View Full Version : The Only Adult In The Room
test
Pages :
1
2
3
4
5
6
[
7]
8
MACRO MINUTE – THE U.S. ECONOMY IS NOT COLLAPSING
31 AUGUST 2011 BY CULLEN ROCHE 63 COMMENTS
Over the last several years my outlook for the domestic economy has been generally steady – we’re in a balance sheet recession and the government is running large enough budget deficits to offset the effects of de-leveraging to a large degree. This means the economy won’t fully recover and feel healthy again until the balance sheet recession is over and the private sector can run with the baton without the aid of the government’s massive deficits. Based on my estimates, we likely won’t be at that point until 2013 or perhaps later.
The primary reason why the government response has failed to generate a sustainable recovery is due to several factors. First, our leaders misinterpret the actual way in which our monetary system operates. This has resulted in a persistent dissemination of neoclassical economics over the last 30 years which has contributed to a misguided policy response on both sides of the aisle. This contributed to an excessively financialized global economy and helps to fuel the misguided policy response in the current environment in which monetary policy and the Fed is largely impotent. In short, we’ve focused too much on helping the banks when in fact, this was never a banking crisis. It was always a household crisis. Unfortunately, Main Street has been overlooked for the most part.
In terms of the outlook going forward – not much has changed. These broader macro trends are all still in place. The balance sheet recession continues, large deficits continue, the inept government response continues and therefore the malaise [[but not a collapse) continues. This all means the economy is likely to remain in a growth phase, but domestic demand will remain stagnant to the point where it feels like a recession [[although the NBER won’t classify it as such) and results in a high rate of unemployment and below trend growth. But make not mistake, this is most certainly one long recession – a balance sheet recession.
http://pragcap.com/macro-minute-the-u-s-economy-is-not-collapsing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaNxAzLKegU
If someone is saving money, in order to balance things out, someone needs to spend money to stimulate the economy…
Understanding monetary policy will be like a light bulb going off when you hear the political debates going on these days.
We are NOT bankrupt. It’s not about debt and deficit right now…. Not when a country is in a balance sheet recession… If one side is saving money, in order to balance things out, the other side needs to spend money to stimulate the economy…
The governments is NOT a household. They do not operate the same way. Households cannot create money [[legally) the government can....BUT....
The Government needs to spend the money it creates…this money makes it’s way to households. The more money coming into the household, the more you can save and spend…the more you spend, the more you stimulate the economy. The more demand for goods and services, the more jobs are created which pays you money [[salary) and you send it back to the government to pay your taxes……and then…the govt. destroys it [[literally) and starts the process all over again.
I’ve said this before and I need to repeat, this is the basic and simple version….there are a lot of moving and complex parts to our economy but the basics will take you a long way in helping you determine who has a better grasp on our economic future. Although I will add, BOTH sides are shaky as heck on the issue [[imo) but from everything I’ve heard, Republicans don’t have a frigging clue. [[or they do have a clue and don’t care)
There isn’t a business worth their salt… that will not hire because of regulations and having to pay taxes…that is utterly stupid. They may not like it, they may even find a place that doesn’t have regulations and high taxes but it’s not the reason they will not hire. I’m going to stop here for a sec because I can hear the voices saying….well that’s why we don’t need to regulate and place taxes on companies…that way we can keep them here….really?
If you’re a company that can go to another country and pay workers peanuts…why would you come back to the US simply because we suddenly decided to never have taxes and regulations? [[unless you get to pay US employees peanuts)
Greed is a powerful thing and once you let it out of the box, reining it in with less regulations and or taxes will rarely if ever work. So what’s the solution….hmmmmmmmm…regulations that stop companies from going in the first place…taxes that makes it cost prohibitive maybe?
I’m not saying businesses need to be strangled to death with taxes and regs [[that’s just as counter-productive as the alternative) but some type of mechanism needs to be in place to protect the people who live in this country. Rules tend to suck…that’s life but there is a reason for rules and throwing the rule book away simply because some rules are bad doesn’t make sense.
Anyhoo….
Supply and demand….that’s what makes and breaks any business. If consumers don’t have MONEY to demand what a business is selling…why would a business need to hire if they don’t have customers? Why would they manufacture [[or contact a company that manufactures) more products [[to supply) to customers they don’t have ….the very same customers that do not have money to buy products that are manufactured?
….and where does money come from? [[Stop and think who creates money in the first place not who signs a paycheck)…the "gubment!"
Do debt and deficits ever matter…yes but not under the circumstances [[the reality) we are in right now.
Austerity measure [[cuts, cuts and more cuts) will not help, it will make things worse.
If the government is not spending the money it creates…how will it eventually get to you? Private real job creators you say?
If you owned a widget company and you were sitting on piles of money....and then you decided to hire tons of workers to make tons of widgets....
you would be spending your pile of money on salary, benefits and the making of widgets......now....
if you can't sell those widgets because consumers don't have money....
and money isn't coming in from the sell of widgets to replace the pile of money you are spending
how long do you think you could keep this up without going broke?
The U.S. Treasury is the only government entity that can legally create money.
I hesitate using the word print because that gives people an image of Treasury printing money just because they can...that's not how it works.
Simply because you have the power to do something doesn't mean you should always use that power and in spite of what politicians tell you...the Treasury Dept. doesn't use their power on a whim to pay for things. If they did, we would have a hell of a lot more problems than we do now. [[think playing with blocks and blocks of money because it's cheaper than trying to pay for legos...not a good thing at all...and we are not there....not anywhere close)
Facts About U.S. Money
Source: U.S. Treasury, Bureau of Engraving and Printing, Web: www.bep.treas.gov .
http://www.factmonster.com/ipka/A0774850.html
BTW, when you think money, think legal tender…..why?...because only legal tender designated by a govt is money
If the U.S. suddenly decided, that one dollar bill in your pocket was not legal tender…you would not have money in your pocket…only worthless linen paper.
but...but....you have a bar of gold hidden in the backyard so you have money right?
well try taking that gold bar to Mikey D's to get a cup of coffee and see what happens.:eek:
...and yes their are gold coins in circulation that will buy you a cup of coffee....but they have been designated legal tender....that gold bar in your backyard has not.
Not Hiding It
Columnist: Registering Poor Voters Is ‘Un-American’
Columnist: Registering Poor To Vote 'Like Handing Out Burglary Tools To Criminals'
Ryan J. Reilly | September 2, 2011, 10:40AM
Conservative columnist Matthew Vadum is just going to come right out and say it: registering the poor to vote is un-American and "like handing out burglary tools to criminals."
"It is profoundly antisocial and un-American to empower the nonproductive segments of the population to destroy the country -- which is precisely why Barack Obama zealously supports registering welfare recipients to vote," Vadum, the author of a book published by World Net Daily that attacks the now-defunct community organizing group ACORN, writes in a column for the American Thinker.
"Encouraging those who burden society to participate in elections isn't about helping the poor," Vadum writes. "It's about helping the poor to help themselves to others' money. It's about raw so-called social justice. It's about moving America ever farther away from the small-government ideals of the Founding Fathers."
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/09/columnist_registering_poor_to_vote_like_handing_ou t_burglary_tools_to_criminals.php?ref=fpa
I tried to find a definitive dividing line between the poor and working/middle class but there isn't one that all economists can agree on but I did see one that said owning a home divides the poor form the working class. So according to that definition, if you rent...you're poor
but...."poor" in this country is usually used as a dog whistle...google it!
Contrary To GOP Claims, Small Businesses Say Taxes And Regulation Aren’t Holding Back Hiring
By Pat Garofalo on Sep 2, 2011 at 10:30 am
Predictably, Republicans reacted to today’s dismal jobs number — which showed that zero net jobs were created in August — by blaming the supposed avalanche of taxes and regulations put in place by the Obama administration.
“Private-sector job growth continues to be undermined by the triple threat of higher taxes, more failed ‘stimulus’ spending, and excessive federal regulations. Together, these Washington policies have created a fog of uncertainty that’s left small businesses unable to hire and American families worried about the future,” said House Speaker John Boehner [[R-OH) in a statement today.
However, McClatchy conducted a survey of small business and found that they don’t blame taxes or regulations for their hesitancy to hire:
Politicians and business groups often blame excessive regulation and fear of higher taxes for tepid hiring in the economy. However, little evidence of that emerged when McClatchy canvassed a random sample of small business owners across the nation. [...]
McClatchy reached out to owners of small businesses, many of them mom-and-pop operations, to find out whether they indeed were being choked by regulation, whether uncertainty over taxes affected their hiring plans and whether the health care overhaul was helping or hurting their business.
Their response was surprising.
None of the business owners complained about regulation in their particular industries, and most seemed to welcome it. Some pointed to the lack of regulation in mortgage lending as a principal cause of the financial crisis that brought about the Great Recession of 2007-09 and its grim aftermath.
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/09/02/310818/small-business-contradicts-gop-taxes-regulation/
Former Boehner Staffer Suggests Rick Perry Would Be Happier With the Confederate Constitution
By Ian Millhiser posted from ThinkProgress Justice on Sep 2, 2011 at 10:40 am
Analogies between Texas Gov. Rick Perry [[R) and Confederate President Jefferson Davis are rather obvious in light of Perry’s suggestion that Texas might secede from the union and his wholehearted embrace of the union-destroying doctrine of nullification. Nevertheless, Speaker John Boehner’s [[R-OH) former staffer Scott Galupo spots an unexpected similarity between how Davis and Perry view the Constitution:
I’m curious what Gov. Rick Perry and his fans think about the Constitution of the Confederate States of America. . . .[I]f you subtracted the slavery bits—as far as Perry [[and, for that matter, many like minded conservatives) is concerned—what’s not to like?
It included a line-item veto for the president. It prohibited protective tariffs [[free trade!). It rejected Henry Clay-style federal financing of internal improvements [[no stimulus!).
Galupo is on to something because, as it turns out, Rick Perry’s understanding of the Constitution is a whole lot closer to the Confederate Constitution that it is to anything resembling the Constitution of the United States:
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2011/09/02/310464/rick-perry-confederate-constitution/
I doubt very seriously if Perry could possibly be the only one that would like to go back to the Confederate Constitution…shrugs
Why Goodwin Liu Matters
By Ian Millhiser on Aug 31, 2011 at 4:50 pm
Later today, California’s Commission on Judicial Appointments will hold a two-hour hearing on the nomination of Goodwin Liu to the state supreme court. Goodwin is widely expected to be confirmed shortly thereafter.
Goodwin’s ascension to his state’s highest court will end an 18 month saga that began when President Obama nominated him to a federal appellate judgeship on the basis of his widespread support throughout the legal community — including numerous leading conservatives. Clinton inquisitor Ken Starr called Goodwin an “extraordinarily qualified nominee” who will serve as a judge “with great distinction.” Torture memo author John Yoo called Goodwin a “very well qualified” nominee who will be a “good judge on the bench.”
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2011/08/31/309031/why-goodwin-liu-matters/
18 months to get through the confirmation process….that is totally ridiculous but I’m glad he didn’t give up. Several of President Obama’s nominees have taken themselves out of consideration for various appointments because of the Republican obstructionist tactics. Yeah… for Goodwin Liu for sticking it out.
Sep 2, 2011 4:16pm
Unexpected Detour: Marine One Forced to Land, White House Delays Informing Press
In a highly unusual maneuver, President Obama’s 30 minute flight to the Presidential mountain retreat at Camp David this afternoon was diverted to an undisclosed landing somewhere in the Washington area and a motorcade assembled to drive him to the Maryland site. White House press secretary Jay Carney tells ABC News a “bad weather call” was made before the President and his younger daughter Sasha even boarded the aircraft.
Carney says they have now arrived safely at Camp David. It remains unexplained why the President would be allowed to board Marine One knowing that the landing site on the mountain was experiencing weather making a landing difficult.
The press first learned of the diversion when wire agency still photographers, who traditionally stand by at Camp David for news coverage in case of an emergency, were told by the military at the mountain top Marine base that the President would be motorcading.
The White House press office did not inform the daily travel pool which remains at the White House and does not make the helicopter trip to Camp David. The pool does accompany any bad weather motorcade to the retreat.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/09/president-obamas-helicopter-forced-to-land-due-to-bad-weather/
Interesting story….the Press pool doesn’t care if a President [[any President) flies to Camp David unless there is bad weather…meaning, they only care if there is a possible, “issue.” I realize something like that would be big news but geeze, something rather morbid about that way of thinking.
INFOGRAPHIC: Record Judicial Diversity, Record Judicial Delays
Posted by Colleen Curtis on August 18, 2011 at 06:33 PM EDT
Creating a judicial pool for the 21st Century, one with intellect, fair-mindedness and integrity that resembles the nation that it serves, is a top priority for President Obama and his administration. In fact, the President’s nominations for federal judges embody an unprecedented commitment to expanding the racial, gender and experiential diversity of the men and women who enforce our laws and deliver justice.
Unfortunately, the delays these nominees are encountering on Capitol Hill are equally unprecedented: earlier this month, the Senate left for its August recess without considering 20 eminently qualified candidates, 16 of whom had passed through the bipartisan Senate Judiciary Committee completely unopposed, a development the Washington Post called “not only frustrating but also destructive” in an editorial published yesterday.
The victims of these delays, of course, are the American citizens who are being denied the fair and timely judicial proceedings they deserve because of the chronic shortage of federal judges on the bench. Stephen Zack, president of the American Bar Association, told Senate leaders in a recent letter that the abundance of vacant federal judgeships “create strains that will inevitably reduce the quality of our justice system and erode public confidence in the ability of the courts to vindicate constitutional rights or render fair and timely decisions.”
To better understand how the Senate delays are impacting American families and businesses, take a look at our infographic that explains the confirmation process and highlights the bottleneck.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/08/18/infographic-record-judicial-diversity-record-judicial-delays
The infographic is very interesting. Click link to check it out.
Experts Question Ratings After S&P Gives Subprime Bonds Higher Rating Than U.S. Debt
Brian Beutler | September 2, 2011, 5:18PM
Influential investors are scratching their heads over a little-noticed development: After downgrading the country's credit rating, Standard & Poors is continuing to award AAA status to the same class of assets that nearly blew up the world economy three years ago.
From Bloomberg: "S&P is poised to provide AAA grades to 59 percent of Springleaf Mortgage Loan Trust 2011-1, a set of bonds tied to $497 million lent to homeowners with below-average credit scores and almost no equity in their properties."
In other words: U.S. Treasuries -- widely believed to be the safest investment in the world -- don't make the cut, but subprime mortgage investments do? What gives?
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/09/investors-knock-sp-for-giving-subprime-bonds-higher-rating-than-us-debt-4.php?ref=fpa
What gives?
....free market principles maybe?:rolleyes:
Climate Science Once Again Twisted Beyond Recognition By Conservative Media
August 01, 2011 8:53 pm ET by Jocelyn Fong
"Has a central tenant [sic] of global warming just collapsed?" That's the first sentence of a July 29 Fox News article about a recent study which shows nothing of the sort, demonstrating just how broken climate change coverage is at news outlets like Fox, where scientific illiteracy meets political slant.
Last week, Roy Spencer of the University of Alabama in Huntsville [[UAH), one of the few climate scientists who think we don't need to worry much about global warming, published a paperpurportedly challenging mainstream climate models that is both limited in scope and, by many accounts, flawed. After a Forbes column by James Taylor of the libertarian Heartland Institutemisinterpreted the study and declared that it blows a "gaping hole in global warming alarmism," an avalanche of conservative media outlets, including Fox, followed suit:
[…]not one of these headlines is supported by the study, which itself suffers from important shortcomings, according to climate experts.
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201108010025
Oops!
Fair and Balanced…wow, interesting concept:cool:
September 01, 2011 11:00 AMThe First Bogeyman of the 2012 Campaign
By Gregg Easterbrook
If an election is coming, that means each side needs a bogeyman. The Republicans have chosen first, and theirs is the Environmental Protection Agency. Michele Bachman calls the EPA “the job-killing organization of America,” promising to “padlock” its doors. Tea Party leader Eric Cantor says environmental rules are “job-destroying”. Texas Gov. Rick Perry says he “prays daily” for the EPA to be restricted.
Soon Democrats will choose their bogeyman - The Rich are the current frontrunner.
Elections often are dominated by bogeymen - Republicans claim Democrats don’t care about national defense, Democrats claim Republicans want to eliminate Social Security, that sort of nonsense. Environmental bogeymen are appealing to some factions because the issue involves regulatory arcana that hardly anyone understands, and because environmental subjects are poorly reported in the mainstream media.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/ten-miles-square/2011/09/the_first_bogeyman_of_the_2012031939.php
Another Republican Rebukes Cantor: Chris Christie Demands Hurricane Aid Without Offsetting Cuts
By Zaid Jilani on Sep 1, 2011 at 9:35 am
Last week, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor [[R-VA)shockingly said that Congress should not approve emergency aid to states battered by Hurricane Irene unless it makes offsetting budget cuts elsewhere first. Cantor has been joined by several other congressional Republicans in demanding offsets be found for disaster relief.
Yesterday, the leading Republican in Cantor’s own state, Gov. Bob McDonnell, rebuked him and said disaster aid should not be held hostage for budget cuts. Now, Gov. Chris Christie [[R-NJ) is joining this chorus of Republican dissent, saying that aid should be delivered first and that possible cuts should be decided on later. “Our people are suffering now, and they need support now,” said Christie:
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie reacted angrily to a fight brewing in Washington over whether Hurricane Irene disaster aid may need to be offset by federal spending cuts. “Our people are suffering now, and they need support now. And they [Congress] can all go down there and get back to work and figure out budget cuts later,” the Republican governor told a crowd in the flood-ravaged North Jersey town of Lincoln Park.
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/09/01/309789/christie-cantor-disaster-aid/
Posted on Friday, September 2, 2011
Obama can't create many jobs without Congress' help
By Lesley Clark | McClatchy Newspapers
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama's own job may be on the line as he presents his plan for job creation next week, with the nation's unemployment rate mired at 9.1 percent and his popularity at a record low.
He'll call on Congress to back him on a package of proposals that the White House says will put Americans back to work. Earlier this summer he tried to rally public pressure on Congress to do as he wished, and he may do so again, exercising his power of "the bully pulpit." This week he threatened to bash Republicans on the campaign trail if they fail to follow his lead.
But Republicans in Congress are dead set against any big new spending program, and they control the House of Representatives, so the prospect of no big new jobs program rolling out of Washington before 2013 looms large.
In light of that, is there anything else Obama can do on his own to spur job creation?
Probably nothing significant.
The White House says there are some steps the executive branch can take without congressional approval, but independent analysts — even those who are pressing Obama to make an ambitious case in his address next Thursday for a sweeping job-creation package — say the magnitude of the nation's problems is so large that it's beyond anything the executive branch can do on its own.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/09/02/123030/obama-cant-create-many-jobs-without.html
Today I asked for a joint session of Congress where I will lay out a clear plan to get Americans back to work. Next week, I will deliver the details of the plan and call on lawmakers to pass it.
Whether they will do the job they were elected to do is ultimately up to them.
But both you and I can pressure them to do the right thing. We can send the message that the American people are playing by the rules and meeting their responsibilities -- and it's time for our leaders in Congress to meet theirs.
And we must hold them accountable if they don't.
So I'm asking you to stand with me in calling on Congress to step up and take action on jobs:
http://my.barackobama.com/Time-To-Act
No matter how things go in the weeks and months ahead, this will be an important challenge for our organization.
It's been a long time since Congress was focused on what the American people need them to be focused on.
I know that you're frustrated by that. I am, too.
That's why I'm putting forward a set of bipartisan proposals to help grow the economy and create jobs -- that means strengthening our small businesses, giving needed breaks to middle-class families, while taking responsible steps to bring down our deficit.
I'm asking lawmakers to look past short-term politics and take action on that plan. But we've got to do this together.
I will deliver this message to Congress next week, but I'm asking you to stand alongside me today:
http://my.barackobama.com/Time-To-Act
More to come,
Barack
After the petition a money page will come up....donate if you are able but please sign the petition. [[it's free and easy) The Repubs have made it painfully obvious what they will do to obstruct the President in his efforts to make the economy stronger and the lives of the working/middle class and poor better.
President Obama calls on Congress to pass a clean extension of the transportation bill to keep America moving and avoid costing nearly one million workers their jobs.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AXuJ6Kt138&feature=player_embedded
Without a rise in employment, which provides cash flow to consumers, which drives demand for goods and services and increases the supply of production and manufacturing, then the economy will continue to stagnate and or slide and confidence will continue to erode.
Small business are making it known that taxes and regulations aren’t the impetus for not hiring more employees.
So what’s the answer? ...Fiscal policies and solutions. Who controls fiscal polices and solutions? ... Congress.
What we are looking at is not rocket science, it’s not debt and deficit; it’s not the country going bankrupt or spending too much money. It’s not a leader with a lack of balls or a spine…it’s a congress that refuses to be honest with and work for the American people.
The accomplishments of the first two years of the Obama Administration:
This is a summation of the first two years of the Obama Administration's accomplishments to remind us all about what it means to have the majority in Congress that can actually pass legislation and affect the kind of change that guided the State of our country's affair in the right path. Whether we like what the Obama Administration accomplished or not is beside the point but it takes a majority to push for something as we had witnessed during the first two years of the Obama Administration.
This is also a reminder about why we need to reverse the power structure in 2011 by electing more and better Democrats to achieve more of what we had started in the first two years of this Administration. I understand some folks will try to undermine the progress we have made but we must highlight them so that the false narrative of some does not feel like the reality.
Share it to all that you think will help inform and to those who appreciate what we have accomplished in the first two years of the Obama Administration. And, tell 'em that these were all possible because we had Democratic Majority and why it is important not to be complacent come election 2012.
On reducing and assisting people that have become victims of the increased poverty made worse by economic crisis
1) A $20 billion increase for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program [[SNAP), formerly known as Food Stamps.
2) A $1 billion in funding for the Community Services Block Grant [[CSBG) that is intended to revitalize low-income communities via "Job training and placement assistance", "Financial literacy programs", et al, to helping families become self-sufficient.
3) A $2 billion in new Neighborhood Stabilization Funds that will allow ailing neighborhoods be kept maintained.
4) A $1.5 billion in Homelessness Prevention Funds to keep people in their homes and prevent homelessness.
5) A $5 billion increase for the Weatherization Assistance Program to help low income families save on their residential energy expenditures by making their homes more energy efficient.
6) A $4 Billion program, The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, "authorizes funding for federal school meal and child nutrition programs and increases access to healthy food for low-income children."
7) As part of the HCR bill, subsidies will be available to the uninsured and families with income between the 133 percent and 400 percent of poverty level[[$14,404 for individuals and $29,326 for a family of four).
8) Estabilished Open Doors to end the 640,000 men, women and children who are homeless in America by 2020.
9) Increased the amount of federal Pell Grant awards so that funds are available to those with less access to have opportunity.
10) Provided $510 Million for the rehabilitation of Native American housing.
11) Expanded eligibility for Medicaid to all individuals under age 65 with incomes up to 133 percent of the federal poverty level [[$14,400 per year for an individual).
12) Providing assistance to low-income workers through the Earned Income Tax Credit giving millions of working families the break they need.
13) Education being the way out of Poverty, kicked off the "Race to the Top", a $4.3 billion program, that rewards via grants to States that meet a few key benchmarks for reform, and states that outperform the rest.
On Health Care Reform:
1) Coverage can’t be denied to children with pre-existing conditions.
2) Adults up to age 26 can stay on their parents’ health plans.
3) Free preventive care.
4) Rescinding coverage is now illegal.
5) Eliminating lifetime limits on insurance coverage.
6) Restricting annual limits on insurance coverage.
7) More options to appeal coverage decisions.
8) $5 billion in immediate federal support to affordable Coverage for the Uninsured with Pre-existing Conditions.
9) $10 billion investment in Community Health Centers.
10) Create immediate access to re-insurance for employer health plans providing coverage for early retirees.
11) Made an $80 billion deal with the pharmaceutical industry to contribute to cut prescription drug costs for the nation’s seniors reduce the size of the "donut hole" in the Medicare [[Part D) Drug Benefit.
12) Provides a $250 rebate to 750,000 Medicare Beneficiaries who reach the Part D coverage gap in 2010. As of March 22, 2011, 3.8 million beneficiaries had received a $250 check to close the coverage gap, according to an HHS report.
13) Businesses with fewer than 50 employees will get tax credits covering up to
>35% of employee premiums effective 2011 and a 50% tax credit effective 2013. 14) Creates a state option to provide Medicaid coverage to childless adults with incomes up to 133% of the federal poverty level. By 2014, States are required to provide this coverage.
15) Provides a 10% Medicare bonus payment for primary care services and also a 10% Medicare bonus payment to general surgeons practicing in health professional shortage areas.
16) Medical Loss Ratio [[MLR) requires that insurance companies spend at least 80 to 85 percent of the proportion of the premium dollars on clinical services. As an example, WellPoint's Anthem Blue Cross unit in California has reduced its proposed rate increase.
On Jobs and the Economy:
1) The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 [[ARRA) has worked. The Economy Has Been Growing - take a look at the graph of GDP growth between 2007 thru 2010.
2) The $787 billion economic stimulus package has created or saved nearly 2 million jobs slowing the bleeding
3) Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act of 2009 that extended Unemployment benefits up to 20 weeks and more.
4) Provided $14.7 billion in small business loans increasing minority access to capital.
5) The $26 billion aid to states package preventing large-scale layoffs of teachers and public employees.
6) As of March 31, 2011, created 1.8 million Private sector jobs since Jan 2010.
7) US auto industry rescue plan saved at least 1 million jobs
8) Helped make the Auto Industry start making huge profits again with Ford sales up 19% over last year. GM up 11%. Chrysler up a whopping 31%.
9) Jobs for Main Street Act [[2010)injected $27.5 Billion for Highways, $8.4 Billion for Transit into the country’s transportation system to create jobs and spur economic activity.
10) A $33 Billion Jobs Package that will allow Small businesses to get $5,000 tax credit for new hires.
11) A $26 billion State Aid Package Jobs Bill saving 300,000 teachers and public workers jobs from unemployment.
12) As part of the 2010 tax extension, Unemployment Insurance was extended to 7 million Americans who would have been without income.
On Banking and Financial Reform
1) Signed a sweeping bank-reform bill [[the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act)into law
2) Managed the $700 Billion Troubled Asset Relief Program [[TARP) that Banks have repaid more than 100% of TARP funds [[$251 of the $245 banks owed) as of March 2011 exceeding the original investment by $6 billion.
