is interesting.;)
Bachmann and Palin are cut from the same cloth, sadly, so are their followers.
I find it ironic and more than a little scary that an organization on Tax Relief would even want her to speak. Her biography states she received a LLM from William and Mary in Tax Law [[ a degree they no longer offer but may have offered when she was there) but she graduated law school at Oral Roberts U., a school that had questionable academic standards and a low ranking. Not exactly someone I would trust on the subject of taxes and it's obvious she didn't pay attention in history class.
Speaking of Bachmann
GOP aides irked with CNN for airing Bachmann speech
By Greg Sargent
Here's an interesting twist on Michele Bachmann's plan to offer her own Tea Party-flavored response to Obama's State of the Union speech: It turns out GOP aides are annoyed with CNN for agreeing to air her speech in its entirety.
Originally, Bachmann's response was going to be available for viewing only on the Internet. But CNN has announced that her speech will be shown in full in addition to broadcasting the speech from GOP Rep. Paul Ryan, who was picked for the official response by the Republican leadership.
GOP aides are unhappy with the decision, because it risks making the opposition look conflicted -- as if the two are trying to upstage one another -- muddling GOP efforts to offer a unified response.
Full Story [[http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2011/01/gop_aides_irked_with_cnn_for_a.html?wprss=plum-line)
I guess you can say the upside to this CNN “schadenfreude momemt” … Dems and Repubs seem to be in bi-partisan agreement.:eek:
I agree with Ted Turner, worse thing he ever did was sell CNN.
MotownSteve
01-25-2011, 06:35 PM
Children are supposed to learn to play nicely together.
Funny thing though Steve, as a general rule, children do play nicely together, it's the adults that have the problem. shrugs
sophisticated_soul
01-25-2011, 09:58 PM
Re Michelle Bachman: how does the quote go: Better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool that to open and be proven you are a fool. Something like that. BTW, this is the same woman who called on residents of her state to be 'armed and dangerous'.
I've heard it as it's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.
You guys made be curious so I decided to look it up. Apparently there are several variations of that thought and no one seems to be able to figure out where it originated.
http://ask.yahoo.com/20010115.html
One thing is for sure though, Bachmann needs to keep her mouth shut, well there is a second thing but I'm trying my best to ride the civility train these days. Hint to the wise, don't take any bets on how long that ride will last.....hahahahahahaha;)
A few Editorials
The State of the Union
Published: January 25, 2011
This nation faces huge problems — putting millions of Americans back to work, investing to compete in a 21st-century global economy and wrestling down a long-term budget deficit that threatens everyone’s future.
Ever since the 2010 campaign, we have heard precious little in the way of serious solutions — mostly just smoke-and-mirrors spending cuts from Republicans and their usual clamor for more tax cuts for the wealthy.
Tuesday night’s State of the Union address was President Obama’s chance to rise above that pinched vision, to help Americans understand that while government cannot do everything, it is indispensable in reviving the economy, spurring innovation, educating Americans and keeping them healthy and making the nation competitive globally.
Read More [[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/26/opinion/26wed1.html)
Blast from the Past
Jonathan Cohn
January 25, 2011 | 11:49 pm
Presidents frequently use the State of the Union address to introduce new ideas or try out new political themes. Not tonight. The Barack Obama you heard speaking on Capitol Hill was the Barack Obama who ran for president in 2008. And I think he's here to stay this time.
Remember, Obama spent most of his candidacy sounding calls for long-term change--about appealing to the better instincts of both parties and finding bipartisan solutions to the nation’s problems, about making the “hard choices” necessary to save the economy and, eventually, the planet. Plenty of us dismissed those notions as naïve or misguided. But it was clear that Obama was very serious about them, for better or for worse.
Actually, it was for worse--because Obama couldn’t be that president during his first two years. The collapse of the financial industry and its collateral damage forced Obama to focus on short-term, emergency measures to rescue the economy. The campaign for health care reform ran into unexpectedly stiff and unified Republican resistance, obliterating any hope of bipartisanship on what would become his signature and at times all-consuming initiative.
More [[http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-cohn/82174/blast-the-past)
I thought these were interesting and diverse and the “grumpy old guy” at the end was funny. Guess the speech went passed his bedtime. LOL
January 25, 2011, 6:05 pm
Thread of the Union
By TOBIN HARSHAW
The Thread has lined up a number of Opinionator columnists and guest experts to weigh in over the course of the State of the Union message this evening, with breaking updates throughout. And, as always on the Thread, we’ll be rounding up the most interesting opinions to be found around the blogosphere before, during and after the speech.
Full commentaries [[http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/25/thread-of-the-union/?hp)
I may have to steal this line.
-- Americans are "symbolic conservatives" but "operational liberals." In other words, they like the idea of limited government, but they also like just about everything government does.
This is an old article but interesting read
Voters Are About to be Disillusioned With the GOP
November 10, 2010 | 2:10 pm
Ever since it became apparent that Republicans had a decent chance to win control of the U.S. House, it's been equally apparent that real political power carried real political risks for this particular incarnation of the GOP. They've been incredibly lucky to escape responsibility for the economy and the fiscal situation created by their party from 2001 to 2009; that's been the real gift of the Tea Party movement: the claim that today's Republicans are appalled at the record of the Bush-DeLay GOP, even though they support most of the same policies, and probably don't have the political will to reverse the ones they claim to despise [[who will be the first GOP leader to demand repeal of the Medicare Rx Drug Benefit?).
But going forward, now that they control the House and aspire to gain control of the Senate and the executive branch in the next election, Republicans will be forced to work for an actual agenda. And as Paul Waldman nicely explains in The American Prospect, this can produce a great pivot in the political climate of the country, very fast:
As a long history of public-opinion research has made clear -- and as events continue to remind us -- Americans are "symbolic conservatives" but "operational liberals." In other words, they like the idea of limited government, but they also like just about everything government does. Good things happen to the party that can successfully pander to both impulses, which is why we saw so many ads from Republicans...condemning Democrats for passing a big-government health-care plan because it would ... curtail the growth of Medicare.
More [[http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-cohn/79064/voters-are-about-be-disillusioned-the-gop)
While cruising through the blogosphere I discovered there are those that are buying into Bachmann’s erroneous history lesson...
