The Only Adult In The Room [Archive] - Page 5

ms_m

07-26-2011, 06:03 PM

Mike Lee: I Want America’s ‘House To Come Down’ Unless Congress Votes To Rewrite Constitution
By Ian Millhiser on Jul 25, 2011 at 7:23 pm

In an interview on MSNBC’s Hardball Monday evening, tenther Sen. Mike Lee [[R-UT) admitted that he is using the threat of a catastrophic default to extort the nation into rewriting the Constitution to force a permanent era of conservative governance:

CHRIS MATTHEWS: How many days do you think we have, on the outside, to get this debt ceiling through before we have a problem? How many days?
LEE: I don’t know, maybe ten days.

MATTHEWS: Okay, in ten days you want to change the United States Constitution by two-thirds vote in both houses? That’s what you’re demanding.

LEE: Yes. If possible we can’t change the Constitution just in Congress but we can submit it to the states. Let the states fight it out.

MATTHEWS: And you think you’re being reasonable by saying you want a two-thirds vote in the House, which is Republican, and in the Senate which is Democrat. You want the Democratic Senate, by a two-thirds vote, to pass a constitutional amendment or you want the house to come down?

LEE: Yes. That’s exactly what I’m saying and I’ve been saying this for six months.
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2011/07/25/278811/lee-admits-he-is-an-extortionist/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=It3bOySjTjM&feature=player_embedded

This is the TeaParty’s view in a nutshell. They really want to see a default. In their minds, not only will it win them the WH back but they can rebuild what they destroy into their “ideal” [[ideological inspired) America.

ms_m

07-26-2011, 09:02 PM

Boehner to Adjust Debt Bill After CBO Says it Saves Less Than Intended
By Susan Davis and Katy O'Donnell
Updated: July 26, 2011 | 7:52 p.m.
July 26, 2011 | 7:33 p.m.

House Speaker John Boehner’s debt-ceiling plan would cut $150 billion less from the deficit than he intended, according to estimates released by the Congressional Budget Office late on Tuesday.

The CBO report presented an added obstacle for House Republicans and Boehner in particular, to secure the votes for passage because it undermined leadership’s assertion that Boehner’s proposal would trim the deficit by $1 trillion over 10 years when CBO found it would only do so by $850 billion.

The report immediately sent GOP leadership aides scrambling to find a way to tinker with their proposal ahead of an anticipated Wednesday vote. “We promised that we will cut spending more than we increase the debt limit—with no tax hikes—and we will keep that promise,” said Boehner spokesman Michael Steel. “As we speak, congressional staff are looking at options to rewrite the legislation to meet our pledge.”
http://www.nationaljournal.com/boehner-to-adjust-debt-bill-after-cbo-says-it-saves-less-than-intended-20110726

Guess someone should have used a calculator.

ms_m

07-26-2011, 10:00 PM

IF I HAD TO VENTURE A GUESS….
26 July 2011 by Cullen Roche 5 Comments

There’s really only one scenario that is likely to play out over the coming 6 days:

We’re running right up against the debt ceiling deadline and the two sides don’t look like they’re ready to agree on anything. The Boehner plan is going to go up for vote on Thursday according to the latest reports, but Obama has already said he’ll veto it. So, there’s some potential that we get a “mini TARP” in the next few days where markets continue to tumble as the politicians prove they are serious about deciding to let America go bankrupt.
Then, when push comes to shove, they’ll “work all weekend” [[those hard workers in Congress!) and we’ll get some sort of incredible rescue announcement at the last hour on Sunday evening. Futures soar 200 points and everyone breathes a big sigh of relief as our politicians ride off into the sunset on their white horses….

That’s just a guess though. There is some chance we get no vote over until next week and the Treasury will scrounge up the funds to operate as the sense of urgency builds and the politicians vote on a new plan early next week. Either way, I don’t see how something doesn’t get resolved. The politicians are not intelligent, but even they know they won’t keep their jobs if they let us default and spiral back into recession just because they couldn’t agree on something. And at the end of the day, we have to remember that it’s their jobs that are important – not necessarily the American people.
http://pragcap.com/if-i-had-to-venture-a-guess

This sounds pretty much how things will go but I wouldn't be willing to bet any money on it one way or the other.

There are almost 30 Tea-party members in the house who are under the misguided notion they can change the Constitution to force fiscal responsibility. It's an unrealistic notion. But because it's that or nothing, they will choose nothing. That means Boner needs Dem votes. If he wants Dems votes, he has to get closer to Reid's Bill....and the clock ticks on.

ms_m

07-26-2011, 10:47 PM

HOLD THAT THOUGHT!
GOP Rewrites And Delays Boehner Debt Plan

http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/1292224543840-1.jpg

GOP Delays Debt Limit Vote After Damaging CBO Score
Brian Beutler | July 26, 2011, 6:55PM

Updated at 9:00 p.m.

Moments after the Congressional Budget Office released an analysis finding that the House Republicans' debt limit bill falls far short of one their key goals, House Speaker John Boehner [[R-OH) decided to rewrite the legislation, and according to GOP leadership, an expected Wednesday floor vote on the package will be delayed until Thursday at the earliest.

"We promised that we will cut spending more than we increase the debt limit - with no tax hikes - and we will keep that promise," reads a statement from Boehner spokesman Michael Steel. "As we speak, Congressional staff are looking at options to re-write the legislation to meet our pledge."

It's still unclear whether Republicans will adjust the bill by including deeper spending cuts, by reducing the amount of borrowing it authorizes, or both. Their goal is to cut projected spending by at least $1 trillion in the next ten years, and to authorize no more new borrowing authority than they can achieve in savings. As currently written, the legislation falls short of both goals.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/07/gop-retooling-debt-limit-plan-after-damaging-cbo-score.php?ref=fpa

ms_m

07-26-2011, 11:31 PM

I thought this was an interesting comment referencing the GOP/TeaParty.
Sounds like hyperbole [[and frustration) but sadly I think there is a lot of truth in it.

State voting laws are being changed all over the country making it difficult for many people to vote. My State took up a vote to overrule our Gov's veto on changing voting requirements. Dems pushed back and the Repubs lost but it's not over and can still happen.

Repubs are using the argument this curtails voter fraud but the truth is, the number of actual cases of voter fraud in the entire country are extremely low. Numerous studies have shown they have minimal impact on elections. You hear accusations of voter fraud but that's all they usually turn out to be [[accusations) once investigated.

They are willing to destroy the United States in order to win. Actually I think they want to destroy the United States *period.* They figure that eventually they will win, and a destroyed United States will be much easier for them to rule.

It's the last point that Americans don't yet understand. The GOP doesn't want to govern. They want to rule. Actually, they are planning on it.

None of us will like the US when the GOP is ruling it. None of us, whatever our party. But it will be too late by then, because their voter laws will make it impossible for anyone who has a bad credit rating, who isn't working, who doesn't meet tough residency rules, and a vast host of other stipulations to vote. They are going to step on the US citizenry hard and fast…

ms_m

07-27-2011, 07:50 AM

CIVIL WAR: GOP Coalition Splinters Into Open Conflict Over Debt Ceiling
Benjy Sarlin & Evan McMorris-Santoro | July 27, 2011, 6:00AM

The Republican leadership's efforts to avert a debt ceiling crisis with a two-tiered set of cuts is turning into the most divisive wedge issue the party has confronted since President Obama took over in 2009.

House Speaker John Boehner [[R-OH) may have thought his face-saving plan, which he hoped to bring to the floor Wednesday, offered a path to victory. However, since treading upon it he's been beset from all sides. It's not just that the President is threatening to veto the bill, should it ever make it past the Senate; it's that Boehner's fellow conservatives are sniping at him with [[not so) friendly fire. Now the vote he'd hoped to bring triumphantly to the floor Wednesday looks delayed until at least Thursday, and even then the outcome is uncertain.

That's because the GOP is teetering on the brink of a debt-based civil war. More traditional Republicans and big business types are desperate to avoid a recovery-crushing default. But their Tea Party colleagues are leading a rebellion of epic - perhaps even galactic - proportions. Cue the John Williams music and find out who stands where in this stand-off between the Establishment's storm-troopers and the Rebel Alliance.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/07/it-is-a-period-of.php?ref=fpa

INSANE!

ms_m

07-27-2011, 07:57 AM

Best Comment of the Day....but it's still early:eek:

This is the SUPER BOWL and the Dems are on one side of the field waiting to play. On the other side of the field, the Republicans have about five separate teams arguing over who is going to take the field for the kickoff. The country is sitting in the stands and rooting for [[something?). The blimp is overhead transmitting the confusion to rest of the world to watch. Commercials from each camp, each more spectacularly preposterous than the previous, flood the airways. The Commissioner [[Obama) keeps reminding the teams that the kick off time is almost here and we MUST get started on time... and

[[ENTER YOUR OUTCOME)

ms_m

07-27-2011, 01:19 PM

Tea Party Leaders: If Default Hurts The Tea Party, So Be It
Evan McMorris-Santoro | July 27, 2011, 11:23AM

The tea party is so hell-bent on getting America's finances in order, they're willing to suffer the personal consequences of a government default. That's according to leaders of the Tea Party Patriots, who spoke with reporters in Washington this morning as the city remains gripped in debt ceiling stalemate.

Jenny Beth Martin, a co-founder of the Tea Party Patriots [[the grassrootsier wing of the movement) agreed that default -- and the requisite end in government payments for the programs that go with it -- could hurt the thousands of tea party voters she represents. But she said her members are willing to take the hit.

"If it injures the people that we represent, but it's benefiting the whole country, that's what we need to be concerned about," she said.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/07/tea-party-leaders-if-default-hurts-tea-partiers-so-be-it.php?ref=fpb

Martin said default could be good for the country in the long-run, and said she looks to her own painful financial history as an example.

"As somebody who has gone through bankruptcy, I don't want to see our country into trouble that my family went through." she said. "I understand that means that you've got to sit there and look at: 'What can you do different? Can we sell anything? How can we get out of this mess?' And that's what our government needs to be looking at."
She’s comparing a National default that will also impact the world economy, to her personal bankruptcy.

This is what happens when you don’t have a clue and don’t seem to want one. Being stupid and being ignorant are two different things and this woman and her followers are woefully ignorant, of how our financial system works.

Heaven Help Us All!!!!!

ms_m

07-27-2011, 02:11 PM

I'm re-posting this with a few extra comments:

I said this in another post, Aug 3rd [[SS) checks I’m not concerned with but what I didn’t say, what could happen after Aug 3rd will probably be the kicker.

I’ve been hearing various politicians talk about picking and choosing what should be paid and what should not…Gubment doesn’t work like that…Gubment computers don’t work that way to be more specific. The US has always paid it's bills...period...never a need to decide what to pay or what not to pay.

I read that Fed IT don’t even know if they can come up with a program for something like that and even if they can…not by Aug 3rd…hence the angst Des’ alluded to from his boss.

Now I’m guessing there are people thinking, well this is why we need smaller gubment…well, while you are cutting back the gubment I suggest you cut back the size of the US population too…

80 million checks go out to Seniors and Veterans ….80 million…Seniors and Veterans are not the only people that need to get paid and I’m only referring to the essential things that the population is saying they don’t and will not give up….”hands off my Medicare”

AND NOW, you have a woman who calls herself a leader, saying her thousands of followers are willing to take a hit. Did you hear her say ANYTHING about the millions of lives that will be affected by this….ANYTHING AT ALL?

Ideological sound bites may seem cool and compelling when railing against the Feds and the political party/politicians we love to hate but when reality sets in…???

I said we needed the debt ceiling when we were on the gold standard….no we didn’t. The debt ceiling has been raised almost from the start of its inception. Congress spends money….doesn’t matter which side spends because they both do and when they reach the debt ceiling they raise it and spend more….so why a debt ceiling ….political football.

Go back to the gold standard and force congress to adhere to the debt ceiling right?
Yeah, ok….do you guys know why Nixon took us off the gold standard, probably a good time to look it up.

BTW

Have you guys ever heard the one where Germany’s economy was so bad it was cheaper for kids to play with stacks of German money than it was to buy toy blocks….
http://www.history.ucsb.edu/faculty/...0s/Econ20s.htm
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/57bee4619f805d31abc1b4bab002843b.jpg

Listen folks, I’m not trying to scare anyone. This isn’t 1920 and we’re not Germany but I am trying to get you to think. We all have a voice…now is a pretty good time to start using it as oppose to telling yourself it doesn’t matter or pretending like this will all turn out ok….It may….I don’t know for sure….do you?

I'm actually too numb to be angry right now but for anyone who thinks like these people....please read, please research, please learn. This isn't just about you and other misguided souls this is about an entire nation and the world.

There is no conspiracy theory, no Illuminati, Michael and Elvis are DEAD and the ONLY effing New World order will be created by your refusing not to step into reality and re-evaluate your rigid ideology and beliefs!

Fax numbers can be found by clicking the link below

Contacting the Congress is a very up-to-date citizen's congressional directory for the 112th Congress. As of July 25, 2011 there are 539 electronic contact addresses [[of which 536 are Web-based contact forms), and 539 home pages known for the 540 members of the 112th Congress. Traditional ground mail addresses are available for all current members of Congress.

Find your members of Congress by clicking this link and then click on your state on the map http://www.contactingthecongress.org/index.html

Efax is an excellent service and you can do a fax via your computer

This link is for a 30 day trial….it’s easy and trustworthy

http://home.efax.com/s/r/efax-brand1...FaZx5QodvlXE6Q

For Twitter Users

House Representatives on Twitter
http://www.arrghpaine.com/house-reps-on-twitter

I'll place the other links and number here as well to make this convenient as possible.

The number to call is the U.S. Capitol Switchboard at [[202)224-3121

U.S. Senate: Senators Directory
Offers a directory of current members of the U.S. Senate with full contact information including email addresses.[/B]
http://www.senate.gov/general/contac...nators_cfm.cfm

Directory of Representatives

http://www.house.gov/representatives/#state_ks

ms_m

07-27-2011, 02:41 PM

Get Over It: This Is Who Obama Is
By James Warren
Jul 27 2011, 8:30 AM ET

From his community organizing days to the Illinois State Senate, Barack Obama has always put pragmatic deal-making above ideology, even when it angered allies

As President Obama is pilloried by the left, including by bloggers and editorial writers, for supposedly selling them out during debt ceiling negotiations, a reality check is desperately needed.

Get over it, guys and gals, and remember whom you're fuming over: a deal-making community organizer.
Recognize this man? In a showdown with ideological enemies, he fashioned compromises which made some Democratic allies apoplectic. Republicans weren't happy, either, with what he wrought but grudgingly realized there were few alternatives.

Throughout he exhibited a preternatural calm, always seeking some common ground among disparate interests as if compromise was a goal in and of itself, not any diminution of principle as some Democrats thought.

Yes, that's our president, the man at the center of the improbable Debt Debate of 2011. But it was also State Senator Barack Obama a decade ago. The equally rancorous issue back then was the death penalty and the setting was the Illinois legislature. Not much about him has changed.

"His ideological inclinations are liberal but, as far as being a politician, he's about getting things done. He was always pragmatic and about getting things done," said Peter Baroni, a Republican attorney-law professor-lobbyist in Chicago who had a bird's eye view of Obama while serving as legal counsel to Republicans in the Illinois Senate and to its Judiciary Committee.
Full Article
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/07/get-over-it-this-is-who-obama-is/242600/

ms_m

07-27-2011, 04:47 PM

Dems Prepare For Boehner Plan To Pass House
Brian Beutler | July 27, 2011, 1:13PM

A 24 hour delay, and the revival of Speaker John Boehner's [[R-OH) debt limit plan in the House have changed the legislative calculus in Congress, and now Senate Democrats are piecing together how to move forward if Boehner prevails Thursday evening.

"It appears quite clear that Boehner -- a favor was done by CBO for him yesterday because his bill was doomed to failure," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid [[D-NV) told reporters Wednesday. "And he can juggle things around, and had a caucus today, and he may get it passed, but it doesn't matter. That is a flawed piece of legislation."

Reid says Democrats will decide precisely how to proceed once the gavel comes down on Boehner's vote. House Democrats are expected to oppose that bill unanimously, making Boehner's margin for error very thin -- but momentum within his caucus is in his favor with just over 24 hours before that vote.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/07/dems-prepare-for-boehner-plan-to-pass-house.php?ref=fpa

Fax numbers can be found by clicking the link below

Contacting the Congress is a very up-to-date citizen's congressional directory for the 112th Congress. As of July 25, 2011 there are 539 electronic contact addresses [[of which 536 are Web-based contact forms), and 539 home pages known for the 540 members of the 112th Congress. Traditional ground mail addresses are available for all current members of Congress.

Find your members of Congress by clicking this link and then click on your state on the map http://www.contactingthecongress.org/index.html

Efax is an excellent service and you can do a fax via your computer

This link is for a 30 day trial….it’s easy and trustworthy

http://home.efax.com/s/r/efax-brand1...FaZx5QodvlXE6Q

For Twitter Users

House Representatives on Twitter
http://www.arrghpaine.com/house-reps-on-twitter

I'll place the other links and number here as well to make this convenient as possible.

The number to call is the U.S. Capitol Switchboard at [[202)224-3121

U.S. Senate: Senators Directory
Offers a directory of current members of the U.S. Senate with full contact information including email addresses.[/B]
http://www.senate.gov/general/contac...nators_cfm.cfm

Directory of Representatives

http://www.house.gov/representatives/#state_ks

Ladies and gentlemen, John Boehner’s bill is nothing but a reworked version of Paul Ryan’s kill entitlement bill. If this bill passes the House and gets to the Senate …it will not be pretty….they will either reject it….which puts us right back where we started or….they will pass it which means it goes to President Obama’s desk….at that point he has a decision to make…..veto and default…or sign a sht piece of legislation that will start the process of killing off entitlements….there is a 3rd option that I can think of and that’s saying eff you to the Legislative Branch and making a unilateral decision to raise the debt ceiling….sounds cool and macho right….WRONG! It would be considered an impeachable offense [[or worse) not to mention, it may not even help us keep our credit rating because of all the madness that will surround such a move.

Take the time to understand how our financial system works, if you can’t do that, call your reps….Boner's bill, should not and can NOT pass without an ugly ending.

ms_m

07-27-2011, 04:58 PM

BTW....Senator Reid may believe in magic but I don't. There are millions of things that happen in this world that I cannot explain but show me a magic trick and I guarantee I will find you a reasonable explanation behind it. REAL Magic is produced by an ACTION...not by wishing.

ms_m

07-27-2011, 07:00 PM

House Dems Join Senate In Urging DOJ To Fight Voter ID Laws
Ryan J. Reilly | July 27, 2011, 1:10PM

A coalition of 115 House Democrats have signed a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder calling on the Justice Department to vigorously oppose voter ID laws that are sweeping state legislatures across the country.
"Many of these bills only have one true purpose, the disenfranchisement of eligible voters -- especially the elderly, young voters, students, minorities, and low-income voters," they write in the letter.

"Restrictive voter photo identification legislation has the potential to block millions of eligible American voters, and thus suppress the right to vote. We urge you to exercise your authority to examine these laws so that voting rights are not jeopardized," the members write.
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/07/house_dems_join_senate_in_urging_doj_to_fight_vote .php?ref=fpb

Check out this comment:

Voter suppression???????????
You can't write or cash a check without a picture id....why should you be able to vote without one?

For those of you who do not know or have not bothered to take the time to ask or investigate, yet believe the comment is true….listen up…and clutch the pearls Mable because this is going to be a shocker.

There are hundreds of thousands [[and more I'm sure) of people in this country who DO NOT have a checking account.

You would also be surprised how easy it is to get checks cashed without a bank account, and without a Driver’s License or State issued ID, especially a gubment check. It will cost you an arm and a leg but it can be done.

Even people with checking accounts can go to the bank without ID. My mom has been banking at the same bank for over 50 years. When she’s not feeling well, I call the bank, put her on the phone, they recognize her voice and she tells them she’s sending me over with a check for x amount of dollars.

I go in the bank, say hello to everyone, sign the back of the check, collect the money and walk out without ever pulling my driver’s license out of my wallet.

My mom no longer has a valid picture ID. Getting her one is possible if I have to but the process of doing so will be a pain in the arse because my mom also suffers from dementia. [[the severity depends on the day)

Now if the Rethugs in my state find away to get what they want, I’ll deal with the pain in the arse process so my mom can exercise her Constitutional Right To Vote but there are millions of 91 year olds [[and younger) that don’t have someone like me…what do they do?

Republican law makers know what they are doing is wrong, they also know that stacking the deck against the Dems is a great way to suppress the Democratic process. Yet they convince uninformed people their actions are pure and ethical. Those uninformed people fall for the okee doke every time!

ms_m

07-27-2011, 08:19 PM

CRAM IT! ALL Senate Dems Tell Boehner His Debt Limit Plan Is DOA
Brian Beutler | July 27, 2011, 6:45PM

The entire Senate Democratic caucus -- including independents Joe Lieberman [[CT) and Bernie Sanders [[VT) -- have a succinct message for House Speaker John Boehner: cram it!

In a Wednesday letter, the Democrats seek to prove what Majority Leader Harry Reid [[D-NV) has been saying for days: nobody in his party will vote for Boehner's debt limit plan, and he should stop claiming it's a viable solution to the looming default crisis.

"With five days until our nation faces an unprecedented financial crisis, we need to work together to ensure that our nation does not default on our obligations for the first time in our history," the Dems write. "We heard that in your caucus you said the Senate will support your bill. We are writing to tell you that we will not support it, and give you the reasons why. A short-term extension like the one in your bill would put America at risk, along with every family and business in it. Your approach would force us once again to face the threat of default in five or six short months."
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/07/cram-it-all-senate-dems-tell-boehner-his-debt-limit-plan-is-doa.php?ref=fpb

This is good as long as they follow through. Some may ask why….because Reid’s plan has a good chance of getting through the House. Nancy Pelosi knows how to whip votes from the House Dems and there should be enough sane House Repubs [[??) to make up the difference. Getting Reid’s bill through the Senate should be a no brainer. Basic procedural stuff here and there and boom, it’s on the President’s Desk. It’s cutting it close and we still have to see if Moody downgrades the US credit rating but all we can do is our part and to let our voices be heard and wait. [[some will pray and that’s cool too but please do an action [[call, email, fax, tweet, Facebook) before or after you pray, it would be greatly appreciated and thanks:))

No guarantees how any of this will go down, but if we don't try, it's just as much our fail and fault as the dysfunctional Republican/TeaParty. oh yeah, we still could end up with a clean debt bill although I don't see that happening but...thought I'd throw that out there.

…and a heads up….it will only be a few weeks but the crazy starts up again over the budget.

whoopee [[snark)

VOTE THE CRAZY OUT PLEASE!

MotownSteve

07-27-2011, 10:16 PM

I saw a video clip of a Tea Party rally today. There were tens of people there. If you count the reporters that more than doubles the attendance as there were more reporters than party members. The rally did manage to disrupt the guy cutting the grass.

ms_m

07-27-2011, 10:27 PM

:D yeah I saw that pic MS. Funny you bring it up. I was just thinking, this election process will probably go down as the strangest in American history.

ms_m

07-27-2011, 11:32 PM

Cullen Roche is a pragmatist and his blog is rarely from the point of view of political ideology. Although, many of the comments from others are.

He has often documented how both sides are wrong as two left shoes when it comes to monetary policy [[which is different from fiscal policy) but he seems to always believe, sanity at some point will prevail. I hope he’s right because if there is one point of contention I have with Cullen Roche, he seems to have more faith in people [[in general) than I do….or maybe his faith is rooted in sanity,reality and knowledge and he’s convinced one or all three will prevail. Personally, I’m not convinced but keep looking and striving for the day that I am. [[convinced that is)

MOTIVATION
27 July 2011 by Cullen Roche 19 Comments

Nothing motivates people like fear. And there are few things more fearful in this world than losing enormous amounts of money. The equity markets have done a pretty dramatic about-face in the last 5 days on their way to losing 3.5%. High beta names have fared even worse with small caps down almost 5% in as many sessions.

There’s an unfortunate situation brewing here, however. This fear is likely to motivate the Congressman into action. Remember, rich people hate two things in this world – losing money and losing money. And Congressman are generally rich people so they hate losing money AND losing money. When they see their brokerage accounts diving due to their own actions they feel pretty silly – especially when the fix is fairly simple.

So, expect fear to motivate these rich people into action in the coming days [[week?). And when they finally come to some agreement we can then begin to focus on how much this agreement is going to hurt the economy. Talk about cutting off your nose in spite of your face!
http://pragcap.com/motivation

ms_m

07-28-2011, 12:24 AM

Yo Chi… this one’s for you….it came about as a result of a snarky remark [[http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/07/jon-stewart-boehner-speech-proves-washington-has-plenty-of-cliches-video.php?ref=fpc) Jon Stewart made because the President asked people to call their congressman/woman. I think the comment is a tad harsh on John because he’s is a comedian after all but I understand where this rant is coming from. Especially since many Left Progressives have this hero worship thing going for Stewart. shrugs...but I think you and others will enjoy this; a good rant is a thing of beauty….LOL:cool:

Um yeah Jon Stewart, he's asking your simple @ss to actually do something other then sitting around running your mouths. You see, this is what I cant stand about some people on the left. What type of stupid sh*t is that to say?? "Oh you actually want us to get off our lazy behinds and help you fight off the extremist from completely destroying our country, how dare you"? This dude is one of the lamest people on tv and this is why I say he is a joke compared to Colbert, because Colbert is actually doing something constructive [[creating PACs and what not)...people like Jon Stewart and Bill Maher are professional cynics which is why they are just as dangerous as the Tea Party. They help create a meme that both sides are the same when this time around its not true.

I love how some on the left complains about Democratic messaging always being messed up when the fact is they help mess up the messaging from Democrats. Jon Stewart can afford to be a constant cynic because his position allows him to be one. He wont have to worry about not having any food on the table or not getting a social security check, his kids wont have to worry about Pell grants... so he can afford to be a purist and stand in a corner without compromise. I don't care about people saying "he's a comedian", I'm sorry but I don't find anything funny about him at this point regardless of who he makes fun of. He has a knack for coming off as a self righteous @sshole and if he cared as much as he claims he would tell his audience how serious all of this is and its time to get involved instead of sitting on the sidelines. Anyone who constantly overlooks the obvious treason towards this President and favors chastising Obama instead at this point is suspect to me.

I cannot take the left seriously after this President, they have sat on the sidelines throwing spit balls at him for not fighting for them when they don't even want to fight for themselves. Its the same crap over and over again. I heard Bill Maher say last night that he is "terribly disappointed" in Obama for "caving" to the Republicans on the debt issue. Then he went on with all his superiority complex issues to say what Obama should do...its the same sh*t over and over again with these people.

They are always disappointed. They were disappointed when Obama had Rick Warren give the prayer at his inauguration, they were disappointed when he picked Hillary as his Secretary of State, They were disappointed when the stimulus wasn't big enough for them, they were disappointed when healthcare didn't go far enough for them, they were disappointed when Wall Street reform didn't go far enough for them, they were disappointed when DADT didn't get passed quick enough for them and disappointed in the process, They were disappointed because he didn't come flat out and say he was for gay marriage [[although he never campaigned on the issue yet his actions for the LGBT community have spoken volumes) they were disappointed when Obama sent troops to Afghanistan [[even though he campaigned on focusing on Afghanistan), they were disappointed when he announced the draw-down from Afghanistan because it didn't go far enough for them, they are disappointed when Obama doesn't say exactly what they think he should say or behave how they think he should...some of these people are ALWAYS disappointed. He cant take a sh*t without them being "disappointed" that he took too long to do it.

Its one thing to hold someone accountable but its another then to constantly complain. A portion of the left have become just as obvious as the Tea Party. One side is against everything Obama does and the other side complains about everything he does. Its the same thing. Both sides are weak minded and turncoats. Ive noticed that some on the left are more comfortable with someone fighting for them then actually fighting for themselves. Sitting on the sidelines calling Obama "weak" when they constantly want him to do all the fighting for them. They talked a good game during the Bush years but the fact is when the sh*t hit the fan they left Obama to fend for himself day one. They were not prepared or are too lazy to stand up in these times and help make their message heard, they want this President to do everything on his own and everything for them.

The left constantly squanders opportunities this President gives them to make their case to more independent minded people. They wanted everything on Healthcare all at once because they didn't want to actually have to work to improve the bill over time. They want everything on gay rights under Obama because they don't want to put in the work to actually go up against someone who is actually against their rights. They don't want to fight for anything themselves. Obama can never count on them to help sell the message from the ground up, he can never count on them to actually take to the streets to pressure Republicans to be fair minded, he can never count on them to actually stand with him during times like this instead of piling on him...but the one thing he can always count on them for no matter what is for them to be "disappointed"...when the fact is disappointment doesn't even begin to describe them at this point.

ms_m

07-28-2011, 06:31 PM

Boner postponed the vote because he doesn't have enough votes to pass it...yeah but that's where the good news ends. We need to get a vote out of the way in the House to move this thing forward. There's talk he may reschedule for later this evening.

The smart thing for Boner at this point would be to strip away all the cuts...pass a clean debt ceiling bill with about 20 or so house repubs...all the house dems and call it a day but he would probably need to resign afterward because his party would crucify him. Stay tuned

ms_m

07-28-2011, 10:39 PM

Majority whip: House will not vote tonight on Speaker John Boehner's latest proposal to raise debt ceiling, cut spending.

ms_m

07-28-2011, 11:02 PM

Today 10:41 PM Hoyer, Van Hollen Back Obama Using 14th Amendment To Resolve Debt Crisis

House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer [[D-Md.) on Wednesday night became the latest Democratic leader to throw his support behind the idea of President Barack Obama using the Constitution to raise the debt ceiling without Congress. That option is "arguably in his power," Hoyer said on MSNBC's "The Ed Show."

"Very frankly, if it came down to his looking default in the eye on Tuesday or taking this action, as President Clinton said, it would be better to take the action and find out later that perhaps he went beyond his authority but …protected the creditworthiness of the United States of America."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/27/debt-ceiling-deadline-_n_911605.html#s280957&title=The_Stock_Market

A few weeks ago when I saw and posted the story about the 4th Article of the 14th Amendment I thought it was a cool idea. Then the POTUS said his lawyers didn’t think it was an option. Now everyone is yelling about the 14th but something is bothering me…

1. At the time the 14th was adopted, there wasn’t a debt ceiling so it may be a stretch to say it applies via default

2. Only congress can authorize spending…and that’s spelled out clearly in the Constitution

3. Article 5 of the 14th……

The Fourteenth Amendment [[Amendment XIV) to the United States Constitution was adopted on July 9, 1868 as one of the Reconstruction Amendments.

Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

I’ve seen scholars argue back and forth about the 14/4 but no one has mentioned article 5

I DO NOT want to see the USA default but I'm not at all comfortable with the President turning into a dictator....Bush Jr. blew off the Constitution and I was pissed...setting a 2nd precedent under another POTUS is a very, very dangerous and slippery slope.

ms_m

07-29-2011, 12:38 AM

COLLAPSE: Boehner Pulls Debt Limit Bill Again, With Days Left Before Default
Brian Beutler | July 28, 2011, 10:48PM

What was originally described as a brief snafu has turned into a stunning rebuke of House Republican leaders, who were unable Thursday to round up the minimum number of votes to pass Speaker John Boehner's debt limit bill.

The vote, originally scheduled for 6 p.m., was delayed at the last minute, when Boehner and his leadership team finally faced the harsh reality: despite a swing of momentum in their direction over the previous 24 hours, they didn't have the votes. And with no Democrats there to help them, they needed 217 Republicans to be on board. They were not.
Boehner and his leadership team met for hours, in various leadership offices, with reluctant members, and persuasive supporters, hoping to cobble together a majority. Meanwhile, leadership aides insisted for as long as possible that a vote was still planned late Thursday.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/07/collapse-boehner-pulls-debt-limit-bill-again-with-days-left-before-default.php?ref=fpblg

A few weeks back the Dems were saying Boner could not get anything through without their help...they were right. I must admit I'm impressed the House Dems stood firm on this one and I'd like to think the calls, emails, etc. played a part in making that happen.