3) Cuts Salaries of 65 Bailout Executives
4) Closed offshore tax safe havens, tax credit loopholes on companies that use the tax laws to ship American Jobs oversees. HR 4213.
5) Signed into law the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act to fight fraud in the use of TARP and recovery funds, and to increase accountability for corporate and mortgage frauds.
6) Signed the Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility and Disclosure Act
On Education
1) Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Act of 2010 that increased the amount of federal Pell Grant awards and enabled the stripping of banks privileges as intermediaries for student loan servicing saving the US government about $68 billion dollars over 11 years.
2) Created the Race to the Top Fund, a $4.35 billion program to reward States that submit the best proposals for change.
3) As part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, funded over $100 Billion for reforms to strengthen Elementary and Secondary education, early learning programs, college affordability and improve access to higher education, and to close the achievement gap.
On Energy
1) Implemented renewable fuels mandate of 36 billion gallons by 2022, four times what we currently consume.
2) Automakers will be required to meet a fleet-wide average of New Gas Mileage Standards at 35.5 MPH by 2016.
3) A $60 billion investment in renewable and clean energy.
4) developed a Biofuels Roadmap to determine the next steps in growing an advanced biofuels economy to meet the goal to use at least 36 billion gallons of bio-based transportation fuels by 2022 helping create more green energy jobs.
5) established EPA regulations which require large U.S. ships to cut soot emissions by 85 percent.
6) pledged via the Blueprint for a Secure Energy Future that in a decade from now to cut our oil dependency by one-third, and put America's energy future by producing more oil at home and reducing our dependence on oil by leveraging cleaner, alternative fuels and greater efficiency.
On Housing
1) $275 billion dollar housing plan - $75 billion dollars to prevent at-risk mortgage debtors already fallen victim to foreclosures and $200 billion to bring about confidence to offer affordable mortgages and to stability the housing market.
2) Established "Opening Doors" to end the homelessness of 640,000 men, women, and children in the United States in 10 years.
3) Provided $510 Million for the rehabilitation of Native American housing.
4) Provided $2 billion for Neighborhood Stabilization Program to rehab, resell, or demolish in order to stabilize neighborhoods.
5) Provided $5 billion for Weatherization Assistance Program for low income families to weatherize 1 million homes per year for the next decade.
6) Provided grants to encourage states and localities to take the first steps in implementing new building codes that prioritize energy efficiency.
On Medicaid/Medicare/Social Security
1) giving $250 economic stimulus check to 55 million Social Security and Supplemental Security Income [[SSI) recipients in 2009.
2) Cutting prescription drug costs for Medicare recipients by 50% and began eliminating the plan’s gap [[“donut hole”) in coverage.
3) Passing as part of H.R.3962 [[Preservation of Access to Care for Medicare Beneficiaries and Pension Relief Act of 2010) a $6.4 billion measure reversing a 21 percent cut in physician payments that would have started a flood of rejections by some doctors of seniors covered by Medicare.
4) Expanded eligibility for Medicaid to all individuals under age 65 with incomes up to 133 percent of the federal poverty level [[$14,400 per year for an individual).
5) Committed to ensuring that Social Security Budget Will Not Be Cut nor would change the retirement age.
On Military Veterans and Families
1) A $112.8 billion VA budget, an increase of 15.5 percent over 2009, the largest percentage increase for VA requested by a president in more than 30 years.
2) Implemented a strategic plan to increase the hiring of Veterans and Military spouses throughout the Federal civil service.
3) Provided for the expenses of families of to be at Dover AFB when fallen soldiers arrive.
4) Passed the Veterans' Compensation Cost-of-Living Adjustment Act of 2009 increasing the rates of compensation for veterans with service-connected disabilities and the rates of dependency and indemnity compensation for the survivors of certain disabled veterans.
5) Declared the end of the war in Iraqi bringing back nearly 100,000 U.S. troops home to their families.
6) Donated 250K of Nobel prize money to Fisher House, a group that helps provide housing for families of patients receiving medical care at military and Veterans Affairs medical centers
7) Ended media blackout on war casualties; giving access to the return home of a dead US soldier for the first time since an 18-year ban on coverage was lifted.
8) Create a 'Green Vet Initiative' to promote environmental jobs for veterans
9) Signed into law the 2009 Military Spouses Residency Relief Act, that will allow military spouses to claim residency in the same state as their sponsor and retain that residency as long as the service member is in the military, in the process avoiding the states where they currently reside from taxing their earned income.
10) Signed the Caregivers and Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act of 2010
On LBGTQ issues
1) Extended benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees
2) Signed the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act
3) Instructed HHS to require any hospital receiving Medicare or Medicaid funds [[virtually all hospitals) to allow LGBT visitation rights.
4) Banned job discrimination based on gender identity throughout the Federal government [[the nation's largest employer)
5) Signed the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Treatment Extension Act and while more funding is needed per the 2012 proposed budget, an increase of $80 million to domestic and global HIV/AIDS programs committed
6) Extended the Family and Medical Leave Act to cover Gay employees taking unpaid leave to care for their children of same-sex partners
7) Lifted the HIV Entry Ban.
8) Implemented HUD Policies that Would Ban Discrimination Based On Gender Identity
9) Appointed the first ever transgender DNC member
10) Named open transgender appointees [[the first President ever to do so)
11) Eliminated the discriminatory Census Bureau policy that kept LGBT relationships from being counted
12) Extended domestic violence protections to LGBT victims
13) Repealed the Don't Ask, Don't Tell [[DADT) Discriminatory law.
14) Declared DOMA [[Defense of Marriage Act) unconstitutional and stopped Defending In Court
15) Endorsed a U.N. declaration calling for the worldwide decriminalization of gays and lesbians around the world in an efforts to make it a worldwide policy.
Tax deal extending Bush's tax cut for two years [[TAX CUTS EXPIRE 2012) which often gets criticized will do the following:
1) Keep $3,000 in tax savings annually
2) Unemployment Benefit for 7,000,000 Americans worth $56 Billion.
3) $2,500 in tax savings to help pay for college tuition and other expenses
4) A $2,000 payroll tax savings to someone making $100,000 or a $1,000 payroll tax savings at a 2% employee-side payroll tax cut for over 155 million workers
5) Child tax credit of $1,000 per child with the $3,000 maximum credit threshold.
6) Earned Income Tax Credit that will give on an average $600 in additional assistance to families with 3 or more children
7) A 65 percent tax credit to help cover the cost of COBRA for those who lost their jobs in the recession
8) forecast to creating approximately 1.6 million jobs increasing the GDP for 2011
9) extended the credit for adoption-related expenses that reduces families tax bill up to $13,170 in 2011 through 2012 with a maximum of $12,170 in credit.
Other Notables
1) signed the Health Package For 9/11 Responders bill that puts $4.3 billion into a fund to assist folks that are suffering from problems caused by breathed-in dust and debris during the 9/11 clean up.
2) signed into law a sweeping Food Safety Act bill that contains 18 major changes to food safety laws.
3) made an excellent choice selecting a new Chief of Staff, William Daley, who Eric London has made a super case for why it was a smart choice.
4) made a $78 billion spending cut to the U.S. military and defense department budget, including reducing the size of the Army and Marine Corps.
5) signed in to law the START Treaty with Russia, a sweeping new arms reduction pact that will reduce the stockpile nuclear weapons in both countries adding new verification plan.
6) The passage of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act enabling the rights of workers to sue employers over wage discrimination claims.
7) The expansion of SCHIP health-care program for children worth $33 Billion.
8) The declaration of two million more acres of wilderness in one of the most omnibus
Public Lands bill.
9) Government Transparency as noted by Common Cause, Democracy 21, League of Women Voters and U.S. PIRG-- "The cumulative effect of the Administration's actions has been to adopt the strongest and most comprehensive lobbying, ethics and transparency rules and policies ever established by an Administration to govern its own activities". You can read full report in all of the seven areas the report is graded.
10) signed the Tribal Law and Order Act -- an important step to help the Federal Government better address the unique public safety challenges that confront tribal communities.
http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/09/so-that-ignorance-wont-be-reason-why.html
Like the man or not, agree with his policies or not but President Barack H. Obama accomplished more in two years of his presidency, than Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton did in 12 years, combined."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZP16Nigd0c&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mj868vfkj1I&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z90SeYwK_Q&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGSNjs9v78k&feature=player_embedded
stephanie
09-04-2011, 10:29 AM
Ms M as you know Ms M number 2 has passed away I didnt know if you knew. I know this is not the place to post this but my mother was into Barack Obama so just this once considering the situation I dont think its unappropriate. The real reason I posted here was to ask you how do you post these pics in the forum I dont know how to do that.
Thanks
Steph
Stephanie, I'm so sorry to hear this. My heart goes out to you and your family.
Chk your SDF email.
M
Roberta75
09-05-2011, 09:01 PM
Dear MoveOn member,
I have some tremendously upsetting news: Late Friday, President Obama overruled EPA science and blocked crucial new protections against smog pollution that have been years in the making.1
The decision came after a major campaign by corporate polluters and Republicans to kill the rules.2 The result, according to the Environmental Protection Agency, is likely to be tens of thousands of premature deaths, as well as increased illness among seniors, kids with asthma, and people who have lung problems.3
Worse, in announcing his decision, President Obama repeated discredited tea party talking points about environmental rules costing jobs. The reality is that these standards were the best thing for the economy and the environment. And clean air protections are the perfect issue to remind Americans that enforcing rules to protect citizens' health and safety is one of the most important roles for our government.
With congressional Republicans planning a series of votes starting this week to block other health and environmental standards, we need to set the record straight, right away.4
Will you write a letter to the editor of your local paper reminding folks that environmental protections like these smog rules protect our health AND strengthen our economy?
Our website will give you some tips and make it easy for you to submit the letter to a newspaper near you. And your letter will help persuade folks in your community that we shouldn't be tearing our government down—we should be making it work.
President Obama tried to bury this news by announcing it hours before Labor Day weekend. But on Labor Day we need him standing up for the kinds of health and safety protections that working folks and labor unions have spent decades fighting for, not repeating Republican talking points about how we don't need them.
What's more, Nobel-Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman pointed out that this anti-smog rule would actually create clean energy jobs: "It would have forced firms to spend on upgrading or replacing equipment, helping to boost demand. Yes, it would have cost money—but that's the point!"5
Help push back against tea party Republicans' message that we can't afford to protect our health and safety.
Write a letter to the editor today.
Thank you.
–Adam, Robin, Marika, Peter, and the rest of the team
Sources:
1. "Obama pulls back proposed smog standards, in victory for business," The Washington Post, Sept. 2, 2011.
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=263708&id=30628-9003611-Zao_l_x&t=3
2. ibid.
3. "Obama asks EPA to back off draft ozone standard," Los Angeles Times, Sept. 2, 2011.
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=263709&id=30628-9003611-Zao_l_x&t=4
4. "A Debate Arises on Job Creation and Environment," The New York Times, Sept. 4, 2011.
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=263710&id=30628-9003611-Zao_l_x&t=5
5. "Broken Windows, Ozone, and Jobs," The New York Times, Sept. 3, 2011.
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=263711&id=30628-9003611-Zao_l_x&t=6
Want to support our work? We're entirely funded by our 5 million members—no corporate contributions, no big checks from CEOs. And our tiny staff ensures that small contributions go a long way. Chip in here.
PAID FOR BY MOVEON.ORG POLITICAL ACTION, http://pol.moveon.org/. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. This email was sent to John Cluckie on September 5, 2011. To change your email address or update your contact info, click here. To remove yourself from this list, click here.
It wasn't buried. The blogosphere was on a rampage over it all last week.
I'm sure it's made a lot of environmentalist unhappy but I'm curious, with the Republicans in control of the House and opposing every regulation to come along, why throw this at them when jobs should be the priority and the issue to make a stand on?
THE PRAGMATIC PRESIDENT
By Fareed Zakaria
August 12, 2011
The air is thick with liberal disappointment. In the days after the debt deal, liberal politicians and commentators took to the airwaves and op-ed pages to mourn the agreement. But their ire was directed not at the Tea Party or even the Republicans but rather at Barack Obama, who they concluded had failed as a President because of his persistent tendency to compromise.
As the New Republic’s Jonathan Chait brilliantly points out, this criticism stems from a liberal fantasy that if only the President would give a stirring speech, he would sweep the country along with the sheer power of his poetry. In this view, writes Chait, “every known impediment to the legislative process—special interest lobbying, the filibuster, macroeconomic conditions, not to mention certain settled beliefs of public opinion—are but tiny stick huts trembling in the face of the atomic bomb of the presidential speech.”
But the idea abides. On Aug. 9, the MSNBC host Dylan Ratigan raged on TV that Obama should just give such a speech, overriding Congress and taking charge. But the most revealing moment came minutes after Ratigan’s rant, when his panel of experts pressed him as to what specifically he would want Obama to do once he had usurped power. Ratigan’s answer: allow corporations to re patriate their overseas profits [[presumably by reducing or waiving corporate taxes on the money) to fund a national infrastructure bank. So the great liberal dream is that Obama propose something that he has already proposed and fund it by giving multinationals a tax break.
[…]Obama’s temperament was eloquently expressed by the late Bart Giamatti, a former president of Yale and former baseball commissioner, when he urged students not to fall prey to ideology from the right or left and to celebrate the democratic process that balances the two extremes. “My middle view is the view of the centrist,” he said, before quoting law professor Alexander Bickel, “who would ... fix ‘our eyes on that middle distance, where values are provisionally held, are tested, and evolve within the legal order derived ... from the morality of consent.’ To set one’s course by such a centrist view is to leave oneself open to the charges, hurled by the completely faithful of some extreme, of being relativistic, opportunistically flexible, secular, passive, passionless ... Be of good cheer ... To act according to an open and principled pragmatism, to believe in the power of process, is in fact to work for the good.”
Full Article:
http://www.fareedzakaria.com/home/Articles/Entries/2011/8/12_The_Debt_Deals_Failure_2.html
During Secret Retreat With Billionaires, Koch Lobbyist Admits Tea Party Group ‘Designed’ To Elect Republicans In 2010
By Lee Fang on Sep 6, 2011 at 6:55 pm
This morning, blogger Brad Friedman, writing in Mother Jones [[http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/09/exclusive-audio-koch-brothers-seminar-tapes) and BradBlog [[http://www.bradblog.com/?page_id=8700), revealed a set of audio tapes from the last major donor meeting convened by the billionaire Koch brothers. There are a number of startling revelations [[http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/09/06/312067/at-strategy-seminar-with-wealthy-guests-charles-koch-referred-to-obama-as-a-saddam-hussein-to-be-defeated/) from the scoop — but the opening remarks from Kevin Gentry, a Koch Industries executive at the firm’s DC lobbying office, blow the cover off the many Tea Party efforts underwritten by the billionaires in the Koch network of donors.
Gentry, who doubles [[http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2010/10/20/124642/beck-koch-chamber-meeting/) as the official responsible for doling out Koch charitable grants, admits privately what ThinkProgress [[http://thinkprogress.org/health/2009/05/29/170792/afp-timphillips-astroturf/) and others have noted for years [[http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2009/04/09/37433/lobbyists-planning-teaparties/): Americans for Prosperity, the front group founded by David Koch, orchestrates Tea Party events simply to elect more Republicans. Gentry said he met with Fred Young, a Wisconsin owner of engine manufacturing plants, at an Americans for Prosperity [[AFP) event “designed to help in the Congressional races” during one of their “get out the vote tours”:
KEVIN GENTRY: I’m going to turn it over to a dear friend, Fred Young, for the purposes of an introduction. Fred is a long-time fighter, freedom fighter, in this movement, from Racine, Wisconsin. Former owner of Young Radiator. As part of our efforts last year, in 2010, I was on the road for [TN?] in Wisconsin, here at one of Americans for Prosperity’s last minute kind of get out the vote tours. And I went to an event in Racine, Wisconsin, and met up with Fred. It was sort of a Tea Party AFP event designed to help in the Congressional races. And Fred was kind enough to lend me a sweatshirt because I wasn’t actually prepared for Racine, Wisconsin in November. So Fred, let’s take it away, please.
Full Article:
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/09/06/312478/koch-admits-tea-party-gop-gotv/
This is sick and sad...and so was the debate!
Biggest Applause Line Of The Night Goes To 234 People Perry Has Seen Executed In Texas
The crowd in Simi Valley is a blood-thirsty one: the biggest applause line of the night at the debate went to Rick Perry’s defense of the 234 people that have been executed by the state of Texas while Perry has been governor.
Perry had no apologies for the number, and if anything seemed proud of it. Asked by moderator Brian Williams why the number got so much applause, Perry said this:
“I think Americans understand justice.”
Five takeaways from the Reagan Library debate
September 7, 2011 • Posted in 2012, People, Politics, Republicans
Eight Republicans came to fight for the attention of Republican voters at the Politico-NBC debate at the Reagan Library Wednesday, but only two of them mattered.
Texas Gov. Rick Perry and former front runner Mitt Romney duked it out while the also rans tried their best to get in. But while Newt Gingrich quibbled at the questions and Ron Paul called for an end to entitlements and airline security, here were the key takeaways from the night:
1. Rick Perry really, really thinks Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. He double and tripled-down on that tonight, despite a pretty firm rebuke from Romney. As David Frum tweeted, if Perry winds up being the nominee, that quote will haunt him. And I’m pretty sure Social Security will be the big headline coming out of the debate.
2. Perry also appealed to the anti-science crowd. Perry also refused to back down from his doubts on climate change, though he seemed stumped when asked to name a single scientist who agrees with him. I think he might have even tried to say his scientist was Galileo…
3. Romney was in attack mode. He went after Perry, but even moreso, he trained his attacks on President Obama. As serious and prepared as Romney seemed — he was arguably the technical winner of the debate — it’s hard to see him capturing the passion of the GOP base, which is much more like Perry than it is like Mitt. After all, this was a crowd, in the room at the Reagan Library, that cheered loudly, at the thought of hundreds of executions in Texas.
4. Michele Bachmann disappeared — even her signature “Obamacare” slams seemed to fall flat in the room. She didn’t come across as terribly new or interesting, and failed, utterly, to stand out. Ed Rollins tried masterfully to spin her performance on MSNBC afterward as “not designed to knock someone off the stage” the way Bachmann did to Tim Pawlenty in Iowa, but in reality, that’s exactly what she needed to do.
5. This is now a two-man race. Romney will have to stay on offense against Perry, and take some time off attacking Obama to do it. Perry will need to find a better answer — or an answer, period — on that Gardasil decision he made in Texas, and on his participation in the Al Gore campaign. But I’m sure the White House won’t be wishing him luck, since after tonight, they’ve got to be itching to face Rick Perry next November.
http://blog.reidreport.com/2011/09/five-takeaways-from-the-reagan-library-debate/
Out Of Step With Rest Of Nation, Only One In Three Tea Partiers Think Global Warming Is Real
By Marie Diamond and Brad Johnson posted from ThinkProgress Green on Sep 7, 2011 at 4:05 pm
A new survey on global warming by the Yale Project on Climate Change Communications finds that self-described members of the Tea Party movement are distinctly more skeptical of global warming than all other Americans. Only 34 percent of Tea Party members say they believe global warming is happening, compared to 78 percent of Democrats, and 53 percent of non-Tea Party Republicans:
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/tea_party_beliefs.jpg
Ironically, Tea Party members are much more likely than other groups to believe they are “very well informed,” and are much more likely to say they “do not need any more information” about global warming to make up their minds. A majority among all four groups — Democrats, Republicans, Independents, and Tea Party members — said they support funding for research into renewable energy.
http://thinkprogress.org/
Lawd love a duck!
When your source of info is Fox News, World Net Daily, Red State and the Drudge Report and you think that makes you well informed, you are truly "special.":rolleyes:
GOP Defector Spills the Beans
Sep 5, 2011 2:51 PM EDT
"Mike Lofgren loyally served the GOP on Capitol Hill for 28 years. But no longer. Michael Tomasky on what the defection of a Republican staffer tells us about the state of the party."
Many people are buzzing about an article at truthout.org by one Mike Lofgren, a longtime Republican staff aide on Capitol Hill who just couldn’t take the crazy anymore, left his job, and produced this buzzy [[and quite well-written) lamentation about his party’s tactics and goals. If you haven’t read it, you must. There was nothing in there that surprised me. I’ve been saying all these things for a long time [[as have many others). What continues to dumbfound me is why Lofgren’s assertions are even controversial, because as long as they remain so, “neutral” observers who deny this reality bear some responsibility for the sad shape our politics is in.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/09/05/congressional-staffer-mike-lofgren-turns-on-his-fellow-republicans.html
Goodbye to All That: Reflections of a GOP Operative Who Left the Cult
Saturday 3 September 2011
by: Mike Lofgren, Truthout | News Analysis
Barbara Stanwyck: "We're both rotten!"
Fred MacMurray: "Yeah - only you're a little more rotten." -"Double Indemnity" [[1944)
Those lines of dialogue from a classic film noir sum up the state of the two political parties in contemporary America. Both parties are rotten - how could they not be, given the complete infestation of the political system by corporate money on a scale that now requires a presidential candidate to raise upwards of a billion dollars to be competitive in the general election? Both parties are captives to corporate loot. The main reason the Democrats' health care bill will be a budget buster once it fully phases in is the Democrats' rank capitulation to corporate interests - no single-payer system, in order to mollify the insurers; and no negotiation of drug prices, a craven surrender to Big Pharma.
But both parties are not rotten in quite the same way. The Democrats have their share of machine politicians, careerists, corporate bagmen, egomaniacs and kooks. Nothing, however, quite matches the modern GOP.
To those millions of Americans who have finally begun paying attention to politics and watched with exasperation the tragicomedy of the debt ceiling extension, it may have come as a shock that the Republican Party is so full of lunatics. To be sure, the party, like any political party on earth, has always had its share of crackpots, like Robert K. Dornan or William E. Dannemeyer. But the crackpot outliers of two decades ago have become the vital center today: Steve King, Michele Bachman [[now a leading presidential candidate as well), Paul Broun, Patrick McHenry, Virginia Foxx, Louie Gohmert, Allen West. The Congressional directory now reads like a casebook of lunacy.
Full Article
http://www.truth-out.org/goodbye-all-reflections-gop-operative-who-left-cult/1314907779
The above article has many on point quotes ...and all this coming from a Republican of 30 years.
A couple of years ago, a Republican committee staff director told me candidly [[and proudly) what the method was to all this obstruction and disruption. Should Republicans succeed in obstructing the Senate from doing its job, it would further lower Congress's generic favorability rating among the American people. By sabotaging the reputation of an institution of government, the party that is programmatically against government would come out the relative winner.
A deeply cynical tactic, to be sure, but a psychologically insightful one that plays on the weaknesses both of the voting public and the news media. There are tens of millions of low-information voters who hardly know which party controls which branch of government, let alone which party is pursuing a particular legislative tactic. These voters' confusion over who did what allows them to form the conclusion that "they are all crooks," and that "government is no good," further leading them to think, "a plague on both your houses" and "the parties are like two kids in a school yard." This ill-informed public cynicism, in its turn, further intensifies the long-term decline in public trust in government that has been taking place since the early 1960s - a distrust that has been stoked by Republican rhetoric at every turn [["Government is the problem," declared Ronald Reagan in 1980).
For people who profess to revere the Constitution, it is strange that they so caustically denigrate the very federal government that is the material expression of the principles embodied in that document.
I have joked in the past that the main administration policy that Republicans object to is Obama's policy of being black.[2] Among the GOP base, there is constant harping about somebody else, some "other," who is deliberately, assiduously and with malice aforethought subverting the Good, the True and the Beautiful: Subversives.
It is not clear to me how many GOP officeholders believe this reactionary and paranoid claptrap. I would bet that most do not. But they cynically feed the worst instincts of their fearful and angry low-information political base with a nod and a wink.
The reader may think that I am attributing Svengali-like powers to GOP operatives able to manipulate a zombie base to do their bidding. It is more complicated than that. Historical circumstances produced the raw material: the deindustrialization and financialization of America since about 1970 has spawned an increasingly downscale white middle class - without job security [[or even without jobs), with pensions and health benefits evaporating and with their principal asset deflating in the collapse of the housing bubble. Their fears are not imaginary; their standard of living is shrinking.
What do the Democrats offer these people? Essentially nothing. Democratic Leadership Council-style "centrist" Democrats were among the biggest promoters of disastrous trade deals in the 1990s that outsourced jobs abroad: NAFTA, World Trade Organization, permanent most-favored-nation status for China. At the same time, the identity politics/lifestyle wing of the Democratic Party was seen as a too illegal immigrant-friendly by downscaled and outsourced whites.[3]
While Democrats temporized, or even dismissed the fears of the white working class as racist or nativist, Republicans went to work. To be sure, the business wing of the Republican Party consists of the most energetic outsourcers, wage cutters and hirers of sub-minimum wage immigrant labor to be found anywhere on the globe. But the faux-populist wing of the party, knowing the mental compartmentalization that occurs in most low-information voters, played on the fears of that same white working class to focus their anger on scapegoats that do no damage to corporations' bottom lines: instead of raising the minimum wage, let's build a wall on the Southern border [[then hire a defense contractor to incompetently manage it). Instead of predatory bankers, it's evil Muslims. Or evil gays. Or evil abortionists.
How do they manage to do this? Because Democrats ceded the field. Above all, they do not understand language. Their initiatives are posed in impenetrable policy-speak: the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. The what? - can anyone even remember it? No wonder the pejorative "Obamacare" won out. Contrast that with the Republicans' Patriot Act. You're a patriot, aren't you? Does anyone at the GED level have a clue what a Stimulus Bill is supposed to be? Why didn't the White House call it the Jobs Bill and keep pounding on that theme?
If you truly want to understand the Republican Party of today AND your President....the article is a MUST READ!
..and my best comment of the day award goes to....
The formation of a viable third party has succeeded only once in 230 years, and that was driven by 30 years of intensifying political conflict leading up to the Civil War. Until things get much worse than they are today, the chances of a third party doing anything more than strengthening the hand of the GOP radicals is nil. For now, the better choice is to change the Democratic Party to one reinforced with fortitude instead of driven by fear.
stephanie
09-08-2011, 01:20 AM
This debate [[if you want to call it that) was a joke! When people were clapping about how many people were executed under Perry I winced. Bachmann never answers the questions, Ron Paul rambles as if he wont get any words in, Romney was nervous but looked credible, Cain wanted to give every right to the states and demolish our precious government while trying to be the Republican Obama, Gingrich looked like the forgotten Republican who was once admired and revered, all I could gather from this is that everyone hates Obama and Huntsman is the only one I agreed with on certain issues.