The three-fifths clause was not a measurement of human worth; it was an attempt to reduce the number of pro-slavery proponents in Congress. By including only three-fifths of the total numbers of slaves into the congressional calculations, Southern states were actually being denied additional pro-slavery representatives in Congress. The three-fifths clause was actually put in by 'anti-slavery' signers. [[Our founding fathers) If they had not done this, the south would have had more seats in the house, and a majority.
Wrong…..
The Facts
Introduction
Delegates to the Constitutional Convention of 1787 hotly debated the issue of slavery. George Mason of Virginia argued eloquently against slavery, warning his fellow delegates:
"Every master of slaves is born a petty tyrant. They bring the judgment of heaven on a country. As nations cannot be rewarded or punished in the next world, they must be in this. By an inevitable chain of causes and effects, providence punishes national sins by national calamities."
Southern delegates, on the other hand, argued strenuously that the new government should not be allowed to interfere with the institution of slavery. Delegate John Rutledge of South Carolina, for example, told delegates that "religion and humanity have nothing to do with the questions" of whether the Constitution should protect slavery--it was simply a question of property rights.
The Constitution that the delegates proposed included several provisions that explicitly recognized and protected slavery. Without these provisions, southern delegates would not support the new Constitution--and without the southern states on board, the Constitution had no chance of being ratified. Provisions allowed southern states to count slaves as 3/5 persons for purposes of apportionment in Congress [[even though the slaves could not, of course, vote), expressly denied to Congress the power to prohibit importation of new slaves until 1808, and prevented free states from enacting laws protecting fugitive slaves.
Slavery, as all students of history know, continued to be a divisive issue up through the Civil War. Southern states worried that the balance in Congress might tip against slavery, and so were anxious to extend slavery to new territories and states. The Missouri Compromise of 1820 [[enacted at a time when slave states and non-slave states had equal representation in the Senate) permitted slavery in Missouri, but prohibited slavery in portions of the Louisiana purchase north of 36°30'.
Provisions in the Original Constitution
Article I, Section. 2 [Slaves count as 3/5 persons]
Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons [i.e., slaves].
Article I, Section. 9, clause 1. [No power to ban slavery until 1808]
The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.
Article IV, Section. 2. [Free states cannot protect slaves]
No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.
Article V [No Constitutional Amendment to Ban Slavery Until 1808]
...No Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article.
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/thirteenthamendment.html
Upper South supporters of the Constitution, such as James Madison, also made the argument that a ban on the trade was impossible under the Articles, and thus the Constitution, even if imperfect, was still a good bargain. Deep South supporters, like General Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, simply bragged that they had won a great victory–as indeed they had–in protecting the trade for at least twenty years. In summing up the entire Constitution, Pinckney, who had been one of the ablest defenders of slavery at the Convention, proudly told the South Carolina House of Representatives: "In short, considering all circumstances, we have made the best terms for the security of this species of property it was in our power to make. We would have made better if we could; but on the whole, I do not think them bad."
http://abolition.nypl.org/essays/us_constitution/3/
all emphasis mine
Bachmann supporters can try to spin their revisionist history all they like but if you count a human being as 3/5th of a person, you’re reducing their worth as a human being. And just so we’re clear, buying and taking human beings from their homeland, throwing them in the underbelly of ships and condemning them to slavery doesn’t do a damn thing to promote human worth either!
January 26, 2011, 1:15 am
Giffords’s Condition Is Upgraded
By ANAHAD O'CONNOR
Doctors on Tuesday night upgraded Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords’s medical condition from serious to good, and announced they planned to move her from an intensive care unit to a rehabilitation hospital as early as Wednesday morning.
The upgrade in her condition was another sign of the “strong progress” Ms. Giffords has made since arriving at Memorial Hermann-Texas Medical Center in Houston last Friday, the hospital said in a statement. Doctors at the hospital were slightly concerned over the weekend by fluid accumulation in Ms. Giffords’ brain, which delayed her transfer out of intensive care. But a procedure to remove the fluid led to some improvement.
The decision to upgrade her condition was made Tuesday night.
“Preparations are under way for her transfer to the rehabilitation hospital sometime tomorrow morning, pending review of her medical condition early in the morning,” the hospital said. They said they planned to hold a news conference Wednesday afternoon to discuss her condition.
Reposted from New York Times [[http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/26/giffordss-condition-is-upgraded/?ref=politics)
Fact Checking Rep. Ryan's State Of The Union Response
January 25, 2011 10:40 pm ET
In his televised response to President Obama's State of the Union address, House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan [[R-WI) repeated a series of debunked Republican talking points and attacks on Democratic policies. Among other things, Ryan absurdly claimed that the Recovery Act "failed" to create jobs, overstated Obama's role in creating the current debt, and stubbornly insisted that the Affordable Care Act will increase the deficit, even though nonpartisan experts say that he's wrong.
Ryan: The Stimulus Failed, And Increased Government Spending By 84 Percent!
RYAN: The facts are clear: Since taking office, President Obama has signed into law spending increases of nearly 25% for domestic government agencies - an 84% increase when you include the failed stimulus. All of this new government spending was sold as 'investment.' Yet after two years, the unemployment rate remains above 9% and government has added over $3 trillion to our debt.
"Failed Stimulus?" When President Obama Took Office The Economy Was Shedding Hundreds Of Thousands Of Jobs Per Month...
The Economy Shed Almost 8 Million Jobs Under Republican Policies Before The Recovery Act Could Affect The Economy. According to economist Robert J. Shapiro:
From December 2007 to July 2009 - the last year of the Bush second term and the first six months of the Obama presidency, before his policies could affect the economy - private sector employment crashed from 115,574,000 jobs to 107,778,000 jobs. Employment continued to fall, however, for the next six months, reaching a low of 107,107,000 jobs in December of 2009. So, out of 8,467,000 private sector jobs lost in this dismal cycle, 7,796,000 of those jobs or 92 percent were lost on the Republicans' watch or under the sway of their policies. Some 671,000 additional jobs were lost as the stimulus and other moves by the administration kicked in, but 630,000 jobs then came back in the following six months. The tally, to date: Mr. Obama can be held accountable for the net loss of 41,000 jobs [[671,000 - 630,000), while the Republicans should be held responsible for the net losses of 7,796,000 jobs. [Sonecon.com, 8/10/10, emphasis added]
Based on Shapiro's research, the Washington Post's Ezra Klein created the following chart showing net job losses before and after the Recovery Act was enacted:
There’s More [[http://politicalcorrection.org/factcheck/201101250020)
For Immediate Release
January 25, 2010
Ryan’s Selective Memory, Willingness to Repeated Failed Conservative Policies Troubling
Madison – One Wisconsin Now released the following statements in advance of tonight’s Presidential State of the Union address and the planned response from U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin.