Seems to me Boner has 2 choices, well 3 if you count default but he can keep trying to get the votes he needs, which seems futile at this point or he can push the bill further to the left and or accept Reid's plan and get support from House Dems. Whatever he does, he's shown he's rather useless as Speaker of the House shrugs...and the clock ticks on.

MotownSteve

07-29-2011, 12:04 PM

Just look at the dates of the communications to members of Congress.

http://www.treasury.gov/initiatives/Pages/debtlimit.aspx

ms_m

07-29-2011, 03:26 PM

Interesting Steve and I'll comment later.

Tops/Tempts are in town tomorrow and I still have a lot to do before they get here.

Hopefully this will be over by the time I can get back to the thread.

Take Care

I'll be back

MotownSteve

07-29-2011, 06:00 PM

I saw the Tops six times sixties. They remain one of the greatest groups ever.

ms_m

07-29-2011, 07:06 PM

Between the originals and the new kids, I can beat your six times easy and never break a sweat....LOL

Through eternity, there will always be....:cool:

OK, as some may know, Boners bill passed the house without any Dem votes...it passed because he revamped a crappy bill into an even crappier one to get TeaParty support...IT WILL BE DOA in the Senate so the bottom line, it was a waste of everyone's time and still does not solve the problem.

Next at bat, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi....

Have a great weekend everyone. Feel free to talk amongst yourselves. See you guys Sunday!

ms_m

07-29-2011, 11:19 PM

I wanted to leave you with a few things to consider before I call it a night and get my beauty sleep.:)

How The Revised Reid Amendment Compares To The Revised Boehner Bill

Shortly before the Senate adjourned late Friday without an agreed-upon framework to raise the debt limit, a source passed to TPM a copy of what may be the way out. It a copy of what may be Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's final offer to Republicans in the debt limit standoff.

The gist: Reid hopes to entice Republicans to support his plan in two ways. First, with slightly deeper cuts. Second, by adopting an idea, first proposed by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, that would delegate the authority to raise the debt limit to President Obama -- and give Congress the prerogative to attempt to block Obama from taking that action.

It does not include any penalties or triggers to force Congress to enact entitlement and tax reforms in the coming months.

The new cuts aren't very extensive. They bring the package's total deficit reduction up to $2.4 trillion -- but only when judged against a slightly outdated January baseline. Judged against the current baseline, the revised plan would still reduce the deficit by $2.2 trillion.

It's unclear if Reid is willing to go any further. Asked if this is Reid's final offer, a spokesman says "This is the last train leaving the station and we hope Republicans will get on board."
Late update: At a late Friday press conference, Reid suggested that the door is still open to further tweak his proposal, including by adding failsafes to assure future entitlement and tax reforms -- but it's up to Republicans to offer up their votes.

"We have a closet full of triggers that people have suggested dozens of them but even though earlier this week, I was sitting talking to Jack Lew we talked about triggers for an hour and a half we cant get Republicans to move on any trigger we're not going to have cuts on more programs without some revenue that is a line we've drawn in the sand," Reid said. "It's up to the Republicans, right now we have a proposal, extend the we are waiting for them to do something, anything, move toward us."
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/07/reid-aims-for-gop-support-by-adopting-mcconnell-debt-limit-plan-fallback-plan.php?ref=fpa

Yes the quote is weird at the end but Reid was talking to the press and changed his thought and wording in mid sentence.

Below is the link to the document:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/61238228/How-The-Revised-Reid-Amendment-Compares-To-The-Revised-Boehner-Bill

Great explanation:

The world runs on credit. The US's credit card isn't maxed out, but we do need a raise [[in taxes) because we took a voluntary pay cut [[in taxes) when we couldn't afford to, and that, along with a couple of wars and a deep recession and housing crisis have made it difficult. But we can still pay our bills. That's not the problem. The problem is that certain Republicans don't want to pay our bills.

Let's say you have run up a pretty big bill on your credit card, but you have lots of wiggle room left on your credit card limit, and you have the best FICO score possible. Now, let's say your spouse, with whom you share the bank account, refuses to pay the minimum balance on your credit card.

That's when you get cut off and your interest rate doubles. That's what's happening here.

Keep in mind, the DEBT CEILING does not refer to future spending, only to spending that has already been authorized by congress.

Every dime of those trillions of dollars was fashioned into a bill that was voted on and passed by the House and Senate… and now the TeaRepubs are saying ….screw it, we won’t pay.

They are holding a gun to the head of the debt ceiling and saying, give us what we want or the debt ceiling gets it…..

…there are two problems with this attitude, no matter what they have been offered they have said no and it’s not the debt ceiling [[an arbitrary concept) that will suffer but the American People.

Guess Who Owns the Most U.S. Debt? Not China
January 18, 2011

The United States’ total public debt outstanding was approximately $13.562 trillion at the end of the government’s fiscal year on 30 September 2010. As of 4 January 2011, the United States’ total public debt outstanding has surpassed 14 trillion dollars and is continuing to grow rapidly.

The chart below, courtesy of Politcal Calculations, shows U.S. individuals and institutions, when including the Social Security, U.S. Civil Service and Military trust funds own 62.2% of the U.S. national debt, while foreign nations own the remaining 37.8%.

The big surprise of the chart is that China, contrary to popular opinion, only owns 7.5% of the U.S. debt.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/246958-guess-who-owns-the-most-u-s-debt-not-china

Yes folks…. The USA is the biggest debt holder for the USA.

Debt = US Treasury Bonds
backed by the full faith and credit of the USA….at least for the next few hours…maybe longer but who really knows?….. and who really cares?….not the Teafools apparently.

So if you’ve ever wondered what people meant when saying, Teafools are cutting off their noise to spite their face, well there you have it.

stephanie

07-30-2011, 01:16 PM

Ms M thanks for all of the information we will see what happens! Good luck with the Temps and the Tops.

ms_m

07-31-2011, 11:06 AM

You're welcome Stephanie and thank you. The show was great in spite of the oppressive heat!

I'm still trying to catch up on Washington. There's so much back and forth hearsay it's really hard to get a handle on it.

At this point, the only thing I can say comfortably, there are no immediate plans to stop SS checks this coming week, beyond that, it's a crap shoot. The vote today may or may not give more insight.

However this turns out I only hope the electorate understands what's at stake in Nov 2012. Sitting at home or voting third party because of some rigid ideology or principle will be worse than the midterm disaster of 2010. That, you can count on!

Read an excellent definition on the word principle recently and one of the few I can support whole heartily.

Principle is defined by separating absolutist positioning from more general cost-benefit analysis and valuing the greater good.

Reminds me of Spock's line in the Wrath of Khan

"It is logical. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."

Always did like Spock.:cool:

ms_m

07-31-2011, 07:21 PM

Reid Agrees To Major Debt Limit Deal — Here’s What He’s Signed Off On
Brian Beutler | July 31, 2011, 5:52PM

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid [[D-NV) has signed off on a deal to raise the debt limit pending the approval of his caucus -- and of course if can win the backing of Senate GOP leaders and then a majority of the House.
His spokesman confirms that Reid will present the deal to his caucus shortly, with the hope of holding a vote on it Sunday night, giving House leaders some running room to pass the plan before the nation's borrowing authority expires late Tuesday.

The deal works like this:

It guarantees the debt limit will be hiked by $2.4 trillion. Immediately upon enactment of the plan, the Treasury will be granted $400 billion of new borrowing authority, after which President Obama will be allowed to extend the debt limit by $500 billion, subject to a vote of disapproval by Congress.

That initial $900 billion will be paired with $900 billion of discretionary spending cuts, first identified in a weeks-old bipartisan working group led by Vice President Joe Biden, which will be spread out over 10 years.
Obama will later be able to raise the debt limit by $1.5 trillion, again subject to a vote of disapproval by Congress.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/07/reid-agrees-to-major-debt-limit-deal----heres-what-hes-signed-off-on.php?ref=fpa

You can find the details of the latest version of the talks in the link above. IMO there are some good things and some bad but no one was going get their way 100%.

The extremes from both sides are screaming bloody murder so that tells me this deals looks out for the folks in the middle. [[the needs of the many)

I was surprised Reid’s previous deal didn’t make it through the Senate. Especially after Senate Republicans were bashing their Republican brothers and sisters in the House but I guess I should not be surprised that the Repubs will always come together as one.

Checked Cspan and the Senate is suppose to resume tonight after recess.

This entire mess is way passed old.

ms_m

07-31-2011, 07:43 PM

It's been a rainy, lazy kind of day here...not the kind of day where one feels motivated but I was just thinking about something the POTUS said in one of the many speeches last week. It's in one of the posted videos... feel free to check...BUT...he said he had several plans waiting that would address the issue of the economy and jobs. Considering these plans would have to be brought to the floor of the House by Boner, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting on them.

As I said before... the next crisis the Repubs will manufacture and the Dems will get caught up in is the budget...don't forget...we are 7 months into 2011 and still don't have an authorized budget. If Repubs can find away NOT to address jobs and the economy, you best believe they will find that way.

ms_m

07-31-2011, 09:03 PM

This was posted on the cspan site about 5 mins ago. I don’t know the details of the deal, don’t know if this is a different deal than the last latest deal and really don’t have a desire to speculate. What will be, will be.

President Announces Deal With Congressional Leaders on Debt Ceiling
Votes still to come in House & Senate

President Obama announced this evening that Congressional leaders from both parties have reached an agreement on a plan to raise the debt ceiling.

Saying it wasn't the deal he "would have preferred," the President nonetheless threw his support behind the plan, which will now presumably come up for a vote in the House and Senate this week.

By a count of 50 - 49, the Senate voted this afternoon to not proceed with debate on Majority Leader Harry Reid's [[D-NV) debt ceiling proposal. The vote required 60 votes to clear the filibuster hurdle. Following the vote, the Senate went into recess while negotiations continued off the floor.
http://www.c-span.org/Events/President-Announces-Deal-With-Congressional-Leaders-on-Debt-Ceiling/10737423152/

ms_m

07-31-2011, 09:11 PM

At this point and considering how things have been going, I wouldn’t say it’s a deal until the votes in the Senate and House have been counted and the debt ceiling raised, but that’s just me

IT’S A DEAL! Obama, Congressional Leaders Announce Deal To Avoid Default
Brian Beutler | July 31, 2011, 8:48PM

President Obama and Congressional leaders announced Sunday evening they've agreed to a major, and controversial deal to raise the national debt limit and advance major cuts to government services.

After an intense day of direct and shuttle negotiations, and after a tentative agreement nearly fell apart, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid [[D-NV) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell [[R-KY) took to the floor of the Senate late Sunday to announce an agreement in principle.

"The compromise we have agreed to is remarkable for a number of reasons, not only because of what it does, but because of what it prevents," Reid said.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/07/its-a-deal-obama-congressional-leaders-announce-deal-to-avoid-default.php?ref=fpa

Cardin On Debt Ceiling Deal: Disappointed On Revenues, But ‘Priorities Have Been Protected’
Ryan J. Reilly | July 31, 2011, 8:56PM

TPM caught up with Sen. Ben Cardin [[D-DE) just after Senate leaders announced a deal to raise the debt ceiling limit.

"I want to see the details, but obviously I think what the leader said is accurate: we're going to be very pleased that we have a long-term solution to the debt limit and that our priorities were protected," Cardin told TPM.
"Obviously we're going to be disappointed about the revenue aspects, but that's what a compromise is about," Cardin said. "I want to withhold judgement until I see all the details, but from the way it's been described to me, it seems like it's a true compromise."
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/07/cardin-on-debt-ceiling-deal-disappointed-on-revenues-but-priorities-have-been-protected.php?ref=dcblt

Doug-Morgan

07-31-2011, 09:38 PM

I haven't seen numbers in an hour or so, but Aisan markets opened up higher, so aparently they feel that the deal will be agreed to.

Tom Brokaw made an interesting observation this morning that basically said what I've been saying all along. The Republicans at this time seem to be emulating the mess the Democrats got themselves into in the early/mid 70's by swinging so far towards their flank that they became unelectable for a number of political cycles. He specifically cited George McGovern [[1972) and said the Republicans are running the risk of doing the same thing from the right side that the Democrats suffered through on the left.

ladonna

07-31-2011, 09:44 PM

Obama and Congress reach a tentative dept-ceiling bill!

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-congress-reach-debt-deal-003853348.html

ms_m

07-31-2011, 09:55 PM

Funny Doug, I just saw the news on the Asian Markets, I think the timing of the message was probably aimed at them.

I agree with Brokaw, I also think it's why the POTUS is more focused on moderates and Indies than the extreme left. Trying to get anything sane done when the scales are too far tilted one way or the other is ludicrous.

I saw this comment and think it's pretty much on point.

The other thing to remember about obama is that he is tenacious. Hillary taught him a hell of a lesson in the primaries. You want the job, you never ever stop fighting. Obama just got huge new gas milage agreements while the gop congress is in session. He also got rid of dont ask dont tell. He got universal health care bill. The guy gets shit done. Its ugly. Its painful to watch. But he somehow keeps pushing things in the right direction. He also gets no respect and far too little credit

ms_m

07-31-2011, 09:56 PM

Welcome to the discussion ladonna. Nice to have you here.

stephanie

07-31-2011, 10:21 PM

One thing this whole event has taught me. There are republicans that are now going to become Democrat or Independent.
President Obama will have MORE hurdles to face and if he gets a second term the hatred is not going to change. YES he does get things done and I am confident he cares about the country and his constituents contrary to what the uneducated say who believe everything they read and dont do any research. We really dont know what is in the bill so those who are playing the blame game this early have no facts to base their hatred on either side yet [[related to what may have passed)

Based on what I have seen these last 3 years unless something crazy happens that he didnt do correctly the big O gets my vote again and yes he gets things done,.
Steph

ladonna

07-31-2011, 10:29 PM

Thank you for the warm welcome, Miss M! As always, it's nice to be had. ;O)

ms_m

07-31-2011, 11:14 PM

From what I can tell it's the "triggers" that have both extremes up in arms. I must be getting punchy over this whole thing because I find their outrage hilarious. Depending on who holds the House and Senate in 2012 [[and the WH) will determine who will be hurt by the bullet once the trigger is pulled.

Instead of moaning, groaning and complaining, people should work to make sure they vote, support and work towards sane people getting elected...Reagan, Bush Sr.... 8 years of Bush Jr. and a TeaParty House and the left still doesn't seem to get it....AMAZING!

ms_m

07-31-2011, 11:41 PM

Comment of the year!!!!
BINGO, AMEN AND PASS THE CORNBREAD
Need to put this on billboards and stamp it on the foreheads of voters!

What many fail to realize is that even if congress gave Obama a clean raise of the debt limit this fight would still go on. The voters gave Republicans control of the House in the 2010 elections and Congress controls the purse strings. The Republicans want to cut spending and they won't raise taxes, this was just an opportunity for them to use a bigger anvil than they had with the fight over the continuing resolution - [[ where despite howls from the left that Obama caved, only 350 Million was cut from fiscal year 2011 - roughly a penny for $100 spent). This battle would have continued when that resolution expired on Sept. 30, and it will definitely continue in Nov. under the agreement reached tonight. While it may be foolish to cut spending with the economy still shaky, that was going to be inevitable with Republicans in control of congress.

Sure, Obama might have done himself some favors by starting with his own "no compromise" position, but sooner or later something was going to have to give. I'm guessing at the end of the day , the bulk of these 1 trillion over the next decade cuts will be happening later rather than sooner, and far less than the 100 billion republicans were demanding immediately just last spring will be cut from the 2012 budget.

I'm not defending this deal, honestly I don't know enough about it, and I have my own criticisms of how Obama and the Democrats have handled this fiasco, but to believe that Obama could just hang tough, and nothing was going to get cut from next years budget is as irrational as the teabagger's belief that they could just hold their breath and Obama would be forced to balance the budget immediately.

If you want to see revenues increased through higher tax rates on the top 2% of earners and government take a proactive stance in improving the economy, we're going to have to show up to vote in 2012, and boot the Republicans back into the minority. Unfortunately, until then, those that want to do nothing will always have an advantage when negotiating with those that want to do something.

ms_m

08-01-2011, 01:03 AM

Legislation is compromise. It always has been, it and will be as long as this form of government stands. People interested in implementing change will either have to learn how to compromise or learn to be satisfied with never accomplishing their goals.

Totally agree.

The problem with negotiating now, the POTUS is dealing with THE MOST insane, ignorant,irrational and uninformed group of folks I have ever witnessed....and growing up in a segregated south I've witnessed a lot of insanity.

The scary part, the extreme left is acting the same way and they are suppose to be the "elitist" crowd, [[read educated and informed) the reality based crowd. [[rolling eyes)

Both sides are reacting irrationally and refuse to put aside their wants to support the needs of the many. All they care about is their personal agenda even though they are NOT the majority of the US population.

Both sides who's number MAY reach 15/20% of total voters think their views ARE THE ONLY correct way for the rest of the 80-85%.

It's funny, the extreme left have two so call progressives, Bernie Sanders and Dennis Kucinich [[who seems to live on a planet different from our own)

They had two more, Russ Feingold and Alan Grayson but couldn't be bothered enough to keep either one in office because they were too busy pouting and sitting on the side lines in 2010. [[to teach President Obama a lesson)

Dems are not perfect by any stretch of the imagination [[see repeal of Glass-Steagall, welfare reform and NAFTA) but right now there is one Dem standing between us and total madness and he's catching hell from all sides.

If true progressives really want power, I suggest they elect more than 2 progressives as oppose to watching the 2 [[out of 4) they had.... loose.

The TeaParty already has a head start on ya.....they did better than "4 of a kind" and look where we are now!

ms_m

08-01-2011, 01:33 AM

Geeze Louise, I need to stop reading tonight because the progressive left is truly getting on my last nerve.

You know, it took me less than a hundred pages into Audacity of Hope for me to figure out and understand Barack Obama's view of the world and politics. How so many on the extreme left missed it will forever be a mystery to me.

Either they assumed an educated Black man with a gift for gab was the re incarnation of Stokely Carmichael and H Rap Brown or they held their noise and voted for him anyway, truly believing he would suddenly change to what they wanted him to be.

Both notions are so removed from reality it's not even funny but THAT'S ALL Barack Obama's fault.....[[please insert a million eye rolls here)

ms_m

08-01-2011, 03:06 AM

'IT'S ALL CUTS'
Deal Would Slash Trillions, Create Super Congress.. No Unemployment Benefits Extension.. Paul Krugman: The President Surrenders [[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/)

Huffington Post headline is screaming Repubs are dancing in the street, Nancy Pelosi supposedly may not support the deal and Mr. I'm a true progressive Krugman is claiming the POTUS surrendered....hahahahaha...for the first time all evening I really believe this is going to pass because the public is gullible as hell....and I do apologize to the progressive left....I still think extremist of any kind are missing some screws but the louder you scream, the more the right will think they've won something. If that is what it takes to get TeaParty votes in the House so we can get this over and done....so be it.

ms_m

08-01-2011, 03:27 AM

NEWS FLASH: AMERICA AVOIDS DEFAULT, CRISIS AVERTED
31 July 2011 by Cullen Roche

As you likely know by now, the U.S. government has agreed on a debt ceiling agreement that will avoid the default of the USA. Let me just begin by saying that the media’s coverage of this debate has been absurd and embarrassing. I have yet to see one accurate portrayal of the actual situation. But nothing has been more absurd than the political circus that has erupted over the course of the last few weeks. It’s embarrassing and every single one of our representatives should be ashamed of themselves for allowing this conversation to even reach this point.

As of Sunday evening futures are up almost 200 points and everyone thinks some great crisis has been averted. Last week I predicted this exact scenario to a tee:
http://pragcap.com/news-flash-america-avoids-default-crisis-averted

I like reading Cullen Roche and I even understand why he’s upset over this but if Cullen Roache, Left Progressives or anyone think they can convince me President Obama could negotiate with crazy, fix stupid and get votes from an insane majority to raise the debt ceiling by doing things differently….I’m all ears and open to being wrong.

ms_m

08-01-2011, 04:01 AM

THE USA IS THE MONOPOLY SUPPLIER OF U.S. DOLLARS. THE DEBT OF THE U.S.A. IS DENOMINATED ENTIRELY IN A CURRENCY THAT IT CAN PRINT AT WILL. THIS MEANS THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS THE U.S.A. BEING ABLE TO “RUN OUT OF MONEY” OR DEFAULT IN A TRADITIONAL SENSE LIKE A HOUSEHOLD, STATE, BUSINESS OR EUROPEAN NATION CAN [[THESE ARE ALL CURRENCY USERS AND NOT ISSUERS). THE DEBT CEILING IS ENTIRELY SELF IMPOSED AND NOTHING MORE THAN A POLITICAL TOOL. IT IS ABSURD TO RATE THE CREDIT OR AN AUTONOMOUS CURRENCY ISSUER LIKE THE UNITED STATES. THE DEBT CEILING IS A RELIC OF THE GOLD STANDARD THAT SERVES NO PURPOSE TODAY.

TONIGHT, PRESIDENT OBAMA SAID WE “AVOIDED A DEFAULT”. NO, WE AVOIDED A SELF IMPOSED DEFAULT. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS THE U.S.A. RUNNING OUT OF U.S. DOLLARS AND NOT BEING ABLE TO MEET ITS OBLIGATIONS.

THE LEADER OF THIS COUNTRY UNEQUIVOCALLY DOES NOT UNDERSTAND HOW OUR MONETARY SYSTEM WORKS AND HIS ADVISERS AND THE OTHER CONGRESSIONAL REPRESENTATIVES ARE LARGELY TO BLAME FOR THE CURRENT ECONOMIC DEBACLE.

VOTERS SHOULD BE OUTRAGED BY THIS IGNORANCE.

Personally, I think the leader of this country understands exactly how our monetary system works but he understands human nature and the people of this country better.

How the hell can voters be outraged based on the first part of Cullens’s rant when they don’t even understand it… When they think personal bankruptcy is the equivalent of a National default….or going back to gold will make things all better and don’t even get me started about abolishing the Feds. [[Reserve)

I learned the hard way that when I want change, the first change has to take place with me ….I could have sworn someone once said, we are the change we are looking for….

If “we” can’t take the first step to change, to learn to grow….how in hells bells will one man come along and fix what we refuse to see is broken? [[us ....and I "ain't" talking United States)

ms_m

08-01-2011, 04:33 AM

ugggggggg...the more I think about this the more upset I get.

Cullen Roache is what is known as a MMTer...I'm not going into what that means it's somewhere in all these 21 pages or you can go directly to his site to read it yourself....but I will say their basic approach to economics is dealing with the way fiance works in the world we live in today....the reality.....which is ironic because that's exactly what the POTUS is doing....he is dealing with the reality of a generally uninformed electorate.

You can't get through a brick wall by walking through it, you have to go around it...and trying to get to the correct and sane approach to fixing the economy or implementing sound monetary policy is like going through a brick wall at this point ....with the public and most of our politicians being the bricks....

As the comment stated above, what the POTUS does is painful and ugly to watch but he gets sht done...and later today we all better HOPE he get's sht done again because if he doesn't....cuts without revenue will be the least of our problems.

ms_m

08-01-2011, 05:58 AM

To Escape Chaos, a Terrible Deal
Published: July 31, 2011

There is little to like about the tentative agreement between Congressional leaders and the White House except that it happened at all. The deal would avert a catastrophic government default, immediately and probably through the end of 2012. The rest of it is a nearly complete capitulation to the hostage-taking demands of Republican extremists. It will hurt programs for the middle class and poor, and hinder an economic recovery.

It is not yet set in stone, and there may still be time to make it better. But in the end, most Democrats will have no choice but to swallow their fury, accept the deal and, we hope, fight harder the next time.

For weeks, ever since House Republicans said they would not raise the nation’s debt ceiling without huge spending cuts, Democrats have held out for a few basic principles. There must be new tax revenues in the mix so that the wealthy bear a share of the burden and Medicare cannot be affected.

Those principles were discarded to get a deal that cuts about $2.5 trillion from the deficit over a decade. The first $900 billion to a trillion will come directly from domestic discretionary programs [[about a third of it from the Pentagon) and will include no new revenues. The next $1.5 trillion will be determined by a “supercommittee” of 12 lawmakers that could recommend revenues, but is unlikely to do so since half its members will be Republicans.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/01/opinion/to-escape-chaos-a-terrible-debt-deal.html?ref=politics

Cuts without spending isn’t an optimal deal but since I haven’t seen an official document of what’s in this deal, saying it’s terrible would be disingenuous.IMO

According to this article these cuts take place over a period of 10 years and 1/3 comes from the Pentagon

1.5 mil in revenue will be based on recommendations of a committee and even if it's not rec'd….BY LAW [[WHICH THIS DOESN'T SEEM TO CHANGE) Bush tax cuts expire 12/31/2012 …there’s your revenue

None of what is printed in this article will affect the immediate economy one way or the other which contradicts what the article said in the first paragraph and if you’re telling me the poor and middle class are being affected, you should also spell it out and tell me how. That's nowhere to be found either.

But ya threw us a bone here…..
Reasonable people are forced to give in to those willing to endanger the national interest…..wow thanks, I’m sure that’s what most readers will remember from all of this. [[snark)

ms_m

08-01-2011, 06:39 AM

White House Issues Fact Sheet on Debt Deal
Thought I'd go directly to the source.

President Obama said Sunday evening that leaders of both parties have reached an agreement to lift the debt ceiling, reduce the deficit and avoid a credit default. The House and Senate were expected to meet Monday to discuss the details of the plan. The following is a fact sheet on the deal issued by the White House late Sunday evening.

BIPARTISAN DEBT DEAL: A WIN FOR THE ECONOMY AND BUDGET DISCIPLINE
The debt deal announced today is a victory for bipartisan compromise, for the economy and for the American people. The agreement:
• Removes the cloud of uncertainty over our economy at this critical time, by ensuring that no one will be able to use the threat of the nation’s first default now, or in only a few months, for political gain;

• Locks in a down payment on significant deficit reduction, with savings from both domestic and Pentagon spending, and is designed to protect crucial investments like aid for college students;

• Establishes a bipartisan process to seek a balanced approach to larger deficit reduction through entitlement and tax reform;

• Deploys an enforcement mechanism that gives all sides an incentive to reach bipartisan compromise on historic deficit reduction, while protecting Social Security, Medicare beneficiaries and low-income programs;

• Stays true to the President’s commitment to shared sacrifice by preventing the middle class, seniors and those who are most vulnerable from shouldering the burden of deficit reduction. The President did not agree to any entitlement reforms outside of the context of a bipartisan committee process where tax reform will be on the table and the President will insist on shared sacrifice from the most well-off and those with the most indefensible tax breaks.
Mechanics of the Debt Deal

• Immediately enacted 10-year discretionary spending caps generating nearly $1 trillion in deficit reduction; balanced between defense and non-defense spending.

• President authorized to increase the debt limit by at least $2.1 trillion, eliminating the need for further increases until 2013.

• Bipartisan committee process tasked with identifying an additional $1.5 trillion in deficit reduction, including from entitlement and tax reform. Committee is required to report legislation by November 23, 2011, which receives fast-track protections.
Congress is required to vote on Committee recommendations by December 23, 2011.

• Enforcement mechanism established to force all parties – Republican and Democrat – to agree to balanced deficit reduction. If Committee fails, enforcement mechanism will trigger spending reductions beginning in 2013 – split 50/50 between domestic and defense spending. Enforcement protects Social Security, Medicare beneficiaries, and low-income programs from any cuts.
1. REMOVING UNCERTAINTY TO SUPPORT THE AMERICAN ECONOMY

• Deal Removes Cloud of Uncertainty Until 2013, Eliminating Key Headwind on the Economy: Independent analysts, economists, and ratings agencies have all made clear that a short-term debt limit increase would create unacceptable economic uncertainty by risking default again within only a matter of months and as S&P stated, increase the chance of a downgrade. By ensuring a debt limit increase of at least $2.1 trillion, this deal removes the specter of default, providing important certainty to our economy at a fragile moment.

• Mechanism to Ensure Further Deficit Reduction is Designed to Phase-In Beginning in 2013 to Avoid Harming the Recovery: The deal includes a mechanism to ensure additional deficit reduction, consistent with the economic recovery. The enforcement mechanism would not be made effective until 2013, avoiding any immediate contraction that could harm the recovery. And savings from the down payment will be enacted over 10 years, consistent with supporting the economic recovery.
2. A DOWNPAYMENT ON DEFICIT REDUCTION BY LOCKING IN HISTORIC SPENDING DISCIPLINE – BALANCED BETWEEN DOMESTIC AND PENTAGON SPENDING

• More than $900 Billion in Savings over 10 Years By Capping Discretionary Spending: The deal includes caps on discretionary spending that will produce more than $900 billion in savings over the next 10 years compared to the CBO March baseline, even as it protects core investments from deep and economically damaging cuts.

To Be Continued

ms_m

08-01-2011, 06:42 AM

• Includes Savings of $350 Billion from the Base Defense Budget – the First Defense Cut Since the 1990s: The deal puts us on track to cut $350 billion from the defense budget over 10 years. These reductions will be implemented based on the outcome of a review of our missions, roles, and capabilities that will reflect the President’s commitment to protecting our national security.

• Reduces Domestic Discretionary Spending to the Lowest Level Since Eisenhower: These discretionary caps will put us on track to reduce non-defense discretionary spending to its lowest level since Dwight Eisenhower was President.

• Includes Funding to Protect the President’s Historic Investment in Pell Grants: Since taking office, the President has increased the maximum Pell award by $819 to a maximum award $5,550, helping over 9 million students pay for college tuition bills. The deal provides specific protection in the discretionary budget to ensure that the there will be sufficient funding for the President’s historic investment in Pell Grants without undermining other critical investments.
3. ESTABLISHING A BIPARTISAN PROCESS TO ACHIEVE $1.5 TRILLION IN ADDITIONAL BALANCED DEFICIT REDUCTION BY THE END OF 2011

• The Deal Locks in a Process to Enact $1.5 Trillion in Additional Deficit Reduction Through a Bipartisan, Bicameral Congressional Committee: The deal creates a bipartisan, bicameral Congressional Committee that is charged with enacting $1.5 trillion in additional deficit reduction by the end of the year. This Committee will work without the looming specter of default, ensuring time to carefully consider essential reforms without the disruption and brinksmanship of the past few months.

• This Committee is Empowered Beyond Previous Bipartisan Attempts at Deficit Reduction: Any recommendation of the Committee would be given fast-track privilege in the House and Senate, assuring it of an up or down vote and preventing some from using procedural gimmicks to block action.

• To Meet This Target, the Committee Will Consider Responsible Entitlement and Tax Reform. This means putting all the priorities of both parties on the table – including both entitlement reform and revenue-raising tax reform.

4. A STRONG ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM TO MAKE ALL SIDES COME TOGETHER
• The Deal Includes An Automatic Sequester to Ensure That At Least $1.2 Trillion in Deficit Reduction Is Achieved By 2013 Beyond the Discretionary Caps: The deal includes an automatic sequester on certain spending programs to ensure that—between the Committee and the trigger—we at least put in place an additional $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction by 2013.

• Consistent With Past Practice, Sequester Would Be Divided Equally Between Defense and Non-Defense Programs and Exempt Social Security, Medicaid, and Low-Income Programs: Consistent with the bipartisan precedents established in the 1980s and 1990s, the sequester would be divided equally between defense and non-defense program, and it would exempt Social Security, Medicaid, unemployment insurance, programs for low-income families, and civilian and military retirement. Likewise, any cuts to Medicare would be capped and limited to the provider side.