What is truly sad is that I want Perry to win so people can remind him that SS is a ponzi-scheme! If he brings that up again Obama could win by default.
Hi Stephanie did you get my message?
I agree, it was a joke. After what I saw tonight, I would almost pay to see any of them debate the POTUS. They are all nuts.
Hope you get a chance to read the article I posted. It's excellent and very well written too.
Let me know if you received my message and if not I'll resend.
Glad to see you here.:cool:
What the Left Doesn’t Understand About Obama
By JONATHAN CHAIT
Published: September 2, 2011
This has been the summer that liberal discontent with Obama has finally crystallized. The frustration has been simmering for a while — through centrist appointments, bank bailouts and the defeat of the public option, to name a few examples. But it has taken the debt-ceiling standoff and the threat of a double-dip recession to create a leftist critique of the president that stuck.
Obama’s image as a weakling and sellout on domestic issues now centers on his alleged resistance, from the very first days of his presidency, to do whatever was necessary to heal the economy. “The truly decisive move that broke the arc of history,” wrote the Emory professor Drew Westen in this newspaper, “was his handling of the stimulus.” Just as the conservative repudiation of George W. Bush boiled down to “he spent too much,” the liberal repudiation of Obama has settled on “he didn’t spend enough.”
There’s truth in that. President Obama underestimated the depth of the crisis in 2009 and left himself with bad options in the event the economy failed to recover as quickly as he hoped. And yet the wave of criticism from the left over the stimulus is fundamentally flawed: it ignores the real choices Obama faced [[and the progressive decisions he made) and wishes away any constraints upon his power.
The most common hallmark of the left’s magical thinking is a failure to recognize that Congress is a separate, coequal branch of government consisting of members whose goals may differ from the president’s. Congressional Republicans pursued a strategy of denying Obama support for any major element of his agenda, on the correct assumption that this would make it less popular and help the party win the 2010 elections. Only for roughly four months during Obama’s term did Democrats have the 60 Senate votes they needed to overcome a filibuster. Moreover, Republican opposition has proved immune even to persistent and successful attempts by Obama to mobilize public opinion. Americans overwhelmingly favor deficit reduction that includes both spending and taxes and favor higher taxes on the rich in particular. Obama even made a series of crusading speeches on this theme. The result? Nada.
MORE…
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/04/magazine/what-the-left-doesnt-understand-about-obama.html?_r=1
I'm Not Done Arguing Yet
Jonathan Chait
My piece in the New York Times magazine last weekend about President Obama and the left kicked up a lot of debate. The thesis was that the left's criticisms that Obama failed to secure enough stimulus. Let me address a couple objections I've seen. One argument claims that my argument hinges on the premise that those who argued for more stimulus are unimportant. Here's what I wrote:
It’s worth recalling that several weeks before Obama proposed an $800 billion stimulus, House Democrats had floated a $500 billion stimulus. [[Oddly, this never resulted in liberals portraying Nancy Pelosi as a congenitally timid right-wing enabler.) At the time, Obama’s $800 billion stimulus was seen by Congress, pundits and business leaders — that is to say, just about everybody who mattered — as mind-bogglingly large. News reports invariably described it as “huge,” “massive” or other terms suggesting it was unrealistically large, even kind of pornographic. The favored cliché used to describe the reaction in Congress was “sticker shock.”
More:
http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-chait/94672/im-not-done-arguing-yet
Wednesday September 7, 2011
How Rick Perry Won the Debate
Jonathan Chait
The most intellectually interesting portion of tonight's Republican presidential debate occurred in its opening moments, when Rick Perry and Mitt Romney sparred over their states’ record of job creation. Perry cited his states record of creating jobs. Romney replied that his state inherited a worse situation, and wound up with a lower level of unemployment, while of course ignoring that Perry has governed during a recession. Perry responded that Romney created jobs at a lower rate than Michael Dukakis.
The whole exchange seemed to demonstrate conclusively that the method of evaluating a governor’s record by its job creation, by any measure, borders on useless. The effect of state policy, compared to the broader environment or other factors beyond a governor’s control, is simply too miniscule. Of course, this realization kicks the slats out from beneath Perry’s entire general election economic message.
http://www.tnr.com/blogs/jonathan-chait
Sadly, I think Chait is probably correct…. Perry knows how to play to his base and I’m sure they heard him loud and clear.
He plays right into the hands of the low info voters. He's dumb but dangerous.
See the article I posted above :
Goodbye to All That: Reflections of a GOP Operative Who Left the Cult
Saturday 3 September 2011
by: Mike Lofgren, Truthout | News Analysis
Doug-Morgan
09-08-2011, 08:23 AM
I was listening to an interview with Jonathen Chait during the Political Junkie segment of "Talk Of The Nation" yesterday, and he was spot on. The political reality is that The President does not have the votes to do what he wants to do, and the need to do something has forced compromise on his part.
Also from "TOTN", a couple of weeks ago they had a discussion concerning ideology and electability, and the problem it causes for the Republican party. As it sits now [[in my opinion), Romney would be the better candidate, but may not get nominated. Perry is the more ideological candidate and holds a better chance of getting nominated, but isn't flexable enough in his ideological thinking to win a general. It's a repeat of the problem John McCain had after his nomination 4 years ago. Probably too left for the party faithful, he was forced to take Sarah Palin as his running mate, a move that killed his campaign with moderate independents.
Doug, Jonathan Chait has been on a roll lately. [[in a good way)
The sad part, because of all the crazy rules in the Senate, the POTUS never had the votes. He only had a 60 vote majority for about 4 months and within that 60 were 2 Blue Dogs and Lieberman.
People either forget or didn't know it was Ben Nelson [[D-Nebraska) who almost single handily brought the Health Care Bill down and even Bernie Sanders said, there were only about 10 votes total for single payer, it was never going to pass. But the media hypes everything up to a frenzy and voters fall for it like it's candy. It's one of the many reasons I'm not as confident as you are that Perry can't win the general. I think he has a better shot at it than Romney.
I realize many Indie's and moderates will not vote for him but they just may sit the election out along with many Dems. Add that to the new voter laws around the country and Perry has about the same shot as Bush jr and we all know how that turned out.
The article by Mike Lofgren, lays out the Repub strategy to a tee and so far it's working....and ask yourself, how many MSM [[main stream media) outlets are hyping this article the way they hyped something like the so call "speech gate"?
Doug-Morgan
09-08-2011, 04:38 PM
I hate to say it, but if the independent and moderate voters stay home and sit on their hands, they deserve Rick Perry or Mitt Romney as president. "Decisions are made by those who show up" is the common phrase, and if you don't show up, you have no right to complain about the government you have.
That made me smile Doug because I often say the same thing....but then I realize, although they deserve it, people like you and me don't. Their actions [[or non actions) doesn't only affect them but all of us.
Don't know if you read the article by Mike Lofgren but it truly explains the thinking that's going on out here and how and why it got to this point.
Too many people are accepting what they are being fed, not just by politicians but by the media. Both are pulling on their emotions and neither are motivating them to think, read and or research.
Last night I was thinking about you and how you listen to and read alternative news sources and Doug, you would be surprised how many people don't. People will give many reasons and excuses and I'm not going to say they are not legit but at what point do the American people take responsibility for the part they have played in creating this mess we find ourselves in?
Voters elect politicians that run our country and government and then blame the politicians and government for all the wrongs. But here is the real kicker for me, we vote and blame, not because we truly looked at who these politicians are or how government and our economy really works, we vote and blame based on emotion and identity politics.
Doug, think about this, Texas has THE WORST record in terms of health care, education and a host of other ills yet, Rick Perry is the longest serving governor in this country's history. WHY?
Doug, I'm not going to re-post this right now but check back to page 26 and look at the record of Texas and Perry for the last 10-12 years...then ask yourself ...why?
The Trash Talker: Why Rick Perry Will Thrive in Presidential Debates
Erica Grieder
September 7, 2011 | 12:00 am
A not insignificant portion of the national political establishment—consisting of panicky Democrats and Republicans alike—is hoping that Rick Perry’s commanding lead in recent Republican primary polls will wither under the lights of this month’s multiple presidential debates, beginning with tonight’s event at the Ronald Reagan Library in California. The governor of Texas may be a formidable retail politician, they reason, but as soon as he’s facing sustained, aggressive questioning, and is forced to speak off the cuff about policy, he’ll be exposed for what he truly is: A good ol’ boy who doesn’t have the brains or the manners to earn the public’s trust.
This is, to put it mildly, wishful thinking. Anyone who’s counting on Perry showing up this evening and tripping over himself, in the style of George W. Bush, is in for an unpleasant surprise. Perry has occasionally been a lazy debater and he is sometimes lackadaisical about keeping informed, but he has cultivated a number of rhetorical strengths.
On the issues where he has been motivated to mastery, for example, such as business and electoral politics, he typically has a commanding grasp of the facts. When I’ve interviewed him, I’ve been most concerned about economic issues, and have found him to be an articulate and nimble advocate for the Texas model, controversial though his views may be.
http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/94622/rick-perry-debate-style-gop
Doug last night I was listening to Perry and for a moment feeling smug and confident. I thought, wow, this dude is really bad in this format....then I heard the thunderous applauds when the question was asked about all the executions in his state. My jaw dropped to the floor. It also woke me up. It's people like that, Perry appeals to and they are motivated. The left isn't, at least not now. They are too busy fighting among themselves and blaming the Potus for everything that's going on out here... Instead of concentrating on the real enemy. By the time they figure it out, it could be too late.
There is a myth about the Gore and Kerry elections the left has been holding on to for years...that myth isn't quite true or doesn't tell the entire story. People need to go back and check out who voted and who didn't in those elections and or how they actually voted. Then there is the fact, we call ourselves the greatest democracy in the world and we have one of the lowest voter turn outs of any other democracy....and yes....then we complain when we don't get the results we want.
Guess it’s serendipity I ran across this post…
Republicans Deserve Perry; the Country Doesn't
Thursday, September 08, 2011 | Posted by sepiagurlsweetspot at 11:40 AM
I went into last night's Republican debate thinking Perry was the one and I came out feeling stronger than ever that he truly is their man.
Since President Barack Obama was elected and inaugurated, the Far Right Republicans, now known as the Tea Party, have been spoiling for a fight. This country went through hell under President Bush but not a peep was heard from them. They agreed with everything he did and said and they loved his tough guy stance. Now they have in Perry who is way worse than Bush and they love it.
They want someone who will manifest all their crazy, pent-up fury against this President and they have found it in Perry. He will not back down. He will not apologize. He shows no empathy. He shows certainty and self-confidence. He is white, Southern and unabashedly proud. He is the complete polar opposite of the man they live to hate: Obama.
Full Article:
http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/09/republicans-deserve-perry-country.html
Sorry, Not Buying the "Bowing to Pressure" Critc From Al Gore
Thursday, September 08, 2011 | Posted by Deaniac83 at 7:00 AM
The election of 2000 was the first presidential election since my family had immigrated to the United States. I was a senior in high school, and even though I was neither of age to vote nor yet a citizen, I watched that election with great zeal. I rooted for Vice President Gore, and thought George W. Bush would be a disaster. Since then, I have admired Al Gore as a passionate advocate, a persuasive educator, and at times, a statesman. Forgive me, however, if I have never seen Al Gore as a fighter.
The former VP, on his blog yesterday, lamented at President Obama for halting smog regulations by the EPA. Writes Gore:
President Obama appears to have bowed to pressure from polluters who did not want to bear the cost of implementing new restrictions on their harmful pollution [...]
There are a lot of substantive rebuttals to this, including the fact that the President merely put the smog regulations back on their normal review schedule of every 5 years [[they were last reviewed in 2008), but the environmental policy criticism on this one issue is one thing. But I am not prepared to hear from Al Gore about how President Obama "bowed to pressure." Not from Al Gore.
More:
http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/09/sorry-not-buying-bowing-to-pressure.html
…and just for the record, inspite of all his great environmental work and awards, Al Gore was [[and probably still is) a Blue Dog Dem or in my neck of the woods and considering where he came from, it's called…a Dixiecrat!...and yes, I voted for him. Not because I had any great respect for Gore back then but because the alternative was worse. Life is full of compromises and we make them every day.
Actually, I think the whole Left media would be better off if we were simply able to stop assigning motives when we don't like a given action of the President's. If you disagree on policy, fine. Say so. Say why. We can talk. But we do not need the Left, of all people, trying to come up with evil motives and weakness-of-character reasons to why the President made a decision he did. There is plenty of it from Rick Perry. We frankly don't need it from Al Gore as well.
If we are not astute enough to figure out, who will help us and who will hurt us and fight the ones that will hurt us...we're doomed!!
Great Comment
There are two issues here. One is what the President did. The second is why he did it.
The first is a matter of fact, and like you say, that can be debated as to whether or not it was the best thing to do.
The second gets into more confusing ground. There are the ostensible reasons, some of which you pointed out. My understanding is that pushing the new regulations now would not only put a cost on business [[which wouldn't bother me with all the cash they have laying around) but also would put an extra cost on state, county and municipal governments who do a lot of the monitoring, as they would have to invest in changing a lot of their monitoring devices. I am not positive this is true, but it is what I heard. If it is accurate, then the decision was made to there would not be additional financial hardships on these entities at a time when their fiscal statuses are poor anyway.
Again, these arguments are open to legitimate debate.
However, to throw a motivation which is really a statement on the character of the President is wrong to do. It has nothing to do with hypocrisy and everything to do with misreading, which is inappropriate at all time.
I have been in the mental health profession for decades and one thing I know, is that trying to determine what is going on in another person's mind from the outside, without direct conversation with that person, is almost always going to end up poorly. That is why, on other blogs, when people tried to psychoanalyze Bush, I avoided doing so, despite my limited level of expertise on the subject.
The problem is that once people have made their judgements of character, mindset, what have you, all future events are judged on the basis of the judgement. Since the President has already been judged as weak, corporatist, etc by some, all his actions are viewed in that light.
Jumping to conclusions, making assumptions or stating opinions without all the facts is wrong....I speak from experience because I've done it....but this I know, I can't even attempt to change a behavior I refuse to admit exist.
I've had people get upset and or criticize with me because I say we need to start looking in the mirror but I don't see how anything can change until we take the first step.
We will never, ever be perfect human beings and personally, I'm glad because that would make living boring as hell but at least we can learn to be better human beings and own up to the fact when we are not. Maybe once we do that, we will not be so quick to judge others.
http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/0...-pressure.html
"This isn't political grandstanding. This isn't class warfare," he said. "This is simple math. These are real choices that we have to make. And I'm pretty sure I know what most Americans would choose. It's not even close. And it's time for us to do what's right for our future."
Obama To Congress: ‘It’s Time For Us To Meet Our Responsibilities’
Susan Crabtree | September 8, 2011, 7:06PM
President Obama's delivered a determined address to a joint session of Congress Thursday evening, laying out a bold, nearly half-trillion-dollar plan aimed at creating jobs and giving the weak economic recovery a shot in the arm.
The President's job proposal is wide-ranging, including extensions of unemployment benefits and payroll tax cuts, tax incentives for hiring veterans, as well as funds to rehire teachers, renovate schools, fix roads and rehabilitate neighborhoods suffering from the blight of abandoned homes and buildings, the unfortunate consequence of the housing crisis.
Yet, one of the most serious hurdles the nation and Washington must overcome in jumpstarting the economy, Obama said, is deciding to put country ahead of politics and stop the finger-pointing and inside-the-beltway gamesmanship.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/09/president-obamas-delivered-a-somber.php
Well, folks wanted bold, they got bold…..
“The American Jobs Act”….I like it, sweet, simple and to the point!
Lawd love a duck…this is about to get really interesting.
A few highlights
I also ask every American who agrees to lift your voice and tell the people who are gathered here tonight that you want action now. Tell Washington that doing nothing is not an option. Remind us that if we act as one nation, and one people, we have it within our power to meet this challenge.
President Kennedy once said, “Our problems are man-made – therefore they can be solved by man. And man can be as big as he wants.”
These are difficult years for our country. But we are Americans. We are tougher than the times that we live in, and we are bigger than our politics have been. So let’s meet the moment. Let’s get to work, and show the world once again why the United States of America remains the greatest nation on Earth. Thank you, God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America.
Some of you sincerely believe that the only solution to our economic challenges is to simply cut most government spending and eliminate most government regulations.
What we can’t do – what I won’t do – is let this economic crisis be used as an excuse to wipe out the basic protections that Americans have counted on for decades.
I know some of you have sworn oaths to never raise any taxes on anyone for as long as you live. Now is not the time to carve out an exception and raise middle-class taxes, which is why you should pass this bill right away.
Fact Sheet For the Jobs Act Proposal
http://www.c-span.org/uploadedfiles/Content/Documents/FACT_SHEET%20American_Jobs_Act.pdf
I’ll have the text and or video link posted as soon as it’s available.
American Jobs Act Speech continued from page 31...
Link for the video...still waiting on the text
http://www.c-span.org/Events/President-Addresses-Joint-Session-of-Congress/10737423964-1/
I'll keep looking for a youtube link, I'm sure there will be one shortly
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2l2DtomxTo
The White House
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
September 08, 2011
Address by the President to a Joint Session of Congress
United States Capitol
Washington, D.C.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Speaker, Mr. Vice President, members of Congress, and fellow Americans:
Tonight we meet at an urgent time for our country. We continue to face an economic crisis that has left millions of our neighbors jobless, and a political crisis that’s made things worse.
This past week, reporters have been asking, “What will this speech mean for the President? What will it mean for Congress? How will it affect their polls, and the next election?”
But the millions of Americans who are watching right now, they don’t care about politics. They have real-life concerns. Many have spent months looking for work. Others are doing their best just to scrape by -- giving up nights out with the family to save on gas or make the mortgage; postponing retirement to send a kid to college.
These men and women grew up with faith in an America where hard work and responsibility paid off. They believed in a country where everyone gets a fair shake and does their fair share -- where if you stepped up, did your job, and were loyal to your company, that loyalty would be rewarded with a decent salary and good benefits; maybe a raise once in a while. If you did the right thing, you could make it. Anybody could make it in America.
For decades now, Americans have watched that compact erode. They have seen the decks too often stacked against them. And they know that Washington has not always put their interests first.
The people of this country work hard to meet their responsibilities. The question tonight is whether we’ll meet ours. The question is whether, in the face of an ongoing national crisis, we can stop the political circus and actually do something to help the economy. [[Applause.) The question is -- the question is whether we can restore some of the fairness and security that has defined this nation since our beginning.
Those of us here tonight can’t solve all our nation’s woes. Ultimately, our recovery will be driven not by Washington, but by our businesses and our workers. But we can help. We can make a difference. There are steps we can take right now to improve people’s lives.
I am sending this Congress a plan that you should pass right away. It’s called the American Jobs Act. There should be nothing controversial about this piece of legislation. Everything in here is the kind of proposal that’s been supported by both Democrats and Republicans -- including many who sit here tonight. And everything in this bill will be paid for. Everything. [[Applause.)
The purpose of the American Jobs Act is simple: to put more people back to work and more money in the pockets of those who are working. It will create more jobs for construction workers, more jobs for teachers, more jobs for veterans, and more jobs for long-term unemployed. [[Applause.) It will provide -- it will provide a tax break for companies who hire new workers, and it will cut payroll taxes in half for every working American and every small business. [[Applause.) It will provide a jolt to an economy that has stalled, and give companies confidence that if they invest and if they hire, there will be customers for their products and services. You should pass this jobs plan right away. [[Applause.)
Everyone here knows that small businesses are where most new jobs begin. And you know that while corporate profits have come roaring back, smaller companies haven’t. So for everyone who speaks so passionately about making life easier for “job creators,” this plan is for you. [[Applause.)
Pass this jobs bill -- pass this jobs bill, and starting tomorrow, small businesses will get a tax cut if they hire new workers or if they raise workers’ wages. Pass this jobs bill, and all small business owners will also see their payroll taxes cut in half next year. [[Applause.) If you have 50 employees -- if you have 50 employees making an average salary, that’s an $80,000 tax cut. And all businesses will be able to continue writing off the investments they make in 2012.
It’s not just Democrats who have supported this kind of proposal. Fifty House Republicans have proposed the same payroll tax cut that’s in this plan. You should pass it right away. [[Applause.)
Pass this jobs bill, and we can put people to work rebuilding America. Everyone here knows we have badly decaying roads and bridges all over the country. Our highways are clogged with traffic. Our skies are the most congested in the world. It’s an outrage.
Building a world-class transportation system is part of what made us a economic superpower. And now we’re going to sit back and watch China build newer airports and faster railroads? At a time when millions of unemployed construction workers could build them right here in America? [[Applause.)
There are private construction companies all across America just waiting to get to work. There’s a bridge that needs repair between Ohio and Kentucky that’s on one of the busiest trucking routes in North America. A public transit project in Houston that will help clear up one of the worst areas of traffic in the country. And there are schools throughout this country that desperately need renovating. How can we expect our kids to do their best in places that are literally falling apart? This is America. Every child deserves a great school -- and we can give it to them, if we act now. [[Applause.)
The American Jobs Act will repair and modernize at least 35,000 schools. It will put people to work right now fixing roofs and windows, installing science labs and high-speed Internet in classrooms all across this country. It will rehabilitate homes and businesses in communities hit hardest by foreclosures. It will jumpstart thousands of transportation projects all across the country. And to make sure the money is properly spent, we’re building on reforms we’ve already put in place. No more earmarks. No more boondoggles. No more bridges to nowhere. We’re cutting the red tape that prevents some of these projects from getting started as quickly as possible. And we’ll set up an independent fund to attract private dollars and issue loans based on two criteria: how badly a construction project is needed and how much good it will do for the economy. [[Applause.)
This idea came from a bill written by a Texas Republican and a Massachusetts Democrat. The idea for a big boost in construction is supported by America’s largest business organization and America’s largest labor organization. It’s the kind of proposal that’s been supported in the past by Democrats and Republicans alike. You should pass it right away. [[Applause.)
Pass this jobs bill, and thousands of teachers in every state will go back to work. These are the men and women charged with preparing our children for a world where the competition has never been tougher. But while they’re adding teachers in places like South Korea, we’re laying them off in droves. It’s unfair to our kids. It undermines their future and ours. And it has to stop. Pass this bill, and put our teachers back in the classroom where they belong. [[Applause.)
Pass this jobs bill, and companies will get extra tax credits if they hire America’s veterans. We ask these men and women to leave their careers, leave their families, risk their lives to fight for our country. The last thing they should have to do is fight for a job when they come home. [[Applause.)
Pass this bill, and hundreds of thousands of disadvantaged young people will have the hope and the dignity of a summer job next year. And their parents -- [[applause) -- their parents, low-income Americans who desperately want to work, will have more ladders out of poverty.
Pass this jobs bill, and companies will get a $4,000 tax credit if they hire anyone who has spent more than six months looking for a job. [[Applause.) We have to do more to help the long-term unemployed in their search for work. This jobs plan builds on a program in Georgia that several Republican leaders have highlighted, where people who collect unemployment insurance participate in temporary work as a way to build their skills while they look for a permanent job. The plan also extends unemployment insurance for another year. [[Applause.) If the millions of unemployed Americans stopped getting this insurance, and stopped using that money for basic necessities, it would be a devastating blow to this economy. Democrats and Republicans in this chamber have supported unemployment insurance plenty of times in the past. And in this time of prolonged hardship, you should pass it again -- right away. [[Applause.)
Pass this jobs bill, and the typical working family will get a $1,500 tax cut next year. Fifteen hundred dollars that would have been taken out of your pocket will go into your pocket. This expands on the tax cut that Democrats and Republicans already passed for this year. If we allow that tax cut to expire -- if we refuse to act -- middle-class families will get hit with a tax increase at the worst possible time. We can’t let that happen. I know that some of you have sworn oaths to never raise any taxes on anyone for as long as you live. Now is not the time to carve out an exception and raise middle-class taxes, which is why you should pass this bill right away. [[Applause.)
This is the American Jobs Act. It will lead to new jobs for construction workers, for teachers, for veterans, for first responders, young people and the long-term unemployed. It will provide tax credits to companies that hire new workers, tax relief to small business owners, and tax cuts for the middle class. And here’s the other thing I want the American people to know: The American Jobs Act will not add to the deficit. It will be paid for. And here’s how. [[Applause.)
..........
The agreement we passed in July will cut government spending by about $1 trillion over the next 10 years. It also charges this Congress to come up with an additional $1.5 trillion in savings by Christmas. Tonight, I am asking you to increase that amount so that it covers the full cost of the American Jobs Act. And a week from Monday, I’ll be releasing a more ambitious deficit plan -- a plan that will not only cover the cost of this jobs bill, but stabilize our debt in the long run. [[Applause.)
This approach is basically the one I’ve been advocating for months. In addition to the trillion dollars of spending cuts I’ve already signed into law, it’s a balanced plan that would reduce the deficit by making additional spending cuts, by making modest adjustments to health care programs like Medicare and Medicaid, and by reforming our tax code in a way that asks the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations to pay their fair share. [[Applause.) What’s more, the spending cuts wouldn’t happen so abruptly that they’d be a drag on our economy, or prevent us from helping small businesses and middle-class families get back on their feet right away.
Now, I realize there are some in my party who don’t think we should make any changes at all to Medicare and Medicaid, and I understand their concerns. But here’s the truth: Millions of Americans rely on Medicare in their retirement. And millions more will do so in the future. They pay for this benefit during their working years. They earn it. But with an aging population and rising health care costs, we are spending too fast to sustain the program. And if we don’t gradually reform the system while protecting current beneficiaries, it won’t be there when future retirees need it. We have to reform Medicare to strengthen it. [[Applause.)
I am also -- I’m also well aware that there are many Republicans who don’t believe we should raise taxes on those who are most fortunate and can best afford it. But here is what every American knows: While most people in this country struggle to make ends meet, a few of the most affluent citizens and most profitable corporations enjoy tax breaks and loopholes that nobody else gets. Right now, Warren Buffett pays a lower tax rate than his secretary -- an outrage he has asked us to fix. [[Laughter.) We need a tax code where everyone gets a fair shake and where everybody pays their fair share. [[Applause.) And by the way, I believe the vast majority of wealthy Americans and CEOs are willing to do just that if it helps the economy grow and gets our fiscal house in order.