“I hope that Paul Ryan explains to us why we should trust him and his conservative allies with our finances after they nearly bankrupted the nation with reckless tax cuts for the rich and deregulation schemes to reward companies which put America’s working families last. Paul Ryan himself voted for eight straight Republican budgets that increased spending by a staggering 50 percent. Let’s not forget the so-called fiscal conservatives, like Ryan, who put trillions of dollars in war spending and the unfunded $8 trillion Medicare Part D boondoggle on the checkbooks of our children. Paul Ryan’s ‘Road Map’ would hand our government over to big business and Wall Street speculators, and silence the voices of working families. America needs jobs, not Paul Ryan’s budget-busting, recycled corporate special interest wish list.”
Paul Ryan's eight consecutive budget votes hiking the federal budget by 50 percent: [[http://onewisconsinnow.pnstate.org/site/MessageViewer?dlv_id=13562&em_id=9624.0)
stephanie
01-26-2011, 11:13 AM
Bachmann was Palinesque in her delivery I saw it this morning! Boehner acted like he didnt want to clap at all and Biden was smiling the whole time during the State of the Union. They will go back to their old tricks but Palin and her ilk have ruined the GOP.
...Palin and her ilk have ruined the GOP.
I'm sure Republicans leaders will do everything they can to put all the blame on Palin [[they need her ilk/supporters) but Palin has been only one of many contributing factors to the ruination of the Republican Party.
She has the ability to shape opinion, Republicans in Congress have the ability to pass [[or not pass) laws.
Jan. 26, 2011, 12:22 a.m. EST
Next to Republicans, Obama is presidential
Commentary: President talks of better days; Republicans talk of debt
By Rex Nutting, MarketWatch
WASHINGTON [[MarketWatch) — Democrats sat with Republicans for President Barack Obama’s State of the Union address on Tuesday, but a wide gulf still separates the two parties.
Despite the superficial one-night show of unity by politicians, the nation is not united. America is facing its greatest crisis of confidence in decades, and Washington isn’t helping. The two political parties fundamentally disagree about America’s problems, and what Washington should do to solve them.
Democrats continue to believe that government has a strong part to play in promoting the general welfare and helping to make America more competitive. Republicans continue to insist that government is the problem.
In his address, Obama seemed to embrace both views at once. In promising to rein in the federal debt and to make the government more efficient and streamlined, he reached out to Republicans who scored a big victory in November’s election. Read our complete coverage of the State of the Union speech.
More [[http://www.marketwatch.com/story/next-to-republicans-obama-is-presidential-2011-01-26)
I find it interesting that anyone would time individual categories of the speech but I will admit, spending 0 [[zero) time on NOT promoting fear and hysteria is priceless.
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/5389741782_30d620e4bf_o.jpg
stephanie
01-26-2011, 12:03 PM
People were laughing in the beginning [[two years ago) about the infrastructure but he was dead on [[Pres Obama that is). The roads are crumbling in the US and some of these pipes and roads have not been fixed in 30-40 years just patched up and NOW we are paying for it. Maybe talked about the govt debt to keep the GOP quiet I realize its a concern but I was amazed at the amount of time he spent on it in the speech. WOW what a concept no fear huh? Virginia maybe there is a Santa Claus....LOL
Poor thing, she can’t get any love from the UK either…
Michele Bachmann's Tea Party overdrive mocked for Obama response
Ed Pilkington in New York
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 26 January 2011 15.56 GMT
State of the union: self-styled Tea Party leader in Congress breaks with convention and is ridiculed for gaffes
Michele Bachmann, the self-styled leader of the Tea Party faction in the US Congress, broke with convention to deliver her own alternative response to President Obama's state of the union speech, attracting ridicule from pundits.
Bachmann's comments, spoken to camera and broadcast only by CNN, appeared to be off the mark, literally. She spoke directly into a camera operated by a dedicated broadcaster, Tea Party HD, thinking it was on air when the live camera was to one side.
So when she came to praise American voters — "thanks to you, there's reason for all of us to have hope" — she appeared to be thanking an off-screen CNN cameraman.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/26/tea-party-reply-state-of-the-union
More [[http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/26/tea-party-reply-state-of-the-union)
Note: Part of her looking silly had to do with CNN. She was looking at the web camera, which was originally her platform to speak. CNN should have taken that into account while featuring her.
That’s the ONLY pass I can give this woman/ “Balloon Head”….quoting Chris Matthews on the Balloon Head remark:cool:
I do have one gripe though and this is for BOTH sides. Politicians don't really care nor are they concerned about the "deficit." They care about WHERE and HOW the money is spent not how much is spent.
That spiel about comparing the deficit to average citizens getting in debt pisses me off beyond pisstivity because what's not mentioned, the average citizen doesn't have the ability to print more money [[legally) the Feds do and in this improving but still slow economy, inflation isn't even an issue.
Lawd love a duck they got this thing on the Senate docket. So the BS from the last two years starts all over again and the Repubs
1. Still don’t have a viable replacement
[[ It’s been proven in survey after survey the American people want a better bill not a repeal of the bill….geeesch)
2. Still have not tackled the issue of jobs [[their rallying cry against the Dems when they were in power)
….these fools are determined to shoot themselves in the foot and ordinarily I wouldn’t care but this is such a waste of time.
We need to be moving forward not backwards.
Senate Republicans introduce Obamacare repeal bill — but not all GOPers are on board
South Carolina Republican and conservative firebrand Sen. Jim DeMint introduced legislation to repeal Obamacare on Wednesday, the first official step in bringing the House-passed repeal bill fight into the staid upper chamber.