• Sequester Would Provide a Strong Incentive for Both Sides to Come to the Table: If the fiscal committee took no action, the deal would automatically add nearly $500 billion in defense cuts on top of cuts already made, and, at the same time, it would cut critical programs like infrastructure or education. That outcome would be unacceptable to many Republicans and Democrats alike – creating pressure for a bipartisan agreement without requiring the threat of a default with unthinkable consequences for our economy.
5. A BALANCED DEAL CONSISTENT WITH THE PRESIDENT’S COMMITMENT TO SHARED SACRIFICE

• The Deal Sets the Stage for Balanced Deficit Reduction, Consistent with the President’s Values: The deal is designed to achieve balanced deficit reduction, consistent with the values the President articulated in his April Fiscal Framework. The discretionary savings are spread between both domestic and defense spending. And the President will demand that the Committee pursue a balanced deficit reduction package, where any entitlement reforms are coupled with revenue-raising tax reform that asks for the most fortunate Americans to sacrifice.

• The Enforcement Mechanism Complements the Forcing Event Already In Law – the Expiration of the Bush Tax Cuts – To Create Pressure for a Balanced Deal: The Bush tax cuts expire as of 1/1/2013, the same date that the spending sequester would go into effect. These two events together will force balanced deficit reduction. Absent a balanced deal, it would enable the President to use his veto pen to ensure nearly $1 trillion in additional deficit reduction by not extending the high-income tax cuts.

• In Securing this Bipartisan Deal, the President Rejected Proposals that Would Have Placed the Sole Burden of Deficit Reduction on Low-Income or Middle-Class Families: The President stood firmly against proposals that would have placed the sole burden of deficit reduction on lower-income and middle-class families. This includes not only proposals in the House Republican Budget that would have undermined the core commitments of Medicare to our seniors and forced tens of millions of low-income Americans to go without health insurance, but also enforcement mechanisms that would have forced automatic cuts to low-income programs.

[B] The enforcement mechanism in the deal exempts Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare benefits, unemployment insurance, programs for low-income families, and civilian and military retirement.

I'm having a really tough time seeing the downside in this.
Entitlements need to be reformed but this also exempts benefits to all the precious ENTITLEMENTS. If this is a big win for Repubs I'm Santa Clause.

ms_m

08-01-2011, 07:08 AM

...and most of this was in the Reid and Pelosi deal but they didn't get this much in military cuts and the threat of more if Congress can't get it's act together...that is definitely not a Repub win

The "biggies" [[major social programs) are exempted from this deal. There might be some other discretionary spending which will affect some people but overall, if you have to deal with deficit and debt to raise the debt ceiling, I honestly don't see this as the crap sandwich it's being portrayed as...quite the contrary actually....if anyone sees anything differently please point it out because maybe I missed something [[and I'm not being snarky)

ms_m

08-01-2011, 09:11 AM

My apologies for not posting the link

Fact Sheet: Bipartisan Debt Deal: A Win for the Economy and Budget Discipline
http://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheet-victory-bipartisan-compromise-economy-american-people

ms_m

08-01-2011, 10:16 AM

Includes Funding to Protect the President’s Historic Investment in Pell Grants: Since taking office, the President has increased the maximum Pell award by $819 to a maximum award $5,550, helping over 9 million students pay for college tuition bills. The deal provides specific protection in the discretionary budget to ensure that the there will be sufficient funding for the President’s historic investment in Pell Grants without undermining other critical investments.

The Enforcement Mechanism Complements the Forcing Event Already In Law – the Expiration of the Bush Tax Cuts – To Create Pressure for a Balanced Deal: The Bush tax cuts expire as of 1/1/2013, the same date that the spending sequester would go into effect. These two events together will force balanced deficit reduction. Absent a balanced deal, it would enable the President to use his veto pen to ensure nearly $1 trillion in additional deficit reduction by not extending the high-income tax cuts.

In Securing this Bipartisan Deal, the President Rejected Proposals that Would Have Placed the Sole Burden of Deficit Reduction on Low-Income or Middle-Class Families: The President stood firmly against proposals that would have placed the sole burden of deficit reduction on lower-income and middle-class families. This includes not only proposals in the House Republican Budget that would have undermined the core commitments of Medicare to our seniors and forced tens of millions of low-income Americans to go without health insurance, but also enforcement mechanisms that would have forced automatic cuts to low-income programs.

B] The enforcement mechanism in the deal exempts Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare benefits, unemployment insurance, programs for low-income families, and civilian and military retirement.

Thought I’d break this down somewhat….everything above is a win for the poor and middle class

350 billion cuts to defense over a 10 year period will hit the TeaParty the wrong way but Boner’s fact sheet doesn’t mention this…as a matter of fact, Boner’s Fact sheet and the White House Fact Sheet are not quite the same…some of it has to do with wording the other lies…unless someone wants to believe Boner is a paragon of truth and the POTUS is a liar.

IMO if you are TeaParty, the above thought would be consistent with their group think and if you’re Dem…you need to join the TeaParty ‘cause you’re sitting at the wrong table if you believe Boner over the President.****

[[I’ll post the link to Boners Fact sheet below)

The rest of this agreement is designed to force both parties to act like adults and NOT use the debt ceiling as a hostage …if either side refuses to do that… both sides get equal cuts in their precious programs ...see below

Sequester Would Provide a Strong Incentive for Both Sides to Come to the Table: If the fiscal committee took no action, the deal would automatically add nearly $500 billion in defense cuts on top of cuts already made, and, at the same time, it would cut critical programs like infrastructure or education. That outcome would be unacceptable to many Republicans and Democrats alike – creating pressure for a bipartisan agreement without requiring the threat of a default with unthinkable consequences for our economy.

reminds me of something a parent would threaten their kids with to keep them in line....

****If you think I'm simply being naive or drinking ObamaKoolAid and would like to challenge me on Boner's lies versus lies the President has made and yes he has a few under his belt
give me a few mins to brew a cup of coffee and let's do this [[you must provide links and I will also).....:cool:

Boner’s Fact Sheet
http://www.speaker.gov/UploadedFiles/3-7-31-11-Debt-Framework-Boehner.pdf

ms_m

08-01-2011, 10:37 AM

This one cracks me up:

The Enforcement Mechanism Complements the Forcing Event Already In Law – the Expiration of the Bush Tax Cuts – To Create Pressure for a Balanced Deal: The Bush tax cuts expire as of 1/1/2013, the same date that the spending sequester would go into effect. These two events together will force balanced deficit reduction. Absent a balanced deal, it would enable the President to use his veto pen to ensure nearly $1 trillion in additional deficit reduction by not extending the high-income tax cuts.

Based on this ....no matter what, the Bush tax cuts will go bye-bye...
They expire on 1/1/2013 BY LAW

no balanced deal, the President gets to veto any extension of....

talk about CYA....LOL

this blows that no tax pledge outta the water and did I mention Norquist [[creator of said pledge) backs this deal....goes back to who his major corporate backers are...google can be your friend:)

ms_m

08-01-2011, 10:45 AM

Apparently a few TeaParty folks have gotten wind of the truth, guess we will see how influential The Heritage Foundation and Redstate [[a TeaParty Blog whose nutty leader is on Fox lite...aka.. CNN) really are...tick, tock

ms_m

08-01-2011, 11:43 AM

BTW folks....the debt ceiling expires at midnight tomorrow as of yet, no votes in either the House or Senate have been scheduled....believe the hype or read both plans for yourself carefully and make your own conclusions....the plan on the table or default?

Fax numbers can be found by clicking the link below

Contacting the Congress is a very up-to-date citizen's congressional directory for the 112th Congress. As of July 25, 2011 there are 539 electronic contact addresses [[of which 536 are Web-based contact forms), and 539 home pages known for the 540 members of the 112th Congress. Traditional ground mail addresses are available for all current members of Congress.

Find your members of Congress by clicking this link and then click on your state on the map http://www.contactingthecongress.org/index.html

Efax is an excellent service and you can do a fax via your computer

This link is for a 30 day trial….it’s easy and trustworthy

http://home.efax.com/s/r/efax-brand1...FaZx5QodvlXE6Q

I'll place the other links and number here as well to make this convenient as possible.

The number to call is the U.S. Capitol Switchboard at [[202)224-3121

U.S. Senate: Senators Directory
Offers a directory of current members of the U.S. Senate with full contact information including email addresses.[/B]
http://www.senate.gov/general/contac...nators_cfm.cfm

Directory of Representatives

http://www.house.gov/representatives/#state_ks

Twitter Users:

House Representatives on Twitter
http://www.arrghpaine.com/house-reps-on-twitter

ms_m

08-01-2011, 11:52 AM

I didn't really word that correctly. There is only one plan...but each side has framed the selling of that one plan to whip votes from their respective members

stephanie

08-01-2011, 12:00 PM

Best Comment I have seen on this yet [[other than Ms M of course)
I just took myself to some other sites to see if I could get another viewpoint or two on this "deal." I was amazed. Pushing aside all the hysterical comments and getting down to the nitty-grit*ty facts, this may not be so bad in the short term. I didn't realize that SS would be okay, for example. And in the defense cuts, the service people themselves are Read More... protected. There's other good stuff, too.

What now occurs to me is that this "outrage" from the left, is being actively promoted and encouraged to undermine President Obama in the 2012 elections. This is very cunning and devious but the more I think about it the more I am determined not to allow it to work. By any means possible, the baggery including their tools in the msm, are attempting to make this deal look bad for the D's and especially to undercut President Obama in the presidenti*al election.

The sky is NOT falling, however, and after some considered deliberati*on I think the doom-sayer*s will be proven incorrect. Taking a step back and examining a larger scenario will give us the perspectiv*e to see more than just the debt ceiling in this recent DC debacle. This was never a win/lose situation. There are wheels within wheels here. Personally*, I'm backing away from my initial disappoint*ment and will wait to see how this shakes out.

stephanie

08-01-2011, 12:01 PM

I am getting ready to call the switchboard now Ms M. I am going to be proactive not reactive to this whole thing. I voted for our President and will continue to vote on the local level like he ASKED us to. Remember people he said we should get involved and do things on the local level ever since he started his campaign he cant do this by himself. You have to fight for your rights.

ms_m

08-01-2011, 12:46 PM

Stephanie as much as I hate to admit this, that outrage may help to push this plan through the House. If the left hates it the right loves it...only the folks on the right that are really digging for more facts seem to see the smoke and mirrors.

The major problem as I see it....when the economy is bad, cuts should not be on the table....Federal spending gets more money into the hands of consumers who in turn stimulate the economy...that's just how the system is designed to work but as I said earlier, [[and I paraphrase) how do you talk logic, common sense and facts to people who refuse to use logic, common sense and fact?

So what do you do, you snow their arses and do it in such a way you outrage the extremist on your side to help provide the cover for the snow job...whatever...:rolleyes:

Here’s an interesting perspective:

The 2012 budget thanks to this deal has already been deemed and passed. That budget cuts approx $7 billion from current spending. On a 1.4 trillion dollar budget that isn't a whole hell of a lot draconian cuts.

Next all of this can be undone if the Dems take back the House. Now will Dems get off their butts and do it? Not if all they are going to do is whine about a deal that has more, ifs ands and maybes than actual meaningful cuts.

And a little bit of info I didn’t know:

Is it really always true that debts ceiling increases are not tied to spending cuts? Not really. In 1985 the debt increase was tied to spending cuts with the The Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act.

The 1990 Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act set caps to cut discretionary spending along with new pay-you-go rules, and that too included a debt ceiling increase. The Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act of 1985 set strict deficit targets and automatic spending cuts if the yearly deficit targets were breached. Lawmakers knew that the automatic spending cuts were virtually certain to take effect, and they did.

So much for the Big Dog and his 14th …he didn’t use it but the “Big Dog” say’s to the current POTUS.... do it, do it and folks jump on the band wagon like flies….:confused::eek:

http://www.politifact.com/flor... Clinton was forced to accept cuts in 1997 as part of raising the ceiling.

apologies for the bad link, not sure how Cheney hijacked it....LOL

here is another link that should verify but there's a lot of reading to find it and I'll look for another

http://books.google.com/books?id=M-ECAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA32&lpg=PA32&dq=President+Clinton+forced+to+take+cuts+to+get+de bt+ceiling+passed&source=bl&ots=ZcafLrq2Ph&sig=oP68HQIG6AnSfJgYj_i4mrGbt4Y&hl=en&ei=mdk2Tv_BJI600AGXo63mCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CC4Q6AEwAzgK#v=onepage&q&f=false

And this...

The basic problem we have had in this country for the last twelve years is actually pretty simple: too few Democrats in Congress.

Yes, we had a lot in the last Congress. If we'd had more, most of the shit people bitched about relentlessly--and, in the process demoralized themselves and everyone who agreed with them about--would not have happened. More Democrats in the Senate of the last Congress would have neutralized Joe Lieberman. More Democrats in the House of Representatives in this Congress would have saved us from this insanity. Maybe you'd like a better president, but what we need is a better Congress.

Yglisias, last week: [[from Think Progress)

I really think it’s remarkable how fixated people are on the president and the presidency. Let’s just concede, for the sake of argument, that Barack Obama is history’s greatest monster. But let’s just imagine that the Senate voted by majority rule and that the median House member and the median Senate member both had the same stated policy preferences as Barack Obama, history’s greatest monster. Relative to the status quo, under my scenario we would have had:

— A public option in the Affordable Care Act.— A nationwide carbon pricing plan.— A path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants.— A nationwide “card check” unionization law.— A larger stimulus in 2009, plus additional stimulus in 2010.
That’s a lot! And it’s what would have happened even if Barack Obama was exactly as rotten and unprogressive as the actually existing Barack Obama. All it would take to get to that world would be to make the people occupying the legislative pivot points as rotten as horrible as President Obama, a bar that left-wing critics of Obama keep assuring me is a low bar. So how come we can’t do it?

It’s important for people not to let their frustrations with things Obama has done, is doing, or will do confuse them about the historical record. The overwhelming story of American politics in 2009 and 2010 was of Congress refusing to enact progressive measures that, had they passed Congress, would have been signed into law. If progressives failed during the leadup to the 111th Congress, the failure that really mattered was the failure to elect a more progressive Congress, not the failure to elect a more progressive president. And it’s going to be difficult to get further policy change unless people correctly understand what the sticking points are.

[[injecting my words here) you have two progressive and lost two....helllloooooooooooooooo

The right has an impressive ability to focus on the full spectrum of things that matter, pouring millions of dollars into state legislative races while I think the left remains morbidly obsessed with the desire to hear different presidential speeches.

more of me.....the extreme left cheered when Blue Dogs fell like flies in the midterms.....they were replaced by Teabaggers....way to go progressives [[that's not snark that's straight up sarcasm!!!!)

ms_m

08-01-2011, 01:11 PM

....and because I am impressed.... for a moment I'm going to give Speaker John Boehner the respect he deserves for going along with this...he's putting his job and his neck on the line but he's putting his country first!

as for the POTUS

"It's ugly and painful to watch but he gets sht done"....

time will tell if he pulled it off this time around

but remember, time is not on our side...

stephanie

08-01-2011, 01:14 PM

I wrote my congressman and my representative and will make the phone calls MORE of them tomorrow. I also signed up for Town Hall meetings. Thanks for the push.
Steph

ms_m

08-01-2011, 01:23 PM

Get some friends involved as well.....LOL...what can I say I'm a pushy "B"....hahahahaha

...but thanks Stephanie, getting involved as oppose to sitting on the side lines really can make a difference!!:cool:

ms_m

08-01-2011, 01:51 PM

Paul Krugman is a Political Rookie. Or How Barack Obama Left John Boehner Holding the Teabag, Again.

Paul Krugman is a political rookie. At least he is when compared to President Obama. That's why he unleashed a screed as soon as word came about the debt ceiling compromise between President Obama and Congressional leaders - to, you know, avert an economic 9/11. Joining the ideologue spheres' pure, fanatic, indomitable hysteria, Krugman declares the deal a disaster - both political and economic - of course providing no evidence for the latter, which I find curious for this Nobel winning economist. He rides the coattails of the simplistic argument that spending cuts - any spending cuts - are bad for a fragile economy, ignoring wholeheartedly his own previous cheerleading for cutting, say, defense spending. But that was back in the day - all the way back in April of this year.

But as I said, Paul Krugman is a political rookie compared to Barack Obama. He is either unwilling or unable to actually look at the deal that was announced and realize what just happened: Barack Obama ate John Boehner's lunch, and then he turned Boehner out to go preach to his conservative colleagues that this eating of the lunch by Obama is actually politically good for them.

I am not kidding. Nor exaggerating. I will show you exactly how that happened if you bear with me a little bit. But first, let's get some details of the deal out of the way so that everyone has an idea what we're talking about.

http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/08/paul-krugman-is-political-rookie-or-how.html

My one disagreement, I don’t think Boehner was played and he could end up taking it on the chin for this. Would he have liked to have gotten what he wanted?.... of course , who doesn’t but he’s been in the political game a long time... I also think Lawrence O’Donnell called it a few weeks ago when breaking down the strategy. Of course this thing still has to get passed….AND SOON!!!!

ms_m

08-01-2011, 05:56 PM

House To Vote On Debt Limit Bill Sometime After 6:30 PM ET

ms_m

08-01-2011, 06:25 PM

I think it will pass. Nancy Pelosi is playing it very low key but since she's not the speaker that's exactly what she should do. Besides, many in the the TeaParty think she's the devil 's daughter.

Bachmann is back in Washington to vote no because...

She also added: "Why? Because what we're doing is giving President Obama a blank check to raise spending another 2.4 trillion dollars,

giving President Obama a blank check...has got to be one of THE MOST idiotic phrases Boner came up with and Bachmann is now running with it. How can you give the POTUS a blank check if you are a part of the legislative branch [[The House) that initiates authorization for any "checks"? [[spending)....but this is how politicians get over on uninformed members of the electorate.:rolleyes:

All money bills have to originate in the House of Representatives!!!!!

ms_m

08-01-2011, 06:32 PM

and let me reiterate....raising the the debt ceiling is about spending money that has ALREADY been authorized by Congress!!!!

If the House and Senate thought it was a problem, they should not have voted yes to authorize said spending AND...a large portion of it was authorized under Bush Jr.

ms_m

08-01-2011, 07:00 PM

Voting is under way in the House with about 6 mins left to vote. Reportedly the Dems, especially the Black Caucus are withholding votes until the Repubs max out on yeas...apparently they would like the Repubs to own this but that means if they [[Repubs) can't get the required votes Dems will come in to make the difference.

http://www.c-span.org/Events/Congress-Takes-Up-Compromise-Debt-Plan/10737423198-2/

ms_m

08-01-2011, 07:05 PM

Dem votes are kicking in and I believe Gabrielle Gifford just came in to vote....go Gabby!

ms_m

08-01-2011, 07:08 PM

The Bill has passed the House...

Gabby looks good BTW

ms_m

08-01-2011, 07:12 PM

The Senate is still in session but I'm not sure if they will vote tonight or tomorrow...Cspan is saying "likely tomorrow" but we shall see.

ms_m

08-01-2011, 07:25 PM

Ok the House is finishing up loose ends before they recess for the month of August so I'll switch over to the Senate to see what they are up to.

http://www.c-span.org/Events/Congress-Takes-Up-Compromise-Debt-Plan/10737423198-3/

ms_m

08-01-2011, 07:27 PM

The Senate is voting tomorrow morning....around 9:30am

ms_m

08-01-2011, 07:44 PM

This was a letter on TPM [[Talking Points Memo) I found interesting and a pretty good summation of this mess so far.

Let me get this straight. The President kept revenues on the table, did not touch the sunset provisions in the Bush tax cuts, ensured that military cuts keep the GOP honest, protected Medicare by adding in only provider cuts in the trigger, made the reduction apparently enough to stave off a debt downgrade, got the debt ceiling raised, wounded Boehner by demonstrating to the world that he is controlled by the Tea Party caucus, took out the requirement that a BBA be passed and sent to the states and got the extension through 2012? What exactly is wrong with this deal?

The fact that there are cuts? If people don't like that, why in God's name didn't they turn out to vote and bring back our Congressional majority? Once these nut jobs were in there, it was inevitable that this crap was going to happen. Whether or not it is advisable to cut spending, what exactly was going to stop this from happening? My experience is that the primary factor in all negotiations are the facts on the ground. The complaints center on a ridiculous notion that if the President had only said "no" harder, that these guys would have caved in. This isn't negotiating over who gets the side of the bed near the A/C. This is a complex matter involving 3,000 members and staffers. Negotiations in these situations don't work like this. That's why I'm irked by the constant parade of people comparing the negotiations to movies and card games. These comparisons obscure more than they reveal.

The GOP came out of this looking unreasonable--I've been getting E-mail messages from friends saying they are back with the Democrats because the Tea Party is "destroying this country." Nate Silver tweeted last week that local conservative talk radio in Kansas was filled with callers attacking the Tea Party! The Wall Street Journal ran two editorials which called the GOP delusional and "childish." The vaunted GOP message discipline broke down--I read stories all over the "inside baseball" papers here in DC where GOP House members went on the record after the Friday vote wondering out loud if the party had been damaged! I don't know if you noticed, but John Boehner spent last week negotiating with himself. No new proposals came out from the Dem side, but he produced two proposals, one of which he had to pull after he didn't have votes. A congressional Dem staffer told me his dad, an urban Catholic who voted for Nixon over Kennedy and has always voted Republican suddenly thinks the GOP is out to lunch and supports the President.

But they won today?

Um, ok.

and I'll say it for the letter writer...the last line was snark....hahahaha

ms_m

08-01-2011, 07:48 PM

FYI....BBA = Balanced Budget Amendment which is what the TeaParty wanted but did not get....so sad, too bad:)

MotownSteve

08-01-2011, 08:04 PM

The Senate is voting tomorrow morning....around 9:30am

The NYT says the are starting at 1PM.

ms_m

08-01-2011, 08:12 PM

I've noticed something on the net. The louder the opposition to any Dem or proposal, the better something will probably be for the country in general. Now that IS NOT a sure fire way to know if something is good or not, only research and facts can help you there but there is a pattern with extremist...it's as if they start to get scared people will see the extremist have no clothes....LOL

ms_m

08-01-2011, 08:15 PM

Don't know what to tell you Steve, I was watching them on cspan and they had a resolution to vote at 9:30 the last I checked but then they started with more irrelevant yada yada and I tuned out....we shall see.

ms_m

08-01-2011, 08:24 PM

ok...here is the discrepancy....they start at 9:30 with debates and speeches and scheduled to take up the vote around 12:30 but that could turn into 1:30 but the vote is tomorrow of that I'm sure....LOL

Thanks for keeping me on my toes Steve.:cool:

ms_m

08-01-2011, 08:51 PM

Not to scare anyone but the Senate could be a problem because the Senate Hawks are concerned about the defense cuts...oddly enough that doesn't really include McCain although he's not happy but say's he will vote yes.

The Senate needs 60 votes to pass this thing.

Senate GOP Deeply Divided on Cuts To Military
Susan Crabtree | August 1, 2011, 3:21PM

Some of the Senate's most committed hawks are parting company over the debt deal's prospects for broad defense cuts if Congress gridlocks on entitlement or tax reform.

Sen. John McCain [[R-AZ) is supporting the debt deal despite its potential for severe defense cuts while his usually likeminded colleague, Sen. Lindsey Graham [[R-SC) says he's a solid no in large part because of the threatened reductions in military spending.

"I cannot in good conscience support this deal," Graham said in a statement Monday. "Simply stated, it locks us into more debt, bigger government and most devastating of all, a weakened defense infrastructure at a time when we face growing threats."

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/08/senate-gop-deeply-divided-on-cuts-to-military.php?ref=fpc

What I find interesting to this objection, most of those cuts are only triggered if both sides can't get their act together...but McCain will jump in to make sure they do if it comes to that....teehee

and this....

When Collins pressed her leadership about which national security programs would be subject to spending reductions, she was told that it wouldn't just be Pentagon initiatives but could include Homeland Security funds as well.

...does this mean TSA could, maybe, possibly, ya never know... lose the money that enables TSA to feel ya up????....hmmmmm...:eek:

ms_m

08-01-2011, 09:02 PM

First of all, many of these cuts only happen under a trigger that may or may not go off...but it seems some are concerned with the loss of defense jobs in various states....this comment makes an excellent point

So, when it's the MIC, they're all "where are these cuts coming from," but when its environmental protection, education, unemployment benefits, nuclear safety, air traffic control, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, national parks, disaster response, and all the other stuff the Federal Government does with a very small piece of the budget pie, they're all "meh."

When you make cuts in ANY program you are potentially cutting funds for jobs...amazing how the GOP only gets that in relationship to defense.....hint: many of these defense jobs are in their State

ms_m

08-01-2011, 09:15 PM

In other news....yeah!

U.S. health insurance companies must offer women free birth control and other preventive health care services under Obama administration rules released on Monday, a historic decision supported by family planning groups and opposed by conservative groups.

The rules from the Health and Human Services Department are part of the nation’s healthcare overhaul and largely follow recommendations from an advisory group released last month . Under the new guidelines, no copays would be required.

The U.S. Institute of Medicine [[IOM) report, commissioned by the Obama administration, recommended that all U.S.-approved birth control methods — including the “morning-after pill,” taken shortly after intercourse to stop a pregnancy — be added to the list of preventive health services.

The recommendation faced opposition from conservative and religious groups that balked at using taxpayer money to cover birth control, especially the “morning-after pill.”

The guidelines go into effect on Monday, requiring insurers to provide free coverage of preventive care services for women in all new plans beginning in August 2012.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43972446/ns/health-health_care/

Doug-Morgan

08-01-2011, 09:37 PM

I haven't seen it reported much, but isn't there a waver for some religious based insurance plans that don't require the offering of birth control? I wish I could remember where I saw it, if I could, I'd cite it.

If it's true, this is the type of compromise that is necessary to pass much of the legislation that the progressives want to see. The reason the New York gay marriage bill passed was that it protected churches that did not wish to perform gay marriages for whatever reason.

ms_m

08-01-2011, 10:02 PM

I'm not sure Doug. I remember the waiver for gay marriage in NY but not familiar with one for BC. I'm not sure why there would be a need though. I would think if you had a religious based insurance plan [[I didn't even know they existed) you probably would not be inclined to go for the morning after pill. And unless you're economically deprived, wouldn't need to use insurance to get birth control....it's not that expensive these days.

I see this as a choice and the means to afford it, if you so choose.

ms_m

08-01-2011, 10:19 PM

Free Birth Control Religious Exemption Coverage Sparks Controversy

Found this Doug but to be honest I only skimmed it before I posted but it looks as if there is some type of “conscience clause”

WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration issued official guidelines Monday that will force nearly all health insurance plans to fully cover the cost of birth control, but the mandate makes an exception for religious organizations that morally oppose contraception. That exemption has frustrated some members of both the Catholic and pro-choice communities because it could force thousands of women employed by religious institutions to continue to pay out of pocket for their birth control.

“The multi-billion dollar Catholic health care industry has a lot of influence with this administration, influence that it has now used to allow religious institutions to ride roughshod over the needs of their workers," said Catholics for Choice president Jon O’Brien in a statement. "Not only that, it ignores the consciences of those who decide that to use a modern method of family planning is what is best for them and their families."

The conservative Family Research Council, by contrast, was disappointed with the conscience clause, calling it a "fig leaf" of protection for religious organizations because it may not be interpreted to protect them all.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/01/free-birth-control-religious-exemption_n_915381.html

ms_m

08-01-2011, 11:44 PM

Koch Group Mails Suspicious Absentee Ballot Letters In Wisconsin
Eric Kleefeld | August 1, 2011, 2:08PM
Updated: August 1, 2011, 4:40PM

Is the Koch-backed conservative group Americans For Prosperity up to no good in the Wisconsin state Senate recalls?

As Politico reports, mailers have now turned up from Americans For Prosperity Wisconsin, addressed to voters in two of the Republican-held recall districts, where the elections will be held on August 9. The mailers ask recipients to fill out an absentee ballot application, and send it in -- by August 11, after Election Day for the majority of these races.

"These are people who are our 1's [solid Democrats] in the voterfile who we already knew," a Democratic source told Politico. "They ain't AFP members, that's for damn sure."

There are two other recall elections being held on August 16, targeting two Democratic incumbents, but they are both a distance away from the recipients of these particular mailers.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/08/koch-group-mails-suspicious-absentee-ballot-letters-in-wisconsin.php?ref=fpb

Please stay aware and vigilante. With the upcoming 2012 elections I would not be surprised to see more of this sort of thing. And with voting laws being changed in various states to make the process of voting more difficult, this could and will cause problems for Dems.

If you live in a state that requires an ID, check with friends and love ones to make sure they have what is needed and required.

Make sure you understand all the new laws, old laws and your polling place. I realize that sounds silly to people who have voted in the same place for years but there are folks that have relocated and may not have checked things out yet.

Don't accept as gospel in Robo calls you may receive about change of dates, not needing to vote etc....this has happened.

The process of voting this time out concerns me more than the candidates the POTUS may face, that and disgruntled Dems who think 4 years of Repub rule would be teaching Dems a lesson.

This is going to be an ugly battle and we need all hands on deck to do whatever they can to make sure we keep this country out of the hands of TeaPubs.

It’s never too soon to start looking ahead because you better believe the TP are doing just that.

ms_m

08-02-2011, 04:15 AM

Five Things for Liberals to Like in the Debt Ceiling Deal
By Jay Newton-Small Monday, August 1, 2011

The 2012 budget: At one point in the negotiations, the 2012 budget was to be slashed by $36 billion. The final number of cuts: just $7 billion. And just to ensure we don’t have another bruising government shutdown fight over cuts in September, the deal deems and passes the 2012 budget. Yes, that’s right, the old Gephardt Rule or Slaughter Solution, is back. What’s deem and pass? It’s a legislative trick that essentially means that Congress will consider the budget passed without ever actually having to vote on it.

The trigger: This is counterintuitive, but the trigger is actually pretty good for Democrats. For all that MoveOn thinks that it would force benefit cuts to Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, it actually wouldn’t trigger benefit cuts to any entitlements. The only cuts it would force would be a 2% or more haircut for Medicare providers. And House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, along with most Democrats, has never opposed provider cuts. Not only that, most progressives actually want the Pentagon cuts. So if the committee deadlocks and the trigger is pulled, Democrats won’t be miserable.

The commission: Again, for all the liberal carping about a “Super Congress,” the commission of 12 members — three from each party in each chamber — set up to find the second phase of $1.5 trillion in cuts by Thanksgiving is actually rigged to force some revenue increases. Yes, the Bush tax cuts are off the table. But there are plenty of loopholes, subsidies and other corporate welfare programs that are on the table. And with such a strong trigger, it’s hard to imagine at least one Republican not voting to kill corporate jet subsidies over slashing $500 billion from the defense budget – even if the revenues aren’t offset. The question is: who are Republicans more afraid of, Grover Norquist or the joint chiefs? Democrats’ money is on the joint chiefs.

The immediate cuts: It may seem like a lot, but the $917 billion in the first phase of cuts were carefully negotiated by Vice President Joe Biden and his group. They include $350 billion in Pentagon cuts – a win for liberals. They don’t touch entitlement benefits, another win. And they set top line numbers for the next decade of budgets that aren’t draconian. It still cuts where liberals might prefer to spend, but most of the savings are backloaded to avoid extreme austerity in next few years of fragile economic recovery. Just $7 billion would be cut in 2012, and only $3 billion in 2013. And of that combined $10 billion, half would come from the Pentagon. On top of that, the discretionary spending caps on budgets in future Congresses are subject to revision by those bodies.

The debt ceiling: Raising the debt ceiling through 2013 will not be contingent on the second round of cuts. There will merely be a vote of disapproval. This avoids another messy fight in January and another round of painful forced cuts.