I’ll also offer ideas to reform a corporate tax code that stands as a monument to special interest influence in Washington. By eliminating pages of loopholes and deductions, we can lower one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. [[Applause.) Our tax code should not give an advantage to companies that can afford the best-connected lobbyists. It should give an advantage to companies that invest and create jobs right here in the United States of America. [[Applause.)..........
So we can reduce this deficit, pay down our debt, and pay for this jobs plan in the process. But in order to do this, we have to decide what our priorities are. We have to ask ourselves, “What’s the best way to grow the economy and create jobs?”
Should we keep tax loopholes for oil companies? Or should we use that money to give small business owners a tax credit when they hire new workers? Because we can’t afford to do both. Should we keep tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires? Or should we put teachers back to work so our kids can graduate ready for college and good jobs? [[Applause.) Right now, we can’t afford to do both.
This isn’t political grandstanding. This isn’t class warfare. This is simple math. [[Laughter.) This is simple math. These are real choices. These are real choices that we’ve got to make. And I’m pretty sure I know what most Americans would choose. It’s not even close. And it’s time for us to do what’s right for our future. [[Applause.)
Now, the American Jobs Act answers the urgent need to create jobs right away. But we can’t stop there. As I’ve argued since I ran for this office, we have to look beyond the immediate crisis and start building an economy that lasts into the future -- an economy that creates good, middle-class jobs that pay well and offer security. We now live in a world where technology has made it possible for companies to take their business anywhere. If we want them to start here and stay here and hire here, we have to be able to out-build and out-educate and out-innovate every other country on Earth. [[Applause.)
And this task of making America more competitive for the long haul, that’s a job for all of us. For government and for private companies. For states and for local communities -- and for every American citizen. All of us will have to up our game. All of us will have to change the way we do business.
My administration can and will take some steps to improve our competitiveness on our own. For example, if you’re a small business owner who has a contract with the federal government, we’re going to make sure you get paid a lot faster than you do right now. [[Applause.) We’re also planning to cut away the red tape that prevents too many rapidly growing startup companies from raising capital and going public. And to help responsible homeowners, we’re going to work with federal housing agencies to help more people refinance their mortgages at interest rates that are now near 4 percent. That’s a step -- [[applause) -- I know you guys must be for this, because that’s a step that can put more than $2,000 a year in a family’s pocket, and give a lift to an economy still burdened by the drop in housing prices.
So, some things we can do on our own. Other steps will require congressional action. Today you passed reform that will speed up the outdated patent process, so that entrepreneurs can turn a new idea into a new business as quickly as possible. That’s the kind of action we need. Now it’s time to clear the way for a series of trade agreements that would make it easier for American companies to sell their products in Panama and Colombia and South Korea -– while also helping the workers whose jobs have been affected by global competition. [[Applause.) If Americans can buy Kias and Hyundais, I want to see folks in South Korea driving Fords and Chevys and Chryslers. [[Applause.) I want to see more products sold around the world stamped with the three proud words: “Made in America.” That’s what we need to get done. [[Applause.)
And on all of our efforts to strengthen competitiveness, we need to look for ways to work side by side with America’s businesses. That’s why I’ve brought together a Jobs Council of leaders from different industries who are developing a wide range of new ideas to help companies grow and create jobs.
Already, we’ve mobilized business leaders to train 10,000 American engineers a year, by providing company internships and training. Other businesses are covering tuition for workers who learn new skills at community colleges. And we’re going to make sure the next generation of manufacturing takes root not in China or Europe, but right here, in the United States of America. [[Applause) If we provide the right incentives, the right support -- and if we make sure our trading partners play by the rules -- we can be the ones to build everything from fuel-efficient cars to advanced biofuels to semiconductors that we sell all around the world. That’s how America can be number one again. And that’s how America will be number one again. [[Applause.)
Now, I realize that some of you have a different theory on how to grow the economy. Some of you sincerely believe that the only solution to our economic challenges is to simply cut most government spending and eliminate most government regulations. [[Applause.)
Well, I agree that we can’t afford wasteful spending, and I’ll work with you, with Congress, to root it out. And I agree that there are some rules and regulations that do put an unnecessary burden on businesses at a time when they can least afford it. [[Applause.) That’s why I ordered a review of all government regulations. So far, we’ve identified over 500 reforms, which will save billions of dollars over the next few years. [[Applause.) We should have no more regulation than the health, safety and security of the American people require. Every rule should meet that common-sense test. [[Applause.)
But what we can’t do -- what I will not do -- is let this economic crisis be used as an excuse to wipe out the basic protections that Americans have counted on for decades. [[Applause.) I reject the idea that we need to ask people to choose between their jobs and their safety. I reject the argument that says for the economy to grow, we have to roll back protections that ban hidden fees by credit card companies, or rules that keep our kids from being exposed to mercury, or laws that prevent the health insurance industry from shortchanging patients. I reject the idea that we have to strip away collective bargaining rights to compete in a global economy. [[Applause.) We shouldn’t be in a race to the..........
bottom, where we try to offer the cheapest labor and the worst pollution standards. America should be in a race to the top. And I believe we can win that race. [[Applause.)
In fact, this larger notion that the only thing we can do to restore prosperity is just dismantle government, refund everybody’s money, and let everyone write their own rules, and tell everyone they’re on their own -- that’s not who we are. That’s not the story of America.
Yes, we are rugged individualists. Yes, we are strong and self-reliant. And it has been the drive and initiative of our workers and entrepreneurs that has made this economy the engine and the envy of the world.
But there’s always been another thread running throughout our history -- a belief that we’re all connected, and that there are some things we can only do together, as a nation.
We all remember Abraham Lincoln as the leader who saved our Union. Founder of the Republican Party. But in the middle of a civil war, he was also a leader who looked to the future -- a Republican President who mobilized government to build the Transcontinental Railroad -- [[applause) -- launch the National Academy of Sciences, set up the first land grant colleges. [[Applause.) And leaders of both parties have followed the example he set.
Ask yourselves -- where would we be right now if the people who sat here before us decided not to build our highways, not to build our bridges, our dams, our airports? What would this country be like if we had chosen not to spend money on public high schools, or research universities, or community colleges? Millions of returning heroes, including my grandfather, had the opportunity to go to school because of the G.I. Bill. Where would we be if they hadn’t had that chance? [[Applause.)
How many jobs would it have cost us if past Congresses decided not to support the basic research that led to the Internet and the computer chip? What kind of country would this be if this chamber had voted down Social Security or Medicare just because it violated some rigid idea about what government could or could not do? [[Applause.) How many Americans would have suffered as a result?
No single individual built America on their own. We built it together. We have been, and always will be, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all; a nation with responsibilities to ourselves and with responsibilities to one another. And members of Congress, it is time for us to meet our responsibilities. [[Applause.)
Every proposal I’ve laid out tonight is the kind that’s been supported by Democrats and Republicans in the past. Every proposal I’ve laid out tonight will be paid for. And every proposal is designed to meet the urgent needs of our people and our communities.
Now, I know there’s been a lot of skepticism about whether the politics of the moment will allow us to pass this jobs plan -- or any jobs plan. Already, we’re seeing the same old press releases and tweets flying back and forth. Already, the media has proclaimed that it’s impossible to bridge our differences. And maybe some of you have decided that those differences are so great that we can only resolve them at the ballot box.
But know this: The next election is 14 months away. And the people who sent us here -- the people who hired us to work for them -- they don’t have the luxury of waiting 14 months. [[Applause.) Some of them are living week to week, paycheck to paycheck, even day to day. They need help, and they need it now.
I don’t pretend that this plan will solve all our problems. It should not be, nor will it be, the last plan of action we propose. What’s guided us from the start of this crisis hasn’t been the search for a silver bullet. It’s been a commitment to stay at it -- to be persistent -- to keep trying every new idea that works, and listen to every good proposal, no matter which party comes up with it.
Regardless of the arguments we’ve had in the past, regardless of the arguments we will have in the future, this plan is the right thing to do right now. You should pass it. [[Applause.) And I intend to take that message to every corner of this country. [[Applause.) And I ask -- I ask every American who agrees to lift your voice: Tell the people who are gathered here tonight that you want action now. Tell Washington that doing nothing is not an option. Remind us that if we act as one nation and one people, we have it within our power to meet this challenge.
President Kennedy once said, “Our problems are man-made –- therefore they can be solved by man. And man can be as big as he wants.”
These are difficult years for our country. But we are Americans. We are tougher than the times we live in, and we are bigger than our politics have been. So let’s meet the moment. Let’s get to work, and let’s show the world once again why the United States of America remains the greatest nation on Earth. [[Applause.)
Thank you very much. God bless you, and God bless the United States of America. [[Applause)..........
Posted at 08:29 PM ET, 09/08/2011
What’s in the president’s jobs plan, and what comes next
By Ezra Klein
[…]The plan, taken as a whole, attempts to include every single theory of how to address the jobs crisis. If you believe we need more direct spending, you’ve got the infrastructure component. More tax cuts? The plan has $250 billion in tax cuts. More help for the unemployed? Yep. More deficit reduction? Next week, the White House will release a package that offsets this plan and reduces the deficit by more than $1.5 trillion on top of that.
Of course, in much the same way that everyone can find something to like in this plan, everyone can find something to dislike. If you believe tax cuts are ineffective during a demand-driven crisis, the plan spends a lot of money on tax cuts. If you don’t believe in infrastructure spending, there’s plenty of it in here to offend you. If government spending goes against your moral code, well, the government is going to spend money. And next week, when the Obama administration releases its deficit-reduction ideas, liberals are going to be a lot less enthusiastic than they are tonight.
So the question for members of Congress ends up being simple: do you want to focus on the things you do like and compromise on the things you don’t like in order to get some action on jobs and deficit reduction? Or do you want to focus on the things you don’t like and abandon the things you do like in order to kill the legislation? All Obama can do is ask. Now it’s up to Congress to answer.
Full Article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/now-its-up-to-congress/2011/08/25/gIQArMIIDK_blog.html?hpid=z2
…and up to the American people to insist they [[Congress) act
...and for anyone who may have missed this point, The President structured The American Jobs Act in a way that it will be paid for.
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/breakdown1.jpg
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/breaking2.jpg
There is something in the internet blogging world known as "a straw man argument"...I detest them.
The definition goes like this:
The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position.
Personally, I think they make the person look stupid, as if they can't comprehend the written or spoken word.
An example of a strawman argument goes like this....
Michele Bachman said...
“It was interesting to me that if you look at the president’s remarks, almost out of the gate, the president began by insulting members of Congress,” she said. “He invited them to be a part of this address this evening…And yet he began with an insult — for a circus tent.”
“That isn’t what this is. I don’t consider the greatest, most deliberative body in the United States, the House of Representatives, a circus, a political circus,” Bachmann continued. “It isn’t at all.”
Now what the President actually said was this...
The people of this country work hard to meet their responsibilities. The question tonight is whether we’ll meet ours. The question is whether, in the face of an ongoing national crisis, we can stop the political circus and actually do something to help the economy. [[Applause.) The question is -- the question is whether we can restore some of the fairness and security that has defined this nation since our beginning.
Now, where is the insult?
I didn't hear him yell out to the members of Congress..."you lie"
I didn't hear him call anyone out of their name, or post insulting cartoons and jokes of them and their families...did you?
People make up these stupid straw-men arguments because they are too frigging dense to respond to what a person actually says, so they need to create outrage and indignation over a made up argument...one THEY made up...not you...and did I mention, I DETEST THEM!:mad:
I thought this was an interesting play by play of the speech with a few surprise nuggets thrown in.
All emphasis mine.
8 Sep 2011 06:59 PM
Andrew Sullivan: The Dish
Live-Blogging Obama's Jobs Address
7.57 pm. This was also a speech aimed directly at his own party - rallying the troops, creating a framework for the campaign ahead, betting that things are bad enough that the infrastructure spending and the tax cuts will not alienate debt-concerned independents. In style, the last thing it was was professorial. This was a blunt, potent, confident attempt to win back the hearts of a disillusioned base, while appealing to the center in ways Republicans may feel a little leery of rejecting, given their already deep reputation for obstructionism.
Game on, in other words. Except this isn't a game. And any politician who acts like it is in the next year or so will pay a price.
7.49 pm. This was indeed a speech directed at independents and also at those who fear that America is in terminal decline. It was rooted in patriotism; it was framed to portray Obama as the pragmatic centrist he actually is. And it was not dishonest - these are the choices, short-term and long-term, that we have to make. And we should not be required to wait for another year and a half for action.
One key will be how it's paid for. It seems that Obama is simply insisting that the super-committee should add $450 billion to its remit for long-term spending reductions, including Medicare. I cannot imagine the House GOP agreeing to that.
Another key is exactly what infrastructure projects are indeed "shovel-ready" enough to help in the next year or two. But the general idea of building permanent infrastructure as a way to use currently idle labor seems appealingly simple to me - and a classic Depression era maneuver.
7.46 pm. Wow. A threat to take this vision across the country if the GOP doesn't cooperate now. That's Truman-speak. After months of mild attempts to get Republicans to agree, he hasn't caved, and he hasn't demonized them. But he has now upped the ante, and has new fire in his belly. If he can succeed in getting a bulk of the jobs bill through and if the super-committee doesn't fail, we have a chance to turn this economy around.
7.42 pm. Now we get the full-throated defense of government action as part of American history, Republican and Democrat. I think this speech could well turn his own party base around - and frame the coming year on terms more favorable to him than the Republicans.
7.39 pm. The impassioned line to be used against Perry if he's the candidate:
We shouldn’t be in a race to the bottom, where we try to offer the cheapest labor and the worst pollution standards. America should be in a race to the top. And I believe that’s a race we can win.
7.34 pm. This is the moment when Obama, rather than the GOP, ups the ante. This is what you might call aggressive conciliation. And here's what I'm also hearing: a very stirring appeal to patriotism, to the idea that America can be far better than we have become today. The repetitive comparison between America and China - the appeal to global competitiveness - is one of the best ripostes to the Big Lie that this president isn't somehow in love with this country.
7.29 pm. My own view is that this blend of short term stimulus balanced by serious long term entitlement reform is so obviously the sanest, smartest way forward it will sink in with most Americans. And complementing it with tax reform to give taxpayers a fair shake is the icing on the cake. What's now clear is that he is betting big in the nest year. This is more aggressive than I have seen him since he got elected. There is a steely impatience here that is obviously designed either to get something done now, or, if not, to run a Truman-style anti-Congress presidential campaign.
7.24 pm. After small businesses, a proposal for veterans. This is a cooptation of Republican erogenous zones with strong government action. It is the message he was elected on. He's bringing red ideas and blue ideas for jobs. And now he's touting more tax cuts - daring the GOP to oppose tax cuts for the middle classes. Brilliant line:
I know some of you have sworn oaths to never raise any taxes on anyone for as long as you live. Now is not the time to carve out an exception and raise middle-class taxes, which is why you should pass this bill right away.
He's rocking it.
7.23 pm. A simple message: these are proposals previously backed by Democrats and Republicans. How many times has he now quite sternly said "Pass This Bill"?
7.20 pm. A direct challenge for infrastructure investment - a patriotic challenge. Remember what I said about him staying on the ropes before he comes out swinging? This is not a milque-toast speech or a milque-toast proposal. It's a big bet on the country's desire for action, not debate. And so far, it sounds like something a sane Republican would be happy to support.
7.17 pm. An appeal to pragmatic bipartisanism in the current crisis - effective, and in the details, much more radical than I expected. And the message is even blunter: "You should pass this bill right away." And first off, it's all about tax cuts. Tax cuts. But we haven't quite gotten to the "all of it is paid for" have we?
7.13 pm. A late start. A warm reception. And a poignant admonition to the political and media class about their pettiness and narcissism. An immediate attempt to break through the usual political blah.
He's on tonight.
7.07 pm. A new nugget from the debate last night: Rick Perry physically grabbing Ron Paul and jabbing a pointed finger in his face in a commercial break. A nasty little image for a nasty little man.
6.54 pm. A treat beforehand: Biden and Boehner talking about recent golf games.
Yep, they talk about that kind of thing. Biden's expressions were classic, though. There is something about the way he interacts with people that makes me feel at home. I think it's his Catholic Irish character - even when he screws up, even when he can't shut up, even when he's pretty much unbearable. While I'm on this Catholic kick, I should note that culturally speaking, I think Rick Perry is just not going to wear well with white Catholics. The death penalty insouciance and the healthcare callousness will hurt him with that demographic.
http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/09/live-blogging-obamas-jobs-address.html
During the Sept. 7 Republican debate, Ron Paul clashed with fellow Texan Rick Perry once again.
This time, things got physical.
During a commercial break, Perry walked up to Paul's podium, physically grabbed Paul's wrist, and pointed at Paul's face with his other hand
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/156369.jpg
[[photo Reuters).
Perry and Paul were placed next to each other at the center for the Republican debate.
Before the physical exchange, the war of words between Paul and Perry was perhaps even more heated.
When Paul was asked if he supports getting rid of the minimum wage, the doctor briefly answered the question [[he supports getting rid of it) and then launched into an attack against Perry.
http://img.ibtimes.com/www/articles/20110908/210639_ron-paul-debate-rick-perry-gop-debate-september-7.htm
It’s possible the media is making more of this than should be. He [[Perry) looks as if he's trying to intimidate but it doesn't come off as all that physical other than a touch. Although, the finger in the face thing is always annoying.
It’s hard to know what went on since this pic was taking off camera doing a break. But I do agree, Perry is a, “nasty little man.”
Did the stimulus work? What the studies tell us
By Zachary Roth | The Lookout – Wed, Aug 24, 2011
Did the 2009 stimulus bill work?
Critics of the Obama administration say no, pointing out that, two years later, the economy is still barely growing, and unemployment remains high. Supporters say without the stimulus, things would be even worse. The answer matters, because it'll help determine the kind of approaches to job creation that gain support going forward. [[http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/obama-jobs-ideas-target-long-term-unemployed-144755024.html)
So Dylan Matthews of the Washington Post has done a service by rounding up the various economic studies [[http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/did-the-stimulus-work-a-review-of-the-nine-best-studies-on-the-subject/2011/08/16/gIQAThbibJ_blog.html) of the question. He writes: "Of the nine studies I've found, six find that the stimulus had a significant, positive effect on employment and growth, and three find that the effect was either quite small or impossible to detect."
Matthews then assesses the strengths and weaknesses of each of the individual studies -- and concludes: "I'm inclined to believe that the preponderance of evidence indicates the stimulus worked."
That's hardly the end of the story. But it does get at an important reality: The expert consensus on the stimulus is significantly more positive than you'd think from listening to much of the debate over how to fix the economy. That debate which tends to assume that because the White House already tried stimulus and the economy is still hurting, it's now "out of bullets," and can only propose more targeted job creation ideas.
Not that what experts say tends to cut to much weight in Washington these days.
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/did-stimulus-studies-tell-us-194114742.html
The question the American people should be asking, have the majority members of the House, proposed any job creation bills since they took office 8 months ago?
Well, I’ll be….a proposal even Krugman can like…who wouldda thunk?
Op-Ed Columnist
Setting Their Hair on Fire
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: September 8, 2011
First things first: I was favorably surprised by the new Obama jobs plan, which is significantly bolder and better than I expected. It’s not nearly as bold as the plan I’d want in an ideal world. But if it actually became law, it would probably make a significant dent in unemployment.
[…]So, at this point, leading Republicans are basically against anything that might help the unemployed. Yes, Mr. Romney has issued a glossy, well-produced “jobs plan,” but it might best be described as 59 bullet points with nothing there — and certainly nothing to justify his assertion, bordering on megalomania, that he would create no fewer than 11 million jobs in four years.
The good news in all this is that by going bigger and bolder than expected, Mr. Obama may finally have set the stage for a political debate about job creation. For, in the end, nothing will be done until the American people demand action.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/09/opinion/setting-their-hair-on-fire.html?_r=1&hp
GOP Derides Obama Jobs Plan As ‘Second Stimulus,’ Ignoring Success Of The First
By Pat Garofalo posted from ThinkProgress Economy on Sep 9, 2011 at 10:30 am
Last night, President Obama rolled out a $450 billion job creation package before a joint session of Congress, calling for a plan that includes a payroll tax reduction, money for infrastructure and school modernization, as well as help for homeowners and reforms of the unemployment insurance program. “This plan is the right thing to do right now. You should pass it,” Obama said.
But while the GOP leadership has made some conciliatory comments — with Speaker John Boehner [[R-OH) saying that “the proposals the President outlined tonight merit consideration” — many Republicans have derided the plan by calling it another stimulus, along the lines of the 2009 Recovery Act:
More
Of course, all of this criticism is based on the incorrect assumption that the 2009 Recovery Act didn’t work. But as the Congressional Budget Office has continually found, the Recovery Act created or supported millions of jobs, keeping the unemployment rate up to two points below where it otherwise would have been. At its height in the third quarter of 2010, Recovery Act funds were supporting up to 3.6 million jobs.
In June of this year, Recovery Act funding was still supporting up to 2.9 million jobs. This chart tracks the change in employment that occurred following the passage of the Recovery Act:
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/recoveryactjobs0909.jpg
Thus far, economists have offered “mainly positive reviews” of Obama’s plan, with Mark Zandi of Moody’s Analytics estimating that “the plan would add 2 percentage points to GDP growth next year, add 1.9 million jobs, and cut the unemployment rate by a percentage point.” Analysts at Goldman Sachs estimate that the plan will boost growth by 1.5 percentage points, while the Economic Policy Institute said that the plan will create 2.6 million jobs and support another 1.6 million, boosting overall employment by almost 4.3 million.
The reason that unemployment is so high, even with the Recovery Act, is that it wasn’t big enough to deal with the scale of the problem. But to Republicans, the millions of jobs created by the Recovery Act signal abject failure, and therefore Obama’s new jobs plan doesn’t warrant consideration, even as the economy struggles to throw off the chains of the Great Recession.
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/09/09/315347/gop-second-stimulus/
Has anyone ever noticed that when Repubs make their outrageous claims they rarely if ever back those claims up with empirical data [[facts)?
Perry is the most recent example of that. During the debate he was asked to name studies and or scientist that say global warming was a myth. [[my paraphrasing) Several days later and he still has not answered the question.
So I ask you, where are the studies that say the first stimulus package didn’t work?
There are none because it did work…but it wasn’t enough.
For, in the end, nothing will be done until the American people demand action.
..........
Morning Briefing: September 9, 2011
By ThinkProgress on Sep 9, 2011 at 9:00 am
President Obama’s new plan would create. Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, predicts Obama’s “American Jobs Act” will likely add 1.9 million jobs and grow the economy by 2 percent. The nonpartisan Economic Policy Institute reported that it would boost employment by around 4.3 million jobs, with 2.6 million jobs coming from new initiatives alone.
Reacting to Obama’s jobs address, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor [[R-VA) said House Republicans will consider his proposal to expand a payroll tax cut for employees. “Republicans are not for allowing tax increases for anyone, we don’t believe in that,” Cantor said, adding that Obama’s payroll tax provision “will be part of the discussions going forward.”
New York Times columnist Paul Krugman offered praise for President Obama’s announced jobs legislation, calling it ” significantly bolder and better” than he expected. However, he pointed out that “nothing will be done until the American people demand action,” noting that Congress will need to be persuaded to take action on jobs.
While he didn’t yell “you lie,” Rep. Jeff Landry [[R-LA) broke congressional decorum last night when he quietly shilled for the oil industry with a sign reading “Drilling = jobs” during President Obama’s jobs address to a joint session of Congress. Other Republican lawmakers boycotted the speech, even though Speaker John Boehner [[R-OH) urged his members to appear.
More
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/09/09/315350/morning-briefing-september-9-2011/
ACTION: Time to make some Jobs calls
It's time to start flooding the phone lines in Washington. It's time to call our senators and congress people. Tell them you heard what President Obama said last night, and you want them to pass the American Jobs Act right away, no delaying, no debating, no stalling. The call will only take you 3 minutes.
Click here [[http://www.contactingthecongress.org/) to get the office numbers of your senators and congressperson. [[Type in your zip code.) Dial.
In general writing a letter is the most effective means of communicating with congress, but it takes a really long time for them to process letters. Calling is the next best option. Faxes and emails aren't quite as good because they can easy be tossed.
Here's some information on the American Jobs Act. Pick something specific you like from it and mention it when you call. [[I wouldn't go into "well I would change X or Y" because as soon as congress tries to amend it, it'll go down in flames.)
American Jobs Act fact sheet:
1. Tax Cuts to Help America’s Small Businesses Hire and Grow
• Cutting the payroll tax in half for 98 percent of businesses: The President’s plan will cut in half the taxes paid by businesses on their first $5 million in payroll, targeting the benefit to the 98 percent of firms that have payroll below this threshold.
• A complete payroll tax holiday for added workers or increased wages: The President’s plan will completely eliminate payroll taxes for firms that increase their payroll by adding new workers or increasing the wages of their current worker [[the benefit is capped at the first $50 million in payroll increases).
• Extending 100% expensing into 2012: This continues an effective incentive for new investment.
• Reforms and regulatory reductions to help entrepreneurs and small businesses access capital.
2. Putting Workers Back on the Job While Rebuilding and Modernizing America
• A “Returning Heroes” hiring tax credit for veterans: This provides tax credits from $5,600 to $9,600 to encourage the hiring of unemployed veterans.
• Preventing up to 280,000 teacher layoffs, while keeping cops and firefighters on the job.
• Modernizing at least 35,000 public schools across the country, supporting new science labs, Internet-ready classrooms and renovations at schools across the country, in rural and urban areas.
• Immediate investments in infrastructure and a bipartisan National Infrastructure Bank, modernizing our roads, rail, airports and waterways while putting hundreds of thousands of workers back on the job.
• A New “Project Rebuild”, which will put people to work rehabilitating homes, businesses and communities, leveraging private capital and scaling land banks and other public-private collaborations.
• Expanding access to high-speed wireless as part of a plan for freeing up the nation’s spectrum.
3. Pathways Back to Work for Americans Looking for Jobs.
• The most innovative reform to the unemployment insurance program in 40 years: As part of an extension of unemployment insurance to prevent 5 million Americans looking for work from losing their benefits, the President’s plan includes innovative work-based reforms to prevent layoffs and give states greater flexibility to use UI funds to best support job-seekers, including:
• Work-Sharing: UI for workers whose employers choose work-sharing over layoffs.