But a slew of mostly moderate senators declined to support DeMint’s legislation, raising questions on the unity of the Republican caucus.
Even with the full support of Republicans, the measure faces steep odds as Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid still controls the chamber and is expected to face a Democratic filibuster.
“Republicans are standing with the American people who are demanding we repeal this government takeover of health care,” said DeMint in a written statement.
“Repealing ObamaCare is vital to the future of our nation and the health of our people. ObamaCare will raise health costs, reduce choices, ration care, hike taxes, cut jobs, increase the national debt and put bureaucrats between patients and their doctors. It’s time to start over and implement commonsense solutions that allow Americans to choose affordable plans across state lines, end frivolous lawsuits that drive up costs, and gives equitable tax treatment to those who don’t get insurance from their employer,” DeMint said.
Full Article [[http://news.yahoo.com/s/dailycaller/20110126/pl_dailycaller/senaterepublicansintroduceobamacarerepealbille2809 4butnotallgopersareonboard)
Note: Sensenbrenner has yet to make a true, mostly true or even half true statement and although Poltifact only clocks him in at two statements, one was false and the other only had a tad of truth.
There isn’t any overwhelming emphatic support for repeal from the American people.
Tea Party supporters don’t even come close to being a majority voice in this country no matter how loud they scream or get face time in the media.
Republican from Wisconsin
U.S. Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner [[R.Wis) was elected to Congress in 1979. He represents a district covering Milwaukee County suburbs.
"We had a debate on whether ‘ObamaCare’ was the way to go to fix up health care and the American voters said no -- emphatically."
Read More [[http://politifact.com/personalities/jim-sensenbrenner/)
...and check around the site, Bachmann is batting a 1000 in BS.
Dennis Kucinich Suing Congressional Cafeteria Companies Over Olive Pit
The Huffington Post Nick Wing
First Posted: 01/26/11 01:53 PM Updated: 01/26/11 02:15 PM
Rep. Dennis Kucinich [[D-Ohio) recently filed a lawsuit against the food-service companies that run a congressional cafeteria over a 2008 incident involving a stray olive pit placed in a sandwich wrap.
In his complaint, captured by Gawker, Kucinich argues that the wrap, which was supposed to contain only pitted olives, was "unwholesome and unfit for human consumption." Chewing the pit, he claims, resulted in "serious and permanent dental and oral injuries requiring multiple surgical and dental procedures."
Kucinich is seeking $150,000 from Restaurant Associates and three other companies that run the cafeteria in the Longworth congressional office building.
Check out Gawker's coverage of the matter, which includes a video that may contradict Kucinich's account -- showing him speaking, seemingly uninhibited, on the House floor mere days after what he claims was extensive dental work.
Reposted from HuffingtonPost [[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrlBeEkvzHY)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrlBeEkvzHY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrlBeEkvzHY
Now I'm sure there are those that may think about the issue of space ships and Kucinich and I don't blame you but to be honest, after living in Vegas for 10 years I saw some strange things that defied logic by the weather service as well as Andrew Air Force Base. Now unlike Dennis, I'm not willing to go on record to say what they were and what they were not [[I simply don't know) but I will give homie a pass on that issue [[forget you Des....LOL) but suing over an olive pit.....?????
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/imagesdbl.jpg
destruction
01-26-2011, 06:03 PM
MsM.....You just went on record as saying you saw UFO's.....Did they force you?
Just remember, "It's not your fault"......AND we already have a thread going where you can register your thoughts.
....So that you can continue to do the fine work you're doing over here.
I've heard that the aliens [[is it still PC to call them that...or is it EBE?) have sometimes implanted devices in people's teeth. Maybe his was dislodged....and that's why he's suing.
Just one question.....Is Edwards going to be his attorney?
If he wants to sue a food service, tell him to head over to GSA's cafeteria, before they tear it down.
HAHAHAHAHA
Nice try but weak. I went on record as saying, I didn't
know and never once mentioned UFO's....boink....you lose but thanks for playing.:cool:
Let me qualify this for your snarky butt....I didn't mention the word UFO but I did mention the words space ship in connection with Dennis NOT ME.....hahahahahaha
Posted at 9:11 AM ET, 01/27/2011
David Axelrod: "No grand repositioning"; Obama is a "progressive"
By Greg Sargent
David Axelrod chatted with around a dozen bloggers at the White House late yesterday, and I got a chance to ask him to respond to all the claims -- coming from left-leaning, right-leaning and nonpartisan observers alike -- that Obama is in the midst of an ideological makeover in the wake of the 2010 losses and in preparation for reelection.
Axelrod adamantly denied there had been any discussions about repositioning at all and reaffirmed that Obama is a "progressive." Axelrod's answer, alternately frustrated and pleading, is worth quoting at length, because it captures something interesting about the collision between Obama and Axelrod and Washington's permanent culture.
Axelrod acknowledged that something fundamental about Obama's public persona had been "ground down," and also shared an anecdote I hadn't heard before about his big breakout speech at the Democratic National Convention in 2004:
I'm not going to change the nature of this town and the nature of our politics....But we tend to sit on the back of the truck and look at what happened before, and then define what's happening now in the context of what happened some other time.
Full Article [[http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2011/01/david_axelrod_no_grand_reposit.html)
Oh dear, that progressive title is going to make a few heads explode.....LOL
stephanie
01-27-2011, 05:28 PM
It made my head explode...LOL Got a question for you Ms M. I have only seen the young turks on the Internet and Cenk is the main guy with whoever is sitting next to him. Why do you think this guy has a lot of influence I mean he has some high youtube numbers but they are not in the millions.
Steph
Right now his influence is limited to the blogosphere. In addition to his net TV show he also post semi regularly on two of the major Democratic net blogs. I'm a member of one and they have a membership of over 250k but receive an average of 1.5 million hits a day. [[that's not a mis print) I don't know the stats of the other site and or sites he may post on but they all have a large viewership as well. [[members and lurkers) These blogs also have their share of political figures that post from time to time as well [[including candidate Barack Obama) so that gives you an idea of their influence albeit small but enough to make politicians court their favor.