In a world where the Tea Party didn’t exist, would this be a good bill for Democrats? Absolutely not. But considering that the trigger, commission, two-step process and discretionary budget cuts could’ve been a LOT worse – and actually were in Boehner’s version of the bill – this deal will be easier to swallow. The commission will likely mean a long-term win for Democrats: they’ll get either their revenue increases or achieve significant Pentagon cuts. It could mark a political victory as well: If Pelosi passes this bill on primarily Democratic support, they’ll look like the adults in the room who can compromise and govern, a stark contrast to the Tea Party freshmen.

Read more: http://swampland.time.com/2011/08/01/five-things-for-liberals-to-like-in-the-debt-ceiling-deal/#ixzz1TrCO9teT

ms_m

08-02-2011, 12:48 PM

Senate has passed the Debt Ceiling Bill
Finally this is over.

....until the next manufactured crisis.

ms_m

08-02-2011, 02:19 PM

About 30 years ago, the religious right decided, after futile attempts to affect policy by creating their own power center that it would be easier to take over an existing Political Party instead & that is exactly what they did.

With the help of Ronald Reagan, the Republican Party ceased to be the moderate-to-conservative entity that it once was, one that was truly interested in governance through dialog, compromise & a patriotic embrace of our system into what we see today.

A bunch of close-minded, dogmatic ideologues & degenerate, crackpot teabaggers who are closer to the "Party of Lincoln ROCKWELL" than the "Party of LINCOLN".

They got their way.

Isn't it time that the LIBERALS in the Democratic Party took a few moves from the "moral" majority's playbook, get involved at the grass roots of our Party & re-take it so that it might stand for the ideals & values that WE hold, back to the Party of Thomas Paine & FDR??

Don't like the way the BlueDogs betrayed us?

Get involved at the primary level & get rid of them there... don’t just say that you'll "vote third party" or register as an "Independent" or even worse, STAY HOME as a "protest vote"... because you lose your influence when you do that… once they are on the ticket.. it’s already too late...

& STOP empowering the 'baggers & their GOP lackeys by hoisting up their putrid standards & allowing them to divide us.

Stand up for what we can be, & GET INVOLVED!

I love this comment although I have one bone to pick.

As an Independent I’ve more than had enough with the notion that being an Indie makes you less than committed or “principled” because you refuse to join either party.

I stated this a few years ago and I will restate it now. Not because I’m upset with anyone here but because I need to vent.

People have all kinds of reasons for doing what they do and folks need to stop thinking they can place everyone in the same box because of some stupid label.

I became eligible to vote in 1971. Yes, 40 years ago and I registered as an Independent. Why? Because I grew up in an era where Democrats/Dixiercrats grudgingly gave me my Civil Rights and Republicans used me to score political points….me as in a person who is Black.

I tend to vote straight party Dem ticket simply because they lean more to my way of thinking than Republicans but I don’t give flying goose eggs about the ideology of either party. One will screw you without the Vaseline and the other will say thank you and maybe buy you dinner. I don’t have any illusions about politics or politicians, it is what it is and I deal with that reality.

Not all Dems, Repubs or even TeaParty folks [[individually) are bad and not all are good but as a group they ALL have their issues…some more than others and so far, the Dems have the least… although with the extreme left acting like idiots, that could change any day now.

I truly believe in the greater good…that doesn’t mean I don’t look out for me and mine but I understand and accept I live in a society with all kinds of people, who have all kinds of beliefs and all kinds of problems and simply because I want something a certain way and will fight like hell to get it….. doesn’t mean my way will work for everyone. No law says I have to like it but I do accept it….To me….that’s what being an Independent means…my thoughts are independent of some collective mindset even though many separate issues we come to agreement on.

Just needed to get that off my chest…thanks

MotownSteve

08-02-2011, 02:30 PM

Senate has passed the Debt Ceiling Bill
Finally this is over.

....until the next manufactured crisis.

And the POTUS has signed it. So we can breathe a momentary sigh of relief. But wait. I've heard some comments that the bill does nothing to cut spending, create jobs, etc. The good stuff that has to be done. So now congress will take a month off and come back and I imagine it will be business as usual. Meaning, a lot of talk and very little accomplished. I would love to be proven wrong on my last sentence.

ms_m

08-02-2011, 02:51 PM

Republicans are the House majority, the TeaParty/Koch contingent and their ilk, have them by the balls...I wouldn't hold my breath on a jobs bill anytime soon.

ms_m

08-02-2011, 06:30 PM

A view of the future?

Study: Tea Partiers Outworked Democrats In Debt Fight
Remember that enthusiasm gap from the 2010 election that was oh-so-deadly for Democrats? It looks like it hung around for the debt ceiling fight as well.

A telephone poll by the Pew Research Center for People and Press found that Republicans and Tea Party-affiliated respondents both paid more attention to the debt negotiations and were more likely to take action to influence the outcome.

Some 66% of the two groups followed news on the issue closely versus only 34% of those who had different views or did not offer a political opinion. Nor were they passive observers: some 66% of Republicans and Tea Partiers contacted an elected official during the standoff while only 5% of the rest did the same. This despite a direct appeal from President Obama to do exactly that.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/08/study-tea-partiers-outworked-democrats-in-debt-fight.php?ref=dcblt

ms_m

08-02-2011, 07:09 PM

Congress isn’t the problem. The GOP is the problem.
By Jonathan Bernstein

Pundits who are finding fault with American democratic institutions right now need to begin their diagnosis by looking at what ailes the Republican Party.

One of the things that you’re going to be reading plenty of, particularly when the budget battles kick in again this fall, is that the American democratic system is broken. Jacob Hacker and Oona Hathaway have a typical example in the New York Times today. Their claim: Congress is dysfunctional, leading to power grabs by the president and a general erosion of normal American democratic processes.

I don’t agree. For one thing, as of now it appears that everyone successfully managed to get to a deal. The fact that both sides fought hard up to the deadline isn’t really a sign of a flaw in the system; it’s more or less what you would expect.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/congress-isnt-the-problem-the-gop-is-the-problem/2011/03/28/gIQAHf73nI_blog.html

smark21

08-02-2011, 08:02 PM

A view of the future?
[B]

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/08/study-tea-partiers-outworked-democrats-in-debt-fight.php?ref=dcblt

A conclusion one can draw is that Democrats have well rounded busy productive lives while tea partiers have nothing better to do with their time but follow politics.

ms_m

08-02-2011, 08:34 PM

Interesting conclusion, but have you ever stopped to look around and think about how much of that busy productive life is influenced by politics and political legislation...be it the air you breathe, the water you drink, the food you buy, the car you drive etc.....???

ms_m

08-02-2011, 08:47 PM

Giving it more thought, I’m thinking the conclusion could be made that maybe Democrats simply take too much for granted…

The Purpose of the U.S. Government per the Constitution

As outlined in the opening preamble of the United States' constitution, it was the Founding Fathers' intent to have the federal government perform six fundamental functions. An excerpt from the U.S. Constitution that best expresses these purposes reads, "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America". In the paragraphs below, I will attempt to provide a brief, simplistic synopsis of each primary point.

To Form a More Perfect Union:While initially, the [[former) colonies weren't united, they soon came to realize that there is strength in solidarity and as such formed an alliance with one another. Thus, the Constitution provide for such a union.

To Establish Justice: The most vital role in a successful democratic government is to ensure justice within the nation. Though the term justice is open to interpretation, the explanation most widely accepted is that the law must be fair, unbiased, and logical. While these standards we are not always met within this nation, the American people wish to strive for such ideals.

To Provide for the Common Defense: While the Constitution didn't necessarily allow for elite military operations, it did intend for the government to provide a basic system of defense against enemies of the state. The U.S. government has, over the years, broadened the definition of defense and has also utilized this role of the government most often.

To Secure the Blessings of Liberty: The American nation was built around the ideals of individual freedom and liberty, however, the Founding Fathers also came to the realization that certain boundaries must be set forth in order to ensure that such liberties would not breach those of other citizens'. While the government certainly makes it a point to promote such personal liberties, it is up to the American people to constantly challenge the government to provide for such freedoms.

To Promote the General Welfare: A broad purpose of the government that is constantly open to adaptation and growth, is the role of the government to provide the American people with services and regulations that are for the public good. Such regulations may include health and food standards, public education, and consumer protection. However, in order to allow capitalism to flourish, the government leaves certain services available to private businesses [[such as railroads and airline transportation), this allows market competition to thrive so that the consumer can receive the best services and prices possible.

To Insure Domestic Tranquility:This role of the federal government is relatively self-explanatory in name. The government must provide order in society and allow for domestic peace. It must also present the nation from ever ascending into anarchy.

While the history of the United States has progressed, the purpose and role of the American government has also evolved. However, the purposes indicated in the Constitution still remain at the core of the American government foundation.

ms_m

08-02-2011, 09:00 PM

Comment of the Day
I didn't write this but I wish I had;)

" Mark my words: a large part of the GOP's strategy for 2012 is to exploit the anger of the left at those who don't deliver on the left's wish list and their refusal to stay focused on those who actively prevent it.

They [[GOP) want Dem support and activism and voter turnout as suppressed as possible come Nov 2012. The circular firing squad is a REFLEX on the left and they know it....and we are proving them correct daily."

You may now return to your regularly scheduled myopic self-destructive autonomic response

stephanie

08-02-2011, 09:10 PM

What we dems have to do is expose the lies and deceit of the GOP! Just because they tend to instill fear into people means nothing. Remember David and Goliath by all appearances how would this boy beet this huge giant? He had God on his side. Im not trying to get religious I am using this as an example. If we got as involved as the Mad Hatters and their tea party we could get some things accomplished. One of the cardinal rules of Republicans is they stick together even if they dont like each other. We get all bent out of shape and believe every little thing we hear because we are too nice. No more MR Nice Guy as Alice Cooper would say. We can be cordial but we dont have to cave in or lie and spread false truths like they do. Im not saying all Repubs are like that I am not a far lefty myself. Power is in numbers [[and yes money) but if you can get a group together and stand for what you know is right is is possible to gain the House and the Senate back.

Instead of being focused on what our President has not done lets focus on what he HAS done and hopefully will continue to do but we have to give something and vote on a local level not just give money. It only takes one day out of your schedule to vote and read whitehouse.gov, also look at some of the articles MS M has put up. If Obama were a socialist or dictator there is no way he would be acting the way he is but remember when he took office all you heard was socialist, Marxist and Communist! Why? Because when people hear these words they think of Hitler. They certainly were not going to say he is an African or a Kenyan that is too racist and not patriotic enough. The old saying kill them with kindness we can kill the takeover with facts and accomplishments. Dont let these Lipton tea people [[no offense to Lipton) make you think that this president is weak or has no spine.

ms_m

08-02-2011, 09:49 PM

LOL, Stephanie you reminded me of something I recently posted on the cork-board over my desk...

I'm not Nice, I'm Polite...there's a difference:cool:

The problem, they are mobilizing and working to do everything possible to keep the House, take the Senate and the White House....and take a look around at State and local governments, school-boards , planning boards etc. and see whose in charge.

shrugs...maybe people really don't care, maybe they really believe their lives will be the same with a President Romney, Bachmann or Perry and a TeaParty controlled House and Senate and let's throw in a few TeaParty Supreme Court Judges to make it really interesting....oh wow, what fun that will be!

ms_m

08-02-2011, 10:31 PM

When I first saw an article about merchandising being sold by candidates that’s not being made in America I thought it was somewhat trivial, until I read these comments.

"No, I wasn't aware it was made in Honduras," Cain said in response. "I was just aware it was Fruit of the Loom ... which is an American company."

This is a statement on the Fruit of the Loom Corporate Website

At Fruit of the Loom, Inc. we believe that successful companies need healthy societies.
We embrace the concept of Corporate Social Responsibility as a tool that provides an integral view of business and society. It is our responsibility to strategically utilize our expertise and resources to run a competitive and profitable business while at the same time adding value to the communities in which we operate by preserving our planet’s natural resources and empowering our people.

Our people?.... I have nothing against the people of Honduras and I don’t begrudge the nominal wages they may be receiving but last I checked, Honduras was not a part of the USA. …so what’s with the “our people”?

Ron Paul did not know, either -- but unlike other candidates, he isn't apologetic about it. "I wasn't aware of it ... but I wouldn't change it," said Paul. "I would argue the case that the market should determine it."

American unemployment is staggering but let’s let the market determine who gets a job and who doesn’t.

ms_m

08-02-2011, 10:46 PM

FAA Shutdown Means Workers Must Pay To Work

WASHINGTON -- The failure of Congress to authorize a budget for the Federal Aviation Administration has put some 4,000 agency employees and tens of thousands of contractors temporarily out of work. But even some FAA workers who haven't been furloughed find themselves in a peculiar financial jam.

Roughly 40 FAA inspectors have been asked to continue working despite the stoppage because their jobs are important for air safety. Yet since Congress hasn't allocated money to the agency, these employees have to cover their own travel expenses until the shutdown is resolved. Although their wages and expenses will eventually be recouped, these workers will end up covering work-related credit charges -- and possibly interest -- until funding is freed up.

The inspectors are among the thousands who will suffer the real consequences of congressional deadlock.
"It's incredibly unfair," FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt said in a conference call with reporters on Tuesday. "We can neither pay them nor compensate them" for their expenses until the shutdown ends.

Babbitt and transportation secretary Ray LaHood had urged the Senate to pass a bill Tuesday before the chamber breaks for recess and lawmakers head home, leaving thousands out of a job until September.

Sen. Barbara Boxer [[D-Calif.) asked her colleagues to pass a House bill without its most controversial elements,

but Sen. Tom Coburn [[R-Okla.) objected to Boxer's request.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/02/faa-furlough-congress-reauthorization_n_916322.html

MotownSteve

08-03-2011, 12:26 AM

Just imagine if congress did not get paid for a month. On second thought, they'd be getting what they are worth.

ms_m

08-03-2011, 09:32 AM

If anyone is running into folks complaining about the debt deal....this could help to counter their objections....AND....talking points;)

Debt Ceiling Deal: The Devil Is In The Details
Posted by Leo Soderman on 8/01/11

Congress finally has a deal on the table that may pass. The House passed it Monday evening with a vote expected to be held in the Senate mid-day on Tuesday. And that vote is also expected to be successful in passing the debt ceiling deal. So, who won? Who lost? Is it a massive cave by the President and Democrats? Or is there something more to it?

In looking at the deal, folks on the left are acting outraged. Medicare takes some cuts, there’s no revenue component, it looks like the Republicans got everything they wanted. Indeed, Speaker of the House John Boehner says he “got 98 percent of what I wanted”. But did he?

Here’s some of the details that say he might have some ‘splaining to do later:

Revenues

Democrats are upset that the deal does not include increasing revenues. But that’s not accurate. In fact, it virtually guarantees a revenue increase by the end of 2012. And Boehner knows it.

Here’s how it works: Part of the deficit reduction estimates used to sell this deal to the Republicans count on Congressional Budget Office estimates. Those estimates set a baseline. All reductions have to come from that baseline and if any additional spending is to be made, offsetting cuts must also be enacted.

Here’s where it gets interesting. The CBO baseline already assumes that the Bush Era tax cuts will expire at the end of 2012. The spending levels for 2013 include the additional revenue from those cuts expiring. If Republicans want to extend those tax cuts [[which are considered spending), they will have to make cuts to the budget to offset every penny. They won’t have the political control needed to do that before the end of 2012, even if the President loses his office and they take control of the Senate, as the cuts expire in 2012, and a new administration and Congress would not be seated until January 2013.

So, unless Republicans want to try to pass an extension along with offsetting cuts during an election year, those cuts will expire. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has already said he will not allow the issue to come to a vote, and the President has vowed he will veto it. So if Republicans want to extend those cuts, they will have to come up with $4T in spending cuts to offset the tax cuts. To make it more difficult still, the deal makes it clear that those cuts must come in a 50/50 ratio between defense and non-defense spending, with Social Security, Medicaid, unemployment insurance, civilian and military retirement off the table. Medicare cuts would only come from the provider side, not the individual.

Now, take that in for a minute. If Republicans want to extend the tax cuts, they will need to cut an equal amount out of spending, with half of that coming from defense spending. Half. This is in addition to the $350B that are already being cut as part of this deal. To get their tax cuts, Republicans would have to slash another $2T from defense spending. They would have to justify slashing the defense budget for the benefit of the wealthiest Americans. And with all the social programs off the table, where will they find the other $2T?

The plain fact is, they can’t. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says he won’t let it come to a vote, and the President says he would veto any extension. But the key issue is – they don’t need to. In fact, all they have to do is make sure to speak loudly if/when Republicans try to extend any tax cuts, and frame it as cutting the military. It’s a pretty clear cut distinction and attacks the entire ethos of Republicans as deficit hawks and military backers. In the meantime, if the Republicans can’t find the cuts, the cuts expire, and revenue increases.

Now, Boehner has played this deal as one that does not allow “tax increases”. He had to for it to pass. But the safe bet is that most of the Republicans who voted for this did not realize that the baseline includes the additional revenue from the expiration of the Bush era tax cuts, and that extending them is not counted as raising taxes, but rather, as increasing spending. And that will require hugely Draconian cuts in the areas Republicans are most loathe to touch.

An interesting battle will start next year. It will begin to pit the military industrial complex against the bankers and million/billionaires. If the rich guys want to keep their tax cuts, 50% of it will come from military spending – contractors. That’s a big lobby to fight against. It will be fascinating to see how the spin starts to work there, as Republicans find their corporate benefactors are suddenly pitted against each other, and the American people get to see where the loyalties really lie.

Medicare and Social Programs
There has been a bit of moaning that this deal touches Medicare. But again, the details are important. The area touched here has nothing to do with individuals. It’s all on the provider side.

To be sure, this could have an effect on individuals, as providers may decide they don’t want to deal with Medicare if reimbursements are reduced, and this could reduce choice. But on the subscriber side, nothing changes. More importantly, the subscriber side is sequestered from further cuts, as are Medicaid and Social Security in their entirety.

Again, this is really a trap for the Republicans. With all of those areas off the table, where will they find cuts? And remember, they still need to cut an equal amount from defense as they do for anything else. Social programs are a large part of the budget. When you take them off the table, you remove major sources of budget reduction. Which means that cuts to other areas will have to be massive to have a chance at making a difference. So Republicans will have to sell Draconian slashes to areas such as education to be able to find enough budget to cut.

But here’s a kicker – $1.5T in cuts and additional revenue must be defined and sent to Congress for ratification before the end of 2011. So, while Boehner is claiming no raising of taxes, with this deal he has put Republicans further behind the 8-ball. If they do not pass a package that features all of these cuts, an automatic trigger is reached, and an addition $500B is immediately cut from defense, and additional cuts would be made to infrastructure and other programs. That’s in addition to the $350B already cut as part of the deal.

Why does this leave Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is a tough spot? Because they must pass $1.3T in cuts before the end of the year to avoid the automatic trigger. They don’t want to be seen as cutting military spending [[although that is likely where a lot will come from anyway). And because they insisted that the decrease in spending from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan not be counted as spending reduction, they’ve removed that ploy from the table as well. If they are unwilling to compromise, they will be facing massive additional cuts to the military. And all while not touching sacred social programs. That’s a hell of a corner to be painted into.

So, What Did It Accomplish?

A whole bunch. Pell Grants have actually been increased. The default scenario has been averted until at least 2013 with a debt ceiling raise. It did not require the passage of a Balanced Budget Amendment. And the cuts that are included are backloaded, meaning that they come further down the line, when the economy is [[hopefully) on a better footing.

Sure the President is taking heat on this now. But the focus can now be on jobs [[on which there has not been a single piece of legislation), and Republicans who are gloating now may not be so cheerful when it comes time to make the cuts they demanded.
http://www.editedforclarity.com/2011/08/01/debt-ceiling-deal-the-devil-is-in-the-details/

ms_m

08-03-2011, 10:52 AM

Before I run out to do errands....you know, that busy, productive life thingy....hahahaha

thought I'd repost this just to give myself a pat on the back...teehee...very narcissistic move I know...but oh well...we all have our moments:cool:

So what do you do, you snow their arses and do it in such a way you outrage the extremist on your side to help provide the cover for the snow job...whatever...

ms_m

08-03-2011, 01:03 PM

I use to give Ryan credit for being smart, I’m taking those credits back.

Paul Ryan To Dems: Show Us Your Budget…No, The Other One!
Brian Beutler | August 3, 2011, 12:12PM

Before yesterday, Republicans on Capitol Hill liked to feign anger about Senate Democrats' failure to pass a budget in over two years.

Now that the debt limit deal is done -- and it's essentially a 10-year budget, with the force of law -- Republicans are...still attacking Democrats for...not passing a budget!
Here's Rep. Paul Ryan [[R-WI) -- the GOP's top budget guy -- in a Wall Street Journal op-ed:
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/08/paul-ryan-to-dems-show-us-your-budgetno-the-other-one-1.php?ref=fpa

The President’s budget proposal has been posted @ whitehousegov since February.
I’ll give you two guesses why it hasn’t passed…hint…..R/TP

The President's Budget for Fiscal Year 2012
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget

ms_m

08-03-2011, 01:22 PM

Anyone remember the game gossip…..you tell one person something and it gets whispered in someone’s ear, then they whisper it to the next and so on… and then the last person has to say what the gossip was…..I can’t remember one time where that last person ever got it right….LOL

2 gossip items have been circulating… supposedly VP Biden called Repubs, terrorists…personally, I can dig the analogy but HE DID NOT.

The 2nd had to do with folks claiming he said the POTUS was prepared to use the 14th to raise the debt ceiling…..WRONG again.

Biden: 14th amendment and terrorists
By: CNN Chief White House Correspondent Jessica Yellin

Washington [[CNN) – Here is more information from Democrats familiar with today's closed-door House meeting, with Vice President Biden.

The Vice President said the 14th amendment was NOT an option for the President. Context: Rep. DeFazio [[D-Oregon) wanted to know why the president didn't just use the 14th amendment. The VP explained the president had his legal scholars look into it and decided it was not appropriate. We've previously been advised that VP Biden consulted with the White House counsel's office about options – including whether the 14th amendment could be invoked.

On reports that the VP called tea party lawmakers "terrorists": Multiple Democratic sources say the VP was listening to angry Democrats vent about Republicans who said they "negotiate like terrorists" "how can you negotiate with hostage takers" and that they "feel pick pocketed."
FULL STORY
http://whitehouse.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/01/biden-14th-amendment-and-terrorists/

ms_m

08-03-2011, 06:07 PM

As Iraq hedges, U.S. drawdown moving swiftly
By CHRIS CARROLL
Stars and Stripes
Published: August 3, 2011

WASHINGTON — While Iraq’s government dithers over whether to American troops should stay beyond the end of this year, the accelerating pace of the drawdown is making it increasingly difficult for the United States to reverse course if called on to maintain operations in the country.

“There’s a momentum in the process once you start closing sites down ... and you start moving troops and contractors out of Iraq,” Army Maj. Gen. Thomas Richardson, who oversees logistics for U.S. Forces Iraq, told reporters Wednesday.

About half of 94 U.S. military sites slated for closure at the start of Operation New Dawn in September 2010 have already been shut down, while another seven will be closed this month, he said. The site closures schedule isn’t designed to preserve bases needed if the U.S. stays. The mission now is simply to be out of the country by the year-end deadline.

“We’re on a glide path based on drawing everything down to zero, because that’s the orders we’ve been given,” he said.
http://www.stripes.com/news/as-iraq-hedges-u-s-drawdown-moving-swiftly-1.151053

ms_m

08-03-2011, 06:17 PM

30 Years After Reagan Busted The Air Traffic Controllers Union, GOP Holds FAA Hostage Over Anti-Union Demands
By Travis Waldron on Aug 3, 2011 at 2:55 pm

Thirty years ago today, President Ronald Reagan threatened to fire almost 13,000 air traffic controllers unless they called off their strike and returned to work. He then followed through on his threat, firing most of the workers — represented by the Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization [[Patco) — and banning them from the federal workforce for life. Today’s GOP is celebrating by holding another group of airline industry workers hostage over the party’s radical anti-union stance.

Republican demands that a measure making it harder for workers to unionize be attached to the re-authorization of the Federal Aviation Administration [[FAA) has led to the agency’s shutdown, costing the government more than $200 million a week, leaving 4,000 FAA employees and 70,000 construction workers out of work, and forcing airline inspectors to work without pay. And because Congress is now in recess until September, the shutdown is almost assured to last at least another month.

The FAA shutdown is the latest GOP effort to weaken unions at the federal and state level. And while Reagan broke Patco, a move that had many damaging and long-lasting effects on the American labor movement, today’s Republicans are going much further, according to Joseph A. McCartin’s editorial in today’s New York Times:
More
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/08/03/286573/reagan-faa-gop/

ms_m

08-03-2011, 06:26 PM

WHERE DOES THE MONEY COME FROM?
2 August 2011 by Cullen Roche 219 Comments

Where does the money in the economy come from? What is the budget deficit? What is the national debt? In this video, adorable bears and bunnies prove that they know more about our monetary system than every single person in elected office today:

Adorable bear: “The National Debt is the amount of money to the penny that the federal government has created since it began creating dollars. It includes all of the dollars held by the public plus all of the dollars held by foreign companies that have done business with the U.S. There is no taking it back. Paying off the National Debt is impossible and it makes no logical sense to think of the National Debt in the way we have been taught.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pozWUCrP37E&feature=player_embedded

Cullen Roche

Think of it like this. If the govt wanted to be “rich” tomorrow what would they have to do? According to your textbooks they would have to increase revenues. Obama’s been saying this for weeks. “We need to increase revenues”. Well, if the govt wanted to really become “rich” they could just tax us of 100% of our USD assets. Just take all those dollars back! Then they’d have this enormous surplus with which to spend! Of course, the pvt sector would be poor, but who cares if the govt is rich right? Wrong. Taxes serve to regulate aggregate demand. That means that the only risk from too little or too much taxation is the threat of inflation. If we tax too little we could cause very high inflation as demand outstrips capacity. If we tax too much [[as we do now) then you get, well, look around you…..

I should add. The national “debt” is a misnomer. As the video implied, it’s illogical for a currency issuer to “finance” its spending. The bond market is a gold standard relic. So, the debt is not really debt. We don’t pay it back because we owe it to ourselves. When you are watching TV and some buffoon comes on and compares us to Greece, households, corporations, etc you need to turn it off so your brain doesn’t become further poisoned. Sadly, this thinking is prevalent. Obama and just about all of our leaders have been saying these things for the last few weeks. Bill Gross says it is in his monthly letter. These people quite literally do not understand how the US monetary system works. And I can prove it quite simply by showing them make no distinction between a currency user and a currency issuer….It’s frightening to say the least….

Some MMTers like to refer to the national debt clock as the national savings clock because what it really represents is the private sector’s [[mostly) savings….I talked about this here the other day [[http://pragcap.com/whoa-thats-a-lot-of-private-sector-savings-i-mean-debt):

http://pragcap.com/where-does-the-money-come-from

ms_m

08-03-2011, 06:52 PM

I consider myself a reality base thinker. It’s why I’m drawn to the blog of Cullen Roche, he too considers himself a reality based thinker.

What I’ve noticed over the years when talking to or reading people who think this way, they sometimes forget to take into consideration that reality comes with many different perspectives. I think of them as sub realities, if you will. For instance….

There is the reality of where money comes from as illustrated in this video and in the comments Cullen made after the video.

There is the reality of what people believe or have been taught to believe which can be seen in the woman who said she and her fellow TP members were prepared to deal with a default because “she’s been through bankruptcy”…now that has nothing to do with how our financial system works but she believes it does and that’s her reality.

Then there is the reality of our current political climate….a climate that has Republicans/Tea Party folks in control of the House….the congressional body that controls the purse strings [[per the Constitution) of our country. The same majority that is determined to do whatever it takes to make President Obama a one term president, even if it means destroying everything in it’s path to get there.

All of these things and more [[since I probably missed a few ) are what President Obama deals with. These are the things he has to look at, work with and maneuver around to get things done.

I think people should keep this in mind when reading and hearing all the hysteria surrounding the decisions he makes. Looking from the outside it may seem simple or as if there are simple solutions but there aren’t any simple solutions when you’re dealing with the reality of so many different things, people, places, beliefs, wants, needs, wishes, etc.

ms_m

08-03-2011, 07:11 PM

A little long but worth a read to the end [[even if you don't agree!)

AUTHOR UNKNOWN but it is all over the web.

Arrogance of being President while being Black

I don't think anyone was under some real illusion that the election of Barack Obama actually means the end of racism in America. I'm pretty sure that the president-elect knew it better than anyone. After all, he saw it every day, from the moment he announced his candidacy. To some degree, he saw it within his own party during the primaries. And he saw it in all ugliness during the general election. For half of this country, he was "That One". No matter how big and clear his victory was. No matter how smart he is. No matter how decent he is. No matter what a true patriot he is. No matter how optimistic and positive his vision for America was. All that didn't matter. Because at the end of the day, he was still black.

I'm quite old. I remember, vaguely, where my parents were on November 22, 1963. I've seen so many presidents. Some were feared, some were hated, some were adored, some popular and some not. But all of them, without exception, were treated with the highest respect deserving the office of the president of the United States.

That is until a black man won the right to occupy this office. It's been 13 months now, and in the eyes of so many, Barack Obama is still that one. He is being disrespected and at the same time being held to the highest standard of any president I've ever seen – and not just by the Republican side! He has to perform three times better than any president in history, and even that may not be enough.

For the media, he is many more times just "Obama" than "President Obama". They create scandals out of nothing issues. It took them at least 6 years to start giving Bush a small part of the shit he deserved. It took them 6 months to begin crap all over Obama because he's yet to fix the catastrophe that was left for him.

They use condescending tones when they talk about him, and only mildly less condescending when they talk TO him. With anyone else, CNN wouldn't dare go to commercials every time the president speaks, like they did during that summit on Thursday. They wouldn't dare be counting how many minutes George Bush or Bill Clinton were talking. Chris Mathews wouldn't dare make an issue out of Ronald Regan calling members of congress by their first name, like he is not actually the president. They fully cooperate with the Right-Wing smear machine when it comes to president Obama's national security performance – even if almost every independent and military expert actually thinks that he's a terrific Commander-in-Chief. You'll never see them on TV, and virtually no one from the Left, in congress and outside, defend the president on this matter.

I don't care about the Far-Right. They're just crazy ignorant Neanderthals. It's the way the beltway and the mainstream treats this president that is shocking. On Thursday, almost every Republican had no trouble interrupting him in the middle of a sentence. They looked like they're going to vomit every time they had to say "Mr. president". They all had this Eric-Cantor-Smirk whenever he spoke. Then they went out and started to spit their stupid talking points, to the delight of the media. Sarah Palin, a woman who can hardly read, thinks that he was "arrogant" towards John McCain, and somehow this is an important news. Because you see, "Obama's Arrogance" is the talking point of the day.

Oh, those talking points. He is arrogant [[because he knows the facts better than all of them combined). He is an elitist [[because he uses big words that they don't understand). He is weak on national security [[because he actually thinks about the consequences). He divides the country [[well, he did that the day he had the audacity to win the election). Worst of all, he actually thinks that he's the president. He even dared to say so on Thursday. How arrogant of him. You'd think that previous presidents didn't have any ego. Somehow it turned out that the one president who treats even his biggest opponents with the utmost respect – is the arrogant one. I wonder why?

I expected that his winning the Presidency would bring out some ugliness, but it's been far worse than I imagined. The racism coming from the Right is obviously clear and shameless, but there's also some hidden and maybe subconscious and disturbing underline tone behind some of the things that I read here and throughout the Left blogosphere, even before the end of Obama's first year - 'He's weak, he's spineless, he's got no balls, primary him in 2012'. It'll be dishonest to deny that.

The fact is that for millions in America, Barack Obama is this uppity black man [[Not even a "real" black), who received good education only due to affirmative action, and has no right to litter the sacred Oval Office with his skin color. They just can't accept the fact that the president is a black man, who unlike his predecessor, was actually legally elected. But what's really sad is that it's not just the fringe, its deep deep in mainstream America .