• A new “Bridge to Work” program: The plan builds on and improves innovative state programs where those displaced take temporary, voluntary work or pursue on-the-job training.
• Innovative entrepreneurship and wage insurance programs: States will also be empowered to implement wage insurance to help reemploy older workers and programs that make it easier for unemployed workers to start their own businesses.
• A $4,000 tax credit to employers for hiring long-term unemployed workers.
• Prohibiting employers from discriminating against unemployed workers when hiring.
• Expanding job opportunities for low-income youth and adults through a fund for successful approaches for subsidized employment, innovative training programs and summer/year-round jobs for youth.
4. Tax Relief for Every American Worker and Family
• Cutting payroll taxes in half for 160 million workers next year: The President’s plan will expand the payroll tax cut passed last year to cut workers payroll taxes in half in 2012 – providing a $1,500 tax cut to the typical American family, without negatively impacting the Social Security Trust Fund.
• Allowing more Americans to refinance their mortgages at today’s near 4 percent interest rates, which can put more than $2,000 a year in a family’s pocket.
Flip through the enhanced graphics slideshow below:
American Jobs Act Address Enhanced Graphics
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/AJA.jpg
Click Here:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/09/08/american-jobs-act-get-facts
Some reactions to President Obama's plan from different sources
Friday, September 09, 2011 |
Posted by TiMT at 9:11 AM @ The People’s View
http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/09/details-in-president-obamas-jobs-bill.html
Obama Jobs Speech Changes Conversation by Ari Berman
The introduction of the “American Jobs Act” was both a policy and rhetorical shift from the administration, away from the above the fray “most reasonable man in the room” strategy aimed at a narrow sliver of independent voters and toward a more aggressive, feistier Obama, one who is not afraid to run against the do-nothing Congress, take his case directly to the American people and ruffle a few feathers. It’s the Obama, quite frankly, that many of his supporters have been waiting quite some time to see.
But for now, Obama’s speech was an important first step in changing the conversation and defining the debate on his own terms. I particularly liked the section where he invoked Abraham Lincoln to argue for the essential role of government in America. Think of it as the president’s long-awaited reply to the Tea Party. Said Obama:
We all remember Abraham Lincoln as the leader who saved our Union. But in the middle of a Civil War, he was also a leader who looked to the future—a Republican president who mobilized government to build the transcontinental railroad; launch the National Academy of Sciences; and set up the first land grant colleges. And leaders of both parties have followed the example he set.
Ask yourselves—where would we be right now if the people who sat here before us decided not to build our highways and our bridges; our dams and our airports? What would this country be like if we had chosen not to spend money on public high schools, or research universities, or community colleges? Millions of returning heroes, including my grandfather, had the opportunity to go to school because of the GI Bill. Where would we be if they hadn’t had that chance?
How many jobs would it have cost us if past Congresses decided not to support the basic research that led to the Internet and the computer chip? What kind of country would this be if this Chamber had voted down Social Security or Medicare just because it violated some rigid idea about what government could or could not do? How many Americans would have suffered as a result?
No single individual built America on their own. We built it together. We have been, and always will be, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all; a nation with responsibilities to ourselves and with responsibilities to one another. Members of Congress, it is time for us to meet our responsibilities.
Bold Emphesis Added
NY Time Oped: The Jobs Speech:
With more than 14 million people out of work and all Americans fearing a double-dip recession, President Obama stood face to face Thursday night with a Congress that has perversely resisted lifting a finger to help. Some Republicans refused to even sit and listen. But those Americans who did heard him unveil an ambitious proposal — more robust and far-reaching than expected — that may be the first crucial step in reigniting the economy.
snip
If Republicans ultimately choose gridlock over compromise, as they did in the debt-limit fight last month, the president will be able to say that he proposed a centrist jobs plan that his base wasn’t crazy about, that Republicans should have been able to accept, and that he pleaded with Congress to pass. Given that, if you’re an Obama partisan, a Republican rejection might be exactly what you want — though that’s a perverse policy outcome. Even if the president himself would prefer to pass something, he has given himself room to push back hard on Republican lawmakers should they balk.
Thursday’s speech could end up being most notable as the first major address of Obama’s 2012 campaign against the GOP House.
Obama Puts Passion Into Jobs Speech Rarely Seen In His Presidency by Howard Fineman
WASHINGTON -- Most presidents kick off their re-election campaigns with a speech on the campaign trail somewhere, or from the Oval Office. President Obama did it in a novel, telling and shrewdly chosen place: in the middle of an address to Congress.
If people were wondering what template Barack Obama would choose for his re-election effort -- some had suggested FDR in 1936 or Ronald Reagan in 1984 -- we now have an answer:
Harry Truman in 1948, the "Give 'Em Hell Harry" who challenged Congress to tackle with the post-war nation's problems and castigated the Republican Congress for its obstinate failure to do so.
Addresses to joint sessions of Congress are supposed to be august, stately and somber affairs, but the president turned it into a raucous and lively mixture of a campaign stump speech and a college-style debate on the floor of the British House of Commons.
His tactical strategy is clear. The only political institution less popular than he is at this time is the Congress. An astounding, almost pre-revolutionary 82 percent of the American people think that the Congress is doing a bad job of dealing with the nation's problems.
Obama’s jobs speech challenges GOP By Eugene Robinson
President Obama raised his speechifying game Thursday night, as he had to do. Another billet doux inviting hostile congressional Republicans to please sit around the campfire and sing “Kumbaya” wouldn’t have cut it. What Obama did, instead, was issue a challenge -- and, not incidentally, lay out the opening themes of his reelection campaign.
Perhaps the most significant line in Obama’s speech was his promise to take his jobs message to the people in “every corner of the country.” He told the assembled members of Congress that if they balk at passing his American Jobs Act, he will go over their heads. That answered the obvious question: What does Obama intend to do when House Republicans ball up his bill and throw it in the trash?
Stimulus for Skeptics By DAVID BROOKS
Thursday night the president gave one of the most forceful and compelling domestic policy speeches of his presidency. His proposals were drawn from the middle of the ideological spectrum and were selected to appeal to people who don’t put a lot of faith in government spending. There’s a payroll tax cut, a small business tax cut, infrastructure spending, subsidies so states don’t have to lay off cops, firefighters and teachers, and a plan to use unemployment insurance to subsidize temporary work for the unemployed to get them back involved in the labor force.
WashPost: Forceful, yes. Impatient, very much so. By Stephen Stromberg
There wasn’t much you could call professorial about President Obama’s jobs speech Thursday night. Forceful, yes. Demanding, perhaps. Impatient, very much so.
“We meet at an urgent time for our country,” Obama began.
“I am sending this Congress a plan that you should pass right away,” he said. “It will put people to work right now,” he claimed.
“Pass this jobs bill,” he repeated — over and over again, with a frequency only rivaled by his use of the phrase “right away.”
The Fix
President Obama delivered a forceful call to action in a speech on jobs tonight to Congress, repeatedly employing rhetoric that sounded like the early stages of his 2012 campaign stump speech.
Many of the proposals in Obama’s $447 billion jobs plan had been previewed before he stepped in front of a joint session of Congress around 7 pm eastern time. But his aggressive tone was something new — and unexpected.
snip
At the speech’s conclusion, Obama issued a clear warning to those who would stand in the way of the bill; “You should pass it,” he said. “And I intend to take that message to every corner of this country.”
For, in the end, nothing will be done until the American people demand action.
G.O.P. Legislators Balk at a Call to Tie Storm Aid to Budget Cuts
By RAYMOND HERNANDEZ
Published: September 6, 2011
WASHINGTON — As Congress prepares to tackle the issue of providing aid to areas ravaged by Tropical Storm Irene, a rift has opened among House Republicans over the federal government’s role in providing disaster relief.
The House majority leader, Eric Cantor of Virginia, and other Republicans have suggested that any disaster aid the government distributes should be offset by an equal amount in spending cuts to keep the federal deficit from growing.
But with Congress returning this week from its summer recess, House Republicans from flood-damaged areas are rejecting that position, saying that helping people whose lives have been upended by the storm should take precedent over managing the budget deficit.
The reaction is particularly noteworthy because it is coming from members of the House Republican freshman class, a group that swept into office last year on a platform of reducing the federal debt and the size of government.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/07/nyregion/new-york-republicans-in-congress-balk-at-a-call-to-tie-storm-aid-to-budget-cuts.html?_r=4
Human nature will never cease to amaze me…..The Federal Government is A OK, "all dat" and a bag of chips, when you need them to do something for ya!
Nikki Haley 'So Wants' To Drug Test People Applying For Jobless Benefits
David Taintor | September 9, 2011, 2:32PM
South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley [[R) doesn't want Florida to have all the fun of drug testing suspicion-less citizens before receiving state benefits.
"I so want drug testing," Haley said on Thursday, according to the Associated Press. "It's something I've been wanting since the first day I walked into office."
And now Haley is trying to make that dream come true, pushing for people applying for jobless benefits to first pass a drug test before receiving any aid, the AP reports.
South Carolina's unemployment agency has said that drugs are a minuscule factor in jobless claims. A 2009 estimate put the rate at 0.3 percent.
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/09/nikki_haley_so_wants_to_drug_test_people_applying. php?ref=fpb
This woman didn’t stroll into the SC Governor’s Mansion. SHE WAS VOTED IN!
…and for all those people who have never even set foot in the south and want to bash it…last I checked, Wisconsin wasn’t anywhere close to the US southern border and their gov isn’t much better than this one. Not to mention take a look around the country and see where ignorance like this is taking place…it’s all over!
This isn’t about the south but the uninformed and ignorant who vote for ignorant people and then complain it’s not their fault but the other guy.
Do people really want this kind of Republican ignorance running this country, our states, our cities?
Does this woman not realize drug test are not free? Does she not realize her state would have to pay for a drug testing program for an agency with a drug problem than represents 0.3% of the people involve? Does she not realize she would be creating more government bureaucracy to implement it?
Here is a tip, take it for what it’s worth and frame your “strawmen arguments” however you like….Black people represent 12% of the population so no matter how you slice it….we are not taking anything from you, entitlement money and unemployment is not only coming to us, we are not all on welfare and it’s not our fault your life is screwed…and do I need to also remind you, we are not holding a gun to your head when you mark your ballot and pull the lever. Stop listening to the dog whistles these politicians are blowing and THINK for your self.
Why am I on this track, simple….because Blacks and other minorities only represent about 30% of the population in 2011.
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/USBreakdownCensus.jpg
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/CopyofUSCensus.jpg
That means the majority of the middle class is White and their standard of living is shrinking. Politicians…Republican politicians are doing their best to make the White middles class think it’s the fault of Blacks and other minorities….”the others,” “that one,” the not “real amuricans”….these politicians are lying to you….they do not care anymore about you than they do me and guess what…it’s not the color of our skin that is their problem but the lack of green in ALL our pockets!
…and yes I am aware that not every Middle Class White person in American is falling for the okee doke….I’m also aware that there are some Black Americans falling for it as well, but maybe someone can explain why millions of Middle Class White Americans keep voting against their own best interest by electing Republican idiots to office. I’m guessing, probably for the same reason some Blacks are doing it….they are not THINKING RATIONALLY!
30% of the population alone cannot put anyone in office. 30% of the population doesn’t have a choice but to rely on the rest of you to get it right. That’s not playing the race card and as the President said the other night…it’s basic math….helloooooooooo!
BUT….you need us as much as we need you…we need each other folks…neither one of us can do it alone because it’s the 1% of the population that has more money than all of us combined!!!! While Republican politicians are pitting us against each other, it’s the 1% that are skinning and grinning and doing fine!!!!!
Does that really make sense to you? If not, what are you doing about it?
U.S. Population: 312,176,991
Sep 09, 2011
*224,767,433 – Whites
*87,409,558 – Minorities
*Approximate numbers
The media and politicians love to throw out stats about the disappropriate
number of minorities on welfare and although the percentages are high, they somehow forget to mention, there are still more off the program than on it.
They also forget to mention that in terms of raw numbers, the folks sitting in the 70% [[population) range…are the ones at the top of the totem pole when it comes to entitlements and welfare and because there are so many poor minorities, we don’t live as long. Do you know what that means? Well, the way I see it, not only are there more of the 70% using entitlements, they are using them longer than the minorities. Yet somehow, it’s the fault of minorities for all the ills in this country.
PLEASE….stop buying into all the dog whistles and misinformation and realize who the real enemy is.
GOP Reps. Dismiss Tax Cut For Working Americans In Favor Of Giveaways To Corporations
By Alex Seitz-Wald posted from ThinkProgress Economy on Sep 9, 2011 at 7:06 pm
Despite their professed devotion to tax cuts, a surprising number of Republican lawmakers are less than thrilled with President Obama’s proposed extension of temporary cuts to the payroll tax as part of his jobs package unveiled last night. While the tax holiday for middle- and working-class Americans is one of the most effective ways to stimulate the economy via tax policy, these conservative lawmakers prefer tax breaks go to those who need them least: corporations and the wealthy.
For instance, Tea Party firebrand Rep. Allen West [[R-FL) rejected a payroll tax holiday completely on Fox Business last night, saying it has already been tried and that we should “cut this corporate tax rate” instead. Also on Fox Business, Rep. Phil Gingrey [[R-GA) said he had a problem with the payroll tax holiday because it goes to “people who are already working.” But in the next breath, Gingrey called instead for a tax break for corporations who have kept money overseas. Watch it:
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/09/09/315751/gop-reps-dismiss-tax-cut-for-working-americans-in-favor-of-giveaways-to-corporations/
Wow, they sure care about the American workers don’t they? [[SNARK)
REPORT: As Their States’ Bridges And Roads Crumble, GOP Leaders Remain Opposed To Infrastructure Investment
By Travis Waldron and Tanya Somanader posted from ThinkProgress Economy
President Obama’s plan to kickstart the economy and put the American people back to work includes investing in the nation’s rapidly deteriorating infrastructure, which, as studies have shown, is in need of as much as $2 trillion in immediate investment just to bring it up to date. In the past, Republicans have agreed that infrastructure improvements are needed, but in the context of economic stimulus and in their effort to remain opposed to anything Obama offers, they have chosen to ignore the nation’s infrastructure and jobs crises. Unfortunately, that approach doesn’t mean either crisis will go away.
Republican leadership has continually blocked efforts by Obama and Congressional Democrats to invest in infrastructure improvements, and as a result, bridges and roadways in their states are crumbling. According to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics, about 12 percent of the nation’s bridges are considered “structurally deficient,” the same rating given to the Minneapolis bridge that collapsed in 2007, killing 13 people. Roughly another 12 percent are considered “functionally obsolete.” In four of the five states represented by Republican congressional leadership, the rate of structurally deficient or functionally obsolete bridges outpaces the national average. ThinkProgress compiled a breakdown of the status of roads and bridges in each of those five states and, where applicable, individual congressional districts:
Full Article:
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/09/09/315827/report-as-their-states-bridges-and-roads-crumble-gop-leaders-remain-opposed-to-infrastructure-investment/
It’s been stated over and over that the Repubs will do anything to bring President Obama down, including taking the country and it’s people with him. I bet for some, it’s the President’s fault for being who he is…huh? [[insert rolling eyes here)
I needed a good LOL…what about you?:cool:
President Obama Needs a Better Umbrella Holder
By Dan Amira
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/a_250x375.jpg
Barnett's form needs work.Photo: Jim Watson/AFP/Getty Images
As President Obama boarded Air Force One on his way to Virginia today, Air Force One Staff Sergeant Brian Barnett tried to shield his boss from the rain. From the looks of this photo, it wasn't a success. It's not exactly Barnett's fault — Obama, for whatever reason, tends to sprint up the stairs to his airplane. Still, there are some very skilled umbrella holders out there. That Fonzworth guy must be available.
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/
President Obama takes the stage in Richmond, Va. Today/9-09-11
Not bad for a man who according to many in MSM says, is losing his base.;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=550EPTH_bUo&feature=player_embedded
The Speech:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeMHBZes--Q&feature=player_embedded
Map of the Day: Republicans for Austerity—in Voting
—By Adam Serwer
| Thu Sep. 8, 2011 1:32 PM PDT
On Thursday, Senator Dick Durbin [[D-Ill.) held a hearing on the rash of restrictive voter ID laws being pushed by Republicans all over the country. Voting rights activists have argued the laws will reduce turnout among minorities and the poor.
Republicans' huge midterm victory last November translated into increased control of state legislatures, which they've used to pass new, more onerous restrictions on voting, sometimes explicitly for the purpose of suppressing votes from Democratic-leaning constituencies. Judith Brown Dianis of the Advancement Project called the wave of restrictions the largest effort to suppress the vote "since Reconstruction."
The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights has produced a map showing how many states are in the process of passing such laws:
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/map-of-shame.jpg
What the map doesn't show is that five states, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Ohio, and West Virginia, have actually curtailed early voting as well. As Ari Berman reported, some of these ban voting on "the Sunday before the election—a day when black churches historically mobilize their constituents."
"Americans are killed by lightning more often than they are victimized by fraud that voter ID would do something to stop," said Justin Levitt, a professor of law at Loyola Law School. "We've amputated a foot to stop a potential hangnail." The Brennan Center for Justice estimates that nearly ten percent of eligible voters lack the kind of photo ID required by these voter ID laws.
Full Article
http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/09/republicans-austerity-voting?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Motherjones%2Fmojoblog+%28Mot herJones.com+|+MoJoBlog%29
Showing your ID to pick up a plane ticket is a privilege extended to you by a private business; walking into a bank with an ID to cash a check is a privilege extended to you, also by a private business….
VOTING is a Right protected by the Constitution of the United States of America!!!!!
Just in case you’re still not convinced what this is all about….
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/2008ElectoralMap.jpg
I report…you decide!
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/map-of-shame.jpg
Some will hide their heads in the sand forever, the rest of us need to get involved!
Nitey Nite :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y54FRMedT_s&feature=player_embedded
MotownSteve
09-10-2011, 01:16 PM
Re this voter registration nonsense. It seems to me that if the state requires you to have a voter registration card they should provide the card and the where withall to get it. I just looked at my card and it has my name, some numbers, my signature, change of address/death info. No photo. I guess if I lost it anyone could use it.
Steve, as far as I know, all states issue a card after you fill out the registration form. Mine is some flimsy paper thing that came in the mail. The problem is, new laws are requiring you show photo ID [[issued by the State/DMV) at the time you vote....and to make it more difficult, many states are closing their satellite DMV's that are in or near lower income neighborhoods, making it even harder to get to the DMV. Heck I drive and just renewing my license is a pain in the rear because I have to go so far out to get to an office. [[the main DMV which is actually close to me does not issue driver's license or ID's)
MotownSteve
09-10-2011, 03:52 PM
ms_m, Sometimes me thinks the only thing George Orwell got wrong was the year. In NJ it is now actually easier for me to get my license and registration than it is to get my car inspected.
I hear ya Steve. Even people with advantages are finding it tough these days so think about those that don't have the same type of advantages.
People with, don't truly understand what's it's like for people without. We take a lot of things for granted.
On Eve Of 9/11 Anniversary, Cantor Insists On Massive Cuts To First Responders In Exchange For Emergency Disaster Aid
By Judd Legum on Sep 10, 2011 at 12:18 pm
Yesterday, President Obama requested $5.1 billion to provide disaster relief to communities struggling to recover from recent hurricanes, floods, earthquakes and wildfires. The request includes $500 million in emergency funds FEMA needs to continue to operate effectively through the end of September.
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, whose home state of Virginia was hit by an earthquake and Hurricane Irene, is demanding more partisan spending cuts in exchange for approving the request. From Politico:
But a spokesperson for House Majority Leader Eric Cantor [[R-Va.) signaled late Friday that the GOP is likely to insist on offsets for the $500 million in emergency funds Obama requested for 2011…
“The House has passed $1 billion in disaster relief funds that is fully offset, which we will look to move as quickly as possible.”
The funds referenced by Cantor’s spokesperson are contained in the House Department of Homeland Security Appropriations bill, which is adamantly opposed by Senate Democrats. Why? The “offsets” contained in the bill are actually massive cuts to first responders. Sen. Mary Landrieu [[D-LA) explains:
Full Article:
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/09/10/316237/on-eve-of-911-anniversary-cantor-insists-on-massive-cuts-to-first-responders-in-exchange-for-emergency-disaster-aid/
While McConnell Opposes Infrastructure Investment, Major Kentucky Bridge Shuts Down Over Safety Concerns
By Travis Waldron on Sep 10, 2011 at 2:32 pm
Yesterday, ThinkProgress published a report detailing Republican Congressional leadership’s opposition to infrastructure investments even as structural deficiencies in bridges and roadways persist in their home states. Among those is Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, where 34 percent of bridges are considered structurally deficient or functionally obsolete.
The Sherman Minton Bridge, one of three major bridges spanning the Ohio River between Louisville, KY and southern Indiana, was among the Kentucky bridges listed as deficient. And last night, the Sherman Minton Bridge was closed after further deficiencies, including cracks, were found in a load-bearing part of its structure. The Louisville Courier-Journal reports:
Full Article:
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/09/10/316190/while-mcconnell-opposes-infrastructure-investment-major-kentucky-bridge-shuts-down-over-safety-concerns/
REPORT: As Their States’ Bridges And Roads Crumble, GOP Leaders Remain Opposed To Infrastructure Investment
By Travis Waldron and Tanya Somanader on Sep 9, 2011 at 3:25 pm
This Minnesota bridge was also rated "structurally deficient"
President Obama’s plan to kickstart the economy and put the American people back to work includes investing in the nation’s rapidly deteriorating infrastructure, which, as studies have shown, is in need of as much as $2 trillion in immediate investment just to bring it up to date. In the past, Republicans have agreed that infrastructure improvements are needed, but in the context of economic stimulus and in their effort to remain opposed to anything Obama offers, they have chosen to ignore the nation’s infrastructure and jobs crises. Unfortunately, that approach doesn’t mean either crisis will go away.
Republican leadership has continually blocked efforts by Obama and Congressional Democrats to invest in infrastructure improvements, and as a result, bridges and roadways in their states are crumbling. According to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics, about 12 percent of the nation’s bridges are considered “structurally deficient,” the same rating given to the Minneapolis bridge that collapsed in 2007, killing 13 people. Roughly another 12 percent are considered “functionally obsolete.” In four of the five states represented by Republican congressional leadership, the rate of structurally deficient or functionally obsolete bridges outpaces the national average. ThinkProgress compiled a breakdown of the status of roads and bridges in each of those five states and, where applicable, individual congressional districts:
Full Aritcle:
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/09/09/315827/report-as-their-states-bridges-and-roads-crumble-gop-leaders-remain-opposed-to-infrastructure-investment/
MotownSteve
09-11-2011, 04:29 PM
I hear ya Steve. Even people with advantages are finding it tough these days so think about those that don't have the same type of advantages.
People with, don't truly understand what's it's like for people without. We take a lot of things for granted. I have had times in my life when I have been amazed by the generosity of people with next to nothing. Then there are those with mega wealth who donate to political candidates who should not be running for dog catcher; but, never have they done anything for those who need help just to get through each day.
Steve there are a lot of incredibly good, decent and generous people in this country but unfortunately their voices and good deeds are drowned out.
To a certain extent, it's always been that way but because of technology and the 24 hour news cycle, we hear more about the negativity.
I can understand people bickering over ideological differences or opinions but these days, it goes beyond that and I find it disturbing.
I've never cared much for PC thinking but I do believe in good manners, home training and making an effort to do unto others as you would have them do unto you but that seems to have gone out the window as well.
Capitalism by nature breeds greed which is why I think there needs to be checks and balances on the capitalistic system but until more Americans start to look at things in a more honest and rational manner, even if you find things that go against what you've always believed, I honestly don't see how things will ever change. But...that can't stop us from trying to make a difference, from trying to change things because doing nothing at all, will get us nowhere.
MotownSteve
09-11-2011, 10:23 PM
Well put ms_m
Thanks Steve.
America Needs Its Edge Back
Sep 12, 2011 1:00 AM EDT
Obama is right. We need new roads and schools. But the Tea Partiers will fight him all the way.
Finally, Barack Obama found the passion. “Building a world-class transportation system is part of what made us an economic superpower,” he thundered in his jobs speech on the evening of Sept. 8. “And now we’re going to sit back and watch China build newer airports and faster railroads? At a time when millions of unemployed construction workers could build them right here in America?”
Obama’s urgency was rightly about jobs first and foremost. But he wasn’t talking only about jobs when he mentioned investing in America—he was talking about our competitiveness, and our edge in the world. And it’s a point he must keep pressing.
In a quickly reordering global world, infrastructure and innovation are key measures of a society’s seriousness about its competitive drive. And we’re just not serious. The most recent infrastructure report card from the American Society of Civil Engineers gives the United States a D overall, including bleak marks in 15 categories ranging from roads [[D-minus) to schools and transit [[both D’s) to bridges [[C). The society calls for $2.2 trillion in infrastructure investments over the next five years.
More:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2011/09/11/america-needs-to-get-its-edge-back.html
On numerous occasions I’ve posted articles and links to help people understand how our monetary system works.
Not sure if it’s getting through or even if anyone cares but for those of you that have at least tried to understand, think about this.
When the Federal Government spends money, it goes somewhere, not back to the Treasury Dept., not back to the Feds but at some point it reaches someone’s hand.
Current members of Congress are bound and determined we cut spending in almost every program we have but one….Defense spending…whose hands do you think that money is reaching? If you think it’s the men and women defending our country, think again!
Rebuilding our infrastructure would not only make us safe in our travels but put money in the hands of the men and women who do the work. Rebuilding our schools will give our kids a better environment in which to learn and thrive….and put money in the hands of the workers who do the work.
Military contractors didn’t build this country. The average Joe and Jane on the street did. If our government is going to spend money, shouldn’t they be the ones that benefit?
Drew Westen's Nonsense
Jonathan Chait
August 8, 2011 | 8:26 am
Westen is a figure, like George Lakoff, who arose during the darkest moments of the Bush years to sell liberals on an irresistible delusion. The delusion rests on the assumption that the timidity of their leaders is the only thing preventing their side from enjoying total victory. Conservatives, obviously, believe this as much or more than liberals. But the liberal fantasy has its own specific character. It is unusually fixated on the power of words. Before Westen and Lakoff, Aaron Sorkin has indulged the fantasy of a Democratic president who would simply advocate for unvarnished liberalism [[defend the rights of flag burners, confiscate all the guns) and sweep along the public with the force of his conviction.