Stephanie in the political blogworld there are so call "stars," and wannabe be stars, just like in mainstream. It's an interesting culture. Take for instance Ariana Huffington. I remember when Huffington Post first hit the net and it was a rather good little news outlet without ads but few people outside of certain political circles knew who Ariana was. The larger the blog grew, the more popular she became and now she's all over the places as a political pundit.
I laugh that these guys and gals start out as alternative sources to mainstream media but their popularity propels them right into the lap of mainstream media; the very format they rallying against.
The extreme left and the extreme right detest being compared, the left calls it a false equivalence. Whatever they call it or how they choose to label or see it....the real difference between the two boils down to ideology but when you look at them objectively, the tone of the rhetoric is the same. Neither side [[as a general rule) wants to hear any view point outside their own, neither side wants to compromise and both sides think only their way is the right way for all Americans. Both sides have a mindset that says, either you're with me or against me ....bottom line, both sides think their crap don't stink. :rolleyes:There's more insight and to be fair, major differences between the two extremes but that gives you a little background.
Anyhoo, Cenk is caught up in that mindset. He wasn't always like that but Ariana has somewhat set the standard and everyone wants to be her. The best way to accomplish that is the same way many in MSM accomplish it, appeal to the extreme. So Cenk went extreme left and it surprised me how many extreme leftist there are out here. No big deal as long as he remains in the shadows[[the blog world) but with exposure to mainstream he will probably take his act with him to continue to gain views, popularity......
Stephanie, thinking back on all this I actually remember when Cenk started changing. During the health care debate he tired to rally the troops for a massive demonstration. It was a major flop. Not only didn't he get many people to show up but didn't receive one ounce of news coverage and it was staged in front of CNN in Atl. LOL
He went underground for awhile and when he hit the scene again, he was super extreme progressive man....his popularity grew, his following grew, and he's been running with it every since...and so it goes
BTW Stephannie, keep in mind, a splintered political base can cause major problems......look at the Repubs and the Tea Party folk.....
In the blog world [[in the shadows) the Democratic base is very splintered right now. I would even go so far to say, the atmosphere is toxic. If that starts to spill over into mainstream, that's a problem.
January 27, 2011, 4:13 pm
Jay Carney to Become White House Press Secretary
By MICHAEL D. SHEAR and JACKIE CALMES
5:19 p.m. | Updated Jay Carney, the spokesman for Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., will replace Robert Gibbs as the White House press secretary, the White House announced.
Mr. Carney, a former reporter for Time magazine and chief of its Washington bureau, will become the new, public face of the West Wing and the primary combatant with the Washington media. Mr. Gibbs is leaving the White House to become an outside adviser for President Obama as the 2012 election nears.
Mr. Obama met with Mr. Carney over the weekend as he continued to remake his administration at the halfway point of his current term.
Read More [[http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/27/jay-carney-to-become-white-house-press-secretary/?nl=us&emc=politicsemailema1)
MotownSteve
01-27-2011, 10:00 PM
I got this in an email from a friend and thought is was worth posting:
Subject: Monday on Fox news
Monday we learned that the staffers of Congress family members are exempt from having to pay back student loans. This will get national attention if other news networks will broadcast it. When you add this to the below, just where will all of it stop?
35 States file lawsuit against the Federal Government
Governors of 35 states have filed suit against the Federal Government for imposing unlawful burdens upon them. It only takes 38 [[of the 50) States to convene a Constitutional Convention.
This will take less than thirty seconds to read. If you agree, please pass it on.
This is an idea that we should address.
For too long we have been too complacent about the workings of Congress. Many citizens had no idea that members of Congress could retire with the same pay after only one term, that they specifically exempted themselves from many of the laws they have passed [[such as being exempt from any fear of prosecution for sexual harassment) while ordinary citizens must live under those laws. The latest is to exempt themselves from the Healthcare Reform... in all of its forms. Somehow, that doesn't seem logical. We do not have an elite that is above the law. I truly don't care if they are Democrat, Republican, Independent or whatever. The self-serving must stop.
If each person that receives this will forward it on to 20 people, in three days, most people in The United States of America will have the message.. This is one proposal that really should be passed around.
Proposed 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution: "Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and/or Representatives; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and/or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States ."
Additionally, Congress voted automatic annual pay raises for themselves. This negates angering constituents by having to vote annually for a raise in pay,
Steve, there is very little Congress does that surprises me but some of this sounds misleading and vague. Were there any links?
Barack Obama: Paradoxical Whig
Posted on Jan 26, 2011
By E.J. Dionne, Jr.
Be ready for the paradoxical phase of Barack Obama’s presidency. Many things will not be exactly as they appear.
Paradox No. 1: Because over the next two years he can’t get sweeping, progressive legislation through the Republican-led House, Obama will be doing far more to make the core progressive case that energetic government is essential to prosperity, growth and equity.
Paradox No. 2: His talk about the new, the bold and the innovative is in the oldest of political traditions. The Obama of Tuesday night represented not the rambunctious liberalism of the late 1960s but the unifying, John Kennedy-style liberalism of the decade’s beginning—with a dash of Dwight Eisenhower moderation. Obama also sounded like a Whig, the insufficiently appreciated 19th-century American political party that proudly included Henry Clay and Abraham Lincoln.
Full Story [[http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/barack_obama_paradoxical_whig_20110126)
Sounds like the messaging is going to be better this time around.
MotownSteve
01-27-2011, 10:17 PM
My apologies. Please disregard my above posting. I should have checked it first.
Steve, I didn't go through all the claims but this first one is false
Monday we learned that the staffers of Congress family members are exempt from having to pay back student loans.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/studentloans.asp
You might want to check out the rest of it. Maybe some are true, maybe not but mass emails such as this, are not always what they seem to be.
My apologies. Please disregard my above posting. I should have checked it first.
No problem Steve.:D
I love this...