Barack Obama's ability to remain above all this slob, to keep his optimism and his strange and mostly unjustified faith in people, while continuing to gracefully deal with an endless shitstorm – is one of the most inspiring displays of human quality I have ever seen. And I can only hope that the Cosmos is on his side because God is and He never makes a mistake.

Sometimes, they make me feel ashamed to be a white man!!

ms_m

08-03-2011, 07:14 PM

to keep his optimism and his strange and mostly unjustified faith in people,

this is the part that amazes and perplexes me the most about the POTUS...

ms_m

08-03-2011, 08:58 PM

Outstanding rant!!!!!
As a matter of fact I’ve posted similar rants from this same person before but he/she has outdone themselves with this one!!!!!.....and let the choir say, AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

We are our own worst enemy.. and we better acknowledge that simple fact that unless we confront this cancer as a unified front then the entire nation will succumb to the bagger agenda.

Sure the baggers are crazy & destructive... but there are ALSO crazy & destructive members in the Progressive movement.. especially the political neophytes, the mopes and the whiners that are counterproductive to the point of suicide.

In fact, these children are worse than the baggers and the rest of the degenerate right-wing because they tear us apart from the inside out. They are more interested in salving their own ego than taking a pragmatic view that while things may not measure up to their unattainable ideals, not realizing [[or refusing to realize) that they have a much better chance under the Democratic Partty than any alternatives we were presented with or are likely to be presented with..

They want everything perfect, and they want it NOW, and the fact that it took thirty years for us to wind up in this mess never seems to cloud their minds with reality.

There are sane and insane on BOTH sides of the aisle... but the ones who claim that they only want things to be better are the worst though, because they hide their destructive agenda behind infantile adhesion to unachievable purism's.

There are certain circumstances when we progressives need to shelve our differences [[however nuanced) and vote the democratic ticket... and the 2012 election will historically be one of those times.. as the stakes are higher now than they have ever been... or ever likely to be.

But today.. at this point in time, if we all don't hang together, we could very well allow the crackpot baggers to get a permanent foothold into our Legislature.

Would you really want to see an Eric Cantor or a Rand Paul... a Michelle Bachmann or a Rick Santorum in positions where they would be writing and enforcing our laws... to be defining to the world who we are as a "people"?

Do you HONESTLY feel that there is "NO DIFFERENCE"???

Now, more than any other, we need to vote together… en masse and go on the record as being foursquare against this cancer that is all-too-fast metastasizing in our culture ... for if these shills for the racists, the bigots, and those whose putrid worldview ever get a permanent grip on our system of justice.. our system of governance, we might never survive to fix it later.

Being a "Progressive" isn't easy...

"Progressivism" is the POLITICAL iteration of "Liberalism".

"Liberalism" is a worldview.... a way of understanding the relationship between all peoples and the comprehension that it is INDEED our responsibility to see to the needs of others... of the "commons".

"Progressivism" is the political manifestation of that ideal... the 'mechanics' of initiating those principals into the rule of LAW.

It is much harder to adhere to it's tenets than just whining or spouting empty platitudes.

We should leave that honor to the republicans.

About 30 years ago, the religious right decided, after futile attempts to affect policy by creating their own power center that it would be easier to take over an existing Political Party instead & that is exactly what they did.

With the help of Ronald Reagan, the Republican Party ceased to be the moderate-to-conservative entity that it once was, one that was truly interested in governance through dialog, compromise & a patriotic embrace of our system into what we see today.

A bunch of close-minded, dogmatic ideologues & degenerate, crackpot teabaggers who are closer to the "Party of Lincoln ROCKWELL" than the "Party of LINCOLN".

They got their way.

Isn't it time that the LIBERALS in the Democratic Party took a few moves from the "moral" majority's playbook, get involved at the grass roots of our Party & re-take it so that it might stand for the ideals & values that WE hold, back to the Party of Thomas Paine & FDR??

STOP empowering the 'baggers & their GOP lackeys by hoisting up their putrid standards & allowing them to divide us.

Don't like the way the BlueDogs betrayed us?

Get involved at the primary level & get rid of them there... don’t just say that you'll "vote third party" or register as an "Independent" [[or even WORSE.... staying home as a "protest vote")... because you lose your influence when you do that… once they are on the ticket.. it’s already too late...

I fully realize and acknowledge the value of realistic goals and the necessity of healthy skepticism, but when that skepticism ferments and devolves into an intractable cynicism, it becomes more than just 'counterproductive'.. it raises failure to a self-fulfilling prophesy.

Stand up for what we CAN be, & GET INVOLVED!

all emphasis are mine

ms_m

08-04-2011, 03:09 AM

Health Care Reform

You can go to this site and see the health care goodies that President Obama and the Democratic Congress have scheduled for the next couple of years. It's law.

http://www.healthcare.gov/law/...

When the POTUS entered office his big issues concerning heath care were
1. people who got sick wouldn't get kicked off their insurance
2. people who had existing or past medical problems could get insurance
3. the 40 million Americans who couldn't afford health insurance would be taken care of. All three items, in there.

Many people on the left [[extreme progressives especially) went out of their minds spreading the meme that the POTUS had caved because he didn’t fight for or get the Public Option…but check the link above and see what the American people DID GET!

Then point me to one president that did better or got closer to a national heath care system….even one that wasn’t perfect.

If people want more, I suggest you fight like hell to make sure the Dems maintain control of the WH, put a REAL [[60 vote) Dem majority back in the Senate and retake the House.

And I’m sorry folks but I honestly don’t see how that can happen if you’re not paying close attention to what’s going on out here, if you’re not involved.

On a side note….the more I read about these triggers in the debt ceiling deal, the more I like them and realize what a smart move they were. They are going to be a rope around the necks of Republicans right before the election and I’m looking forward to seeing the rope tighten around their necks!

Nothing in this bill, nothing will touch the Dems signature programs in terms of benefits to Americans, nothing, nada, zip… but it will blow the heads off of the Repubs and their precious defense spending.

Now that all the details of this bill are finally being looked AT and and dissected, the only talking point left seem to be centered around cuts to Medicare Providers....oh noooooooo, doctors are going to drop medicare patients.....BULL!

The only doctors who would POSSIBLY drop Medicare Patients are doctors with nothing but rich patients and if they have a large majority of rich patients, I doubt If they even accept Medicare.....as a matter of fact, a doctor whose opinions I read on the subject had this to say...

Medicare is one of my highest payers.
I get $79 from Medicare for a standerd office visit.
United Health care pays me $65,
Blue Shield pays me $73 and Blue Cross $74 for the same visit.
This business about Medicare lowballing us is crap!!

He also provided this extremely informative link

http://www.truecostofhealthcar...

The exception to all this drama about providers would be hospitals who really are getting a raw deal with Medicare but that's because of the 2003 Medicare Act and I'll give you one guess who passed that puppy.....REPUBLICANS!

ms_m

08-04-2011, 08:34 AM

Threatened Defense Cuts in Debt Deal Could Loom Over 2012 Race
By Julie Hirschfeld Davis and Gopal Ratnam - Aug 4, 2011 12:01 AM ET

The threat of $500 billion in future defense cuts codified in the new deficit-reduction law could sharpen a dispute between Republicans and Democrats over national security as the 2012 campaign intensifies.
President Barack Obama and congressional Republican leaders designed the defense cuts -- as well as reductions in all other areas of government, including Medicare -- as a doomsday incentive to force Congress to enact a more targeted spending- cut package by year’s end.

For the Defense Department, cuts ranging from substantial reductions in the military’s 1.43 million-strong force to eliminating subsidies for the Pentagon’s chain of subsidized grocery stores would likely be on the table under the worst-case scenario. Regardless of whether they materialize, the potential cuts to the military have become a political weapon for both sides.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-04/threatened-defense-cuts-in-debt-deal-could-loom-over-2012-race.html

This is going to be one of the new talking points coming from the GOP. What I find ironic, even the extreme left is falling into the trap of repeating this and prior to this deal, they were screaming the loudest about cutting defense spending.

A few things you want to remember:

that defense trigger kicks in if the so call "super committee" can't come up with a compromise so if the Repubs don't want to end up with egg on their faces they are going to have to act like adults to avoid that trigger.

Please familiarize yourself or at the very least keep the [[debt ceiling deal) article above that I posted handy. It will help peel us all off the ceiling when the media and extremist start spreading their hyperbole on this issue AND you can use it to spread the correct info to people you know.

The other thing that crossed my mind....on Sept 10, 2001 CBS broadcasted a very interesting report...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6iS1WIcEqXI

[[an estimated) 2.3 TRILLION missing and we're still standing and defending ourselves folks and that money has yet to turn up!!!!

ms_m

08-04-2011, 08:55 AM

I'll try and remember to post this each time we go to a new page so it can stand front and center in our minds. If I forget I'd really appreciate help in the copy and paste efforts.:cool:

If anyone is running into folks complaining about the debt deal....this could help to counter their objections....AND....talking points

Debt Ceiling Deal: The Devil Is In The Details
Posted by Leo Soderman on 8/01/11

Congress finally has a deal on the table that may pass. The House passed it Monday evening with a vote expected to be held in the Senate mid-day on Tuesday. And that vote is also expected to be successful in passing the debt ceiling deal. So, who won? Who lost? Is it a massive cave by the President and Democrats? Or is there something more to it?

In looking at the deal, folks on the left are acting outraged. Medicare takes some cuts, there’s no revenue component, it looks like the Republicans got everything they wanted. Indeed, Speaker of the House John Boehner says he “got 98 percent of what I wanted”. But did he?

Here’s some of the details that say he might have some ‘splaining to do later:

Revenues

Democrats are upset that the deal does not include increasing revenues. But that’s not accurate. In fact, it virtually guarantees a revenue increase by the end of 2012. And Boehner knows it.

Here’s how it works: Part of the deficit reduction estimates used to sell this deal to the Republicans count on Congressional Budget Office estimates. Those estimates set a baseline. All reductions have to come from that baseline and if any additional spending is to be made, offsetting cuts must also be enacted.

Here’s where it gets interesting. The CBO baseline already assumes that the Bush Era tax cuts will expire at the end of 2012. The spending levels for 2013 include the additional revenue from those cuts expiring. If Republicans want to extend those tax cuts [[which are considered spending), they will have to make cuts to the budget to offset every penny. They won’t have the political control needed to do that before the end of 2012, even if the President loses his office and they take control of the Senate, as the cuts expire in 2012, and a new administration and Congress would not be seated until January 2013.

So, unless Republicans want to try to pass an extension along with offsetting cuts during an election year, those cuts will expire. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has already said he will not allow the issue to come to a vote, and the President has vowed he will veto it. So if Republicans want to extend those cuts, they will have to come up with $4T in spending cuts to offset the tax cuts. To make it more difficult still, the deal makes it clear that those cuts must come in a 50/50 ratio between defense and non-defense spending, with Social Security, Medicaid, unemployment insurance, civilian and military retirement off the table. Medicare cuts would only come from the provider side, not the individual.

Now, take that in for a minute. If Republicans want to extend the tax cuts, they will need to cut an equal amount out of spending, with half of that coming from defense spending. Half. This is in addition to the $350B that are already being cut as part of this deal. To get their tax cuts, Republicans would have to slash another $2T from defense spending. They would have to justify slashing the defense budget for the benefit of the wealthiest Americans. And with all the social programs off the table, where will they find the other $2T?

The plain fact is, they can’t. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says he won’t let it come to a vote, and the President says he would veto any extension. But the key issue is – they don’t need to. In fact, all they have to do is make sure to speak loudly if/when Republicans try to extend any tax cuts, and frame it as cutting the military. It’s a pretty clear cut distinction and attacks the entire ethos of Republicans as deficit hawks and military backers. In the meantime, if the Republicans can’t find the cuts, the cuts expire, and revenue increases.

Now, Boehner has played this deal as one that does not allow “tax increases”. He had to for it to pass. But the safe bet is that most of the Republicans who voted for this did not realize that the baseline includes the additional revenue from the expiration of the Bush era tax cuts, and that extending them is not counted as raising taxes, but rather, as increasing spending. And that will require hugely Draconian cuts in the areas Republicans are most loathe to touch.

An interesting battle will start next year. It will begin to pit the military industrial complex against the bankers and million/billionaires. If the rich guys want to keep their tax cuts, 50% of it will come from military spending – contractors. That’s a big lobby to fight against. It will be fascinating to see how the spin starts to work there, as Republicans find their corporate benefactors are suddenly pitted against each other, and the American people get to see where the loyalties really lie.

Medicare and Social Programs
There has been a bit of moaning that this deal touches Medicare. But again, the details are important. The area touched here has nothing to do with individuals. It’s all on the provider side.

To be sure, this could have an effect on individuals, as providers may decide they don’t want to deal with Medicare if reimbursements are reduced, and this could reduce choice. But on the subscriber side, nothing changes. More importantly, the subscriber side is sequestered from further cuts, as are Medicaid and Social Security in their entirety.

Again, this is really a trap for the Republicans. With all of those areas off the table, where will they find cuts? And remember, they still need to cut an equal amount from defense as they do for anything else. Social programs are a large part of the budget. When you take them off the table, you remove major sources of budget reduction. Which means that cuts to other areas will have to be massive to have a chance at making a difference. So Republicans will have to sell Draconian slashes to areas such as education to be able to find enough budget to cut.

But here’s a kicker – $1.5T in cuts and additional revenue must be defined and sent to Congress for ratification before the end of 2011. So, while Boehner is claiming no raising of taxes, with this deal he has put Republicans further behind the 8-ball. If they do not pass a package that features all of these cuts, an automatic trigger is reached, and an addition $500B is immediately cut from defense, and additional cuts would be made to infrastructure and other programs. That’s in addition to the $350B already cut as part of the deal.

Why does this leave Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is a tough spot? Because they must pass $1.3T in cuts before the end of the year to avoid the automatic trigger. They don’t want to be seen as cutting military spending [[although that is likely where a lot will come from anyway). And because they insisted that the decrease in spending from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan not be counted as spending reduction, they’ve removed that ploy from the table as well. If they are unwilling to compromise, they will be facing massive additional cuts to the military. And all while not touching sacred social programs. That’s a hell of a corner to be painted into.

So, What Did It Accomplish?

A whole bunch. Pell Grants have actually been increased. The default scenario has been averted until at least 2013 with a debt ceiling raise. It did not require the passage of a Balanced Budget Amendment. And the cuts that are included are backloaded, meaning that they come further down the line, when the economy is [[hopefully) on a better footing.

Sure the President is taking heat on this now. But the focus can now be on jobs [[on which there has not been a single piece of legislation), and Republicans who are gloating now may not be so cheerful when it comes time to make the cuts they demanded.
http://www.editedforclarity.com/2011...n-the-details/

ms_m

08-04-2011, 09:03 AM

BTW...if anyone runs across something I say that doesn't seem factual, please bring it to my attention. I'm human and I do make mistakes. I try and go back and correct things I see but sometimes I forget. example...I think I said we don't have a 2011 budget, I meant 2012. Had planned on correcting that and forgot...in addition to being human I also suffer from CRS from time to time. [[Can't Remember ...uh, err... Stuff) Jai's "magic elixir" will do that to you.....:D

ms_m

08-04-2011, 10:06 AM

The Spoilsmen: How Congress Corrupted Patent Reform
Posted: 8/4/11 08:25 AM ET

Read article here
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/04/patent-reform-congress_n_906278.html?page=1

I posted this link because anything dealing with IP [[Intellectual Property Rights) is something that could be germane to the music industry. Now this particular bill is more about patents but I found it extremely illuminating [[but not surprising since I did warn folks) that a member of congress who feign sincere concern and interest in fighting for musicians [[the little guys) a few years ago, is suddenly fighting for major corporations on IP issues…..and THIS is the man who you think is willing to protect you?....I’m just saying!!!!

But 65 Republican votes simply weren't enough. Section 18 stayed, one of several highly-targeted special interest provisions included in the House bill. Another item protects big accounting firms like PriceWaterhouseCoopers and KPMG from lawsuits. As Roll Call reported, Medicines Co. will score $214 million from an earmark in the patent bill backed by Reps. Michele Bachmann [[R-Minn.) and John Conyers [[D-Mich.), which bolsters protections for its drug Angiomax. The Senate version, meanwhile, explicitly protects patents owned by tax software companies like TurboTax and Quicken, a difference with the House bill that will have to be ironed out in conference.

ms_m

08-04-2011, 10:34 AM

This is what happens when a CONSERVATIVE Supreme Court allows corporations to become people and it wasn’t a Dem that appointed these conservative judges…

I occasionally volunteer with a group that advocates Campaign Finance Reform and as a general rule we are ignored. [[but don’t let that deter us) Please do not ignore the things that are happening out here thinking they have nothing to do with your everyday life. If you do, one day you’re going to wake up and not be able to recognize this country…personally it’s less and less familiar to me with each passing day.

Mysterious Firm Gives $1 Million To Pro-Romney Group, Closes Shop
Benjy Sarlin | August 4, 2011, 9:54AM

A firm with no apparent purpose or even clear address donated $1 million to Restore Our Future, a Super PAC supporting Mitt Romney, before closing up shop.

The cash and its mysterious origins, first reported on by NBC's Michael Isikoff, raise significant questions about the limits of campaign money in the post-Citizens United era. Super PACs, which can accept unlimited corporate donations to run independent political ads, are required to disclose their donors. But the firm, W Spann LLC, which was formed in Delaware in March by a Boston lawyer and dissolved in July, is a private company and can thus conceal details of its backers and agenda.

"What you have here is a roadmap for how people can hide their identities" when making donations, a former FEC general counsel, Lawrence Noble, told NBC.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/08/mysterious-firm-gives-1-million-to-pro-romney-group-closes-shop.php?ref=dcblt

ms_m

08-04-2011, 04:23 PM

Reid Says Deal Has Been Reached to Reopen F.A.A.
By REUTERS
Published: August 4, 2011 at 4:15 PM ET

WASHINGTON [[Reuters) - Congressional leaders reached a bipartisan compromise on Thursday to temporarily settle a funding dispute and allow thousands of workers at the Federal Aviation Administration to return to their jobs.

"This agreement does not resolve the important differences that still remain. But I believe we should keep Americans working while Congress settles its differences and this agreement will do exactly that," Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid said in announcing the accord.

Democratic aides said the Senate will formalize the deal on Friday by approving a previously stalled short-term funding passed by the Republican-led House of Representatives.

The compromise came after President Barack Obama stepped up pressure on fellow Democrats as well as Republicans to find a way to allow an estimated 74,000 transportation and construction workers get back to their jobs.
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2011/08/04/us/news-us-usa-infrastructure-faa.html?_r=1&hp

MotownSteve

08-04-2011, 07:21 PM

Republicans at work: Firm gives $1 million to pro Romney group and then dissolves. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44011308/ns/politics-decision_2012/

ms_m

08-05-2011, 01:13 AM

Presidential Power
By Kevin Drum
Wed Aug. 3, 2011 3:49 PM PDT
Full Article Here
http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2011/08/presidential-power

Has the White House really been staggeringly uncreative compared to Republicans? We don't have to guess about this. We recently had a Republican president in office for eight years and we can see just what he did. Keep in mind that George Bush was a very partisan animal and was advised by Karl Rove, a man with a major-league reputation for political ruthlessness. So what did Bush do to whip Democrats in line when they opposed him? Let's roll the tape:

• 2001 tax cuts: passed by reconciliation so no Democratic votes were needed.

• No Child Left Behind: No arm twisting here. This was a bipartisan bill
cosponsored by Ted Kennedy. Bush got Democratic votes by agreeing to give Kennedy a lot of what he wanted.

• War resolution: No arm twisting here either. After 9/11 Democrats were gung ho to invade Afghanistan and kick some al-Qaeda butt.

• PATRIOT Act: Ditto.

• Sarbanes-Oxley: This was basically a Democratic bill. Not only was there no arm twisting, Bush signed it reluctantly.

• McCain-Feingold: Ditto.

• Iraq war resolution: No arm twisting again. Lots of Democrats favored this and so did the public.

• Homeland Security Department: Let's see. Oh yeah, I remember: Bush got his way here by winning the 2002 election and regaining his majority in Congress.

• 2003 tax cuts: Again, passed via reconciliation. No Democratic votes needed.

• Medicare Part D: Lots of arm twisting here, but mainly by Tom DeLay against his fellow Republicans. Several Democrats voted for it in the Senate, but let's be honest about this: details aside, it got some Dem votes because it was a piece of liberal social welfare legislation of the kind that Dems have long favored.

• Social Security privatization: This failed. Bush was unable to get support from his own party, let alone coerce any support from Democrats.

• Immigration reform: Ditto, more or less.

Contrary to his reputation, Bush mostly succeeded by pressing a moderate, and sometimes even liberal, agenda. Tax cuts aside, which he passed solely with Republican support, the only real ruthlessness he showed toward Democrats on behalf of a conservative priority was the campaign hardball he played to add a union-busting provision to the Homeland Security bill. That was about it for presidential toughness. Ironically, the biggest show of ruthlessness during the Bush years was in the appointment of judges, but the ruthlessness there was wielded by Orrin Hatch, who made it easier to confirm conservative judges by peremptorily changing the blue slip rule [[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A50120-2005Jan30.html) in a remarkably cynical display of naked power politics. Democrats responded by filibustering a bunch of judges, which was also pretty unprecedented, and the whole thing eventually got resolved by a group of centrist senators called the Gang of 12. In this case, both sides displayed some ruthlessness, but not President Bush. He was just about the only person not really involved.

I'm not trying to make it sound like presidents are powerless. They can set agendas, they have control of executive orders, they have a pretty free hand in foreign policy, they can sway public opinion, they can lead their own party, and they can bargain with the other party. But Richard Neustadt taught us a long time ago that, especially on domestic issues, presidential power is distinctly limited. There's just not that much in the way of ruthless arm-twisting that they can do these days, and while Obama may not be as creative on this score as he ought to be, neither was Bush. That's more a reflection of political reality than it is of the character of either one of them.

1On the specific issue of the debt ceiling, the obvious thing Obama could have done differently was to insist that it be included as part of the lame duck deal last year. But for all the grief he's gotten over this, it's worth keeping in mind that Obama got a helluva lot out of that deal. In the end, he got a food safety bill, passage of the START treaty, a stimulus package, repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell, and a 9/11 first responders bill. Maybe it would have been worth risking all that over inclusion of a debt ceiling increase, but that's hardly an open-and-shut case.

What's more, Obama also won passage during his first two years of a stimulus bill, a landmark healthcare bill that Democrats had been trying to pass for the better part of a century, a financial reform bill, and much needed reform of student loans. And more: a firm end to the Bush torture regime, the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, a hate crimes bill, a successful rescue of the American car industry, and resuscitation of the NLRB. Oh, and he killed Osama bin Laden too.

Sure, we all could have wished for more. Everyone has different hot buttons, and I particularly wish that financial reform had been stronger and that Obama had somehow managed to get cap-and-trade across the finish line. I'm also unhappy with the extension of the Afghanistan war and Obama's Bush-like policies regarding national security and civil liberties. Still and all, in two years Obama has done more to enact a liberal agenda than George Bush did for the conservative agenda in eight.

That's not bad, folks. All things considered, I'd say Obama is the most effective politician of the Obama era. And the Bush era too.

ms_m

08-05-2011, 10:37 AM

While on Summer Recess, Congress Blocks Recess Appointments
by Marian Wang
ProPublica, Aug. 3, 2011, 2:55 p.m.

A pedestrian crosses a road with the U.S. Capitol building in the background on Aug. 1, 2011 in Washington, D.C. [[Mark Wilson/Getty Images)

As many have noted, members of Congress left behind some unfinished business when they headed home for their August recess. But here’s something else you should know: Even though hordes of lawmakers have left D.C., neither chamber of Congress officially adjourned.

The reason? In an effort to block President Obama from making recess appointments—which the Constitution allows presidents to do—Congressional Republicans have kept Congress technically in session.

The Washington Examiner explains:

The Republican-controlled House used a procedural move to help force this issue. Though it's the Senate that must confirm presidential appointments, under the U.S. Constitution, it cannot adjourn for more than three days without the approval of the House.

So, instead of adjourning, both the House and Senate will be conducting what are known as “pro forma” sessions. What that entails, essentially, is having a member of Congress stick around the Capitol to strike the gavel for what are sometimes seconds-long sessions, according to the Examiner.

And if history is our guide, it seems Congress will have to hold these perfunctory sessions at least once every three days.
http://www.propublica.org/blog/item/while-on-summer-recess-congress-blocks-recess-appointments

Heck of away to run a government.

ms_m

08-05-2011, 10:59 AM

Congressional Approval Sinks To All-Time Low As Americans Blame Republicans For Debt Problems, Intransigence
By Travis Waldron on Aug 5, 2011 at 10:25 am

Americans are increasingly unhappy with Congress in the wake of the deal reached by President Obama and Republican Congressional leaders, according to a new poll released by the New York Times and CBS News. While Obama’s approval rating held steady at 48 percent after signing the deal — which will raise the debt ceiling over the next eighteen months in exchange for massive spending cuts — Congress’ approval rating dropped to an all-time low:

A record 82 percent of Americans now disapprove of the way Congress is handling its job — the most since The Times first began asking the question in 1977, and even more than after another political stalemate led to a shutdown of the federal government in 1995.

Job Marking Still Moving Sideways, Austerity Still Dragging Growth
By Matthew Yglesias posted from ThinkProgress Yglesias on Aug 5, 2011 at 9:40 am

The job numbers released this morning showed private sector payrolls up 154,000. It takes about 125,000 new jobs per month to keep up with population growth. So in a sane world you’d take those 154,000 new private jobs, add on a few thousand public sector jobs, and you’d be on the road to recovery. Not the fastest, awesomest recovery in human history but definitely a real recovery in which the employed share of the population is steadily rising and where more employed people means more income means more sales, etc., etc., etc.

But we didn’t add a few thousand jobs to the public sector. Instead we once again lost tens of thousands of government jobs. Specifically, we lost 37,000 government jobs. That pushes the overall number to 117,000 total new jobs. Allowing for uncertainty about the estimates, that means we’re basically treading water. Things are neither getting better nor worse. And that’s because all year we’ve been perversely trying to massively cut state & local government payrolls in the middle of a huge labor market downturn.

Meanwhile, a report on yesterday’s crash:

Investors roared into Treasury bonds, cash and other low-risk assets on Thursday, acting on their fears about the weak global economic outlook on a day when stock markets in the United States declined more than 4 percent.

Links for Both Articles [[in full) Here:
http://thinkprogress.org/

ms_m

08-05-2011, 10:32 PM

Standard & Poor’s downgraded the US credit rating from AAA to AA+
BUT….they did so based on a 2 trillion dollar error on their part they have admitted to.
….fishy doesn’t even begin to describe this move. [[the other rating agencies still show the US at AAA and have no plans at this time to change it.

The ratings agency Standard & Poor's has reduced the United States' credit rating from AAA to AA+ with a negative outlook, the company announced late Friday, saying a bipartisan deal to reduce the nation's debt did not go far enough and citing crippling political gridlock.

The first downgrade of U.S. credit in history could cost the government and ordinary consumers billions of dollars by jacking up interest rates the U.S. must pay on its $14.4 trillion debt and a host of rates consumers must pay for items such as mortgages, car loans and credit cards.

The move by S&P follows decisions by two other major ratings agencies, Moody's and Fitch, to maintain the United States' AAA rating, though Moody's assigned a negative outlook.
"The downgrade," S&P said in a statement announcing its move, "reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government's medium-term debt dynamics."

In particular, Standard & Poor's added, it grew more pessimistic about U.S. debt because of the dispute over raising the debt ceiling.

One government official said S&P's analysis leading to the eventual downgrade was "based on flawed math and assumptions" to the tune of roughly $2 trillion and that "S&P has acknowledged its numbers are wrong" during communications with the Obama administration.

The error involved a failure to start from the March 2011 CBO baseline and resulted in an estimated debt-to-GDP ratio that would be much higher than anything CBO would have come up with. However, sources familiar with the matter say after the Treasury Department pointed out the flaw, S&P corrected the figures in its statement on the downgrade.

Nevertheless, a Treasury Department spokesperson told ABC News, "A judgment flawed by a $2 trillion error speaks for itself."

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/us-sees-standard-poors-debt-rating-downgrade-coming/story?id=14220820

ms_m

08-06-2011, 01:53 AM

Good luck with that pivot by Donny Shaw August 5, 2011

With the debt ceiling debate over for now, the Obama Administration is promising a "pivot to jobs." Given that the trillions in cuts in the debt bill are going to cause higher rates of unemployment than what we would have had otherwise, shifting to job creation makes sense. But the Administration can't create jobs on their own, they need legislation from Congress. Given Congress' recent history with handling jobs bills, don't be surprised if the pivot doesn't result in anything but bitter feelings.

Already this year, the Senate has spent nearly two months debating two bipartisan jobs bills only to end up walking away from both of them because of politically-motivated gridlock.

The first debate was on a bill to reauthorize and expand the Small Business Innovation Research [[SBIR) and Small Business Technical Transfer [[SBTT) programs, two of the largest research and development funding programs in the federal government. The programs were signed into law in 1982 by President Reagan after being passed by a divided Congress in the middle of a major recession. The programs have a solid history of bipartisan support, and the reauthorization bill that was debated this year has co-sponsors from both parties. But that didn’t stop the bill from be killed and, as a result, congressional authority for the programs expiring on May 31st.
Read More
http://www.opencongress.org/articles/view/2354-Good-luck-with-that-pivot

144man

08-06-2011, 08:27 AM

So they can make a $2 trillion error...time to downgrade Standard & Poor's credibility rating.

ms_m

08-06-2011, 09:39 AM

:eek:

Agree 144man.

What's really ironic, back in late 2008 when we were going through the economic meltdown, the actions of Standard and Poor's and Moody were implicated in the mess.

If I remember correctly they were accused of knowing many of the companies were insolvent but continued to post their high ratings anyway.

I'd really need to go back and look it up to refresh my memory but I think they claimed they "didn't know" and only went by the info they were given by the companies in question.

ms_m

08-06-2011, 10:36 AM

FOX Nation drew some howls of derision for referring to President Obama's birthday bash as a "Hip Hop BBQ" on its website, complete with a picture of Jay-Z, Chris Rock, and Charles Barkley for emphasis.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/08/the-best-of-hiphopbbqacts.php?ref=fpc

The rest of this story is about how people on Twitter turned this headline into a joke. If you’re interested click link above BUT…..

Best Comment of the day….

I don't know about you, but when I want to know what Black America is thinking I go straight to Fox News. Maybe that's why I don't know my ass from a hole in the ground.

HAHAHAHAHA…now THAT was funny…..heeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeey:cool:

ms_m

08-06-2011, 10:42 AM

oops

CBS/NYT Poll: Congressional Disapproval At An All-Time High
Kyle Leighton | August 4, 2011, 7:10PM

Well, Congress has done it. It's hit its highest disapproval ratings since the New York Times/CBS News poll was created in 1977. In the wake of the debt debate, a full 82% of Americans are displeased with the legislative branch, with only 14% approval.
It's not so much the deal that was struck on the debt ceiling increase, which

Americans were split on: 46% actually approved of the deal versus 45%. It was the perceived motivations that have people upset. 82% of the poll's respondents said that disagreements between parties on the debt ceiling debate were due to "gaining political advantage," rather than "doing what's best for the country," which only 14% saw as the motivator for Congress. Those numbers perfectly mirrored the general Congressional ratings.