Westen's op-ed rests upon a model of American politics in which the president in the not only the most important figure, but his most powerful weapon is rhetoric. The argument appears calculated to infuriate anybody with a passing familiarity with the basics of political science. In Westen's telling, every known impediment to legislative progress -- special interest lobbying, the filibuster, macroeconomic conditions, not to mention certain settled beliefs of public opinion -- are but tiny stick huts trembling in the face of the atomic bomb of the presidential speech. The impediment to an era of total an uncompromising liberal success is Obama's failure to properly deploy this awesome weapon.
Westen locates Obama's inexplicable failure to properly use his storytelling power in some deep-rooted aversion to conflict. He fails to explain why every president of the postwar era has compromised, reversed, or endured the total failure of his domestic agenda. Yes, even George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan infuriated their supporters by routinely watering down their agenda or supporting legislation utterly betraying them, and making rhetorical concessions to the opposition. [[Ronald Reagan boasted of increasing agriculture subsidies and called for making the rich pay "their fair share" as part of a tax reform that did in fact increase the tax burden on the rich; Bill Clinton said "the era of big government is over" and ended welfare as an entitlement; etc., etc.)
More:
http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-chait/93323/drew-westens-nonsense
Capital gains tax rates benefiting wealthy feed growing gap between rich and poor
By Steven Mufson and Jia Lynn Yang, Published: September 11
The K Street office of Mark Bloomfield, president of the American Council for Capital Formation, is full of knickknacks collected in three decades of lobbying for cutting the capital gains tax.
The coffee table has campaign buttons that read “Capital Gains = Better Jobs.” One wall displays a blown-up cartoon retracing the steps that led President Jimmy Carter to reluctantly sign a cut in the capital gains tax rate. On a shelf sits a framed, handwritten note from President George W. Bush in December 2003 that says: “Dear Mark, I got your treatise on taxes — many thanks. I will look it over with keen interest. Merry Christmas.”
For the very richest Americans, low tax rates on capital gains are better than any Christmas gift. As a result of a pair of rate cuts, first under President Bill Clinton and then under Bush, most of the richest Americans pay lower overall tax rates than middle-class Americans do. And this is one reason the gap between the wealthy and the rest of the country is widening dramatically.
The rates on capital gains — which include profits from the sale of stocks, bonds and real estate — should be a key point in negotiations over how to shrink the budget deficit, some lawmakers say.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/capital-gains-tax-rates-benefiting-wealthy-are-protected-by-both-parties/2011/09/06/gIQAdJmSLK_story.html?hpid=z3
As Sophia on The Golden Girls use to say…picture it, a country that didn’t have Unemployment, Health Care, Social Security, scaled back minimum wage laws, etc. Now let’s say you work hard and save money but suddenly lost your job, your home, and your health…how long would your savings last, what would you do once it was gone?
If you’re part of the group that reaps the generous benefits of cuts on capital gains tax, you are probably good to go, if not, you're screwed and BTW... welcome to the world of the 99'ers.
Health Reform at Work: $700 Million More to Expand Community Health Centers, Create Jobs
Monday, September 12, 2011 | Posted by Deaniac83 at 11:18 @ The People’s View
In the middle of everything else going on today, let me drop in a little bit of good news about health care reform. Health care reform is literally working: the Department of HHS has just released an additional $700 million in grants for community health centers to expand and hire. This comes on the heels of other significant investments in the community health centers from Obamacare [[yes!), as we noted them previously. From the September 9 press release:
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services [[HHS) today announced the availability of approximately $700 million to help build, expand and improve community health centers across the U.S. to provide needed care to low-income Americans. The funds, authorized by the Affordable Care Act, will support renovation and construction projects, boosting centers’ ability to care for additional patients and creating jobs in those communities.
Of the $700 million, $600 million is for long term renovations and expansions, and $100 million for fixes that are needed right away. The $700 million is, of course, part of the $11 billion authorized for CHCs in the AHHS also reports that since the beginning of the president's term, community health centers have added some 18,600 full time jobs in the most distressed communities across the country. That's just health center staff. Since the passage of health reform, they have been creating additional work from funds to expand and fix up health centers, i.e. construction jobs, just like with this grant.
Full Article:
http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/09/health-reform-at-work-700-million-more.html
Fox Host Suggests Serena Williams’ Outburst Had A ‘Racial Undertone,’ Says It ‘Is What’s Wrong With Our Society’
By Tanya Somanader on Sep 12, 2011 at 1:40 pm
After suffering from a career-threatening foot injury and subsequent life-threatening blood clots, rant-prone tennis player Serena Williams waged a serious comeback in pursuit of her 14th grand slam title at the U.S Open this year. But Williams not only lost her finals match yesterday — she lost her temper. Down a set, Williams ripped a forehand in the first game of the second set that she thought was a winner and yelled, “Come on” before the ball reached her opponent Samantha Stosur. Umpire Eva Asderaki invoked the hindrance rule and awarded the point to Stosur, giving her the game.
Williams berated Asderaki at a later changeover. “If you ever see me walking down the hall, look the other way, because you’re out of control,” she said. “You’re a hater. You’re unattractive inside. Who would do such a thing? And I never complain. Wow, what a loser.” While most reports deemed this emotional rant inappropriate, Fox and Friends host Gretchen Carlson views Williams as “what’s wrong with our society“:
CARLSON: See, this is what’s wrong with our society today. That’s the entitlement generation right there.
http://thinkprogress.org/media/2011/09/12/316676/fox-host-suggests-serena-williams-outburst-had-a-racial-undertone-says-it-is-whats-wrong-with-our-society/
The same thing is wrong now as it was when John McEnroe would rant like a mad man…guess he was part of the entitlement society too, although it was never said about him…..ughhhhhhhh
This is the kind of BS dog whistles I spoke about upthread…and the fact it's coming from Fox News doesn't excuse it. Please don't try to excuse this sort of thing away. Making excuses only makes the problem worse not better.
Right or wrong Serena shouldn't be single out based on "entitlement" crap...and I guarantee she has more money than most folks trying to make a racial example out of her!!!!!!
See this crap for what it is folks, open your eyes to what the media and politicians are trying to do in terms of dividing us. It's real, it's not some dayum race card, reverse discrimination and or all the other crap they are trying to play it off as!!!!!
Great Link:
Federally-funded health centers care for you, even if you have no health insurance. You pay what you can afford, based on your income. Health centers provide:
checkups when you're well,
treatment when you're sick,
complete care when you're pregnant,
immunizations and checkups for your children, dental care and prescription drugs for your family, mental health and substance abuse care if you need it.
Pass it on!
http://findahealthcenter.hrsa.gov/Search_HCC.aspx
September 12, 2011, 11:36 am
White House Would Cut Deductions to Pay for Its Jobs Plan
By HELENE COOPER
2:24 p.m. | Updated The White House said on Monday that it would cover most of the cost of his payroll tax cut and other job initiatives by limiting the deductions that can be claimed on the tax returns of wealthier taxpayers.
President Obama, repeating what is clearly going to be the mantra for his stump speeches this fall, called on lawmakers Monday to “pass this bill” — his $447 billion jobs package.
At the White House, his budget director described how the administration would propose to pay for the plan, as the president has promised to do.
Jack Lew, the director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, said the bulk of the plan –- some $400 billion over ten years — would be raised by limiting the itemized deductions, such as those for charitable contributions and other expenditures, that may be taken by individuals making more than $200,000 a year and families making over $250,000 a year. The rest would come from provisions affecting oil and gas companies, hedge funds, and the owners of corporate jets.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/12/obama-pleads-for-congress-to-approve-jobs-bill/?nl=us&emc=politicsemailema1
This would only apply if you’re making between 200-250 grand a year or a big time corporate exec in oil or something and if you are and have a private jet…let’s talk…..LOL
From one flip flopper to another…LOL
Romney Campaign Says Perry Is Backpedaling On Social Security
Evan McMorris-Santoro September 12, 2011, 4:49 PM
Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign is attacking Rick Perry for what it says is his hasty retreat on Social Security ahead of tonight’s debate in Tampa, Florida.
Team Romney points to Perry’s USA Today op-ed from this morning, where the Texas governor makes a lot of noise about saving Social Security for the future but doesn’t mention the phrases “monstrous lie” or “Ponzi Scheme.”
That’s a backpedal, Romney’s campaign says.
“Rick’s Latest Retreat On Social Security,” reads a new screaming press release headline from the Romney shop.
In his op-ed, Perry writes that he’s trying to save Social Security with all his talk of Ponzi schemes, not eliminate it as his opponents charge [[and an even cursory reading of his book, Fed Up! might suggest.)
More:
http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/09/romney-campaign-says-perry-is-backpedaling-on-social-security.php?ref=fpa
...and this "states right" thing is beyond getting on my nerves. The entire issue of "state rights" has a history going all the way back to the Civil War and one of these days I'm going to get into it but for now....50 states doing their own thing....really? So forget about the United part and see how well that works out for you in the long term...
...and BTW, once you set the precedent with each state administering SS...you are delusional if you think the "succession" will stop there.
Republican debate sponsored by the TeaPaty
Unfriggin real...
Ron Paul asked about a hypothetical 30 year-old who has no insurance and needs intensive care.
“So society should just allow him to die?” Wolf Blizter asked....“Yeah!” someone in the audience shouts out.
Whoever he was, I guess it didn't occur to him that 30 year old could be his brother, cousin or best friend.
I've seen enough of this. I'll wait for the post debate analysis.
stephanie
09-12-2011, 10:13 PM
Ms M I will get with you tomorrow. I couldnt wait to come here and see what you had to say about the debate I saw the whole thing and Huntsman is the only one I could tolerate. I am sorry they want to privatize everything and I dont believe anything that any of them had to say. Everythjing is anti government and PRO big business. I am watching the analysis as well.
MotownSteve
09-12-2011, 11:35 PM
Ms M I will get with you tomorrow. I couldnt wait to come here and see what you had to say about the debate I saw the whole thing and Huntsman is the only one I could tolerate. I am sorry they want to privatize everything and I dont believe anything that any of them had to say. Everythjing is anti government and PRO big business. I am watching the analysis as well.
Hi Stephanie,
Which is why they idolize Ronald Reagan who sold the country to corporations.
You're better than I am Stephanie because after the cheering over let someone die remark I was done.
If you offer someone help and they refuse the offer, that's one thing but simply walking away from a dying person because they made a stupid choice is barbaric and the audience proved just how barbaric people can be. The night people cheered Perry for executing over 200 people [[which several turned out to may have been innocent after the fact) took my breath away but this was beyond the pale.
This is why I believe libertarianism only works in theory, in practice we don't have the type of culture where everyone looks out for everyone else or truly gives a sht beyond their own circle. ...and even then only for a limited amount of time. Hell, Ron Paul's own supporters will jump all over you and call you every negative diatribe imaginable IF YOU CHOOSE to exercise your LIBERTY and have an opinion or thought that's different from theirs.
In our society a libertarian philosophy would encourage cliques and a survival of the fittest/tribal mentality. You can't erase that type of thinking in 4 years and anyone who thinks they can is naive or simply scamming people.
Huntsman,no longer impresses me and seems to be grasping at straws and looking desperate, Cain is ridiculously clueless, Newt does nothing but whine, Bachmann and Santorum, tried to be relevant but weren't and the two so call front runners just make me want to gag. Neither one would know a principle if it slapped them in the face and even then, they would simply flip flop to an opposite principle.
Politics
CNN Tea Party Debate Live-Blog
By ThinkProgress on Sep 12, 2011 at 7:52 pm
9:53: Asked what he’d bring to the White House, Cain said: “I would bring a sense of humor to the White House because America is too uptight.”
9:52: This would have been a good time for Newt to scold the media for asking stupid questions.
9:50: Wolf Blitzer asks the candidate a vapid question about what they would change in the White House. If Rick Santorum was president, he would expand the White House — not for government, but for his seven children who would need lots of bedrooms.
9:50: Neocon favorite Rick Perry, the so-called “hawk internationalist” wondered if U.S. assistance to Afghanistan “is best spent with 100,000 military who have a target on their back in Afghanistan? I don’t think so at this particular point in time.”
9:49: Rick Perry: It’s really important for us to maintain a presence in Afghanistan. When it comes to his Afghanistan position, consistency is not Perry’s strong suit, however: “Time to bring our young men and women home as safely as we can, but important to keep a presence there.” He responded to Huntsman who called for withdrawal — and got best applause of the night for it.
9:48: FLASHBACK: Before it was known as Tea Party Express, CNN’s debate co-sponsor was known as “Move America Forward,” a Republican front group that organized pro-Iraq war rallies.
9:45: One hour and forty-five minutes into the debate and finally a person of color gets to ask a question — an Afghan woman.
9:45: Audience begins to boo Ron Paul when he tries to explain to Rick Santorum why we can’t blame all Muslims for terrorism caused by extremists. Audience again boos when Paul complains of “unfair treatment” of Palestinians.
9:45: another example of the society we live in…liberty and freedom sounds good as long as it your liberty or freedom but if it someone else’s you don’t like or don’t agree with…screw ‘em. In a way, freedom and liberty can be just like greed, once you get a taste of it, you want to hoard it all to yourself while playing some righteous lip service to the idea of freedom for all.
It's a nice and enticing dream this thing call libertarianism …but left unchecked, many of us know how the movie plays out.
The full play by play:
http://thinkprogress.org/
Op-ed
12 Sep 2011 11:40 AM
Republicanism As Religion
The Dish covered the remarkable web essay of Mike Lofgren, but I didn't comment myself because it so closely follows my own argument in "The Conservative Soul" and on this blog, that it felt somewhat superfluous. But I want to draw attention to the crux of the piece, because if we are to understand how the right became so unmoored from prudence, moderation and tradition and became so infatuated with recklessness, extremism and revolution, we need to understand how it happened.
It is, of course, as my shrink never fails to point out, multi-determined. But here is Lofgren's attempt at a Rosebud:
How did the whole toxic stew of GOP beliefs - economic royalism, militarism and culture wars cum fundamentalism - come completely to displace an erstwhile civilized Eisenhower Republicanism?
It is my view that the rise of politicized religious fundamentalism [[which is a subset of the decline of rational problem solving in America) may have been the key ingredient of the takeover of the Republican Party. For politicized religion provides a substrate of beliefs that rationalizes - at least in the minds of followers - all three of the GOP's main tenets.
http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/09/goodbye-to-all-that-the-lofgren-thesis.html
add these thoughts to the article I posted a few pages back [[see below) and what we are dealing with seems crystal to clear. [[at least to me)
Goodbye to All That: Reflections of a GOP Operative Who Left the Cult
Saturday 3 September 2011
by: Mike Lofgren, Truthout | News Analysis
http://www.truth-out.org/goodbye-all-reflections-gop-operative-who-left-cult/1314907779
This isn’t the Eisenhower Republican Party, heck even St Ronnie [[Reagan) wouldn’t make it in this current crop of extremist.
I’m old enough to remember a simpler time and there are some things I miss but I will be dayum if I’m willing to go back to recapture those days. You can’t filter out the bad things from those times to enjoy the good. Life doesn’t work that way.
Economy
Despite 600,000 Public Sector Layoffs, Darrell Issa Says Government Shouldn’t Try To Prevent Teacher Layoffs
By Marie Diamond posted from ThinkProgress Economy on Sep 12, 2011 at 6:30 pm
At least 600,000 government workers have lost their jobs since the recession began, but Republicans nevertheless keep scapegoating public employees who have shouldered more than their fair share of economic pain. Rep. Darrell Issa [[R-CA), chairman of the House Oversight Committee, became the latest lawmaker to join in this trend during an appearance today on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, where he said that government shouldn’t try to save teachers’ jobs because that would be like another stimulus package:
ISSA: Whether or not the federal government borrows money from overseas sources to keep teachers in XYZ state on the payroll seems to be stimulus II. It seems to be something that the states have to decide what the right number of teachers are, and fund that, and not have us borrow money from overseas to keep $30 billion worth of money to try to aid the states. We did that once. It’s time for us to say states have to step up to the plate. That’s a good example where I don’t think that belongs in this stimulus bill. I don’t think we should be maintaining government workers with borrowed money.
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/09/12/317084/despite-600000-public-sector-layoffs-darrell-issa-says-government-shouldnt-try-to-keep-teachers-on-the-payrolls/
The US Government does not borrow money from overseas. We sell Treasury Bonds.
There is a big difference between selling and borrowing. I don’t care how many politicians try to pretend otherwise.
Let’s use a bit of logic for a moment:
1. If you could create your own money, why would you need to borrow money?
2. If the money you created was the exact same form of legal tender the US uses [[USD)why would you borrow a Renminbi [[China), a Yen [[Japan), a Pound Sterling [[UK)?
3. How would that make sense? It’s not as if you could walk into a USA grocery store and purchase food items with a Yen or any other currency from “overseas.”
The same applies to the US. It pays for things with USD....no other currency but USD and we create USD. Not China, not Japan, not the UK, not any other country in the world but the USA, creates USD. [[at least not LEGALLY, I should add)
Interesting analysis….
Political MoJo
→ Elections, Politics
Ron Paul: Mitt Romney's Unlikely Secret Weapon
—By Tim Murphy| Mon Sep. 12, 2011 6:58 PM PDT
If you watched Monday's the CNN/Tea Party debate, you could be forgiven for asking what the septuagenarian Texas congressman Ron Paul has against his home state governor, Rick Perry. It's pretty simple, actually. Paul is channeling the same grievances that tea partiers in Texas have attacked Perry with for years. Specifically, that his executive order mandating the Gardasil HPV vaccine for adolescent girls was an invasive power grab by big government; that he increased spending over his decade as governor; that he's raised the state's level of debt; and that he's raised taxes [[Paul says he's experienced this firsthand).
If this sounds familiar, it's because this is the same line of attack that was launched against Perry in 2010 by Debra Medina, the nurse and former county GOP chair who finished a surprising third in the Texas gubernatorial primary. [[I previewed this line of attack back in August.) There's more there that Paul likely believes but neglected to mention [[the much-maligned Trans-Texas Corridor, which he and others viewed as a harbinger for a future North American Union, for instance.) And it's not the first time; if anything, it was just a more substantive reprise of the back-and-forth between Perry and Paul at last week's debate, which culminated in this photo [[http://reason.com/assets/mc/mwelch/2011_09/RonPaulPerry.jpg).
MORE:
http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/09/ron-paul-mitt-romneys-unlikely-secret-weapon
Fox News' Paranoid Alternate Universe
—By Adam Serwer| Wed Sep. 7, 2011 8:27 AM PDT
Two-thirds of viewers who say Fox News is the news source they trust most believe discrimination against whites is as big a problem as discrimination against minority groups, according to a study released Tuesday by the Brookings Institution and the Public Religion Research Institute. The number, 68 percent, is an exact reversal of the percentage of black people in the same poll who say that discrimination against whites is not as big a problem as discrimination against minorities. The study was based on polling conducted by PRRI.*
The Brookings/PRRI study uses "reverse discrimination"—an unfortunate term that suggests a difference in kind, not in degree—to describe anti-white discrimination. Nevertheless, the revelations about the views of consumers who most trust Fox News are disturbing:
Among Americans who say they most trust Fox News, 26 percent say reverse discrimination is a critical issue, nearly twice as many as say discrimination against minority groups is a critical issue [[14 percent). At the other end of the spectrum, only 8 percent of Americans who most trust public television say reverse discrimination is a critical issue, compared to 27 percent who say discrimination against minorities is a critical issue.
The financial crisis wiped out 20 years of minority wealth gains, and minority incarceration and unemployment rates are far higher than those of whites, but white Americans have nevertheless become more receptive to the idea that whites face as much discrimination as minorities. While the numbers for those who trust Fox News are much higher, a majority of whites in the study, 51 percent, also say they believe discrimination against whites is as big of a problem as discrimination against minorities. That's despite relatively low levels of interaction between whites and minorities. According to the study, "More than 8-in-10 Americans report having a conversation with an African-American person at least once a day [[43 percent) or occasionally [[40 percent)." Most of these exchanges, apparently, involve black people callously turning down whites applying for jobs or home loans. Nevertheless, while opinions of Muslims and immigrants vary by age and political perspective, demographic groups surveyed expressed positive impressions of African Americans across the board. [[Otherwise, they might be racist or something.)
More:
http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/09/fox-news-paranoid-alternate
If 12% of the population could “critically” discriminate against 72% of the population, why the heck did we wait so long to implore whatever secret weapon we have to accomplish such a phenomena? [[rhetorical question and rolling eyes)
Lawd love a duck….
jillfoster
09-13-2011, 10:53 AM
Ms. M... somehow I KNEW that we'd be discussing the "Let him die" remark. It was more than one person in that audience supporting that. The damn teabaggers are showing their true colors, and you know what, there were a ton mroe in that audience that WANTED to shout out, but didn't. For anyone who needs it, the videotape:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PepQF7G-It0&feature=player_embedded
Jillfoster when I heard it I was totally stunned. The people in the audience definitely showed their true colors.
jillfoster
09-13-2011, 12:42 PM
I think Perry cut his own throat with the social security crap. I don't understand for the LIFE of me, why everyone is having a nuclear meltdown over Social security like it's some evil thing. It was worked just FINE for the last 75 years, and in the future, it will have trouble. Well... we are all living longer due to advancement in medical technology... so all you need to do is raise the retirement age one year a time over time until it becomes solvent again. You don't get RID of it, you just make adjustments when needed. How hard is that? The problem is that people who are against social security have money, their health, and all their faculties. These people need to be told "Ok... suppose you have a car accident tomorrow and sustain brain damage, and can never work again, what would you do? " something tells me they wouldn't have an answer to that question.
Jillfoster I was reading an article the other day about SS and the fix is so easy and simple it's crazy....and it's not even something that needs to be done immediately. [[I'll try and find the article)
The Republicans have been trying to dismantle entitlement programs from day one and now they are simply using it all as a red herring pretending it's costing too much money. The one thing that's out of control is Bush's Medicare addition that was never paid for and a joke. Looking back, I'm sure it was deliberately set up to cause problems.
I'm so over these people it's not even funny but what really gets me are the voters who have their heads up their butts refusing to see what's going on.
Found it...here you go JillFoster...
Some Gutsy Talk on Social Security
—By Kevin Drum| Mon Sep. 12, 2011 1:57 PM PDT
Just last week Rick Perry called Social Security a Ponzi scheme and a "monstrous lie." This week he revises and extends those remarks in USA Today:
Our elected leaders must have the strength to speak frankly about entitlement reform if we are to right our nation's financial course and get the USA working again. For too long, politicians have been afraid to speak honestly about Social Security. We must have the guts to talk about its financial condition if we are to fix Social Security and make it financially viable for generations to come.
Now, I'm pretty sure the Washington Post would have given Perry a little more room on their op-ed page if he'd truly wanted to speak frankly and gutsily about how to fix Social Security, as opposed to merely saying that we ought to speak frankly about it and then calling it a day. But for some reason, Team Perry decided that USA Today, with its vast hotel-bound audience and 300-word limit, was a better bet.
Which is too bad, because of course, we should speak frankly about the financial condition of Social Security. So here's some gutsy talk for y'all: Social Security has a small long-term funding shortfall. It can be fixed easily. The CBO recently estimated that Social Security has a long-term cumulative deficit of 0.6% of GDP, and the table below lists 30 options for fixing this. All you have to do is pick some combination of options that adds up to 0.6% and you're done. It's so easy that even Rick Perry can do it.
Personally, I'd wait and begin phasing in changes starting in about 20 years or so, which would require picking a basket of options that adds up to something like 1.2% or so. But that's just little old coastal left-winger me. Either way, though, whether you make the changes now or later, it's all pretty simple. And that, my friends, is some gutsy talk.
http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum
Click link to see chart
Fact Sheet: The American Jobs Act
THE AMERICAN JOBS ACT
1. Tax Cuts to Help America’s Small Businesses Hire and Grow
Cutting the payroll tax in half for 98 percent of businesses: The President’s plan will cut in half the taxes paid by businesses on their first $5 million in payroll, targeting the benefit to the 98 percent of firms that have payroll below this threshold.
A complete payroll tax holiday for added workers or increased wages: The President’s plan will completely eliminate payroll taxes for firms that increase their payroll by adding new workers or increasing the wages of their current worker [[the benefit is capped at the first $50 million in payroll increases).
Extending 100% expensing into 2012: This continues an effective incentive for new investment.
Reforms and regulatory reductions to help entrepreneurs and small businesses access capital.
Read All:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/09/08/fact-sheet-american-jobs-act
Republican politicians are not fighting for you, I don’t hear an overwhelming number of Dem politicians out there fighting for you, the ONLY person out there stumping is President Obama and VP Biden. This jobs bill is for us, the American people….help them to fight for you!!!!!
Please call your SENATORS [[http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm) AND REPRESENTATIVES [[http://www.congressmerge.com/onlinedb/)today and tell them to PASS THE AMERICAN JOBS ACT BILL!
Comment of the day:
I've already started, by writing my Representative. My Senators are next. Then, there will be messages to Speaker Boehner and House Majority Leader Cantor. Emails. Letters. Tweets. I've given them 30 days [[now 29) to put the bill, as is, on the President's desk for signature. If anyone in Congress wants us to take them seriously during the next election, then they need to pass the bill. That is our mantra; that is our motto. Pass the bill. It can be done quickly. It can be done efficiently. All they have to do is pass the bill. But they won't, unless we hound them. They will hem and haw and twiddle their thumbs and exchange barbs, before taking even the simplest action; I expect nothing less with this bill. We must encourage them to change this behavior, to put governance first and party politics last. This is the system the founding Fathers created, a system whereby the American people would be the ultimate arbiters of their governance, but it would require them to be involved. Get involved. Your life, the life of your family, the life of your nation, depends on it.
This is bill is not political gamesmanship. We need stimulus or we are screwed. The economic crisis in Europe is also affecting us. We live in a global economy, we all are connected....tell your Senators and Reps to PASS THIS BILL....three words, that's all it takes.....PASS THIS BILL!
Op-ed
How to Turn Republicans and Democrats Into Americans
An insider’s six-step plan to fix Congress
By MICKEY EDWARDS
ANGRY AND FRUSTRATED, American voters went to the polls in November 2010 to “take back” their country. Just as they had done in 2008. And 2006. And repeatedly for decades, whether it was Republicans or Democrats from whom they were taking the country back. No matter who was put in charge, things didn’t get better. They won’t this time, either; spending levels may go down, taxes may go up, budgets will change, but American government will go on the way it has, not as a collective enterprise but as a battle between warring tribes.