Even if he wanted to, Obama couldn’t beat a unified business community. His bet is that business people tend to be conservative but not ideological. By bringing some CEOs to his side, he can isolate the GOP as a doctrinaire party uninterested in practical things. It will be the trickiest alliance of his presidency, but perhaps also the shrewdest.[/B]
I often think many people don't understand it's possible to separate political ideology from a conservative or liberal point of view. In our current political environment it's not always the case but it is possible imo. To me ideology limits your perspective and although that can be a good or bad thing depending on the perspective, dogma and doctrines always seem too rigid [[to me) they sometime squeeze people into a box [[metaphorically speaking) they can't get out of. It's like that purity test thing the Republicans came up with a few years ago......if you don't believe in this, this and this, you're not one of us. I've even seen the far left play that game.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8vOQCnuhh4&feature=player_embedded
GDP growth clocks in at 3.2% for fourth quarter
by Meteor Blades
Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 06:04:36 AM PST
The Commerce Dept. reported [[http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdpnewsrelease.htm) this morning that annualized growth in gross domestic product reached 3.2 percent in the fourth quarter of 2010, the sixth quarter of growth in that measure. With today's number, adjusted for inflation and seasonality, GDP has risen [[http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/TableView.asp?SelectedTable=6&ViewSeries=NO&Java=no&Request3Place=N&3Place=N&FromView=YES&Freq=Qtr&FirstYear=1929&LastYear=2010&3Place=N&Update=Update&JavaBox=no#Mid) 0.2 percent above pre-recession levels, the previous peak having come in the fourth quarter of 2007. Total GDP growth for 2010 was 2.9 percent.
The results were slightly below what analysts had expected. GDP growth will be revised in two follow-up reports next month and March. Today's number was substantially less than the fourth quarter of 2009, the best showing since the Great Recession began in December 2007. A key number in today's report was final sales, which was up a healthy 7.1 percent.
Real personal consumption expenditures increased 4.4 percent in the fourth quarter, compared with an increase of 2.4 percent in the third. Durable goods increased 21.6 percent, compared with an increase of 7.6 percent. Nondurable goods increased 5.0 percent, compared with an increase of 2.5 percent. Services increased 1.7 percent, compared with an increase of 1.6 percent.
Real nonresidential fixed investment increased 4.4 percent in the fourth quarter, compared with an increase of 10.0 percent in the third. Nonresidential structures increased 0.8 percent, in contrast to a decrease of 3.5 percent. Equipment and software increased 5.8 percent, compared with an increase of 15.4 percent. Real residential fixed investment increased 3.4 percent, in contrast to a decrease of 27.3 percent.
Real exports of goods and services increased 8.5 percent in the fourth quarter, compared with an increase of 6.8 percent in the third. Real imports of goods and services decreased 13.6 percent, in contrast to an increase of 16.8 percent. ...
Real GDP increased 2.9 percent in 2010 [[that is, from the 2009 annual level to the 2010 annual level), in contrast to a decrease of 2.6 percent in 2009.
The increase in real GDP in 2010 primarily reflected positive contributions from private inventory investment, exports, personal consumption expenditures [[PCE), nonresidential fixed investment, and federal government spending. Imports, which are a subtraction in the calculation of GDP, increased.
Many observers have predicted that GDP growth will run about 4 percent in 2011. If that forecast panned out, it would begin making a substantial dent in the vast rolls of the unemployed Americans, now officially at 14.5 million. Many more millions have given up looking for work, dropped out of the labor force entirely or been forced to take part-time jobs even though they need full-time work. But so far, consumer spending, while substantially improved, has been up and down. Because of that and related reasons, the Congressional Budget Office has forecast [[http://cbo.gov/ftpdocs/120xx/doc12039/SummaryforWeb.pdf) a 3.1 percent growth in GDP for all of 2011. That level of growth would only bring down unemployment slowly, perhaps leaving it above 9 percent at the end of the year.
Re-posted From Daily Kos [[http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/1/28/939482/-GDP-growth-clocks-in-at-3.2-for-fourth-quarter)
Gov. Kasich To Black Lawmaker: ‘I Don’t Need Your People’
By Tanya Somanader at 12:20 pm
” I wasn’t quite sure whether or not he was referring to my ethnic group people or my people as in the 350,000 constituents I serve in this state that represent all ethnic groups, all religious groups. I didn’t understand what “I’m not going to hire your people” means.
Delivering on his vision for a “new way,” Ohio Gov. John Kasich [[R-OH) “is on pace to be the first governor since 1962 to have an entire Cabinet without any racial diversity.” Every one of his 22 full-time agency head appointments has been a white person. Only five are women. Dubbing diversity as “metrics that people tend to focus on,” Kasich said, “I can’t say I need to find somebody to fit this metric” because “it’s not the way I look at those things. I want the best possible team I can get.”
Yesterday, the Ohio Legislative Black Caucus held a press conference to express their waning patience with his dismissive attitude and “implore[] Kasich to make better strides to diversify his Cabinet.” But according to State Senator Nina Turner [[D-OH), this time Kasich’s response was a bit more blunt. According to Turner, when the caucus offered him help in finding qualified minority applicants, Kasich told Turner, “I don’t need your people“:
Full Article [[http://thinkprogress.org/2011/01/28/kasich-black-your-people/)
President Addresses Health Care Advocates
Defends Health Care Legislation
Washington, DC
Friday, January 28, 2011
In light of the ongoing critiques against the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act [[PPACA), President Obama defended the law in an address to Families USA's 16th Annual Health Action Conference.
The President reiterated the themes from this week’s State of the Union address on the benefits of the new health care measures. He gave the keynote address before a gathering of more than 1,000 health care advocates.
His appearance showed “the continued high priority of educating the public about the many benefits of the Affordable Care Act,” said Families USA in a statement.
Full Article and Video [[http://www.c-span.org/Events/President-Addresses-Health-Care-Advocates/10737419211-1/)
tamla617
01-28-2011, 07:01 PM
slight change of subject.......
when obama was making his inauguration speech,he said he was the 44th american to hold the office of potus.
he was wrong,do any of you know why? [[i saw this on uk tv tonight,no uk based posters need apply!)