As was the case with other polling around the debt deal, some individual political leaders have taken a hit. In this case, House Speaker John Boehner's disapproval rating went from 42% in April of this year to 57% now, while his national approval rating only went from 32% to 30%. President Obama saw a slight increase in his disapproval rating over that time as well, from 45% to the current 47%, but his approval went from 46% to 48%.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/08/cbsnyt-poll-congressional-disapproval-at-an-all-time-high.php?ref=fpblg

stephanie

08-06-2011, 11:08 AM

I actually started asking people in the street and on the bus [[yes I did) would they vote for Obama again and all of them said yes! I was shocked because I thought that there would be some dissapointed in what they have been hearing and most of these people are not under the illusion that the right is trying to create. I think the American people and foreigners included are a lot smarter than what people think they are and we may see a higher number at the polls. I must say people have faith in our president and a lot of these people like myself were Hilary supporters before Barack Obama came into the pic. Never not once have I heard the term he was a Jr Senator come out of anyones mouth and most of the people are enthralled by his intelligence and demeanor.

ms_m

08-06-2011, 11:30 AM

That's great to hear Stephanie. The media wants and need controversy so they ramp up a lot of the negativity and the blog world is not far behind but it's always good to hear what the average person in the street is thinking....although I wouldn't suggest reading the editorial comments in my local paper...;)...shrugs...."sometimes you're the windshield, sometimes you're the bug":eek:

Obama Jobs Plan: President Pushes His Proposals For Growth

WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama is calling on Congress to put politics aside when lawmakers return from their recess in September and pass a series of initiatives the president says will spur job growth.

In his weekly radio and Internet address Saturday, Obama said Washington's urgent mission is to get the economy growing faster and create jobs. The latest jobs report released Friday was better than expected, with the economy adding 117,000 jobs and the unemployment rate ticking down a notch to 9.1 percent.

"Our job right now has to be doing whatever we can to help folks find work, to help create the climate where a business can put up that job listing, where incomes are rising again for people," Obama said.

The steps the president wants Congress to take include extending payroll tax cuts for another year, passing three free trade agreements and enacting patent reform. All of the measures are proposals the president has called for previously.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/06/obama-jobs-plan-president-pushes-proposals_n_920082.html

Not quite a 'do-nothing Congress,' but it's close
Fervent partisanship and the debt standoff are making it the least productive in years.
July 04, 2011|Kathleen Hennessey

Freshman Republican Sen. Kelly Ayotte is often asked what surprises her most about serving in the esteemed upper chamber of Congress. The earnest, 43-year-old conservative from New Hampshire has come up with an uncomplicated reply:
"I thought that we would vote on a lot more bills."
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jul/04/nation/la-na-do-little-congress-20110704

To say she thought wrong would be an understatement…..

Active Legislation

112th Congress [[2011-2012) [[Dem Senate Majority – Republican House Majority)
Updated August 3, 2011
http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/legislative/b_three_sections_with_teasers/active_leg_page.htm

Public laws are in red [[bills that have passed)
Bills that did not pass have been struck through.

Compare the above to 111th Congress [[Both Chambers controlled by Dems)
http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/legislative/b_three_sections_with_teasers/active_leg_111.htm

ms_m

08-06-2011, 11:37 AM

BTW...and yes I do understand it's not a fair comparison but 112th Congress has been here for more than 100 days....and if memory serves, folks didn't have a problem screaming about what the POTUS supposedly hadn't done in his first 100 days!

stephanie

08-06-2011, 12:23 PM

Whats funny was I did not expect the President to come back this quickly to talk about jobs I guess [[well I know) it has been on his mind for quite some time but with the birth certificate event [[Mr Trump and company), BP oil spill, debt ceiling crisis, he has had to handle one thing at a time and I thought he might take a few days to rest and address this but he is on it. Now the question is how much cooperation will he get? I wish I had this mans energy he is able to rebound like a rubber ball. Also I dont think he is doing this for campaign reasons I think he really wants to get something accomplished,
Dont get me started on Tavis Smiley and Cornel West when I get back from the store we can rag on them...LOL Ms M number 2 is doing well by the way I will give an update on that thread when I get back
Steph

ms_m

08-06-2011, 12:40 PM

Glad to hear your mom is getting better Stephanie. That's good news!

Actually there have been job bills sitting in congress since they convened in January...guess Boner and the Rethugs don't think they are important.

ms_m

08-06-2011, 12:49 PM

GOP 2012 Candidates Agree Obama Deserves The Blame For S&P Downgrade… But Disagree Over Why
Thomas Lane | August 6, 2011, 11:55AM

S&P's own explanation of their decision to downgrade the U.S credit rating spreads the blame around. Tellingly, It slams the GOP's intransigence over letting the Bush tax cuts expire. Overall, it paints a bleak picture of the whole political system.
However, for the GOP presidential candidates it's pretty clear where the blame really lies. You guessed it: with President Barack Obama.

What's interesting, though, is that they haven't quite settled on a common line over whether the President is responsible for the downgrade by being too active or too inactive.

Michele Bachmann is clearly in the "too active" camp. She was one of the first out the gates with a bell-ringing press release that called for the "immediate resignation" of Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner. But it's clear where her attention is really focused: "President Obama is destroying the foundations of the US economy one beam at a time," she rails. "This President has destroyed the credit rating of the United States through his failed economic policies and his inability to control government spending by raising the debt ceiling," she continues, suggesting she either hasn't read - or has completely ignored - the S&P report.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/08/2012-gopers-agree-obama-deserves-blame-for-the-downgrade-but-disagree-over-why.php?ref=fpa

Just to keep the record straight. In spite of Poor’s 2 trillion dollar error, one of the main reasons they cited for the downgrade was NOT spending but lack of raising REVENUE!...you know, that thing that the GOP "2012er's" pledged not to do!

ms_m

08-06-2011, 07:34 PM

Who Is Washington's Most Effective Politician?

5 Aug 2011 11:00 AM

Dave Roberts says Mitch McConnell, but Kevin Drum thinks the Senate minority leader "just had the easiest job:"

McConnell's sole goal for the past two years has been obstruction, something that Senate rules make easy. And the debt ceiling deal was a dog's breakfast of ideas from various sources. McConnell took credit for its final form, but he could do that mainly because, unlike John Boehner, he didn't have to put up with a big tea party contingent and was able to compromise without fear of losing his job.

Benen expands on Drum's conclusion that Obama is the right choice by listing his many [[unheralded) accomplishments. Serwer dissents. I think Obama is easily the winner and currently stupidly under-rated - and drowned out by all the noise in the conservative-media-industrial-complex.

Here are the political accomplishments: defeating the most heavily favored party machine in decades [[the Clintons) while actually bringing his biggest rival into his cabinet, where she has performed extraordinarily well; helping to cement the GOP's broad identity as extremists opposed to compromise; entrenching black and Hispanic loyalty to his party; retaining solid favorables and not-too-shabby approval ratings during the worst recession since the 1930s. 44 percent of the country still [[rightly) blame Bush for this mess, only 15 percent blame Obama.

On policy: ending the US torture regime; prevention of a second Great Depression; enacting universal healthcare; taking the first serious steps toward reining in healthcare costs; two new female Supreme Court Justices; ending the gay ban in the military; ending the Iraq war; justifying his Afghan Surge by killing bin Laden and now disentangling with face saved; firming up alliances with India, Indonesia and Japan as counter-weights to China; bailing out the banks and auto companies without massive losses [[and surging GM profits); advancing [[slowly) balanced debt reduction without drastic cuts during the recession; and financial re-regulation.

Yes, there have been failures. The election of Scott Brown; the 2010 mid-terms; the surrender to Netanyahu and AIPAC; the botched and ill-conceived war in Libya; the failure to embrace Bowles Simpson up-front; the collapse of cap and trade [[maybe not such a bad thing anyway). But notice what hasn't happened. Where are all the scandals promised by Michelle Malkin? Where are his Katrinas and Monicas?

When I read commentaries expounding on the notion that this man is completely out of his depth, I just have to scratch my head. Given his inheritance, this has been the most substantive first term since Ronald Reagan's. And given Obama's long-game mentality, that is setting us up for a hell of a second one.
http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/08/who-is-washingtons-most-effective-politician.html

ms_m

08-06-2011, 08:04 PM

August 05, 2011 8:00 AM GOP public support drops like the stock market
By Steve Benen

Congress wasn’t popular when Republicans shut down the government in the mid-90s. It wasn’t popular when Republicans impeached President Clinton. It wasn’t popular when the economy crashed in 2008.

But it hasn’t been this unpopular [[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/05/us/politics/05poll.html?_r=1&hp) in my lifetime.

The debate over raising the debt ceiling, which brought the nation to the brink of default, has sent disapproval of Congress to its highest level on record and left most Americans saying that creating jobs should now take priority over cutting spending, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News Poll.

A record 82 percent of Americans now disapprove of the way Congress is handling its job — the most since The Times first began asking the question in 1977, and even more than after another political stalemate led to a shutdown of the federal government in 1995.
Full Article
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_08/gop_public_support_drops_like031331.php

ms_m

08-06-2011, 08:07 PM

Also, I’m fascinated by the claim that a birthday party “didn’t create jobs.” Maybe I should have run a post this morning that said, “John Boehner had breakfast this morning, didn’t create jobs.” Or maybe, “Eric Cantor watched some TV, didn’t create jobs.”

Would Fox prefer that the president cancel his birthday, put pen to paper, and write a stimulus bill Fox’s congressional allies can kill?

August 05, 2011 12:55 PM Fox just can’t help itself
By Steve Benen

There was a private White House party last night in honor of President Obama’s 50th birthday. Here’s how Politico described the event.

[Shortly after 5 p.m.], the party started with dinner in the Rose Garden, accompanied by “The President’s Own” United States Marine Band. Then the First Lady and his daughters presented POTUS with a cake, and everyone moved into the East Room for performances that included R&B singer Ledisi, and Herbie Hancock. Stevie Wonder came up at the end and sang a medley ending in “Signed, Sealed, Delivered I’m Yours.” DJ Cassidy played Motown, hip hop, and ’70s and ’80s R&B.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_08/fox_just_cant_help_itself031342.php

Excellent taste in music but of course, "Foolish Fox We lie about being News" didn’t see it that way….follow link above for more.

ms_m

08-07-2011, 12:27 PM

Michael Cohen had an item a couple of weeks ago, before the debt-ceiling agreement was reached, noting:

It’s hard to think of any other situation in American history where a political party has taken such a scorched earth approach to policy-making.

Steve Benen, Political Animal
August 07, 2011 10:50 AM The worst thing the GOP has ever done?

I was on a radio show recently talking about the debt-ceiling hostage standoff and was asked whether this was the worst thing Republicans — or any major party, really — have ever done. The more I think about it, the more the question resonates with me.

My mind quickly went to the war in Iraq and all that’s associated with it — the casualties, the lies, the torture, the many costs — as the worst thing Republicans have ever done, but for the sake of conversation, let’s stick primarily to domestic politics.

Where would the GOP’s hostage fiasco rank on the list of modern Republican misdeeds?
Full Article
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/

"scorched earth approach to policy-making"

I think that is a key phrase that people should commit to memory and not take for granted....this will continue, it is not going away until the electorate starts to take it seriously; stop treating them as some sideshow or joke.... and do everything possible to get these folks out of office.

I TRULY understand the attitude and the need to simply dismiss these folks but it is a mistake to do so.

"TeaParty" is a brand but the attitude behind that brand is real....very real!
Many will denounce the brand, many will tell you they no longer identify with it, many will stop showing up for the rally's but the attitude remains.

Anyone who believes these folks suddenly got a foothold into local, state and federal government by accident or a fluke ONLY because of the 2008 Presidential election... and subsequently the 2010 "shellacking", are deluding themselves!

ms_m

08-07-2011, 07:32 PM

Thursday, August 4, 2011
White House Counters Myths About Debt Ceiling Deal

The White House released a new infographic today to help explain the details of the Budget Control Act, the bipartisan compromise the president and congressional leaders reached in order to raise the debt ceiling earlier this week.

The graphic is intended to make the actual content of the budget deal clear and to dispel various myths and misinformation that have been swirling in the public dialogue both before and after the deal was made public.

The top of the graphic outlines the three key elements of the budget deal: 1) the lifting of the debt ceiling by at least $2.1 trillion through 2013; 2) the schedule of spending cuts amounting to almost $3 trillion [[with notes that Pell Grants are protected and that the cuts are balanced between domestic and defense spending); and 3) the establishment of the bipartisan committee that must identify additional spending cuts of$1.5 trillion in deficit reduction by November of this year.

The graphic breaks into further detail the workings of this "super committee," explaining that it will consist of six members from each party and that the legislation it sends to the floors of the two houses will be fast-tracked and protected against filibusters and amendments, two processes that traditionally slow, kill, or neutralize legislation.

More:
http://www.bluewavenews.com/2011/08/white-house-counters-myths-about-debt.html

ms_m

08-07-2011, 07:38 PM

FYI:

The 2nd phase of this deal will not kick in until after the 2012 election. The onus is on the voters to make sure the Dems have a super majority in both the House and Senate. With that in place, this deal can be repealed.

Enforcement mechanism established to force all parties – Republican and Democrat – to agree to balanced deficit reduction. If Committee fails, enforcement mechanism will trigger spending reductions beginning in 2013 – split 50/50 between domestic and defense spending. Enforcement protects Social Security, Medicare beneficiaries, and low-income programs from any cuts.

MotownSteve

08-07-2011, 09:31 PM

I found this interesting reading. http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daniel-gross/u-credit-rating-victim-gop-sabotage-021622372.html

ms_m

08-07-2011, 10:17 PM

Great read Steve, thanks for posting!

Professor Krugman wrote:

On one hand, there is a case to be made that the madness of the right has made America a fundamentally unsound nation. And yes, it is the madness of the right: if not for the extremism of anti-tax Republicans, we would have no trouble reaching an agreement that would ensure long-run solvency.

On the other hand, it's hard to think of anyone less qualified to pass judgment on America than the rating agencies. The people who rated subprime-backed securities are now declaring that they are the judges of fiscal policy? Really?

Just to make it perfect, it turns out that S&P got the math wrong by $2 trillion, and after much discussion conceded the point -- then went ahead with the downgrade.

. . . In short, S&P is just making stuff up -- and after the mortgage debacle, they really don't have that right.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/

I don’t always agree with Dr. Krugman but I think the above is spot on.

Politically, does blame need to be assigned? Yes and I cast my vote for Republican obstructionism or as Sen. Kerry is now calling it, "The TeaParty Downgrade." Great messaging, rah, rah and I’m not being snarky.

…..but…the real issue, which I’m rather annoyed few are talking about, how does this affect us ….we, the people…helloooooo…anyone remember we’re still out here?.... and what does congress intend to do about it?

That’s a rhetorical question because as long as we have a TeaParty controlled house…we’re SOL [[for now)

We don’t have to stay that way though….

ms_m

08-07-2011, 10:54 PM

Repost – A Refresher

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pozWUCrP37E&feature=player_embedded

1. We tax in order to create demand for the currency. In addition, it controls *aggregate demand or effectively, the money supply

2. The bond market is a monetary tool. NOT a fiscal financing tool.

3. Foreigners do not fund our spending.

4. Money must be created before government bond auctions can occur and before taxes can be enforced. Otherwise, there is no currency in the system to tax and no money to raise via bond auctions. This is just basic logic in terms of the way the current system works. It can be no other way.

5. Households, states, Europe and the gold standard are not remotely similar to the modern monetary system in which the Federal government of the USA functions.

A Simple Example Of A Modern Monetary System
The following example should help clarify some of the concepts mentioned above. Please excuse the simplicity, but this can be a mind bending concept if you are textbook taught [[trust me, I know the feeling) so I will keep it simple:

On a journey around the world with members of the US Navy we become shipwrecked and find ourselves on a beautiful island. There is a wonderfully productive citizenry there and they are accepting and generous of us. They are impressed by our combat training, weaponry, etc and hold us in high regard. We form a pact and what will later be known as a “government” whereby my men offer protection and safety in exchange for acceptance into their society. We agree to a government by the people and for the people and I am elected as their President. Economic activity is the heart of this country and the people are innovative, enjoy hard work and reap the benefits of their labor.

The people of this island once transacted with sea shells, but luckily, these innovative folks were wise enough to create a computer system just recently. I propose that we modernize our economy and begin transacting in a fiat currency so as to make trade more convenient and efficient. Lugging around sea shells grew tiresome. I issue “Reserve” notes and initiate an electronic system that tracks each citizen’s transactions. These notes, on their own, are not worth more than the paper they’re printed on. However, they serve as a convenient medium of exchange.

It’s not free to live on the island, however, with all of these new resources and organized services. So, we create a tax. This acts as the glue that binds our monetary system together. This makes the citizens beholden to government via the “Reserve” notes. They MUST have them in their account on April 15th of every year. I’ve created demand while also fulfilling their desire to transact conveniently and reliably. Why would they agree to this? Because I am offering them protection among various other services in exchange for this small tax burden. Because this island has a long standing feud with a neighboring island they are happy to pay this tax and sleep well at night.

This is exactly what the US government does. In return, they spend money on public works, create jobs, supposedly spend money on furthering our nation’s prosperity [[in theory at least) and protection of the nation [[a military). It is essentially an acknowledgment that we are stronger as a united state. As the services offered by the state increase and grow it’s possible that this tax burden could increase. It’s important, however, that the role of the government not infringe on the prosperity of the private sector to an undue extent. Remember, government is a tool that is to be utilized by the citizens to further the private sector’s prosperity. If the citizens on my island are productive and innovative we can expect our overall quality of life to increase. If, however, I am corrupt, mismanage my currency or produce currency in excess of my island’s productive capacity I risk currency collapse in the form of the public’s rejection of my currency system.
http://pragcap.com/resources/understanding-modern-monetary-system

*aggregate demand:In macroeconomics, aggregate demand is the total demand for final goods and services in the economy at a given time and price level.

It is the amount of goods and services in the economy that will be purchased at all possible price levels. This is the demand for the gross domestic product of a country when inventory levels are static.

Reference Link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aggregate_demand

ms_m

08-08-2011, 01:29 AM

Please do not forget that many Republicans are implementing austere voter registration laws to suppress the most likely Democratic vote in several states where Republicans have the legislative majority.

Although all voting can be negatively affected by this, these laws will impact applicable U.S. Senator and Representative elections more than the Presidential Election process and could create an even more obstructionist, unproductive and extreme right wing Congress.

Please be sure to remind everyone you know what the Republicans are doing and have done to suppress the vote. Many of these changes are going unnoticed and there will be voters who are surprised when they get to the polls to find the rules have changed.

Most of the measures would require people to show a form of official, valid identification to vote. While driver’s licenses are the most common form, voters can also request free photo IDs from the Department of Motor Vehicles or use a passport or military identification, among other things.”

Although this seems relative easy and simple to some, the extra step may discourage voters who will have to pay to retrieve documents, like birth certificates, for proof to obtain a free card.

A few state bills and laws also reduce the number of early voting days. In the 2008 presidential election, a majority of those who cast early votes did so for President Barack Obama.

The following is a list of some state voting changes either enacted or under consideration:

• Wisconsin – A valid photo identification is needed before a voter could cast a ballot.
• Florida – Restrictions tightened on third-party voter registration organizations and the number of early voting days has been shortened. Florida already requires photo identification.
• South Carolina – A valid photo identification is needed before a voter could cast a ballot.
• Texas – A valid photo identification is needed before a voter could cast a ballot.
• Kansas – A valid photo identification is needed before a voter could cast a ballot.
• Ohio – Legislature considering voter-identification bill.
• Pennsylvania – Legislature considering voter-identification bill.

There is a constitutional right to vote, and putting up needless barriers makes a mockery of freedom.

A not so inconsequential side issue: Have Republicans considered the cost of such laws? A photo identification given to permit voting must be free. Otherwise, it constitutes a poll tax, and poll taxes are unconstitutional.

This information needs to go viral. The more voters are aware the better prepared they will be. Our future and the future of our country depend on it.

Stop the shenanigans over the voter ID bill
Some Republicans seem to be drunk on power; sober up.

Is there a more blatant recent example of hubris in state politics than this? Last week, when Republican N.C. lawmakers failed to override Gov. Bev Perdue's veto of their voter ID bill, House Majority Leader Paul Stam invoked a parliamentary procedure to keep the bill alive for another veto vote anytime before the legislature adjourns its short session next summer.
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/08/01/2494688/stop-the-shenanigans-over-the.html

eternal vigilance by the people is the price of liberty
Andrew Jackson

ms_m

08-08-2011, 12:11 PM

Michele Bachmann’s Radical Reading List
Benjy Sarlin | August 8, 2011, 11:14AM

Ryan Lizza's New Yorker piece on Michele Bachmann, which focuses on the Tea Party candidate's influences, is the current talk of the political world. The article delves deep into Bachmann's ideological roots, showcasing a number of books and films by her favorite far-right Christian thinkers. Here are a few of the highlights from Bachmann's reading list.

According to Lizza, Bachmann traces her conversion to evangelical Christianity to a series of films by theologian Frances Schaeffer entitled "How Should We Then Live?" condemning everything from the Italian Renaissance to modern day government conspiracies.

Bachmann also highlighted Schaeffer follower Nancy Pearce's recent book, "Total Truth: Liberating Christianity from Its Cultural Captivity," as a "wonderful" read. Per Lizza, the book urges readers to be skeptical of any non-Christian ideas, because even though they may be right some of the time "the overall systems of thought constructed by nonbelievers will be false" unless built on "Biblical truth."

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/08/michele-bachmanns-radical-reading-list.php?ref=fpa

As the self proclaimed leader of the “TeaParty Congressional Caucus,” Bachmann typifies the thinking of the radical extreme right. [[and yes there are exceptions I’m sure)

Their ideology and world view didn’t originate with the emergence and branding of the TP and what many of us see as crazy, these folks see as "absolute truth."

In their view, “liberalism” is the culprit for what they see as the decay of the moral fiber and financial problems of the US. As a result, it [[liberalism) must be destroyed at all cost in order for them to rebuild our society in "their image."

They are committed and focused [[beyond reason) to carry out their mission.

ms_m

08-08-2011, 02:58 PM

Both Bush and Perry were deemed the evangelically acceptable candidates after the evangelicals took control of the Texas Republican Party about 1990.

This is part of the move towards Dominion Theology which is the effort of certain evangelicals who call themselves "Christians" to take political control of the nation and to place America under biblical law. Florida's Katherine Harris was one of those people, and I have seen hints that Sarah Palin's political support comes first from the Dominionists. The C-Street home for politicians is another of their political outreach efforts.

But look at what the article above said about Frank Shaefer's publications. Everything since the beginning of the Enlightenment is wrong according to these people. That is also taught by Pat Robertson through his broadcasting network and through Regent Law School. Also through Jerry Falwell's Liberty University.

There is a sizable block of votes supporting the way Michelle Bachmann and her husband think, and they can take over smaller electoral entities. They have taken over the Texas Republican Party and then the Texas state government. I don't know the details about Oklahoma, but look at their Senators. Also they have Oral Roberts University which is a center of the infection. Smaller states with poor educations systems like Tennessee, Kentucky, Kansas and Missouri are going to be susceptible to takeovers. [What does this mean for control of the Senate after the 2012 election?]

Michelle Bachmann may be ignorant but she is no joke. The poor economy makes her more acceptable to a lot of voters.

This is one of the best comments I’ve seen to date discussing people like Bachmann.

And as another commenter pointed out….

Thanks for practically the only substantive comment on the theocratic line of thought that attracts MB and her supporters. The rest of you can laugh and poke fun at this, but it was not so long ago that this stuff was considered so marginal as to qualify as the joke most of you think it is. But no more. This stuff has spent some 4 decades moving into the mainstream. They're in this for the long haul.

Rick Perry is another one to keep an eye on, although I think his total persona is as phony as a 3 dollar bill. He comes off more "Elmer Gantry" than sincere but people are falling hard for his [[alleged) con game.

jillfoster

08-08-2011, 04:03 PM

I think Standard and Poors whould be boycotted for torpedoeing the economy for no reason, other than punitive punishment for politicians' squabbling. And SHAME on the NYSE for putting credence to their bullshit, however, that doesn't surprise me, since the NYSE have always been a bunch of chicken liittle, freaking out over this and that wringing their hands and yelling the sky is falling. I picture them huddling under desks hiding from a terrorist attack every time someone cuts the cheese. and yes, Ms. M... Michelle Bachmann is a dangerous bitch. Certainly she won't get the nomination, she's too polarizing, but maybe we SHOULD hope she gets the nomination, Obama would certainly win against her.

MotownSteve

08-08-2011, 05:17 PM

ms_m

08-08-2011, 05:19 PM

Jill Foster I wouldn't count Bachmann out just yet. I saw what the TP did to the old guard Repubs in the debt ceiling deal...they really are no joke and as I said....the TP is nothing but a brand, these folks have been in stealth mode for 40 years working their way towards power.

They are in the majority in our state government and the only thing keeping them from totally taking over is the gov [[a Dem) and some serious kick arse Black legislators. They have completely taken over our local school board. Other states are having the same problems...Wisconsin, Florida...These folks are in it to win it and people are not taking them seriously. I think the recall election in Wisconsin will be am interesting race to watch but even if they lose....they will simply regroup and come back to fight another day.

I read the Italian S&P's offices were just raided by the Italian police. Apparently they are doing their dirty work worldwide.

It's not about the NYSE it's all about investors and how they react but truth is, the stock markets are volatile for several reasons and S&P is just one of many....and FYI, the bond market is strong but it's practically begging folks to give up the money. If you follow this sort of thing you understand why we need to be spending instead of enacting austerity measures.

Politics is becoming much too influential in our monetary policies because politicians are not being responsible in handling fiscal policy. But when you have a group of people who don't understand either and are willing to take the country down over their personal ideology...all you can do is get them out of power. [[read office)

ms_m

08-08-2011, 05:46 PM

Every now and then Dr Krugman will say something that moves me but what he doesn't say, the other agencies could be playing a big role in denouncing S&P's decisions. Krugman has the mouth and the perfect platform to be advocating something like that. He could use that platform to embarrass the other agencies to take a stand...or at least try.... but he prefers beatchn' to actually doing something....shrugs

ms_m

08-08-2011, 07:15 PM

Obama: ‘No Matter What Some Agency Says, We Will Always Be AAA’
Susan Crabtree | August 8, 2011, 2:19PM

President Obama in a somber address to the nation Monday sought to summon Americans' strength and perseverance as stocks continued in a 500-point free fall in the first trading day after Standard & Poor's rating service downgraded the nation's creditworthiness.

"Markets will always rise and fall," Obama told the nation. "No matter what some agency may say, we've always been and always will be a AAA country."

For all the troubles the U.S. faces, Obama said, the country continues to have the best universities, most productive workers, and "the determination to shape our future."

"We're going to need to summon that spirit today," he continued.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/08/obama-no-matter-what-some-agency-says-we-will-always-be-aaa.php?ref=fpb

ms_m

08-08-2011, 07:19 PM

Re-Post

Debt Ceiling Deal: The Devil Is In The Details
Posted by Leo Soderman on 8/01/11

Congress finally has a deal on the table that may pass. The House passed it Monday evening with a vote expected to be held in the Senate mid-day on Tuesday. And that vote is also expected to be successful in passing the debt ceiling deal. So, who won? Who lost? Is it a massive cave by the President and Democrats? Or is there something more to it?

In looking at the deal, folks on the left are acting outraged. Medicare takes some cuts, there’s no revenue component, it looks like the Republicans got everything they wanted. Indeed, Speaker of the House John Boehner says he “got 98 percent of what I wanted”. But did he?

Here’s some of the details that say he might have some ‘splaining to do later:

Revenues

Democrats are upset that the deal does not include increasing revenues. But that’s not accurate. In fact, it virtually guarantees a revenue increase by the end of 2012. And Boehner knows it.

Here’s how it works: Part of the deficit reduction estimates used to sell this deal to the Republicans count on Congressional Budget Office estimates. Those estimates set a baseline. All reductions have to come from that baseline and if any additional spending is to be made, offsetting cuts must also be enacted.

Here’s where it gets interesting. The CBO baseline already assumes that the Bush Era tax cuts will expire at the end of 2012. The spending levels for 2013 include the additional revenue from those cuts expiring. If Republicans want to extend those tax cuts [[which are considered spending), they will have to make cuts to the budget to offset every penny. They won’t have the political control needed to do that before the end of 2012, even if the President loses his office and they take control of the Senate, as the cuts expire in 2012, and a new administration and Congress would not be seated until January 2013.

So, unless Republicans want to try to pass an extension along with offsetting cuts during an election year, those cuts will expire. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has already said he will not allow the issue to come to a vote, and the President has vowed he will veto it. So if Republicans want to extend those cuts, they will have to come up with $4T in spending cuts to offset the tax cuts. To make it more difficult still, the deal makes it clear that those cuts must come in a 50/50 ratio between defense and non-defense spending, with Social Security, Medicaid, unemployment insurance, civilian and military retirement off the table. Medicare cuts would only come from the provider side, not the individual.

Now, take that in for a minute. If Republicans want to extend the tax cuts, they will need to cut an equal amount out of spending, with half of that coming from defense spending. Half. This is in addition to the $350B that are already being cut as part of this deal. To get their tax cuts, Republicans would have to slash another $2T from defense spending. They would have to justify slashing the defense budget for the benefit of the wealthiest Americans. And with all the social programs off the table, where will they find the other $2T?

The plain fact is, they can’t. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says he won’t let it come to a vote, and the President says he would veto any extension. But the key issue is – they don’t need to. In fact, all they have to do is make sure to speak loudly if/when Republicans try to extend any tax cuts, and frame it as cutting the military. It’s a pretty clear cut distinction and attacks the entire ethos of Republicans as deficit hawks and military backers. In the meantime, if the Republicans can’t find the cuts, the cuts expire, and revenue increases.

Now, Boehner has played this deal as one that does not allow “tax increases”. He had to for it to pass. But the safe bet is that most of the Republicans who voted for this did not realize that the baseline includes the additional revenue from the expiration of the Bush era tax cuts, and that extending them is not counted as raising taxes, but rather, as increasing spending. And that will require hugely Draconian cuts in the areas Republicans are most loathe to touch.

An interesting battle will start next year. It will begin to pit the military industrial complex against the bankers and million/billionaires. If the rich guys want to keep their tax cuts, 50% of it will come from military spending – contractors. That’s a big lobby to fight against. It will be fascinating to see how the spin starts to work there, as Republicans find their corporate benefactors are suddenly pitted against each other, and the American people get to see where the loyalties really lie.

Medicare and Social Programs
There has been a bit of moaning that this deal touches Medicare. But again, the details are important. The area touched here has nothing to do with individuals. It’s all on the provider side.

To be sure, this could have an effect on individuals, as providers may decide they don’t want to deal with Medicare if reimbursements are reduced, and this could reduce choice. But on the subscriber side, nothing changes. More importantly, the subscriber side is sequestered from further cuts, as are Medicaid and Social Security in their entirety.

Again, this is really a trap for the Republicans. With all of those areas off the table, where will they find cuts? And remember, they still need to cut an equal amount from defense as they do for anything else. Social programs are a large part of the budget. When you take them off the table, you remove major sources of budget reduction. Which means that cuts to other areas will have to be massive to have a chance at making a difference. So Republicans will have to sell Draconian slashes to areas such as education to be able to find enough budget to cut.

But here’s a kicker – $1.5T in cuts and additional revenue must be defined and sent to Congress for ratification before the end of 2011. So, while Boehner is claiming no raising of taxes, with this deal he has put Republicans further behind the 8-ball. If they do not pass a package that features all of these cuts, an automatic trigger is reached, and an addition $500B is immediately cut from defense, and additional cuts would be made to infrastructure and other programs. That’s in addition to the $350B already cut as part of the deal.

Why does this leave Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is a tough spot? Because they must pass $1.3T in cuts before the end of the year to avoid the automatic trigger. They don’t want to be seen as cutting military spending [[although that is likely where a lot will come from anyway). And because they insisted that the decrease in spending from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan not be counted as spending reduction, they’ve removed that ploy from the table as well. If they are unwilling to compromise, they will be facing massive additional cuts to the military. And all while not touching sacred social programs. That’s a hell of a corner to be painted into.

So, What Did It Accomplish?