If we are truly a democracy—if voters get to size up candidates for a public office and choose the one they want—why don’t the elections seem to change anything? Because we elect our leaders, and they then govern, in a system that makes cooperation almost impossible and incivility nearly inevitable, a system in which the campaign season never ends and the struggle for party advantage trumps all other considerations. When Democrat Nancy Pelosi became speaker of the House, the leader of the lawmaking branch of government, she said her priority was to … elect more Democrats. After Republican victories in 2010, the Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell said his goal was to … prevent the Democratic president’s reelection. With the country at war and the economy in recession, our government leaders’ first thoughts have been of party advantage.
This is not an accident. Ours is a system focused not on collective problem-solving but on a struggle for power between two private organizations. Party activists control access to the ballot through closed party primaries and conventions; partisan leaders design congressional districts. Once elected to Congress, our representatives are divided into warring camps. Partisans decide what bills to take up, what witnesses to hear, what amendments to allow.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/07/how-to-turn-republicans-and-democrats-into-americans/8521/1/
It’s been awhile since I’ve seen such a fair and unbiased article. I think the ideas have merit. In addition to these ideas, I’d like to see campaign finance reform.
As long as “corporations are people my friend,” money will always have a major role at the political table.
Voter apathy enemy of democracy
August 13, 2011 7:42 PM
BY GARY KNOX
Letters to the editor as well as conversations with Yuma Sun readers tell me that some folks value what I write. It is equally true, certainly more vociferously, that others challenge virtually every word I put to print, especially disputing various political and economic views.
Such competing voices, however, are the foundation for democratic governance. Rich, competing voices about issues have been a historic source of national pride. This point-counterpoint paradigm at the core of our political system creates respectable opportunities [[but no guarantees) for quality political discourse. Its purpose is to find, if not something close to consensus on critical matters, at least areas between extremes that, when smoothed out, result in workable outcomes.
This give-and-take dynamic shines throughout our iconic marketplace of political thinking. It's how we breathe life into democratic principles and allow for government “of the people, by the people and for the people.” It's a pillar of national strength, predating the Constitution of America's Founding Fathers.
Yet there are times when wholesome political dialogue bogs down, indeed, halts. It happens when contrarians go silent — whether by choice, decree or out of fear. Any silencing of exchanges in ideas runs counter to democracy to the extent that voices across the vast range of competing ideas are hushed.
Such muted environments happen for many reasons. They occur when opponents are shouted down. Voices are unheard when citizens are denied their constitutional right to vote.
But the most devastating crisis for democracy occurs when, as free individuals, we just plain decide not to vote. That simple failure to exercise our hard-fought responsibility undermines every American democratic expectation. Such retreats from civic duty undercut our political system — so much so that non-voters actually leave their futures in the hands of others, contrary to democratic principles.
Non-participants may rationalize their absence at the polls by thinking that those who vote think like they think; they unquestionably don't. Nor should they mindlessly believe that government led by those elected will do as they believe it should. Nor should they expect that those who others elect will seek sacrifices for the things they believe in.
Thriving democracies require that every voice be heard, no matter how dissenting. If not, silence gives the other guy power over those who remain voiceless. Thus apathy is the great enemy of democracy. Apathy degrades America. Each failure to express oneself by voting presents an extreme challenge to the democratic principles for which many forebears literally died on our behalf. By not voting, we mock America.
Voting gets one's voice heard. It is a fundamental civic starting point, though not sufficient for healthy governance. There is an accompanying robust civic duty: voters hold a substantial responsibility to be inquiring citizens. Our burden requires that each of us know for whom we vote and assign our choices to those most likely to carry our values forward in the decisions we elect them to make.
This duty to achieve full civic responsibility requires citizens to do a bit of investigation. We must ask questions. Which of those on the ballot are most likely to reflect the ideals of governance that I expect from my elected officials? What is the vision for our society and community of each candidate? What values does each hold — are they like mine or in major conflict with me? To what extent will each candidate pursue community interests, or do any seemingly hold personal, ax-grinding agendas? Is any beholden to special interest groups? Do candidates actively listen to constituents, or do they come with unshakable ideological positions? Do they seek to look out for the most vulnerable among us? Do they speak in platitudes without providing substance?
Pursuit of these and similar questions is a beginning for getting your voice heard, albeit secondhand. By casting your vote for those who are most aligned in their values, concerns and interests with yours, you know that your voice, even as the sound emits from another mouth, echoes you at the governance table. That is the strength of government founded in democratic principles.
http://www.yumasun.com/opinion/democratic-72186-political-vote.html
The Pragmatic President
By Fareed Zakaria
The air is thick with liberal disappointment. In the days after the debt deal, liberal politicians and commentators took to the airwaves and op-ed pages to mourn the agreement. But their ire was directed not at the Tea Party or even the Republicans but rather at Barack Obama, who they concluded had failed as a President because of his persistent tendency to compromise.
As the New Republic’s Jonathan Chait brilliantly points out, this criticism stems from a liberal fantasy that if only the President would give a stirring speech, he would sweep the country along with the sheer power of his poetry. In this view, writes Chait, “every known impediment to the legislative process—special interest lobbying, the filibuster, macroeconomic conditions, not to mention certain settled beliefs of public opinion—are but tiny stick huts trembling in the face of the atomic bomb of the presidential speech.”
But the idea abides. On Aug. 9, the MSNBC host Dylan Ratigan raged on TV that Obama should just give such a speech, overriding Congress and taking charge. But the most revealing moment came minutes after Ratigan’s rant, when his panel of experts pressed him as to what specifically he would want Obama to do once he had usurped power. Ratigan’s answer: allow corporations to re patriate their overseas profits [[presumably by reducing or waiving corporate taxes on the money) to fund a national infrastructure bank. So the great liberal dream is that Obama propose something that he has already proposed and fund it by giving multinationals a tax break.
http://www.fareedzakaria.com/home/Articles/Entries/2011/8/12_The_Debt_Deals_Failure_2.html
September 12, 2011
American Jobs Act :: Impact by State
Posted by Linda H on 1:15 PM
Click on link and see how your state will benefit from the American Jobs Act
http://www.whatisworking.com/2011/09/american-jobs-act-impact-by-state.html
Please call your SENATORS [[http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm)AND REPRESENTATIVES [[http://www.congressmerge.com/onlinedb/) today and tell them to PASS THE AMERICAN JOBS ACT BILL!
Hyperinflation and the Fed
—By Kevin Drum| Fri Sep. 9, 2011 11:23 AM PDT
The Fed has been pumping billions of dollars of reserves into the banking system over the past few years. This hasn't created any inflationary pressure yet, but monetary hawks worry that it will if the Fed waits too long to unwind its balance sheet. "You cannot afford to get behind the curve on reining in this extraordinary amount of liquidity because that will create an enormous inflation down the road," said Alan Greenspan a couple of years ago.
Karl Smith agrees that this is an issue that needs to be taken seriously. At the same time, it's also an issue that Ben Bernanke has the tools to address. "The Fed has complete power to slow the expansion of lending and hence the emergence of hyper-inflation," says Karl, "and it doesn’t have to remove its reserve injections to make it happen."
Click the link for the full explanation. It's a little long, but very friendly. Basically, the Fed's authority to pay interest on reserves is the hero of the story. But the bottom line is simple: hyperinflation just isn't something to worry about, no matter how many gold bugs tell you otherwise.
More:
http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2011/09/hyperinflation-and-fed
Mini Reports
Obama for America launched AttackWatch.com [[http://www.attackwatch.com/)today. Interesting site. Remember “Fight the Smears”? The new site is like the old effort, only this one will likely be better.
Such a no-brainer: [[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/13/american-jobs-act-would-b_n_959139.html?1315922036#s321678&title=Frankel_Staffing_Entry)“The jobs package President Obama sent to Congress on Monday includes a ban on hiring discrimination against the jobless.”
Shoshana Hebshi is an American citizen, with a Saudi father and a Jewish mother. She’s a wife and a mother, and lives in the American heartland. How she was treated on a flight over the weekend is a national disgrace [[http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/09/flying-while-half-arab-and-half-jewish-this-one-is-shocking/244984/).
Jill Foster you'll enjoy this:
IS SOCIAL SECURITY A PONZI SCHEME?
12 September 2011 by Cullen Roche 206 Comments
This evening’s Tea Party Debate in Tampa Bay is once again running into the whole “social security is a ponzi scheme” argument as Rick Perry and Mitt Romney go after one another on this hotly contested subject. Perry has consistently referred to the program as a “ponzi scheme” – a term which has come under harsh criticism from many on the left and right who claim that the term is misleading and hyperbolic. And they’re exactly right.
First of all, let’s get the definition of a ponzi scheme right. According to the SEC, a ponzi scheme is “an investment fraud that involves the payment of purported returns to existing investors from funds contributed by new investors.” Quite simply, a ponzi scheme involves the promise of future payments that current returns do not justify.
The confusion in the Social Security debate revolves around this idea that there is a “trust fund” that current workers pay into to fund those who are currently receiving the benefits. Due to a multitude of factors, the current beneficiaries are essentially receiving more than they themselves paid into the system. So, this “trust fund” appears deficient. It has the appearance of paying more out than it brings in. But this is a misconception of the way government spending works.
Full Article:
http://pragcap.com/is-social-security-a-ponzi-scheme
MotownSteve
09-13-2011, 09:48 PM
I heard someone the other day, I think it was a professor who was a guest on Morning Joe saying that Soc Sec is safe for 70 years but does need some tweeking. It can be tough to know where the truth lies but the thing to do is keep questioning.
Steve, the more you understand how our monetary system works the better you will be at figuring out what's true and what's not true when it comes to the almighty dollar in this country.
Hate Breeds Hate: a righteous rant
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 | Posted by sepiagurlsweetspot @ The People’s View
Just found this Blog Post where a woman says she cannot leave her house because of "the gays":
"The same people who say I shouldn't impose my morality on them, are imposing immorality on me and my children to the point that I literally have a hard time even leaving my home anymore to do something as simple as visit the park. And this is freedom?"
Blog Post:Can't Even Go to the Park.* [[Editor's note: see end if you must click on this link)
This woman is serious. She is not playing. She truly thinks she and her children are being damaged by the mere existence of 'the gays'. This is no different to how people treated blacks in this country when they tried to swim in swimming pools or marry out of their race or, for heavens sake even tried to exist.
I was not surprised and this saddens me. Why? because I have now fully come to accept that hate like this in this country is endemic. This has been the ugly secret that was hidden under a thin veneer for many decades but now it is clear to see. Minorities, especially African-Americans, have known this forever and basically have come to terms with it. However, there are many who seem genuinely surprised that a black President did not bring about the racial harmony that they thought he could magically bring about just by his election. So many have been and are still in denial about the hate that runs through the very fabric of this country.
More:
http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/09/hate-breeds-hate-righteous-rant.html
Economy
With Record Number Of Americans Falling Into Poverty, Rand Paul Says The Poor Are Getting Rich
By Tanya Somanader posted from ThinkProgress Economy on Sep 13, 2011 at 8:10 pm
Census data revealed today that a record 46.2 million Americans were living in poverty in 2010. But in an aptly-timed hearing entitled “Is Poverty A Death Sentence,” Sen. Rand Paul [[R-KY) flat out rejected the idea that poverty in the U.S is worrisome. As the Ranking Member of the Senate Health subcommittee, Paul offered a dissertation-length statement on how the correlation between poverty and death is only found in the Third World and to claim such a connection within the U.S. is nothing more than “socialism” and “tyranny.”
Stating that “poor children today are healthier than middle-class adults a generation ago,” he even blamed the poor for their own health problems, suggesting “behavioral factors” like a higher incidence of smoking, obesity, or weak family support structures as the only correlation between poverty and health.
Citing the deficit as a primary priority, Paul questioned whether federal low-income programs are “creating unnecessary and unhealthy dependence on government.” He unequivocally declared that “poverty is not a state of permanence” and that “the rich are getting richer, but the poor are getting richer even faster.”
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/09/13/318259/with-record-number-of-americans-falling-into-poverty-rand-paul-says-the-poor-are-getting-rich/
[...]Politicians…Republican politicians are doing their best to make the White middles class think it’s the fault of Blacks and other minorities.
I don't have any reason to make this stuff up folks. It's starring us all in the face.
The White House Blog
Office Hours 9/13/11 or "We Need the American Jobs Act Now": David Plouffe Answers Your Questions on Twitter
Posted by Kori Schulman on September 13, 2011 at 07:30 PM EDT
Today, David Plouffe, Assistant to the President and Senior Advisor, answered your questions on the American Jobs Act during a special session of White House Office Hours. See a recap of the Twitter Q&A below, or over on Storify.
If you didn't have a chance to join us live, there are more Office Hours focused on the American Jobs Act this week. Take a look at the schedule and be sure to follow @WHLive for more chances to engage.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/09/13/office-hours-91311-or-we-need-american-jobs-act-now-david-plouffe-answers-your-quest
Take Action
Contact Elected Officials - Address, Phone, Twitter, Email
Posted by Linda H on 7:58 AM
A list of websites, email addresses, twitter accounts and phone numbers for the Senate, members of the House of Representatives, and the White House:
White House
President Barack Obama - [[Democrat) Twitter
BarackObama
1600 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE NW WASHINGTON, DC 20500
Web Form: http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/barackobama
Phone: 202-456-1111
Comprehensive list of contacts by State:
http://www.whatisworking.com/2011/05/contact-congress-address-phone-twitter.html
Contact your Senators and Reps and tell them to PASS THIS BILL [[American Jobs Act)
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/debt-bush-obama-cartoon.jpg
Re-Post
The Pragmatic President
By Fareed Zakaria
The air is thick with liberal disappointment. In the days after the debt deal, liberal politicians and commentators took to the airwaves and op-ed pages to mourn the agreement. But their ire was directed not at the Tea Party or even the Republicans but rather at Barack Obama, who they concluded had failed as a President because of his persistent tendency to compromise.
As the New Republic’s Jonathan Chait brilliantly points out, this criticism stems from a liberal fantasy that if only the President would give a stirring speech, he would sweep the country along with the sheer power of his poetry. In this view, writes Chait, “every known impediment to the legislative process—special interest lobbying, the filibuster, macroeconomic conditions, not to mention certain settled beliefs of public opinion—are but tiny stick huts trembling in the face of the atomic bomb of the presidential speech.”
But the idea abides. On Aug. 9, the MSNBC host Dylan Ratigan raged on TV that Obama should just give such a speech, overriding Congress and taking charge. But the most revealing moment came minutes after Ratigan’s rant, when his panel of experts pressed him as to what specifically he would want Obama to do once he had usurped power. Ratigan’s answer: allow corporations to re patriate their overseas profits [[presumably by reducing or waiving corporate taxes on the money) to fund a national infrastructure bank. So the great liberal dream is that Obama propose something that he has already proposed and fund it by giving multinationals a tax break.
http://www.fareedzakaria.com/home/Articles/Entries/2011/8/12_The_Debt_Deals_Failure_2.html
NEW LINK
As someone who promotes music, I would never tell you to buy a CD by saying the CD sucks....just an FYI;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jJdDmzb7Kk
I’ve spoken about Daily Kos on a few occasions but never went into a lot of detail because it’s the type of blog, you really need to be there on a daily basis to understand.
In general terms, I enjoyed my time there, I had never met so many politically knowledgeable and astute people anywhere else on the net…and like here at SDF, I even made friends away from the net.
In specific terms though, it became a nightmare.
Daily Kos was started as a political blog to promote, push and raise money for Democrats. Not progressives, not moderates, etc. but Democratic candidates on a national, state and local level.
Like many places on the net there were disagreements or as they are called on Kos, pie fights, but eventually people made up and moved on.
At one point, I started to notice an ugliness I hadn’t seen before and it became increasingly racial in nature. I finally walked away. Fighting with “liberals” who were comfortable throwing around the “N” word was a waste of my time.
Now as it so happens, I still belong to Kos, not because I want to but because it’s like the Bates Motel, you can check in but you can’t check out…and I mean that literally, you can not delete your account at Daily Kos…..anyhoo, because I have friends there I would often hear about the place and I knew it was getting worse and not better. Recently all hell broke loose and a large percentage of AA’s and their supporters were banned from the site. Banned I may add arbitrarily.
Who cares you may say, no one really [[except for the people that were banned and those of us who understood and were a part of the hate fest going on) but it has initiated a lot of talk in the political blog world and some of it good. The post below is part of that good. Some will like it, some will take offense but I hope most will be open minded enough to at least try and understand.
Sunday, September 11, 2011
White privileged sensibilities
In case you're not aware, the great 2011 Daily Kos purge has been underway this week. Just days after I wrote Whatever it is Markos is doing, it's not working, the big man himself stepped in and started banning people from the site and dishing out other discipline as he saw fit.
To the broader political world, most folks will rightly say, "so what?" But the context should provide us with some lessons to learn. That's because one of the biggest battles going on there was about people of color [[mostly African Americans) speaking up when they heard racist things being said by other commentors. The "OMG you're calling me a racist?" reactions where overwhelming and the pushback was severe. After months of this, some black participants and their supporters got angry and said so. It was in the midst of this that Markos came in and lowered the ban hammer without taking the time to look at the context. As a result, about 1/3 of the punishments were given out to either African American participants or their supporters. You can read about Adept2u's [[one of those banned) experience here.
What I observe is something I've been talking/hearing about on progressive blogs for years now. It comes down to the fact that if we want to have dialogue about the issue of racism, white people are going to have to get used to the idea that its going to make us uncomfortable.
Interestingly enough, the first time I ran into this issue online it was in a discussion between Glenn Greenwald and Nezua from The Unapologetic Mexican back in the summer of 2008. I wrote about it here.
It starts out with a post by Greenwald where he says this:
It is always preferable to have views and sentiments -- even ugly ones -- aired out in the open rather than forcing them into hiding through suppression. And part of the reason people intently run away from discussions of race... is because it is too easy to unwittingly run afoul of various unwritten speech rules, thereby triggering accusations of bigotry. That practice has the effect of keeping people silent, which in turn has the effect of reinforcing the appearance that nobody thinks about race [[which is why nobody discusses it), which in turn prevents a constructive discussions of hidden and unwarranted premises.
And here is Nezua's response to that:
In this analysis [[or this part of his post at least) the problem is the various unwritten speech rules. But guess what? There really aren't any. There are just poor attitudes we keep about people who look different. Or who we've been taught to think of differently. And there is a "White" attitude of deciding for everyone else how they should live, be, self-identify, and do many other things. There are old slurs and old tropes that hurt people. These are the things that are flushed out when people speak: attitudes, thoughts, beliefs, manners of speaking that hint at lurking attitudes.
People avoid talking about race because they are scared of exposing their thoughts and views on race. They are afraid they are A RACIST. They are not afraid of "unwritten speech rules." They are afraid that what they really think and feel will cause them to be ridiculed or ostracized in public, or that they may see a part of themselves they have to feel bad about. So they keep the potential to themselves.
But if we keep the focus on Speech Rules, we miss the opportunity to change ourselves...
I would just end by saying what people have to get over is the shame of admitting they are not perfect as-is; admitting that they soaked up some terrible views and thoughts and ideas while growing up absorbing American culture. We have to get over our idea that the work of becoming a Grownup is over—the work of improving ourselves, of continuing the climb toward being a helpful and healthy human being. We should search out these grains of harmful thoughts in ourselves like joyful detectives. Because when you can find them, you can change them. Just seeing them begins that change. Just wanting to see them is a part of that change. This is my idea of changing the world for the better.
Amen! I thought that was the whole point of being a progressive...changing the world for the better. But to do so we've got to get over this fear of feeling bad about what we might have done/said that was racist and be prepared to deal with some genuine anger on the part of those we've hurt.
http://immasmartypants.blogspot.com/2011/09/white-privileged-sensibilities.html
There are also links within the post you can check out as well.
I'm not interested in a conversation on this but I would like to say, thanks for taking the time to listen!
MotownSteve
09-14-2011, 12:55 AM
Hate Breeds Hate: a righteous rant
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 | Posted by sepiagurlsweetspot @ The People’s View
I just read the article at the link and found it to be very troubling. I also found that nonsense about can't go to the park troubling.
Steve I agree, the most troubling thing I've seen in the last three years is all the hate and negativity.
I KNEW, electing a Black President would not be some harmonious dream. I KNEW it would not signal the end of racism, bigotry and prejudices. I'm simply too old and have lived through too much, to be that naive but never did I expect the intensity of the open hatefulness that has developed in this country. Never did I expect the ACCEPTANCE of it. It's the latter that has blown my mind the most!
I don't know how this will all end but I do KNOW.....Together we stand, Divided we fall!
Elmendorf: Stimulus Now, Austerity Later
By Matthew Yglesias on Sep 13, 2011 at 4:46 pm
CBO Chief Doug Elmendorf testified today before the Supercommittee and said, sensibly, that “[t]he combination of fiscal policies that would be most effective would be policies that cut taxes or increase spending in the near-term, but over the medium and longer-term move in the opposite direction.” In other words, the sort of thing that President Obama proposed in his jobs bill. Higher deficits in the short term when interest rates are low and the output gap is large, followed by lower deficits down the road when [[hopefully) the situation will be different.
Clearly that leaves plenty of room for disagreement around the margins about exactly which measures to adopt. But if members of Congress were willing to broadly accept Elmendorf’s ideas, we’d have an easy time working out a compromise. Instead, we live in a world where compromise is impossible because senior House aides are running around saying “Obama Is On The Ropes; Why Do We Appear Ready To Hand Him A Win?”
A legislative compromise on a bill that has a meaningful positive impact on the economy is, by definition, going to be a “win” for President Obama. It would also be a win for the American people. But if you think that beating Obama is the best thing for the long-term interests of the country, then you’ll quite sensibly work to deny him that win. Thus, no compromise and no recovery.
MORE:
http://thinkprogress.org/yglesias/2011/09/13/318324/elmendorf-stimulus-now-austerity-later/
Modern Monetary Theory
[…]The Federal government is the monopoly supplier of currency.
The modern floating exchange rate system helps to maintain equilibrium and flexibility in the global economy.
The currency unit created by the state via deficit spending can only be extinguished by payment of taxes. Therefore, a modern monetary system can best be thought of as a system of debits and credits where government deficit spending credits the private sector and payment of taxes debits the private sector.
Functional Finance
Functional Finance is an economic theory based on the following principles:
The government is an entity created by the people and for the people. It exists to further the prosperity of the private sector – NOT to benefit at its expense. If this entity is allowed to exist for its own benefit or becomes corrupted by a concentration of power, it will become susceptible to dissolution via the populace’s rejection of that government.
Governments should be actively involved in regulating and helping build the infrastructure within which the private sector can generate economic growth. The economy is a complex dynamical system with irrational participants. It cannot be expected to regulate itself or behave rationally at all times. Therefore, some level of government intervention and involvement is not only beneficial, but necessary. But ultimately, it must be the private sector that is the driver of economic growth. While government can aid in this process it cannot be expected to be the primary driver of innovation, productivity and growth.
Money is always created by the state and must therefore be regulated by the state; however, ultimately the private sector must accept this legal tender as the currency unit. Therefore, the private and public sectors should best be thought of as being in partnership with one another and not opposing forces. Government by the people and for the people is not the antagonist in this story, but rather an entity that should be best utilized to maximize private sector prosperity.
Government deficit spending and tax collection should be maintained at a rate that does not impose financial hardship on the private sector. Because the Federal government is not a state or household it should not manage its balance sheet for its own benefit. Rather, taxes and government spending should be managed in a way that most benefits the private sector and encourages private sector prosperity, productivity, innovation and growth.
http://pragcap.com/resources/understanding-modern-monetary-syste
FYI: "Private sector" = people
POTUS Pulls Another Rabbit Out Of His Hat
Posted on 09/13/2011 at 4:45 pm by JM Ashby
The Republicans are growing a little worried [[http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/09/over-gop-objections-budget-hawks-say-super-committee-should-go-big.php?ref=fpb)about the mission they mandated to the “Super Committee” because the Obama Administration is now seeking to use that committee to pass the president’s jobs proposal.
“By asking the Joint Select Committee to increase the $1.5 trillion target to cover the full cost of his plan, the president is essentially tasking a committee designed to reduce the deficit to pay for yet another round of stimulus,” the committee’s co-chair, Rep. Jeb Hensarling [[R-TX) said in a statement last week. “This proposal would make the already-arduous challenge of finding bipartisan agreement on deficit reduction nearly impossible.”
On the contrary, what the president is asking the committee to do is to agree to even more deficit reduction, and just when I thought this administration couldn’t impress me any more with their deviousness, they pull another rabbit out of their hat. [[http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/09/cbo-chief-gives-de-facto-boost-to-obama-jobs-plan.php?ref=fpb)
Many Republicans are resistant to the idea of using the joint committee as a vehicle to pass or pay for Obama’s jobs bill, a significant chunk of which they oppose. But the legislation is written in such a way that — if it passes — it will count any extra savings that the committee finds toward the cost of its bill. And at a Tuesday press conference House Speaker John Boehner encouraged the committee to go well beyond its statutory requirement of finding $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction.
Full Article:
http://bobcesca.com/blog-archives/2011/09/potus-pulls-another-rabbit-out-of-his-hat.html
Affordable Care Act Working for Young People
Posted on September 13, 2011 by Karina
A report [[http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/income_wealth/cb11-157.html)out today from the U.S. Census Bureau finds the percentage of young adults with health insurance increased from 70.7% in 2009 to 72.8% in 2010–despite the weak economy:
A key reason for the increase in coverage is the Affordable Care Act provision allowing young people to stay on their parents’ plans until their 26th birthday [[the provision went into effect for plan years beginning on or after 9/23/10) and it’s expected even more young people will be covered this year. Learn more from HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius:
Affordable Care Act [[http://www.healthcare.gov/news/blog/fewer_uninsured091311.html)in Action: Fewer insured
Young Adults in America
Posted September 13, 2011
By Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health and Human Services
We know that young adults are the age group most likely to be uninsured and before health reform was enacted, many young Americans lost their health insurance when they left home or graduated from school. This meant that your sons or daughters – who might be college students or in their first job – were often forced to choose between paying their rent or maintaining their health insurance. A policy in the Affordable Care Act changes this, by allowing young adults to be on their parents’ plan until age 26. [[http://www.healthcare.gov/foryou/betterbenefitsbetterhealth/youngadults.html)
Today, a new report shows that the Affordable Care Act is working. According to the Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey released today, there was a significant increase in the number of 18-24 year olds with health insurance in the U.S. over the past year.