I'm not sure why this question would be framed as President Obama being wrong because if he's wrong, so are all the US History books AND WhiteHouse historians but I would be interested in hearing the UK correction to our grievance error.:)
18th Century
1. George Washington 2. John Adams
19th Century
3. Thomas Jefferson 15. James Buchanan
4. James Madison 16. Abraham Lincoln
5. James Monroe 17. Andrew Johnson
6. John Quincy Adams 18. Ulysses S. Grant
7. Andrew Jackson 19. Rutherford B. Hayes
8. Martin Van Buren 20. James Garfield
9. William Henry Harrison 21. Chester A. Arthur
10. John Tyler 22. Grover Cleveland
11. James K. Polk 23. Benjamin Harrison
12. Zachary Taylor 24. Grover Cleveland
13. Millard Fillmore 25. William McKinley
14. Franklin Pierce
20th Century
26. Theodore Roosevelt 35. John F. Kennedy
27. William Howard Taft 36. Lyndon B. Johnson
28. Woodrow Wilson 37. Richard M. Nixon
29. Warren G. Harding 38. Gerald R. Ford
30. Calvin Coolidge 39. James Carter
31. Herbert Hoover 40. Ronald Reagan
32. Franklin D. Roosevelt 41. George H. W. Bush
33. Harry S. Truman 42. William J. Clinton
34. Dwight D. Eisenhower
21st Century
43. George W. Bush
44. Barack Obama
http://www.whitehouse.gov/about/presidents
BTW
George Washington was a natural born citizen albeit a British subject at the time of his birth but minor technicalities don't count on this subject of US history.....LOL
To be more accurate I should say a natural born "colonist" but hey, American is, as American does;)
tamla617
01-28-2011, 07:37 PM
lol,thought you'd be 1 st one! its wrong btw.i guess the early presidents were [[originally) british subjects
lol,thought you'd be 1 st one! its wrong btw.i guess the early presidents were [[originally) british subjects
I stand by my answer
P.S. note edit...LOL
you posted before I did the edit
tamla617
01-28-2011, 07:44 PM
he is the 44th president,but not the 44th american
so why is that?its nothing to do with any of the previous potus being foriegn
he is the 44th president,but not the 44th American
I disagree.....the US was established in 1776 that made the colonist US citizens....you can be a hyphenated American but you are still considered an American
btw and I should have mentioned this first, our Constitution doesn't allow a non Amerian to become president
Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution sets the principal qualifications one must meet to be eligible to the office of president. A president must:
be a natural born citizen of the United States;[7]
since Washington would be the only one in questioned, he still fulfills the qualifications, even though the Constitution was established after his presidency.
I stand corrected
History of the U.S. Constitution
When was the Constitution written? According to historical records, in was some time in 1787 when the U.S. Constitution was written. For some time, it was not in effect. It was finally ratified almost two years later. Because of this all-important development, it was used in place of the old Articles of Confederation.
The Constitution went into effect in 1789, the same year Washington took office.
Today 6:41 PM Obama: 'The Future Of Egypt Will Be Determined By The Egyptian People'
Good evening, everybody. My administration has been closely monitoring the situation in Egypt, and I know that we will be learning more tomorrow when day breaks. As the situation continues to unfold, our first concern is preventing injury or loss of life. So I want to be very clear in calling upon the Egyptian authorities to refrain from any violence against peaceful protestors.
The people of Egypt have rights that are universal. That includes the right to peaceful assembly and association, the right to free speech, and the ability to determine their own destiny. These are human rights. And the United States will stand up for them everywhere.
I also call upon the Egyptian government to reverse the actions that they’ve taken to interfere with access to the Internet, to cell phone service and to social networks that do so much to connect people in the 21st century.
At the same time, those protesting in the streets have a responsibility to express themselves peacefully. Violence and destruction will not lead to the reforms that they seek.
Now, going forward, this moment of volatility has to be turned into a moment of promise. The United States has a close partnership with Egypt and we've cooperated on many issues, including working together to advance a more peaceful region. But we've also been clear that there must be reform -- political, social, and economic reforms that meet the aspirations of the Egyptian people.
In the absence of these reforms, grievances have built up over time. When President Mubarak addressed the Egyptian people tonight, he pledged a better democracy and greater economic opportunity. I just spoke to him after his speech and I told him he has a responsibility to give meaning to those words, to take concrete steps and actions that deliver on that promise.
Violence will not address the grievances of the Egyptian people. And suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away. What’s needed right now are concrete steps that advance the rights of the Egyptian people: a meaningful dialogue between the government and its citizens, and a path of political change that leads to a future of greater freedom and greater opportunity and justice for the Egyptian people.
Now, ultimately the future of Egypt will be determined by the Egyptian people. And I believe that the Egyptian people want the same things that we all want -- a better life for ourselves and our children, and a government that is fair and just and responsive. Put simply, the Egyptian people want a future that befits the heirs to a great and ancient civilization.
The United States always will be a partner in pursuit of that future. And we are committed to working with the Egyptian government and the Egyptian people -- all quarters -- to achieve it.
Around the world governments have an obligation to respond to their citizens. That's true here in the United States; that's true in Asia; it is true in Europe; it is true in Africa; and it’s certainly true in the Arab world, where a new generation of citizens has the right to be heard.
When I was in Cairo, shortly after I was elected President, I said that all governments must maintain power through consent, not coercion. That is the single standard by which the people of Egypt will achieve the future they deserve.
Surely there will be difficult days to come. But the United States will continue to stand up for the rights of the Egyptian people and work with their government in pursuit of a future that is more just, more free, and more hopeful.
Thank you very much.
A good friend made the following statement I thought would be of interest on this subject.
I got a phone call re: Egypt, Tunisia,
Algeria from an old friend who is over that way.
I've been trying to wade through the reporting on all of it - and it was suggested that I pay closer attention to al Jazeera, English since I can't read Arabic and to disregard much of the reportage from both the US and G.Britan.
I have tried to follow reporting here - I have read quite a few pieces lauding the protests as a "Democracy Movement". My friend, who is an Islamic activist pointed out that "Democracy" does not mean carbon copy of the US brand.
Interesting also that at this point - in Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood is publicly denying that they have played a role in this.
We live in interesting times.
Maybe we should start thanking this woman, she may bring down the Tea Party single-handedly with her crazy self. [[if they don’t dump her first)
Rep. Michele Bachmann [[R-Minn.) wants to cut $4.5 billion from the health care, earned in blood on the battlefields, for our American military veterans.
A host of veterans groups slammed Bachmann’s plan:
–Veterans of Foreign War national commander Richard L. Eubank said, “The only discussion the VFW wants is to tell the congresswoman that her plan is totally out of step with America’s commitment to our veterans.” “No way, no how, will we let this proposal get any traction in Congress,” said Eubank. “There are certain things you do not do when our nation is at war, and at the top of that list is not caring for our wounded and disabled servicemen and women when they return home,” he said. “I want her to look those disabled veterans in the eye and tell them their service and sacrifice is too expensive for the nation to bear.”