A whole bunch. Pell Grants have actually been increased. The default scenario has been averted until at least 2013 with a debt ceiling raise. It did not require the passage of a Balanced Budget Amendment. And the cuts that are included are backloaded, meaning that they come further down the line, when the economy is [[hopefully) on a better footing.

Sure the President is taking heat on this now. But the focus can now be on jobs [[on which there has not been a single piece of legislation), and Republicans who are gloating now may not be so cheerful when it comes time to make the cuts they demanded.
http://www.editedforclarity.com/2011...n-the-details/

ms_m

08-08-2011, 07:24 PM

Downgrade Hurts Europe More
Aug 8, 2011 9:57 AM EDT

In normal times, you might expect Europe to benefit from a U.S. downgrade, as investors shift their funds into the world’s other AAA countries. But as Stefan Theil writes, Europe is in even worse shape than the U.S.

It was only with massive intervention by the European Central Bank in the bond markets that market mayhem was stopped on Monday morning, at least for now, though European stocks were firmly in the red. The move followed frantic phone calls Sunday evening among European leaders, caught on their vacations when news of the S&P downgrade hit.

Shock waves from Friday’s historic U.S. downgrade threaten to accelerate Europe’s own debt crisis—which has been festering and spreading since Greece became insolvent last year—and infect bigger countries like Italy, Spain, and ultimately France.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel, on a hiking vacation in the Italian Alps, conferred several times over the weekend with French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who is on holiday on the French Riviera. An emergency conference call between finance ministers and the European Central Bank late Sunday night helped push the ECB into action.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/08/08/s-p-s-credit-rating-downgrade-hurts-europe-more-than-u-s.html

ms_m

08-08-2011, 07:53 PM

Jill Foster if anyone can knock Bachmann off her perch, this is the person that can do it.
As crazy as Bachmann comes off, I think she's sincere in her off the wall beliefs but Perry is a straight up con artist. IMO.

Even Romney may have to come out of "The Mittness Protection Program" [[out of hiding)to deal with this dude....as the article says...."stay tuned"

Perry announcement set to sap attention from Saturday's Iowa straw poll
By Michael O'Brien - 08/08/11 03:51 PM ET

Candidates competing in Iowa's straw poll this weekend will share the nation's political attention with Texas Gov. Rick Perry [[R), who's poised to make his presidential ambitions clear in a Saturday visit to South Carolina.

On the same day as the Ames straw poll, Perry is set to attend a gathering of conservative activists in Charleston, S.C., hosted by the conservative blog RedState. There, Perry will send the signal that he's likely going to run for president, according to reports.

"The governor is not a candidate for office at this time. With President Obama’s dismal economic record, and Texas’ success in creating jobs and balancing our budget, Governor Perry continues to consider a potential run for the White House," the governor's spokesman, Mark Miner, said Monday. "Stay tuned."

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/175951-perry-announcement-set-to-sap-attention-from-straw-poll

ms_m

08-08-2011, 08:00 PM

This is why people need to take these right wing extremist seriously. Considering what these Repub legislators have been trying to do in Wisconsin, there is no way in heck the recall race should be this close. But they have deep pockets and a message tailored made for the un-informed.

Polls: Wisconsin State Senate Recalls Down To The Wire
Eric Kleefeld | August 8, 2011, 1:19PM

A new round of Daily Kos/Public Policy Polling [[D) numbers for the Wisconsin recalls, conducted over the past weekend in four out of the six Republican-held seats on the ballot Tuesday, show these contests headed down to the wire. Democrats have a clear lead in one race, Republicans in another, and the other two in statistical dead heats.

However, there is a very important caveat to any polls of these races: There is simply no standard statistical model or frame of reference for these very unusual mass recalls. As such, no prediction is really safe, and election-watchers just have to wait until the votes are counted Tuesday night. Everything will ride on the parties' turnout operations.

In the 32nd district, Democratic challenger Jennifer Shilling leads GOP state Sen. Dan Kapanke by 54%-43%, beyond the Â±3.4% margin of error. Meanwhile in the 10 district, GOP state Sen. Sheila Harsdorf leads Democrat Shelly Moore by 54%-42%, outside the 2.7% margin of error.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/08/polls-wisconsin-state-senate-recalls-down-to-the-wire.php?ref=fpb

ms_m

08-08-2011, 08:29 PM

OP-ED

Where’s The Cliff? Just Follow The Tea Party
Posted on August 5, 2011 by Vince Yanez

http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/Elephant-Cliff.jpg

It started with the lies about healthcare, death panels and Obama is going to take away your guns. Healthcare for Americans became socialism, the ruin of America and a death panel for grandma. Lies turned into shouting at town hall meetings, and the only result, was making sure that no one was able to educate themselves on the facts.

Then it spread into the Birther movement, the Kenyan question and the Muslim problem. Was Obama a Christian, was he an American and was he even born here?

It grew and grew based on what a lot of terrorists groups use to swell their ranks, the fear of not getting something you deserve, the anger toward those who are doing things that you disagree with and the hate towards anything that is different from what you believe. It was no longer about not agreeing with your politically ideology, it became the destruction of America, the ruining of the Constitution and the downfall of our great country.

More
http://thepragmaticprogressive.org/wp/2011/08/05/where%E2%80%99s-the-cliff-just-follow-the-tea-party/

ms_m

08-08-2011, 09:39 PM

Jillfoster....it was brought to my attention I should re-word this

the bond market is strong but it's practically begging folks to give up the money.

it's investors that are begging treasury to take their money, not the other way around
my point being....if the bond market is strong, that shows confidence in the US and it's ability to pay it's bills

my apology to you and anyone I may have confused.

jillfoster

08-08-2011, 09:46 PM

Here's what mystifies me... I would think the other credit agencies would be denouncing S&P.... they should be on this like white on rice, the prefect opporotunity to bury the competition, they need to paint S&P as TRAITORS. So far, only Warren Buffett is the only one taking a hard line... but Stephanopolous this morning really grilled some SOB from S&P this morning, and this guy was squirming and getting quite defensive. George Will has been saying some good things, and I hear there is WIDESPREAD outrage across all political spectrums against S&P:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGTqkQG1pM8

marv2

08-08-2011, 10:23 PM

We, everyone should stand up and fight against this Tea Party bulls**t, Eric Cantor, Mitch McConnell, Boehner, Bachmann, all of them. Who gave them the power over our country? How are Tea Party members more important than you or I? They each have one vote just like the rest of us. Who in the Hell is going to continue to stand by and let this group of assholes destroy this country and it's future just because they do not like the fact that Barack Obama is the President?

marv2

08-08-2011, 10:24 PM

Standard & Poors is a corrupt organization that is being "paid".......

ms_m

08-08-2011, 10:29 PM

MotownSteve

08-08-2011, 10:42 PM

I've had this thought bouncing around my brain for the past few days. What happened to 'A country of the people, by the people, and for the people?

chidrummer

08-08-2011, 11:24 PM

What's happened, motownsteve is that this country is slowly but surely turning into a country of The Corporations, by the Corporations and of course for The Corporations

MotownSteve

08-08-2011, 11:31 PM

Well put,chidrummer. With a lot of help from the republicans.

marv2

08-08-2011, 11:56 PM

I agree and that's why I'm miffed with Krugman. He should be leading the charge [[along with others) to get them, to do just that. The only thing I can come up with though Jillfoster, all these agencies were complicit in the 2008 financial crisis "by giving AAA ratings to financial companies with mortgage-backed assets that turned into toxic waste."

They claimed they based their ratings on the info they were given by the companies....they based their ratings by the amount of money they were paid but why should they let something like facts get in the way of a good lie...oops excuse.

At this point I guess we have to live with the fact, at least they are not following S&P down the rabbit hole but I did see something in passing that Congress may be investigating S&P [[for whatever that's will be worth)...shrugs

Doesn't everyone find it just a bit strange the timing of S&P's downgrading of the U.S. credit rating? It is not a coincedence that they waited until right after the vote allowing for an increase in the debt ceiling to do this and to make it VERY public. It was not based on economic factors but political ones. Naturally the Republicans are going to take this event and run it into the ground!

marv2

08-08-2011, 11:57 PM

I've had this thought bouncing around my brain for the past few days. What happened to 'A country of the people, by the people, and for the people?

Nice thought MotownSteve, but I believe that idea died long ago. Try, a country of the special interest groups, by the special interest groups and for the special interest groups!!!

marv2

08-08-2011, 11:59 PM

What's happened, motownsteve is that this country is slowly but surely turning into a country of The Corporations, by the Corporations and of course for The Corporations

That too Chidrummer. It will be like in the Middle Ages. The few super wealthy and everyone else......SURFS!!!

marv2

08-09-2011, 12:01 AM

Well put,chidrummer. With a lot of help from the republicans.

The Republicans in office today are a bunch liars. They swore when they took over the majority in Congress that their mission was JOBS, or a jobs program. Instead, it was and is deficit reduction and cutting entitlements. That is not why they were elected and that is not what the majority of people in this country are focused on today!

ms_m

08-09-2011, 12:37 AM

This country is STILL by the people. Politicians didn't simply magically appear....people voted them into office or stayed home .

Corporations started to get a bigger foothold in the door because legislation was passed or repealed to allow them in.

....and now, a Supreme Court giving corporations the same rights as an individual.The SCOTUS didn't simply magically appear either.

ms_m

08-09-2011, 08:35 AM

Why Markets Are Melting
Don’t believe the hype: The market collapse has less to do with debt deals, Europe, and downgrades than the ebb and flow of our new, uncontrollable financial system.

Welcome to the crash of 2011. With stunning speed, global markets have sold off to a degree not seen since the worst days of late 2008 and early 2009. In fact, only three times in the past 40 years have stocks sold this hard this quickly, with a 16 percent decline in the S&P 500 in a 10-day period surpassed only by drops in the Octobers of 1987 and 2008.

No one can say precisely when or why this will end. Its triggers we know: a flawed debt deal in the United States, renewed sclerosis in the European Union about peripheral debt issues in Greece and Italy, a downgrade by Standard & Poor’s of U.S. sovereign debt [[oh, the irony of S&P downgrading debt leading to a precipitous decline in the S&P index), and then a wave of global selling. No market has been immune; not one.

Since global markets bottomed in March 2009, there has been an uneasy calm, the capitalistic version of the “Phony War” period between the fall of Poland to Germany in September 1939 and the fall of France in May 1940. None of the reforms passed in the wake of the financial crisis create any breakers against synchronous global financial panic. Yes, there is less leverage and more capital in financial institutions, which is a vital difference between now and then and augurs against a repeat of what happened two years ago, but there are no circuit breakers that prevent the rolling flash-crash of the past week.
Full Article
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/08/08/market-collapse-2011-how-crashes-are-the-new-black.html

ms_m

08-09-2011, 09:02 AM

You simply can not make this stuff up...

Santorum’s Message To People Who Can’t Afford Health Care Costs: Lower Your Cell Phone Bill

By Igor Volsky posted from ThinkProgress Health on Aug 8, 2011 at 3:55 pm
During a meeting with the editorial board of the Des Moines Register on Friday, Rick Santorum said that people who can’t afford health care should stop whining about the high costs of medical treatments and medications and spend less on non essentials. Answering a question about the uninsured, Santorum explained that health care, like a car, is a luxury resource that is rationed by society and recalled the story of a woman who said she was spending $200 a month on life-saving prescriptions. Santorum told her to stop complaining and instead lower her cable and cell phone bills:

SANTORUM: All the other necessities of life, we allow people to have varying degrees of creature comforts, if you will. Why? Because we are people who ration our resources based upon what’s important to us and health care has to be one of those things, which is in the mix of things we make decisions about as to what type of, what kind of money we want to allocate to that.

I had a woman the other day who came up and complained to me that she has to pay $200 a month for her prescriptions…I said, in other words, this $200 a month keeps you alive, she goes yes. I said, and you’re complaining that you’re paying $200 a month and it keeps you alive? What’s your cable bill? I mean, what’s your cell phone bill? Because she had a cell phone. And how can you say that you complain that you have $200 to keep you alive and that’s a problem? No, that’s a blessing!
During a meeting with the editorial board of the Des Moines Register on Friday, Rick Santorum said that people who can’t afford health care should stop whining about the high costs of medical treatments and medications and spend less on non essentials. Answering a question about the uninsured, Santorum explained that health care, like a car, is a luxury resource that is rationed by society and recalled the story of a woman who said she was spending $200 a month on life-saving prescriptions. Santorum told her to stop complaining and instead lower her cable and cell phone bills:

SANTORUM: All the other necessities of life, we allow people to have varying degrees of creature comforts, if you will. Why? Because we are people who ration our resources based upon what’s important to us and health care has to be one of those things, which is in the mix of things we make decisions about as to what type of, what kind of money we want to allocate to that.

I had a woman the other day who came up and complained to me that she has to pay $200 a month for her prescriptions…I said, in other words, this $200 a month keeps you alive, she goes yes. I said, and you’re complaining that you’re paying $200 a month and it keeps you alive? What’s your cable bill? I mean, what’s your cell phone bill? Because she had a cell phone. And how can you say that you complain that you have $200 to keep you alive and that’s a problem? No, that’s a blessing!
http://thinkprogress.org/
Watch it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmwOYrI8EQU&feature=player_embedded

ms_m

08-09-2011, 09:10 AM

op-ed

Pay No Attention To The Corporations Behind The News: Lost In Media Oz
August 8, 2011
By Janine

In a recent conversation with Thomas Bishop about the debt ceiling debacle, he wondered where have all the journalists gone? I wondered the same thing. Had they slowly been attritioned, replaced by shiny, smiley faux reporters who report the news from a sensationalistic perspective or an ideological one? Had they become disillusioned and tired from fighting the corporate overlords to get their stories told in their entirety? Or is the profession itself dying a slow agonizing death? Quite frankly something is very twisted wrong when an entertainment show reports on the debt ceiling and a news station reports on the Nikki Minaj wardrobe malfunction.

It is as if we the people are Dorothy, Toto, Scarecrow, Tin Man and Lion lost in media Oz, ripped from our homey ranch by the cyclone chaos of the political machine and plunked over the rainbow down in the deadly poppy field of ideology where every dogmatic poppy bloom expects we’ll all stay asleep and drugged by the flowers of mind numbing bickering. We’ve been dusted with doctrinal pollen and pelted with wicked witch misinformation launched from flying monkey paws. Actions which have shoved us off the brick road of individual thought and into the forest of fear and confusion.

Instead of being politically poppy complacent we all need to find our way back to the yellow brick road, journey to the Bureaucratic Emerald City and seek an audience with the Wizards of News.

Or better yet, since the investigative journalist has gone the way of the Dodo, we need to investigate matters ourselves and fight our way through the minefields of lies, outwit the disinformation scandalmongers to form our own opinions instead of those opinions being formed for us by “news” stations whose corporate masters lack brains, courage and heart.

Let us travel together down that yellow brick road and seek to decrease the misinformation volume. When we reach the City of News and rip aside the smoke and mirror curtain we shall see the Wizards for who they really are — the propaganda body politic churning the political poppy machine. No magic there.
http://www.politicususa.com/en/lost-in-oz

jillfoster

08-09-2011, 09:45 AM

Rick santorum is such a prick, I'd like for him to have said that to ME... I would have told him, NO, I don't have a cable bill, I use an antenna and get the TV for free. Health care is a creature comfort? You stupid ASS.

ms_m

08-09-2011, 09:54 AM

LOL....calling him a prick might be one of the nicest things anyone has ever called him Jill Foster and Ahole probably the 2nd nicest....LOL

I don't have any idea how much medication this woman has to take but 200/month is crazy high.

I posted a link about the ridiculous cost of medical care. It's so out of control it's scary and it doesn't cost med companies anywhere close to the prices they are charging to produce these things.

Santorum doesn't have a clue and doesn't want one.

ms_m

08-09-2011, 09:57 AM

Healthcare
Introduction: Hidden Cost

When I began my medical career more than a decade ago, people were already very concerned about the skyrocketing cost of healthcare. However, as much as everyone knew medical costs were high, no one in my profession seemed to know why. None of my colleagues could answer even simple questions about what, specifically, was costing so much. This seemed to be a real problem: how could we even begin to control these costs, if even the people in the field didn't know what they were?

Why didn't we know? To start with, unlike any other business in America, almost all of the financial transactions in healthcare are hidden from the providers as well as the patients. We order tests, procedures and medications to manage our patients, but very few doctors, or other healthcare providers, have any idea how much any of those things cost. Patients only rarely pay directly for these services and payment for any service varies substantially from different payers. Hospitals have separate billing departments that are far removed from anyone ordering or performing tests or procedures. No one directly involved with patient care has any notion of the charge or reimbursement for their service. Even most private doctor's offices contract billing companies, who just send them a check each month from the total amount collected, leaving them no notion of the actual charge or reimbursement for an individual service they provided.
http://www.truecostofhealthcare.org/

ms_m

08-09-2011, 10:47 AM

You can not reason with crazy but you can vote it out of office
Pay attention, get involved!!!!

When one attendee suggested that the House push for impeachment proceedings against President Barack Obama to obstruct the president from pushing his agenda, Burgess was receptive.

"It needs to happen, and I agree with you it would tie things up," Burgess said. "No question about that."

When asked about the comment later, Burgess said he wasn't sure whether the proper charges to bring up articles of impeachment against Obama were there, but he didn't rule out pursuing such a course.

Burgess meets with unhappy Tea Party group
Posted Monday, Aug. 08, 2011

KELLER -- Hours after the Dow Jones industrial average closed down more than 600 points Monday, U.S. Rep. Michael Burgess, R-Lewisville, heard from local conservatives who were unhappy that he supported legislation that many believed led to the calamitous day on Wall Street.

Burgess was one of seven Texas Republicans in the House to vote for the landmark deal that raised the country's debt ceiling by $2 trillion while cutting more than that in public spending.

As Burgess told about 100 people at a NE Tarrant Tea Party meeting, he didn't like the deal but thought supporting it was the right thing to do under the circumstances.

Read more: http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/08/08/3277547/burgess-meets-with-unhappy-tea.html#ixzz1UXie6a1q

marv2

08-09-2011, 11:49 AM

You can not reason with crazy but you can vote it out of office
Pay attention, get involved!!!!

Burgess meets with unhappy Tea Party group
Posted Monday, Aug. 08, 2011

Read more: http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/08/08/3277547/burgess-meets-with-unhappy-tea.html#ixzz1UXie6a1q

Now you see what I am talking about? 100 malcontents [[READ: NUTS!) are driving the destruction of this country through their representatives!

ms_m

08-09-2011, 12:50 PM

HAHAHAH...that's funny. 22 pages of posting since Nov 2010 and you really think I haven't noticed the crazy?...

just messing with you Marv....hahahahahahahahaha

ms_m

08-09-2011, 01:25 PM

Nebraska AG Jon Bruning Compares Welfare Recipients To Scavenging Raccoons
Benjy Sarlin | August 9, 2011, 11:28AM

Nebraska Attorney General Jon Bruning, a frontrunner to replace retiring Sen. Ben Nelson [[D-NE), compared poor people to scavenging racoons in a speech this week.

In a video captured by the liberal group, American Bridge 21st Century, Bruning makes the comparison as part of an elaborate metaphor originally focused on environmental regulations. He describes a requirement that workers at a construction project gather up endangered beetles by luring them into a bucket with a dead rat in order to release them elsewhere. But the plan is thwarted when hungry raccoons then eat them straight out of the rat-infested bucket. Which, according to Bruning, is a perfect image to illustrate how welfare recipients receive their benefits.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/08/nebraska-ag-jon-bruning-compares-welfare-recipients-to-scavenging-racoons.php?ref=fpb

73 percent of Nebraska farmers received some sort of payment in 2009.

10 percent of Nebraska farmers collected 62 percent of the
money.

$306.1 million in direct payments was collected by Nebraska
farmers in 2009.

10 percent of Nebraska farmers collected 56 percent of payments
from 1995-2009.

Nebraska was fifth among states in total farm payments at $14
billion from 1995-2009.

Source: Environmental Working Group.

Read more: http://journalstar.com/article...

All this welfare money Nebraska farmer’s [[scavenger’s) collected came from the Federal Government….I wonder what would happen if this dude told farmers they should give the money back…better yet, stop expecting money from the govt and get to work you lazy farmers. [[SNARK)

The real irony, the progressive left can’t stand Ben Nelson because he’s a Blue Dog and although I don’t have any love for Nelson, he’s a hell of lot better than this dude.

Anyone think they can elect a true progressive in Nebraska…I’m still trying to sell beachfront property in Vegas….give me a call…LOL

Lofty principles are great until reality smacks you in the face!

marv2

08-09-2011, 02:00 PM

HAHAHAH...that's funny. 22 pages of posting since Nov 2010 and you really think I haven't noticed the crazy?...

just messing with you Marv....hahahahahahahahaha

I am sorry Ms M, but I had not been keeping up with this thread. Once it had gotten so many responses, I felt it might be too late to join in. But I do watch MSNBC frequently, CNN also. I listen to local political commentary radio programs here in New York and I read several blogs and electronic news outlets. These people are crazy coupled with a thick mean streak and in my opinion, that is dangerous!

ms_m

08-09-2011, 02:41 PM

LOL, you really haven't been paying attention. 95% of the responses was me talking to myself but it's all good and welcome to the show Marv. LOL

MotownSteve

08-09-2011, 03:05 PM

I am sorry Ms M, but I had not been keeping up with this thread. Once it had gotten so many responses, I felt it might be too late to join in. But I do watch MSNBC frequently, CNN also. I listen to local political commentary radio programs here in New York and I read several blogs and electronic news outlets. These people are crazy coupled with a thick mean streak and in my opinion, that is dangerous!

Hi Marv2,
Just yesterday a friend of mine and were talking about how republican = malicious As for dangerous, I'm stuck with Chris Christie.

jillfoster

08-10-2011, 01:11 AM

Nebraska AG Jon Bruning Compares Welfare Recipients To Scavenging Raccoons
Benjy Sarlin | August 9, 2011, 11:28AM

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/08/nebraska-ag-jon-bruning-compares-welfare-recipients-to-scavenging-racoons.php?ref=fpb

All this welfare money Nebraska farmer’s [[scavenger’s) collected came from the Federal Government….I wonder what would happen if this dude told farmers they should give the money back…better yet, stop expecting money from the govt and get to work you lazy farmers. [[SNARK)

The real irony, the progressive left can’t stand Ben Nelson because he’s a Blue Dog and although I don’t have any love for Nelson, he’s a hell of lot better than this dude.

Anyone think they can elect a true progressive in Nebraska…I’m still trying to sell beachfront property in Vegas….give me a call…LOL

Lofty principles are great until reality smacks you in the face!

HAHAHA!! Ms. M... us farmers would tell that SOB to grow his own damn food on his apartment balcony, we'll keep all of it to ourselves.

marv2

08-10-2011, 02:38 AM

Hi Marv2,
Just yesterday a friend of mine and were talking about how republican = malicious As for dangerous, I'm stuck with Chris Christie.

Steve, OMG! You're in Jersey with "The Governor That Ate Atlantic City"! LOL! You do have my sympathies because he's one that has none for middle class and elderly people.

ms_m

08-10-2011, 06:03 AM

Wisconsin GOP Holds On: Dems Take Two Seats In Senate Recalls, Not Magic Three
Eric Kleefeld | August 10, 2011, 12:48AM
Post updated: 1:30AM

Wisconsin Democrats have fallen just narrowly short of an ambitious goal - the attempt to pick up three state Senate seats through recall elections and take a majority in the chamber. As of early Wednesday morning, with six incumbent Republicans on the ballot, Democrats have defeated two -- but narrowly missed out in two others.

Democrats defeated Republican state Sen. Dan Kapanke, who represented the most Dem-leaning seat of any Republican in the chamber, by a 55%-45% margin. They also won a 51%-49% victory over state Sen. Randy Hopper, whose campaign was also damaged by a messy divorce, and allegations by his estranged wife that he "now lives mostly in Madison" after having an affair.

This would get Democrats from their previous 19-14 minority, following the 2010 Republican wave, to a 17-16 margin. In two more safe Republican districts, incumbents Robert Cowles and Sheila Harsdorf won by margins of 60%-40% and 58%-42%, respectively.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/08/wisconsin-gop-holds-on-dems-take-two-seats-in-senate-recalls-not-magic-three.php?ref=fpa

ms_m

08-10-2011, 06:18 AM

Cantor Acknowledges S&P’s Warnings On Taxes, But Urges Colleagues To Ignore Them

By Travis Waldron posted from ThinkProgress Economy on Aug 9, 2011 at 9:40 am

Standard & Poor’s decision to downgrade the United States’ credit rating Friday night came with clear shots at congressional Republicans who had refused to consider tax increases in the deal to raise the debt ceiling. S&P criticized Congress for allowing new revenues to drop from the “menu of policy options,” criticizing “the majority of Republicans in Congress [who] continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues.” The National Journal proclaimed it “hard to read the S&P analysis as anything other than a blast at Republicans.”

Unlike his party’s presidential candidates and several of his congressional colleagues, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor [[R-VA) seems to have heard that blast, as he sent a memo to congressional Republicans today acknowledging S&P’s calls for tax increases. Despite hearing those calls, however, Cantor is urging his colleagues to ignore them:

Over the next several months, there will be tremendous pressure on Congress to prove that S&P’s analysis of the inability of the political parties to bridge our differences is wrong. In short, there will be pressure to compromise on tax increases. We will be told that there is no other way forward. I respectfully disagree.
http://thinkprogress.org/

ms_m

08-10-2011, 06:21 AM

Washington Post: Some health insurance premiums are going down [[Updated)

[quoting WaPo:] It turns out that pigs do fly. Last month, insurer Aetna received approval from Connecticut regulators of its request to reduce premiums on individual policies by an average 10 percent, starting in September. Yes, you read that right: reduce the premium. The decrease, which affects some 15,000 consumers, will save those policyholders $259 annually, on average.

Now that’s change I can believe in!

http://theprogressweekly.wordpress.com/

ms_m

08-10-2011, 06:26 AM

OP-ED

Giving Shape to Democratic Ideas vs. Whining About It
Tuesday, August 09, 2011 | at 8:12 AM

Yesterday, Princeton University history professor Julian Zelizer wrote a piece on CNN asking, "where are the Democrat's ideas?" To which, my question back is, have you been living under a rock the past three years, Professor Zelizer? In an opening paragraph contradicting his own rhetorical question, Zelizer says:

When Sen. Ted Kennedy died in August 2009, many Democrats wondered who would replace him as the voice of modern liberalism. With a Democratic president who was then fighting for an ambitious health care program, many felt Barack Obama would be that voice.

Barack Obama is that voice. The good professor would know so if he had bothered to check. Not only has Barack Obama gotten that ambitious health care program passed, he's got some more Democratic and progressive ideas passed into law. How this history professor just completely leaps past recent history is beyond me, but I am compelled to remind him that President Obama and the Democrats in Congress also:

• Passed the most far-reaching Wall Street reform since the 1930s; created the first ever independent agency to protect consumers from financial industry excesses.
• Codified women's pay equity in the form of the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.
• Passed student loan reform to cut out the middle man [[banks) and use the savings to expand loans.
• Provided the largest increase ever in Pell Grants for students.
• Legislatively repealed Don't Ask, Don't Tell.
• Made the largest investment in infrastructure since Eisenhower and the interstate highways.
• Provided real tax relief to the working poor in the form of a payroll tax cut.
• Extended unemployment benefits to 99 weeks to cope with the extraordinarily difficult economic times.

The above is but a partial list of what President Obama has done to put Democratic and progressive ideas into practice, not just into speeches. But I guess the professor's beef really is about the last few months. You see, apparently, if you don't see the President podium pounding all the time every day, then liberal ideas have died a sorry death.

Read More
http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/08/giving-shape-to-democratic-ideas-vs.html

ms_m

08-10-2011, 12:25 PM

OP-ED

August 09, 2011 7:55 AM
Obama Shows Gambling Streak in Debt-Ceiling Deal
By Ron Klain

Among the many misconceptions about Barack Obama is that he is cautious. In fact, it is hard to think of a modern president in recent times who has been more willing to take big risks, not because he is reckless, but because he is willing to suffer potential short-term setbacks to achieve a desired long-term result. It is in that context that the much-maligned debt-ceiling compromise must be understood.

This sort of risk-taking goes beyond making policy choices, whose success or failure will always be debated, and can’t be known for years. What I am talking about are presidential decisions that can be demonstrably shown to be right or wrong in a relatively short window, with serious repercussions. That sort of risk-taking by presidents is fairly rare, and yet Obama hasn’t hesitated to take such gambles.

One example early in his administration was his choice to “bail out” the automobile industry. There were many ways in which that could have gone wrong: Chrysler Group LLC and General Motors Co. [[GM) could have failed; management changes and bankruptcy filings that the administration insisted upon could have exacerbated problems; good money could have been thrown after bad.

The safe course was the one that President George W. Bush followed: pumping in just enough money to be able to say he had made an effort, and letting the chips fall where they may. But Obama took action by investing substantial funds, demanding important management and strategic changes, requiring bankruptcy filings, and painfully shrinking auto-dealer networks. All were risky steps that could have quickly unraveled.

Two years later, that choice is paying off: Car sales have risen, auto-industry employment is up, taxpayers are getting their money back, and U.S. cars are getting higher consumer ratings than ever.
More
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/ten-miles-square/2011/08/obama_shows_gambling_streak_in031412.php

ms_m

08-10-2011, 04:22 PM

Obama Administration’s Achievements [[Thus Far)

This site is the preview version of our new Obama Achievements Center. It’s a work in progress and a labor of love — for our country.

We’re building a crowd-sourced compilation of the achievements of the Obama administration, with documentation for each achievement linked to it. It
In today’s frenzied media zones, far too much time has been spent putting the spotlight on complaints while significant achievements are either ignored, not reported, or minimized.

The Achievements
Determined to change the media narrative to finally include the good works of this administration, a group of Twitter users got together under Shoq’s leadership and compiled a list of the achievements and promises of the Obama administration, with documented links to every item. It will be updated on an ongoing basis, as this President accumulates more successes and lasting reforms.

Defining what an achievement is in any administration, is itself an interesting issue. We decided that we would define it broadly to include executive orders,important legislation, and significant initiatives or outcomes of any kind, both foreign and domestic. We worked hard to screen out minor or subjective items whenever we had agreement on them. As anyone can see from this very impressive list, they weren’t needed.

The List
You can view the list here [[http://obamaachievements.org/list). It is designed for current browsers, and may not look quite right in older ones, such as IE 6.0. If things look out of place, we recommend updating your browser to the most current version
http://obamaachievements.org/list

ms_m

08-10-2011, 07:25 PM

How Rick Perry Became the Unity Candidate of the GOP
Ed Kilgore
August 10, 2011 | 12:00 am

During the last few weeks, Texas Governor Rick Perry, who is said to be on the very brink of launching a presidential bid, has said and done some things that would have been big trouble, and perhaps mortally damaging, to most politicians. On two separate hot-button issues [[gay marriage and abortion), he first identified with hard-line Tea Party “10th Amendment” interpretations that states should be responsible for sorting out such matters, only to then obsequiously flip-flop to hard-line Christian Right positions favoring the passage of a federal constitutional amendment. And in an encomium to theocracy far beyond anything Michele Bachmann has conjured, he presided over a “prayer assembly” in Houston that embraced the radical “dominionist” viewpoint that only the subjection of America to conservative evangelical prescriptions could heal the country’s economic, as well as moral, problems.