–The National Veterans Foundation’s Rich Rudnick told ThinkProgress that Bachmann’s plan is “terribly misguided,” saying, “veterans benefits are minimal to begin with” and that Bachmann’s scheme would be a “real step backwards.” “Cutting back on the VA right now would be showing contempt for American servicemembers’ sacrifices,” Rudnick said in a phone interview this afternoon.
–Disabled American Veterans Washington Headquarters Executive Director David Gorman said Bachmann’s plan is “[s]uch an ill-advised proposal [it] is nothing short of heartless.” “It is unconscionable that while our nation is at war someone would even think of forcing our wounded warriors to sacrifice even more than they already have,” Gorman said. “Their injuries and disabilities were the result of their service to the nation, and our nation must not shirk its responsibilities toward them. How do you tell a veteran who has lost a limb that he or she has not sacrificed enough? Yet Rep. Bachmann wants to do just that.”
–Veterans for Common Sense executive director Paul Sullivan “said cutting veterans’ health care spending is an ill-advised move at a time when the number of veterans continues to grow as troops return from Iraq and Afghanistan.” “It is really astonishing to see this,” he said.
–VoteVets.org Chairman Ashwin Madia said, “Michelle Bachmann’s plan would turn veterans away from the care they’ve earned and deserve. Congress voted for two wars that have created many veterans that now need help, and we cannot – and will not – turn our backs to them. That’s bad policy that I think even a majority of Republican voters will stand squarely against.”
"http://www.vfw.org/"]http://www.vfw.org[/B]/ [[VFW Will Defeat Bachmann Plan
"No way, no how, will we let this proposal get any traction in Congress."
January 28, 2011
WASHINGTON, D.C., January 28, 2011 — America's oldest and largest major combat veterans' organization announced it will do everything within its power to defeat a plan introduced by Rep. Michele Bachmann [[R-Minn.) to cut $4.5 billion from the Department of Veterans Affairs.
"No way, no how, will we let this proposal get any traction in Congress," said Richard L. Eubank, the national commander of the 2.1 million-member Veterans of Foreign Wars of the U.S. and its Auxiliaries.
On her website, the three-term congresswoman lists more than $400 billion in suggestions to cut federal spending. The VA suggestion would cap increases to VA healthcare spending, and reduce disability compensation to account for Social Security Disability Insurance payments — in other words, an offset. She says her plan is intended to generate discussion.
"The only discussion the VFW wants is to tell the congresswoman that her plan is totally out of step with America's commitment to our veterans," said Eubank, a retired Marine and Vietnam combat veteran from Eugene, Ore.
"There are certain things you do not do when our nation is at war, and at the top of that list is not caring for our wounded and disabled servicemen and women when they return home," he said. "I want the congresswoman to join us in a tour of the Minneapolis VA Medical Center and Poly Trauma Center the next time she's in her home district to witness firsthand the great work the VA does every day to heal their wounds and ease their pain. Then I want her to look those disabled veterans in the eye and tell them their service and sacrifice is too expensive for the nation to bear.
"The day this nation can't afford to take care of her veterans is the day this nation should quit creating them," said Eubank.
tamla617
01-29-2011, 09:13 AM
ms_m
the 22nd and 24th president was grover cleveland,1885 - 89 and 2nd term 1893 -97.benjemin harrison being the 23rd president in between.so cleveland was 1 american but 2 presidents.from his last term as potus the numbering of american v presidential number order was one out.he was 2 presidents [[!) because there was a gap in his 2 terms,clinton for example was 1 president because his terms were consecutive.so obama was the 44th potus and 43rd american,bearing in mind what you've posted the 1st few might not have been american,its probably more accurate to say the 43rd person to serve?either way obama was wrong in what he said at his inauguration. nice bit of trivia for you!
hahahahaha
I can always be super obstinate and say since the designation of President is counted twice because of the gap his citizenship each time he was in office should be counted as well
tamla617
01-29-2011, 09:59 AM
president twice american once!the important thing being non consecutive.
the more i look at this the more holes i can pick!got to find out if the early ones got american nationality
did clinton who won 2 terms in office have to inaugurate for the 2nd term,swear on the bible etc.as he never left office?
and Washington was born in VA. When the colonies declared independence he became a citizen of the USA.....so I'm taking him out of the equation as iffy......LOL
tamla617
01-29-2011, 10:09 AM
ms_m i've just added a question to post#491,hoping you can answer!
all out President's are legally natural born citizens [[much to the chagrin of the birthers)
I'm still willing to make a case for his citizenship to be counted twice :D
yep......which would make your argument and my argument both correct and President Obama wrong....hahahahahaha
tamla617
01-29-2011, 10:23 AM
i'm on this so often its in my favorites! laugh away!
http://www.enchantedlearning.com/history/us/pres/inorder.shtml
MotownSteve
01-29-2011, 10:27 AM
It just dawned on me:
My dog sleeps about 20 hours a day.
He has his food prepared for him.
He can eat whenever he wants, 24/7/365.
His meals are provided at no cost to him.
He visits the Dr. once a year for his checkup, and again
during the year if any medical needs arise.
For this he pays nothing, and nothing is required of him.
He lives in a nice neighborhood in a house that is much larger than he needs,
but he is not required to do any upkeep. If he makes a mess, someone else cleans it up.
He has his choice of luxurious places to sleep.
He receives these accommodations absolutely free.
He is living like a King, and has absolutely no expenses whatsoever.
All of his costs are picked up by others who go out and earn a living every day.
I was just thinking about all this, and suddenly it hit me like a brick in the head.......
My dog is a POLITICIAN
It's interesting they don't list Washington's birth place but list the birthplace of all the others
tamla617
01-29-2011, 10:30 AM
ms_m i was wondering about that!
motownsteve we've voted for worse! [[uk) before now
hahahaha
Steve your dog sounds more like a corporate executive than a politician since politicians have to foot the bill for non government and personal expenses...an exec can just write off his non essential expenses as business related and call it a day....LOL
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.