Indeed, looking back over Perry’s career, these most recent examples are fairly typical of times he’s risked turning off influential factions within the Republican Party. Not that long ago, Perry flirted with the profound alienation of social conservatives by becoming the country’s most visible supporter of Rudy Giuliani’s 2008 presidential bid. In addition, Perry has maintained his support for a law he signed as governor offering in-state college tuition to illegal immigrants brought to the U.S. as children; he’s championed a fishy-sounding and very expensive statewide transportation corridor; and he once proposed that every female teenager in Texas be required to receive vaccination for the HPV virus. So why is it virtually certain that Perry will be instantly launched into the very top tier of the 2012 presidential nominating contest the moment he announces his candidacy?
Full Article
http://www.tnr.com/article/the-permanent-campaign/93415/rick-perry-2012-republican-bachmann-romney

ms_m

08-10-2011, 07:43 PM

Someone you know
has been helped by
health reform
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/healthreform.jpg

Click here to find out how health reform is helping you and or someone you know
http://healthcare.democrats.org/video/?source=DSH

MotownSteve

08-10-2011, 07:46 PM

How Rick Perry Became the Unity Candidate of the GOP
Ed Kilgore
August 10, 2011 | 12:00 am

Full Article
http://www.tnr.com/article/the-permanent-campaign/93415/rick-perry-2012-republican-bachmann-romney

Look at the current candidates. They obviously want to defeat the current POTUS but there is not one winner in the lot.

ms_m

08-10-2011, 08:00 PM

I think Huntsman could do well in the Presidential races but he doesn't have a chance in hell in the Repub Primary. He's not extreme enough.

If Perry finally gets in I'm guessing it will come down to him and Mittens...what happens after that depends on Dem voters.

ms_m

08-10-2011, 08:27 PM

This is Perry's strength...as a result, he will bring twice the energy to the race that Palin did as McCain's VP. Plus he can put two sentences together that sound reasonable. [[lies but reasonable to the uninformed)

Nothing about Nov 2012 is a sure thing and I wouldn't take these folks lightly...well the exception would be Santorum but he's waaaaay out there in crazy land.

But it’s also clear that something else is going on: In keeping with the extraordinary timing that has charmed his entire political career, Rick Perry seems to perfectly embody the Republican zeitgeist of the moment, appealing equally to the GOP’s Tea Party, Christian Right, and establishment factions while exemplifying the militant anti-Obama attitude that holds it all together.

ms_m

08-10-2011, 09:04 PM

Then again, Pawlenty may be the little engine who could….LOL
…but this is the same person who was talking smack about Mittens before the last Repub debate then acted like a wuss when they were face to face…

If he can’t stand up to Mittens, no way he can take Perry down….at least I don’t see it.

Looking Ahead to the Ames Straw Poll
Posted: Aug 10, 2011 7:30 PM EDT Updated: Aug 10, 2011 7:30 PM EDT
by James Swierzbin

With not all the eligible Republican candidates participating, there was some worry that this year's Ames Straw Poll, might not be as big an event, as it has been in years past.

Iowa GOP chairman Matt Strawn doesn't share that sentiment.
Strawn believes that the candidates who are putting their all into Saturday's Straw Poll, will have an advantage, come caucus season.

"It's a great opportunity to identify where your support is around the state and those candidates that aren't here on Saturday, they're gonna miss that opportunity." says Strawn.

The straw poll certainly won't be lacking for media coverage.
More than 800-media outlets have been credentialed for the event, which is more than double the number that came to Ames, 4-years ago.
Iowa State professor and political expert Diane Bystrom is surprised at how much attention this year's straw poll is getting.

Bystrom believes that for many of these candidates, the expectations going in and results coming out, could mean the difference between being a front-runner, and closing the doors on the campaign for good.

"The typical wisdom is that you need to finish in the top three to sustain your campaign." says Bystrom.

Bystrom also believes that former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty has a good chance to pull-off a win, thanks to the strong political organization he's created in Iowa.
Right now though Bystrom believes that Michele Bachmann, not Pawlenty, is the front-runner to win the Ames Straw Poll.

And if Bachmann doesn't finish strong, Bystrom believes that her chances to win the Republican nomination, could dry-up fast.

"If she doesn't finish at the front of the pack with a strong finish, then I think there will be doubts about her viability to run a national campaign." says Bystrom.
http://www.woi-tv.com/story/15246544/looking-ahead-to-the-ames-straw-poll

Right now, if I had to choose a Repub for the POTUS to run against, I'd prefer Mittens. He's not very discipline, his gubernatorial record sucks, he'll turn off TP folks and on a personal tip, he gives off a creepy vibe.

ms_m

08-10-2011, 10:09 PM

Very interesting analysis

Republicans Begin Caving on Taxes
Wednesday, August 10, 2011 |

I know, I know. The big shrill-shreeking story on the upcoming "supercommittee" that will work on additional deficit reduction is right now, "ZOMG, Republicans are appointing anti-tax hardliners, and Democrats are appointing Max Baucus - Noooo!" In fact, Cenk Uygur's "The Young Turks" twitter feed claimed yesterday that "the fix was in" since Max Baucus was appointed by Harry Reid. But the entire Republican Congressional delegations are made up of anti-tax hardliners. The goal here is not to get the Republicans not to pick hardliners but to get them to break that hard line.

They may already be starting to do that. The New York Times' Jennifer Steinhauer reported on an interesting townhall meeting by four conservative House Republicans in Virginia: [[http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/08/10/is-the-house-g-o-p-warming-to-tax-increases/?hp)

In a town-hall-style meeting in Virginia on Tuesday night with four Republican House members ... audience members asked what, if any, revenues the representatives would accept...

Of the four, three gave specific examples that they could possibly acquiesce to. Mr. Rigell – who had invited the other three House members to the meeting because it focused on health care and they are medical doctors – said he thought that at least a few forms of tax subsidies provided to oil companies should be on the table...

Full Article
http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/08/republicans-begin-caving-on-taxes.html

ms_m

08-11-2011, 12:57 PM

[Rachel] Maddow discussed how historic the past two years have been, “If the Senate ratifies the START treaty tomorrow it caps an astonishing period in American political history. For the last two years, Democrats have held the White House as well as big majorities in the House and Senate. The record of achievement in that time, even in the face of unified at times totally random republican opposition, Republican opposition even to things Republicans had proposed in the first place, unified Republican opposition to their own ideas? Their track record even in the face of that is historic. Whether you agree or disagree with what Democrats have done in the first two years of President Obama’s presidency, they have freaking done it.”

She listed all the accomplishments, “The fair pay act for women, expanding children’s health insurance, new hate crimes legislation they said could not be done, tobacco regulation, credit card reform, student loan reform, the stimulus — which in addition to helping pull this country back from the brink of a great depression, was also the largest tax cut ever, the largest investment in clean energy ever, the largest investment in education in our country ever. There was also a little thing you may have heard of called health reform. Also, Wall Street reform, the improvements to the new G.I. Bill, the most expansive food SAFETY BILL SINCE THE 1930s. And tomorrow, President Obama will officially sign a repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

Later Rachel Maddow delivered the kicker, “There are big things this administration said that it wanted to do that it hasn’t done yet. Energy reform, immigration reform, the bush tax cuts for the rich were extended, closing Guantanamo. Those are some of them. Today it looked like one of the important judicial nominees will not get a vote to become a judge this year. There is territory the White House has said it would like to cover that it has not yet covered. By my estimation it is halftime, right, in the first term and with this vote tomorrow they will have gone 85% of the distance they said they wanted to go in the first term of the president.”

If you would have told policy people and political scientists two years ago that halfway through his term in office, Barack Obama will have accomplished 85% of his agenda, they would have laughed at you and told you how impossible that would be given the amount of polarization in our legislative process. If you would go on to tell them that after one year Obama would lose his 60 vote majority in the Senate, and would still pass major legislation the experts would have told you to seek mental help, but this is exactly what President Obama has accomplished.

What Obama has managed to achieve has not been seen in this country since FDR and the New Deal, and on a smaller level LBJ after President Kennedy was assassinated. The past two years have been historic, yet a small vocal minority of Obama’s base is upset with this president and the nation as a whole tends to give him little credit for what he has done.

Source: Rachel Maddow MSNBC

ms_m

08-11-2011, 01:04 PM

Not My Fault!
Tea Party Rep: Bank To Blame For Lending Me $2.2 Million
Tea Party Rep: Bank Should Have Known I Wouldn't Be Able To Repay $2.2 Million Loan
Jillian Rayfield | August 11, 2011, 10:01AM

Tea Party aligned Georgia Rep. Tom Graves [[R), who castigates Washington for fiscal irresponsibility, reached an out of court settlement Wednesday after he was sued for defaulting on a $2.2 million loan -- which his attorney argued is the bank's fault for lending him the money in the first place.

Graves and his business partner Chip Rogers -- who is the state Senate's Republican majority leader -- took out a $2.2 million loan from the Bartow County Bank in 2007 to buy and renovate a local motel. The project soon went belly-up.

The bank, which has since failed and had its assets taken over, sued Graves and Rogers for defaulting. The two Republicans then countersued, "accusing [the bank] of improperly declaring the loan in default after reneging on a promise to refinance it at more favorable terms," according to Jeremy Redmon and Aaron Gould Sheinin of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution .
More
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/08/tea_party_rep_bank_should_have_known_i_wouldnt_be_ able_to_repay_22_million_loan.php?ref=fpa

ms_m

08-11-2011, 03:48 PM

It's going in one ear and out the other....C'est la vie , is right.

Cut And Grow Fail: CBO Schools Tea Party Freshman In Basic Economics
Brian Beutler | August 11, 2011, 3:15PM

Rep. Tim Huelskamp [[R-KS), a Tea Party-backed freshman who voted against the final debt limit bill from the right, wanted to hear from the Congressional Budget Office about the impact of government spending on economic growth. It's an article of faith on the right that vastly shrinking government will magically unleash the forces of private enterprise. But if the newly elected member of the Budget Committee was hoping the non-partisan CBO would affirm that view, he'll be sorely disappointed.

In a response letter Thursday, CBO-chief Doug Elmendorf gives Huelskamp a layman's lesson in Keynesian economics: Under current economic circumstances, new federal spending would help economic growth, and current and future cuts could stymie it, particularly if they hit key government investment.

"When demand for goods and services falls short of the economy's ability to produce them, as is the case currently, increasing government spending can increase aggregate demand and thereby narrow the gap between the economy's actual and potential levels of output," Elmendorf writes.

Unfortunately, this is less likely to change the Tea Party's views than it is to convince them that the non-partisan CBO is in cahoots with big spending Washington liberals. C'est la vie.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/08/cut-and-grow-fail-cbo-schools-tea-party-freshman-in-basic-economics.php?ref=fpb

ms_m

08-11-2011, 04:52 PM

Rick Perry For President: Texas Governor Running In 2012

AUSTIN, Texas — Texas Gov. Rick Perry is running for president. That's the word from Perry spokesman Mark Miner. Miner is telling The Associated Press that Perry will announce his intentions to run for the GOP nomination on Saturday as he visits early primary states of South Carolina and New Hampshire.
Perry's candidacy is likely to shake the GOP field.

His announcement that he is joining the field would come two days after a debate in Iowa and on the same day as his rivals participate in a test vote in the leadoff caucus state.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/11/rick-perry-for-president-_n_924811.html

ms_m

08-11-2011, 08:14 PM

I’ve posted this before…but a little reminder doesn't hurt:cool:

Economic Scene
Yes, 47% of Households Owe No Taxes. Look Closer.
By DAVID LEONHARDT
Published: April 13, 2010

That’s the portion of American households that owe no income tax for 2009. The number is up from 38 percent in 2007, and it has become a popular talking point on cable television and talk radio. With Tax Day coming on Thursday, 47 percent has become shorthand for the notion that the wealthy face a much higher tax burden than they once did while growing numbers of Americans are effectively on the dole.

Neither one of those ideas is true. They rely on a cleverly selective reading of the facts. So does the 47 percent number.

Given that taxes are likely to be one of the big political issues of the next few years — and maybe the biggest one — it’s worth understanding who really pays what in taxes. Once you do, you can get a sense for our country’s fiscal options. How, in other words, will we be able to close the huge looming gap between the taxes we are scheduled to pay and the services we are scheduled to receive?
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/14/business/economy/14leonhardt.html

ms_m

08-11-2011, 08:22 PM

Politics
→ Economy, Money in Politics, Top Stories
It's the Inequality, Stupid
Rich Are the Superrich?

A huge share of the nation's economic growth over the past 30 years has gone to the top one-hundredth of one percent, who now make an average of $27 million per household. The average income for the bottom 90 percent of us? $31,244.
http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/02/income-inequality-in-america-chart-graph

Charts, graphs and facts with sources, oh my…..;)

ms_m

08-11-2011, 08:36 PM

Romney: ‘Corporations Are People, My Friend’ [video]
Benjy Sarlin | August 11, 2011, 12:45PM

Mitt Romney told an Iowa crowd on Thursday that the country should not raise taxes to shore up Medicare and Social Security because "corporations are people" too.

Responding to a question from an audience member as to why Social Security should be included in deficit talks when it doesn't add to the deficit, Romney drifted into a defense of corporate rights.
"Corporations are people, my friend," he said. "Of course they are."

After receiving jeers from the audience over the quote, he elaborated: "Everything corporations earn goes to people. Where do you think it goes? Whose pockets? People's pockets. Human beings, my friend."

Romney went on to suggest raising the retirement age rather than increasing taxes on business in order to fix entitlement programs' shortfalls.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/08/romney-corporations-are-people-my-friend-video.php?ref=fpb
A video of the key quote below:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlPQkd_AA6c&feature=player_embedded

ms_m

08-11-2011, 08:51 PM

Editorial
Where Will Growth Come From?
Published: August 10, 2011

Never has the world economy depended so much on the success of developing nations. A misguided focus on budget cutting has plunged the European Union and the United States down paths that will prolong their economic stagnation and perhaps tip them into another recession. The International Monetary Fund was forecasting 2 percent growth in the euro zone before the financial crisis spread to Italy. The Japanese economy is shrinking. Some top economists put the odds of a double-dip recession in the United States at 1 in 2

These dire prospects, along with the realization that economic policy is blocked by political gridlock in the United States and complacency in Europe, have sent spasms through financial markets, which could further sap growth. Fortunately, developing countries, which account for almost half the globe’s economic output, are growing faster than the industrialized world: in June the I.M.F. forecast that they would grow some 6.5 percent this year and next. Their growth spares the world utter economic stagnation.

Yet developing countries are not robust enough to keep the global economy from sinking in a morass for long. Their economies remain vulnerable to financial turbulence and economic weakness in wealthy nations.
More
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/11/opinion/where-will-economic-growth-come-from.html?ref=politics

ms_m

08-11-2011, 09:17 PM

Team Obama sent the following email to supporters ahead of tonight's debate.

Friend --

You probably weren't planning to watch Fox News tonight. But at 9:00 p.m. Eastern Time, the Republicans will be holding their first Iowa debate. I'm planning to tune in -- and you should, too.

What we're seeing unfold on their side is a race to the right, where it's becoming difficult to distinguish the candidates from each other -- and from the Tea Party Republicans in Congress. I suspect that tonight it will become even more clear that this whole group is way out of the mainstream.

We've put together a helpful guide to a few of the more fascinating positions they've taken. Over the course of the night, we'll be paying close attention to what these candidates say -- and what they don't say. Will they backtrack? Will they double down? Will they hope we forget? Check it out, and pass it on:

http://my.barackobama.com/GOP-Debate-Watch

Keep this page open as you watch the debate tonight -- we'll be keeping score of the candidates' statements and misstatements, and asking folks to share what happens with their friends on Facebook and Twitter.

Don't forget to watch the debate at 9:00 p.m. Eastern Time tonight.

More to come,

Messina
Jim Messina Campaign Manager

Obama for America

Source: My email inbox:)

...and I'm trying to watch but it's difficult listening to people talk that do not have a clue....

ms_m

08-11-2011, 09:23 PM

souka, souka now....this is actually getting pretty good. T Paw is all over Bachmann like white on rice.....LOL

ms_m

08-11-2011, 09:28 PM

Pundits are upset because Bachmann and TPaw went at each other...I thought it was cool and funny as heck...hahahahaha

ms_m

08-11-2011, 09:30 PM

This is turning out to be rather exciting. Newt just went off on Chris Wallace....LOL...this is too funny and not one person has said one thing about how they would create jobs. Oh lawd, now it's Newt and Wallace going at each other.

ms_m

08-11-2011, 09:34 PM

This crap is funny...but I'm rather impressed the questions aren't softball type questions.

BTW....they were told to put "talking points" aside....didn't work...oh well.

MotownSteve

08-11-2011, 09:36 PM

Romney was just talking about bringing in legal immigrants who can work and putting them to work. What about our citizens who have lost and are losing jobs?

ms_m

08-11-2011, 09:38 PM

Herman Cain said, "Americans got to learn how to take a joke".....he is definitely a joke.;)

ms_m

08-11-2011, 09:43 PM

Oh crap....Romney just lied through his teeth....he said he never raised taxes in Mass....his record says otherwise.

ms_m

08-11-2011, 09:44 PM

uh oh...Bachmann and TPaw are going at it again.

ms_m

08-11-2011, 09:46 PM

oops...they kinda forgot about Santorum....teehee

MotownSteve

08-11-2011, 09:49 PM

Is Newt the guy that was run out of the republican party several years ago? He should just shut up and go home!

ms_m

08-11-2011, 09:49 PM

Santorum is going after Bachmann...although he's being nicer about it....this is weird. No one is going after Mittens. Sounds to me they are vying for VP not the Presidency.

ms_m

08-11-2011, 09:51 PM

OK, TPaw gets to FINALLY go after Mittens. This should be interesting.

ms_m

08-11-2011, 10:00 PM

I wish Perry was in this, I'd really be interested in seeing how he would answer these questions.

Pundits are not excited about this debate although they seem to love Newt. LOL

ms_m

08-11-2011, 10:06 PM

I like many of the questions but there isn't any follow up.

ms_m

08-11-2011, 10:09 PM

Ok Newt is coming off whinning....everything is a gotcha question to him....whatever

MotownSteve

08-11-2011, 10:11 PM

If this was not serious business think about what a good comedy writer could do with it.

ms_m

08-11-2011, 10:17 PM

Oh dear, now it's Santorum and Ron Paul....fight, fight....LOL...just joking but they did go at each other.

MotownSteve

08-11-2011, 10:19 PM

Oh dear, now it's Santorum and Ron Paul....fight, fight....LOL...just joking but they did go at each other. Maybe we don't need a writer.

ms_m

08-11-2011, 10:19 PM

Steve....it is coming off like a bad comedy sketch but it's a lot more exciting than I expected...

ms_m

08-11-2011, 10:21 PM

The only thing I see, they seem to be scared of Mittens and Newt.

ms_m

08-11-2011, 10:23 PM

Since when did Santorum give a flying fig leaf about the rights of gays?....Or is it just the rights of gays in Iran? WTH?

Oh dear Ron Paul is pissed....LOL

ms_m

08-11-2011, 10:27 PM

LOL...ok the pundits are now talking and the question was, who up there is looking presidential...one pundit said, President Obama....hahahahahahah...that was funny and AMEN!

They don't like Ron Paul saying he would allow Iran to have nukes...oops

back to the debates...

ms_m

08-11-2011, 10:33 PM

Wow, they asked Bachmann if she would be submissive to her husband if she were President. ouch...she handled it though...she said to her and "Marcus," submissive means respect...not the definition I'm familiar with but hey...to each their own.

ms_m

08-11-2011, 10:41 PM

OK, I need to understand something, what's the difference between The Federal govt "policing" people and the State's "policing" people?

Ok these are all social issues and we all know how where this is going ....blah, blah, blah I don't believe...morals, [[the left has none) blah , blah, blah...now they are asking who is more pro life...[[rolling eyes)

I have never, ever met a person who was NOT PRO LIFE....pro life and pro choice are two separate issues....get over it people!!!!

ms_m

08-11-2011, 10:48 PM

There is not a person up here that can out debate President Obama and Bachman doesn't have a clue how our financial system works and she is lying her arse off and no one is calling her on it....oh hell none of them know ....folks it's time to relearn what you thought you know about the US monetary system in order to make the most responsible choices.

ms_m

08-11-2011, 11:01 PM

Pundits....the guy that dodged the bullet was Mittens....I agree....should be interesting to see how Perry shakes things up if he really does jump in.

Paul said "liberty" comes from the Creator....I'll leave that alone for now.

Ok, now they are going after the Iowa folks to score points in the Iowa Ames Poll.

whatever...

MotownSteve

08-11-2011, 11:01 PM

ms-m, Thanks for the excellent play-by-play.

ms_m

08-11-2011, 11:05 PM

great comment

My basic impression of this debate is that none of these folks is strong enough to withstand Perry's entry into the race. I don't mean I think he's going to win necessarily. But Mitt's hold on frontrunner status looks very shaky to me. It's just that no one else up there can really match him. What's weird about Perry is that usually these savior-like late entrants to a race end up going absolutely nowhere -- Wes Clark, Fred Thompson, etc. But Perry actually seems to be registering strongly in the polls. He's bad bad news for Romney, maybe fatal for Pawlenty. He's certainly managed the atmospherics of his entry perfectly.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/

Unless Perry has a disastrous start like the one Newt had, he's going to eat them all alive.

ms_m

08-11-2011, 11:17 PM

A New DNC Campaign Ad...LOL

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOIMXxytv2U&feature=player_embedded#at=73

"Corporations are people my friend...."

ms_m

08-11-2011, 11:22 PM

ms-m, Thanks for the excellent play-by-play.

LOL, you're welcome Steve. It turned out to be more fun than I had anticipated....LOL

ms_m

08-12-2011, 12:11 AM

Net folks are going nuts over the submissive question that was asked of Bachmann... for those that may not know, let's put a little context in here.

During one of Bachmann speeches she was bragging about working for the govt so she knew how it all worked and didn't work. In that speech she forgot to mention she had worked as a tax attorney for the IRS going after folks. When that info came out, Bachmann tried to clean it up by saying she hated the job and never wanted to go in to tax law but her husband said she should do it. Then she went all right wing Christian and said the bible said you should be submissive to your husband.

So, Bachmann was the one that put foot in mouth before engaging brain, as a result, they asked the question which is fair. Voters have the right to know if a submissive wife would be making the decisions or her husband... if she became President.

A similar question was asked of HRC since her husband was a former president. Another fair question but submissive wasn't brought up because HRC never, ever said she was submissive to the Big dog.

ms_m

08-12-2011, 07:24 AM

4 mins of highlights that pretty much sums up 2 hours of debate....LOL

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-H_ki8UPd3M&feature=player_embedded#at=145

ms_m

08-12-2011, 10:27 AM

Tax loopholes are about finding ways NOT to pay taxes. If you close a loophole, you have to pay the tax….that means your taxes go up….as in your taxes are raised…..

As Ree would say, THINK!

Did Mitt Romney Raise Taxes Or ‘Close Loopholes’?
Benjy Sarlin | August 12, 2011, 9:40AM

News that then-Governor Mitt Romney's office played up his predecessor's tax hikes to secure a better rating from Standard & Poor's may undercut his hardline anti-tax image. But the S&P story also revives a longstanding debate over Romney's own revenue raisers as governor, an issue that takes on greater significance than it did in 2008 thanks to the recent debt ceiling talks.

On Wednesday, Politico reported on apresentation Romney's office gave to S&P in 2004 touting the strength of the state's budget thanks in part to a 2002 tax increase that he opposed. The presentation also highlighted higher fees and newly closed loopholes that Romney championed himself. While Romney supporters have long argued these policies should not count as tax increases, critics have long insisted otherwise and the S&P story pushes the debate into the headlines once again.

The issue of closing loopholes is especially relevant today since Republicans are resisting pressure from the White House and Congressional Democrats to use similar measures to close the deficit -- ending special benefits for oil companies, for example. Small-government activists like Grover Norquist argue that any net increase in revenue amounts to raising taxes and the GOP, with some notable exceptions, has mostly closed ranks around their position.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/08/romneys-sp-revelation-renews-old-tax-fight.php?ref=fpb

ms_m

08-12-2011, 12:52 PM

After Triggering Downgrade, Debt Default Skeptics Try To Run From Their Records — But They Can’t
Brian Beutler | August 12, 2011, 10:16AM

Standard & Poors has a specific justification fordowngrading the U.S. bond rating, and it's deadly for Republicans. It wasn't just that Congress showed itself to be reckless and dysfunctional, or that the GOP shows no sign of ever ending their anti-tax jihad. It's that for a period of weeks, some lawmakers [[read: Republicans) were quite literally shrugging off the risks of blowing past the August 2 deadline, running out of borrowing authority, and missing payment obligations.

"[P]eople in the political arena were even talking about a potential default," said Joydeep Mukherji, senior directior at S&P. "That a country even has such voices, albeit a minority, is something notable," he added. "This kind of rhetoric is not common amongst AAA sovereigns."

This is unambiguous, and leaves little room for obfuscation. S&P's original, lengthy statement explaining the downgrade cited political dysfunction in Congress quite broadly, but did not mention this specific element of the debate. For weeks, high-profile conservative lawmakers practically welcomed the notion of exhausting the country's borrowing authority, or even technically defaulting. Others brazenly dismissed the risks of doing so. And for a period of days, in an earlier stage of the debate, Republican leaders said technical default would be an acceptable consequence, if it meant the GOP walked away with massive entitlement cuts in the end.

Of course, that doesn't mean the GOP won't try to sweep the mess they've made down the memory hole. Here's Rep. Tom McClintock [[R-CA), who sponsored legislation that would've forced the Treasury to prioritize interest payments on U.S. debt in the event of a lapse in borrowing authority. "No one said that would be acceptable," he said of a default. "What we said was in the event of a deadlock it was imperative that bondholders retain their confidence that loans made to the United States be repaid on schedule."

That may be true for McClintock. Others were much more relaxed about the consequences of ignoring the August 2 deadline.
House Budget Committee chairman Paul Ryan said if "a bondholder misses a payment for a day or two or three or four," it's preferable so long as "you're putting the government in a materially better position to be able to pay their bonds later on."

click link for video as well a full article
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/08/after-triggering-downgrade-debt-default-skeptics-try-to-run-from-their-records----but-they-cant.php?ref=fpa

Direct quotes and video will trip you up every time but hey, just do a Newt and call it a gotcha question and all is right with the Repub world ….:mad:

ms_m

08-12-2011, 01:48 PM

David Axelrod Says He’ll Fire Aides Who Call Romney ‘Weird’
Benjy Sarlin | August 12, 2011, 11:11AM

Campaign aides who call Mitt Romney "weird" will be kicked off President Obama's re-election team, according to senior adviser David Axelrod.

The term appeared numerous times in a Politico article quoting a number of named and unnamed Democratic strategists on how they planned to attack Romney in a general election.

Appearing on MSNBC on Friday, Axelrod challenged the report's assertion that the aides quoted were connected to the campaign. "No one on my team believes that," he said, calling the article "garbage."

Asked whether he would fire an aide who used the term, he replied "I would. If someone used words like 'weird,' I would certainly do that."
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/08/david-axelrod-says-hell-fire-aides-who-call-romney-weird.php?ref=fpb

I love the video where Lawrence O’Donnell talked about the politics of “governing” versus the politics of campaigning….if both sides ever learn to understand the difference this country will be one step closer to sanity but I digress….LOL

this article and Axelrod illustrates the politics of campaigning….the comment below highlights it even better….LOL…

It is kind of diabolical, in an entertaining politics as sporting event kind of way.

"I absolutely will not tolerate anyone in my campaign calling Romney 'weird.' No, no matter how strange, off-putting or generally baffling Romney's behavior is, I will absolutely positively fire anyone who says he is 'weird.' We simply cannot tolerate anyone referring to him as 'weird,' and I cannot believe that anyone quoted as referring to him as 'weird' was connected to our campaign. Yes, it is true that the governor often seems oddly disconnected from ordinary people as he campaigns and makes frequent social missteps that demonstrate a truly puzzling blind spot in his social skills set that bespeaks of a life of privilege that leaves him unable to connect with ordinary Americans, but that doesn't mean we're going to call him 'weird.' Absolutely not. Perish the thought."

ms_m

08-12-2011, 05:21 PM

G.O.P. on Defensive as Analysts Question Party’s Fiscal Policy
By JACKIE CALMES

WASHINGTON — The boasts of Congressional Republicans about their cost-cutting victories are ringing hollow to some well-known economists, financial analysts and corporate leaders, including some Republicans, who are expressing increasing alarm over Washington’s new austerity.

Their critiques have grown sharper since last week, when President Obama signed his deficit reduction deal with Republicans and, a few days later, when Standard & Poor’s subsequently downgraded the credit rating of the United States.

But even before that, macroeconomists and private sector forecasters were warning that the direction in which the new House Republican majority had pushed the White House and Congress this year — for immediate spending cuts, no further stimulus measures and no tax increases, ever — was the wrong one for addressing the nation’s two main ills, a weak economy now and projections of unsustainably high federal debt in coming years.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/13/business/economy/voices-faulting-gop-economic-policies-growing-louder.html?_r=1&nl=us&emc=politicsemailema1

Where the heck were all these Republican economist before this crap happened? It’s not as if the Repub/TeaParty crowd SUDDENLY became obstructionist to any kind of spending that would stimulate the economy. They have been pushing this agenda since President Obama came into office but NOW all of a sudden sane Repubs see the light?

Why is that, because the GOP corporate backers are getting their bottom lines spanked because of the TP insanity that’s why?

You can’t reason with crazy…. period! Maybe one day others will wake up to that reality as well but I swear, I’m not ready to bet the farm on that thought!:mad:

ms_m

08-12-2011, 06:01 PM

Standard and Poors punctures Michele Bachmann’s blissful fantasy
By Greg Sargent

Wow, what colossally bad timing. Here’s Michele Bachmann at the debate last night, insisting that the Standard and Poors downgrade proved that she was right to oppose raising the debt ceiling:

“I think we just heard from Standard & Poor’s. When they dropped — when they dropped our credit rating, what they said is, we don’t have an ability to repay our debt. That’s what the final word was from them.

“I was proved right in my position: We should not have raised the debt ceiling. And instead, we should have cut government spending, which was not done. And then we needed to get — get our spending priorities in order.”

Unfortunately for Bachmann, Standard and Poors has now clarified that it’s actually people like her, who oppose raising the debt ceiling and aren’t mindful of the consequences of default, that were a primary reason for the downgrade:

A Standard & Poor’s director said for the first time Thursday that one reason the United States lost its triple-A credit rating was that several lawmakers expressed skepticism about the serious consequences of a credit default — a position put forth by some Republicans.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/standard-and-poors-punctures-michele-bachmanns-blissful-fantasy/2011/03/03/gIQAl37TBJ_blog.html

If this mess wasn’t so serious I could actually laugh at how fast S&P is throwing the Repup/TP under the bus...they deserve to be under the bus but one is just as bad as the other.

ms_m

08-12-2011, 06:15 PM

Who’s Really Responsible For U.S. Debt Downgrade
Brian Beutler | August 12, 2011, 1:36PM

Now that Standard & Poors has confirmed that the chorus of default doubters in the GOP was part of what spooked them into downgrading the U.S. credit rating, Republicans will do all they can to pretend that they never questioned the risk of missing payment obligations, or allowing borrowing authority to lapse. But they sure did!

Here's a long, partial timeline of influential Republicans either vouchsafing default, or downplaying the consequences of passing the August 2 deadline without raising the debt limit.

Rep. Paul Ryan [[R-WI), May 17, 2011: "You want to make sure that the bondholder has confidence that the government's going to be able to pay them.... That's what I'm hearing from most people, which is if a bondholder misses a payment for a day or two or three or four what is more important that you're putting the government in a materially better position to be able to pay their bonds later on."

Rep. Eric Cantor [[R-VA), May 18, 2011: "What I think is that the markets are looking to see credible progress on changing the fiscal trajectory in Washington. The markets are not fooled by some date imposed to say that that is the trigger for the collapse. I think the markets are looking to see that there is real reform."

click to continue...
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/08/whos-really-responsible-for-us-debt-downgrade.php?ref=fpa

Media outlets be they net or mainstream are smelling blood and jumping on the band wagon as well….but take heart America, the extreme right continues to defend this crap while the extreme left wants to primary the POTUS....and I wish that was snark!