The report showed that the percentage of young adults with insurance increased from 70.7% in 2009 to 72.8% in 2010. That translates into 500,000 more young people with insurance. We expect even more will gain coverage in 2011 when the policy is fully phased in.
Young people sometimes think they’re invincible, but it’s important for everyone to have insurance. One car accident, one slip in a shower, or one sudden illness can result in months or even years of health care bills that can bankrupt the average family if that son or daughter is uninsured.
This 2% increase in coverage for young people came as the number of Americans under 65 with insurance went down slightly. The Affordable Care Act will help provide coverage at a decent price for millions of uninsured Americans starting in 2014, when millions of Americans will have access to affordable insurance options.
To read more about the health insurance coverage data released today, please visit this page. [[http://aspe.hhs.gov/health/reports/2011/CPSHealthIns2011/ib.shtml)
http://www.democraticleader.gov/blog/?p=4395
From Abstract to Reality: Census Data Shows Why Health Reform is Essential
Wednesday, September 14, 2011 | Posted by Deaniac @ The People’s View
Here comes the Republicans' worst nightmare about ObamaCare: it works! Every single provision of the Affordable Care Act that has gone into effect thus far has worked. First, it lowered premiums of "Medicare Advantage" plans by 1% despite having the government stop subsidizing it to the tune of 14% extra over traditional Medicare. Medicare changes were one of the first to go into effect. As insurance regulations, like beginning this plan year, insurers have to spend 80-85% of premiums on actually providing care, started to kick in, heads exploded and in some market, private insurance premiums headed south. President Obama massively expanded coverage for children through SCHIP before the big health care reform, and since then by stopping health insurer discrimination based on pre-existign conditions against children first.
And? And, beginning September 23 of last year, insurance companies have been required to insure adult children under 26 under their parents' insurance plans. So? So, in a survey just released by HHS, there was only one age group that increased their health insurance coverage. Wanna take a guess which one?
18-24 year olds were the only age group to experience a significant increase in the percentage with health insurance over the past year, from 70.7% in 2009 to 72.8% in 2010. This is a two percentage point increase in the share of adults 18-24 with coverage and represents 500,000 more young adults with health insurance.
Full Article:
http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/09/from-abstract-to-reality-census-data.html
The GOP's Genius Plan to Beat Obama in 2012
If Pennsylvania Republicans and their buddies in other states execute a plan to change election rules, Obama has a one-way ticket to Losertown.
—By Nick Baumann
Republican state legislators in Pennsylvania are pushing a scheme that, if GOPers in other states follow their lead, could cause President Barack Obama to lose the 2012 election—not because of the vote count, but because of new rules. That's not all: there's no legal way for Democrats to stop them.
The problem for Obama, and the opportunity for Republicans, is the electoral college. Every political junkie knows that the presidential election isn't a truly national contest; it's a state-by-state fight, and each state is worth a number of electoral votes equal to the size of the state's congressional delegation. [[The District of Columbia also gets three votes.) There are 538 electoral votes up for grabs; win 270, and you're the president.
Here's the rub, though: Each state gets to determine how its electoral votes are allocated. Currently, 48 states and DC use a winner-take-all system in which the candidate who wins the popular vote in the state gets all of its electoral votes. Under the Republican plan—which has been endorsed by top Republicans in both houses of the state's legislature, as well as the governor, Tom Corbett—Pennsylvania would change from this system to one where each congressional district gets its own electoral vote. [[Two electoral votes—one for each of the state's two senators—would go to the statewide winner.)
http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/09/gop-electoral-college-plan-beat-obama-2012
I should be shocked but I'm not. Republicans will do anything to keep the POTUS from getting a second term and it's getting to the point, voters from both sides are all too happy to help.
Gosh, Could Obamacare Be Working?
Jonathan Cohn
September 14, 2011 | 10:13 am
Need a reason to believe the Affordable Care Act is starting to work? The Census Bureau just gave you a half million of them.
That’s how many young adults had health insurance in 2010, as compared to 2009, according to the official estimates. Or, to put it another way, the proportion of 18- to 24-year olds without health insurance fell, by roughly two percentage points, last year.
That’s pretty remarkable, given what was happening in the rest of the population. For every other group of non-elderly adults, from 35 through 64 years of age, the proportion without health insurance increased. [[See the graph above.)
That's the sort of decline you'd expect, given economic conditions: When people lose jobs, they also lose access to employer-sponsored insurance. When their incomes fall or their debts rise, they have a harder time keeping up with premiums.
But then why aren't 18- to 24-year-olds suffering the same fate? What makes them so special? Nobody can be certain right now. Health insurance estimates are famously quirky and these data frequently mask critical information. But, as noted yesterday, the circumstantial evidence suggests, very strongly, that the Affordable Care Act is the primary factor.
Full Article:
http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-cohn/94924/uninsured-young-adult-affordable-care-act-census
Tax Hikes Now? No. Tax Hikes Later? Yes.
Jonathan Cohn
September 13, 2011 | 11:23 pm
President Obama this week did exactly what he promised to do last week: He proposed a way to pay for his jobs bill.
In particular, he suggested raising taxes on the wealthy and then using the money to offset the cost of school building, payroll tax breaks, and other expenditures designed to boost the economy. He also invited the congressional super-committee to come up with alternatives, as long as they generate the same amount in combined savings and revenue.
Republicans were quick to pounce: Obama wants to raise taxes! Instead of saving the economy, he's going to kill it! And even less hyperbolic commentators from the right were unhappy. Here, for example, is Megan McArdle, who has actually said some charitable things about Obama's proposal. "Paying for the bill with tax hikes--any tax hikes--is going to substantially reduce the stimulus this bill provides."
Do they have a case? Most economists would agree that raising taxes right now would slow the economy. But let's be clear: That's not what the administration is proposing. As Budget Director Jack Lew confirmed in yesterday's White House press briefing, the tax increases wouldn't take effect until January 2013 -- i.e., sixteen months from now. That's a significant difference.
Full Article:
http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-cohn/94895/tax-increase-obama-jobs-bill-keynes-deficit
It's been obvious to me for awhile Republicans will often attack President Obama's character because they can't truthfully attack his policies.
For all the hand wringing and name calling, he's actually getting the job done and HELPING the American people.
Has everything he's done been a success...no... but he keeps at it no matter what and on the policy front, he's winning ...as a result we're winning and the Republican politicians know that as well.
They also take great pleasure in knowing....the American people as a general rule, don't have a clue.
I like reading comments from articles almost as much as the article themselves. This one was particularly inspiring.
Last Spring I was unhappy with Obama and made some stupid comments. It was a brief phase. I had stated in one comment here last Spring that it would be better if a real Republican won the White House because it would most likely hurry our downfall and the subsequent revolt or uprising. I also said it would be better to take the plunge into the Republican hot water all at once instead of like the proverbial frog in the slowly warming water. Since I made those ignorant comments I have seen them repeated here many times.
Initially, sometimes when I get riled up I will act more on emotion rather than common sense, but in time, I always come back to reality and find center ground.
A Republican take over of both chambers of Congress and the White House would be the absolute worst thing for America and Americans. The middle class will get hammered and the poor will be devastated.
It’s always a plus to see a secure adult who can admit when he/she has been wrong. An adult that understands, you can not change a behavior, you will not admit exist. Bravo, to all the adults in the room!
Random Comments:
We already have a multi-trillion dollar infrastructure program under way…the only problem is that it’s in Afghanistan and Iraq. We just need to give the Pentagon the GPS coordinates for Cleveland…
I couldn’t have said that any better. Build a road or bridge in Afghanistan? THAT is military strategy. And no one, and I mean no one asks how it is being “funded”.
Build/repair infrastructure here, and it needs to “paid” for by cuts elsewhere. But according to Republicans, the biggest injustice would be to pay for any of this off the “backs” of the affluent. Who are not only doing better than ever but are also our job creators. [[snark)
The GOP heavily supports this message, and frankly, I think it is working. Meanwhile, I just can’t stop rolling my eyes.
Ironically, the comments above were in reference to another article....amazing how they both fit in with the article below...
Cantor Voted For Billions To Rebuild Schools In Iraq, Now Opposes Funding School Construction In America
By Judd Legum on Sep 12, 2011 at 3:10 pm
Majority Leader Eric Cantor [[R-VA) voted for over $120 billion to rebuild Iraq and Afghanistan, funds that were used to construct and repair schools, roads, bridges, and other critical infrastructure.
Now, Cantor is opposing President Obama’s proposal to spend $30 billion to modernize 35,000 American schools. Reuters has the story:
U.S. House Republican Leader Eric Cantor said on Monday he will not support President Barack Obama’s proposal to renovate U.S. schools as part of the administration’s bill to spur job growth.
He added that Obama should focus instead on cutting federal regulations that he says kill U.S. jobs…
The president’s proposal is a modest effort. The total maintenance and repair backlog at U.S. schools is estimated at $270 billion to $500 billion. While the funding Obama is proposing is fully offset, Cantor voted to build schools in Iraq and Afghanistan with deficit spending.
Full Article:
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/09/12/317046/cantor-billions-iraq-schools/
Are we paying attention?
Take Action
Contact Elected Officials - Address, Phone, Twitter, Email
Posted by Linda H on 7:58 AM
A list of websites, email addresses, twitter accounts and phone numbers for the Senate, members of the House of Representatives, and the White House:
White House
President Barack Obama - [[Democrat) Twitter
BarackObama
1600 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE NW WASHINGTON, DC 20500
Web Form: http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/barackobama
Phone: 202-456-1111
Comprehensive list of contacts by State:
http://www.whatisworking.com/2011/05...e-twitter.html
Contact your Senators and Reps and tell them to PASS THIS BILL [[American Jobs Act)
..........
…a glimpse in the world of President Obama…
Blue Dogs Cool To Obama Jobs Vision
Brian Beutler | September 14, 2011, 1:29PM
Blue Dog Democrats are pushing members of the joint deficit Super Committee to reduce the deficit significantly more than they've been tasked with. But they don't want to talk about President Obama's jobs plan. And beneath the surface its clear that there are major differences between the White House and conservative members of his party.
Leaders of the Blue Dog caucus held a press conference in the Capitol Visitor's Center Wednesday to push the Super Committee to "go big." But thanks to an explicit efforts by Democrats and the administration the deficit panel's work has become linked to the idea of job creation, and Obama's jobs bill. But the Blue Dogs didn't really want to talk about it.
After the press conference I asked Rep. Heath Shuler [[D-NC) whether he agreed with CBO chief Doug Elmendorf -- and by extension Obama -- that the wisest economic path involves near term stimulus followed by long-run fiscal restraint.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/09/blue-dogs-cool-to-obama-jobs-vision.php?ref=fpblg
I often see people on the left criticizing and ridiculing the POTUS and inevitably the rallying cry will be, he should be more like FDR….
Let’s take a look at a few facts.
We’ll start with the fact that FDR had a super Democratic majority
75th US Congress
Senate
Democratic [[D): 76 [[majority)
Republican [[R): 16
Farmer-Labor [[FL): 2
Wisconsin Progressive [[P): 1
Independent [[I): 1
TOTAL members: 96
House of Representatives
Democratic [[D): 334 [[majority)
Republican [[R): 88
Wisconsin Progressive [[P): 7
Progressive [[P): 1
Farmer-Labor [[FL): 5
TOTAL members: 435
BUT….even with this super majority
FDR wasn’t able to get a National Health Care Plan
http://www.pnhp.org/facts/a_brief_history_universal_health_care_efforts_in_t he_us.php?page=2
He didn’t fight for Civil Rights and allowed Jim Crow to continue?
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/jimcrow/struggle_president2.html
He allowed deficit hawks to influence his economic policy
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/jun/14/lunatics-economy-cuts-frankin-roosevelt
He cut benefits to veterans, funding for research, education, and slashed salaries of federal employees?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franklin_D._Roosevelt
President Obama on the other hand… Success Stories
Posted by Linda H on 3:08 PM [[http://www.whatisworking.com/p/economy-what-is-working.html)
President Obama has accomplished all this without a super majority, [[not anywhere close to one) and while dealing with opposition from Republicans, his own party and even his base.
Are we paying attention?
…and just to check to see if you REALLY are paying attention….
**UPDATED: Barack Obama and the myth of the progressive ‘majorities’
July 16, 2011 • Posted in People, Politics, President Barack Obama, U.S. Senate
To progressives who complain about Barack Obama “squandering” the progressive majorities he supposedly had going for him when he was elected president, I refer you to the following chart [[from Wikipedia):
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/seats.jpg
What the chart shows is the actual number of Democrats and Independents in the Senate from the time Obama was sworn in, in January 2009, through the present, when Democrats hold a slim, 53-47 majority in the upper chamber.
Of the 56 Democrats and 2 Independents caucusing with the Senate majority when Barack Obama took office, [[there were two seats unfilled, due to a disputed race in Minnesota that wasn’t resolved until July, and the former Obama Senate seat in Illinois) —
17 represented red or red-leaning states:
Majority leader Harry Reid [[Nevada)
Max Baucus and John Tester [[Montana)
Ben Nelson [[Nebraska)
Mark Begich [[Alaska)
Blanche Lincoln [[Arkansas)
Jeanne Shaheen [[New Hampshire)
Kay Hagan [[North Carolina)
Kent Conrad and Byron Dorgan [[North Dakota)
Tim Johnson [[South Dakota)
Evan Bayh [[Indiana)
Jim Webb and Mark Warner [[Virginia)
Robert Byrd and Jay Rockefellar [[West Virginia)
Claire McCaskill [[Missouri)
Another 27 represented blue or blue leaning states:
Diane Feinstein and Barbara Boxer [[California)
Chris Dodd [[Connecticut)
Frank Lautenberg and Bob Menendez [[New Jersey)
Jeff Bingaman and Tom Udall [[New Mexico)
Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand [[New York)
Ted Kaufman and Tom Carper [[Delaware)
Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley [[Oregon)
Daniel Inouye and Danidel Akaka [[Hawaii)
Jack Reed and Sheldon Whitehouse [[Rhode Island)
Dick Durbin and Roland Burris [[until November 2009, when the seat flipped to Republican Mark Kirk)
Patrick Leahy and Bernie Sanders [[Democrat and Independent, respectively, from Vermont)
Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell [[Washington)
Barbara Mikulski and Ben Cardin [[Maryland)
Ted Kennedy and John Kerry [[Massachusetts [[Kennedy died in August 2010 and his
seat flipped to Republican Scott Brown in February 2010)
The remaining 12 represented swing states:
Michael Bennett and Mark Udall [[Colorado)
Sherrod Brown [[Ohio)
Bill Nelson [[Florida)
Bob Casey [[Pennsylvania, plus Arlen Specter who switched parties in April 2009)
Tom Harken [[Iowa)
Herb Kohl and Russ Feingold [[Wisconsin)
Carl Levin and Debbie Stabenow [[Michigan)
Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota
*Al Franken didn’t come on board until in July 2009.
In addition, there was Joe Lieberman, who by January 2009 was a reliable vote for the red state caucus on key legislation like healthcare, despite hailing from blue Connecticut.
continued next page...
Even if you generously put all of the swing state Democrats into the “progressive” group, and that’s stretching it when it comes to certain votes, that puts the president at minus 18 reliable “progressive” votes in the Senate.
And because Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell made it clear from the start that he intended to have his caucus use the filibuster on every piece of legislation, and vote as a bloc, forcing Democrats to always need 60 votes to pass anything, those numbers really matter.
[Sidebar: In the House, Democrats had both a stronger majority and a stronger progressive majority, with the progressive caucus outnumbering the blue dog caucus by something like 83-54 in 2009 [[the blue dogs lost half their numbers in the 2010 elections.)
That's why the House was able to pass something like 400 bills, including lots of progressive legislation, fewer than a third of which ever made it to the Senate floor. The House is where ideological ideals live -- on the left as well as on the right [[witness the amount of right wing legislation that the tea party caucus, also about 83 strong, has passed, but which has gone nowhere in the Senate). The Senate is where they go to die, and actual law is made.]
Despite the myth-making on the left, Democrats actually held their tenuous 60-vote majority for only five months in 2009: from July of that year, when Al Franken was finally sworn in after winning the recount against Norm Coleman, through November 2009, when Democrats lost Barack Obama’s old Senate seat in Illinois to Mark Kirk. Then in a special election the following January, Scott Brown won Teddy Kennedy’s old seat, and was sworn in on February 4th.
Could Barack Obama have somehow rammed through the entire progressive wish list in five months? I find it hard to see how, given the unreliability of the blue dog Senators. Could he have convinced the conservative Senators to put a vote to repeal Don’t Ask Don’t Tell through, at the same time they were struggling to get a healthcare bill done? Could he have gotten them to add DOMA to their task list, given the knock-down, drag-out healthcare fight and with the rising tea party town hall rebellion brewing? Maybe, but I doubt that, too.
MORE:
http://blog.reidreport.com/2011/07/myth-of-progressive-majority/
..........
I'm in it, to win it...how about you?
Take Action
Contact Elected Officials - Address, Phone, Twitter, Email
Posted by Linda H on 7:58 AM
A list of websites, email addresses, twitter accounts and phone numbers for the Senate, members of the House of Representatives, and the White House:
White House
President Barack Obama - [[Democrat) Twitter
BarackObama
1600 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE NW WASHINGTON, DC 20500
Web Form: http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/barackobama
Phone: 202-456-1111
Comprehensive list of contacts by State:
http://www.whatisworking.com/2011/05...e-twitter.html
Contact your Senators and Reps and tell them to PASS THIS BILL [[American Jobs Act)
..........
The Fierce Advocate for Consumers Goes to Washington
Wednesday, September 14, 2011 | Posted by Deaniac @ The People’s View
Obama caves! It suuuucks that he didn't nominate Elizabeth Warren to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau! We're sooo disappointed! Some of us said that well, other than the fact that her nomination would only set up a huge brawl in DC without actually any chance of confirmation or any chance of exposing the Republicans' real obstruction agenda, the White House has a hand behind pushing her to run for the Senate in the Bay State. Well, don't look now but Elizabeth Warren is in. She's just formally announced her run for Senate in Massachusetts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wx2H31ZgkIQ&feature=player_embedded
“Washington is rigged for big corporations,” Warren continued. “A big company, like GE, pays nothing in taxes, and we’re asking college students to take on even more debt to get an education? We’re telling seniors they may need to learn to live on less? It isn’t right, and it’s the reason I’m running.”
“We have a chance to help rebuild America’s middle class. We have a chance to put Washington on the side of families. We can do this together,” Warren says in her announcement video.
http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/09/fierce-advocate-for-consumers-goes-to.html
She will make a hell of a senator if voters wake up and get behind her. Good thing the President “caved” [[snark)
When it comes to leftwing messaging…they will ridicule the Obama Administration all day, every day but fail to see, too often the left [[as in base) is it’s own worst enemy. The really sad part, the Republican/TeaParty, count on it!
The Poll Paradox For Perry: Obama A ‘Socialist’ But Ending Social Programs Would Be Terrible
Kyle Leighton September 14, 2011, 1:50 PM
Rick Perry, meet your base.
A PPP poll out on Wednesday illustrates a clear contradiction within the GOP electorate: overwhelming majorities of voters who deride President Obama as a socialist, but who also love actual real social welfare programs — Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid — and don’t want to see them cut.
For a candidate like Rick Perry, that cognitive dissonance could present real problems. He’s rocketed to the front of the pack on the strength of his appeal to the Tea Party, where the Obama-as-socialist rhetoric runs red hot. He’s also pretty much declared war on Social Security.
71 percent of Republicans in the poll agree that President Obama is a socialist. But 75 percent of them don’t think that the government should end Social Security. 78 percent think that ending Medicare would be a bad idea. And 61 percent say the same about Medicaid [[health care for the poor).
http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/09/ppp-republican-poll-obama-a-socialist-but-ending-social-security-medicare-medicaid-would-be-horrible.php?ref=fpa
It would help if MSM, politicians and even pundits [[on both sides)…as well as many average [[and uninformed) voters, stop pushing the meme that being poor is solely synonymous with minorities.
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/USBreakdownCensus.jpg
Rep. Joe Walsh’s Plan To End Israel
By Matthew Yglesias posted from ThinkProgress Yglesias on Sep 14, 2011 at 3:35 pm
A sane Israeli government would have tried to use the Palestinian drive for United Nations recognition as an opportunity for creative thinking about how to achieve some goals, but instead, the quest to find partners who’ll back them up in saying no to anything has left them with guys like Rep Joe Walsh [[R-IL) who’s pushing a plan for the elimination of Israel:
One such measure supports “Israel’s right to annex Judea and Samaria,” the biblical name attached to the area otherwise known as the West Bank. The resolution, which was submitted last week by tea party firebrand Rep. Joe Walsh [[R-Ill.), accuses the Palestinians of breaking past agreements with the U.S. and Israel. [...]
“My hope is that this will help buck up Israel,” Walsh said in an interview last week. “We’re not going to get peace until the other side realizes that they’re dealing with strength, that Israel and the U.S. are not going to back down.” [...]
[…]You can have a single state with sovereignty from the Mediterranean to Jordan, but that state can’t possibly be Israel. Or if it is Israel, it would have to be a sovereign state that’s formally committed to denying citizenship to a large and growing minority of its residents. Walsh would, in other words, take exactly what’s so anomalous and problematic about the occupation of the West Bank and exacerbate it. This is fine if you’re playing partisan games or think you read something about it in the Bible, but it’s a ludicrous foreign policy strategy.
Full Article:
http://thinkprogress.org/yglesias/2011/09/14/319229/rep-joe-walshs-plan-to-end-israel/
This is what happens when you let emotion [[and ignorance)... not facts and logic rule your thinking.
This idiotic solution would start the mother of all wars.
GOP Jobs Plan: More Snakes?
Benjy Sarlin | September 14, 2011, 4:34PM
Democrats and Republicans all agree that the nation needs to move on a jobs agenda. And Republicans have a new plan: unleash the reins of snake commerce.
GOP members of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee are incensed over a proposed regulation that would restrict the transportation and importation of nine types of snakes, including the Burmese Python.
In a new report entitled "Broken Government: How the Administrative State has Broken President Obama's Promise of Regulatory Reform," GOP members cited the proposed snake ban as one of seven examples of red tape choking off job growth in an already ailing economy.
More:http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/09/gop-jobs-plan-more-snakes.php?ref=fpa
Warning: Picture of a snake involved…just though I’d let you know:eek:
The Republican/TeaParty has officially crossed over into the land of the totally absurd!
I knew they would stall and obstruct but dayum, they really do think Americans are
stupid....and if we don’t push back on the BS we ARE stupid!
I'm in it, to win it...how about you?
Take Action
Contact Elected Officials - Address, Phone, Twitter, Email
Posted by Linda H on 7:58 AM
A list of websites, email addresses, twitter accounts and phone numbers for the Senate, members of the House of Representatives, and the White House:
White House
President Barack Obama - [[Democrat) Twitter
BarackObama
1600 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE NW WASHINGTON, DC 20500
Web Form: http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/barackobama
Phone: 202-456-1111
Contact your Senators and Reps and tell them to PASS THIS BILL [[American Jobs Act)
just discovered the link isn't working and no one said a word...hmmp...anyhoo
Comprehensive list of contacts by State:
http://www.whatisworking.com/2011/05/contact-congress-address-phone-twitter.html
I have to say something about these snakes because the more I read the more convinced I am that many people in this country have lost their ever loving mind!
I actually looked it up and it just so happens this snake thing is a billion dollar industry...I get that. I also believe that saying snakes are going to start slithering up the east coast is probably a scare tactic since many people don't like the dayum things....I know I don't but let's get real. When you're driving across that old bridge and it starts to collapse...or you send your kids to school and the ceiling falls on their head are you really going to think to yourself...wow, glad I saved the snakes and the folks that breed them? Not to mention, if you're out of a job, how in heck are you going to buy and maintain a friggin snake?
Priorities people...priorities...snakes are not our first and foremost priority right now. Congress can debate snakes AFTER they start to look out for all the unemployed and struggling Americans, not just some snake breeders and their slimy little reptiles....although I'm sure the Repubs feel right at home discussing the dayum things.:mad:
MotownSteve
09-14-2011, 07:24 PM
More on Joe Walsh: http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2011/09/joe-walsh-child-support-tea-party-judge-order-/1
GOP Squares off Against Economists, Reality
Wednesday, September 14, 2011 | Posted by Cedwyn at The People’s View
But we already knew that, didn't we? Here's the first salvo in their latest crusade against rationality, in the form of the following statement from Boehner's office, circa formation of the debt panel committee:
Deficit reduction will spur job creation and, therefore, the supercommittee does not need to take on an additional mission. “As every economist and every rating agency has made clear, getting our deficit under control is the first step to help get our economy growing again and to create jobs."
Stopped laughing yet? Okay.
It hardly seems necessary to point out how time after time [[http://www.forbes.com/sites/petercohan/2011/05/03/do-tax-cuts-create-jobs/), it has been determined [[http://www.epi.org/publication/tax_cuts_wont_create_jobs/) that, no, tax cuts don't quite create jobs like the GOP wishes [[http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/susan-milligan/2011/06/20/corporate-tax-cuts-dont-stimulate-job-growth) they would, but I kinda can't resist this [[http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/11/30/sherrod_brown_tax_cuts_dont_create_jobs_unemployme nt_benefits_do.html):
"Congressman Cantor [[R-VA) either failed English class or failed logic class or failed history class because these tax cuts for the rich that Bush did twice, in '01 and '03, resulted in very little economic growth. We saw only one million jobs created in the Bush years, 22 million created in the Clinton years when we reached a balanced budget with a fairer tax system," Sen. Sherrod Brown [[D-Ohio) said on MSNBC.
Full Article:
http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/09/gop-squares-off-against-economists.html
It sure is taking Mr Family Guy Republican a long time to state his position....I've heard several stories from him over the last several months.
But if we don't get off our butts to push back against people like Walsh...THIS kind of idiot will be our fate!
Yes I know, I have already posted this but
I started thinking, it may not be sinking in so I figure…better safe than sorry…be repetitive:cool:
Besides, many of us have been out of school for so long [[myself included) I think we have forgotten what we learned in Civics in terms of how legislation works. We get too caught up in talking points, our personal emotions and ideology and not enough actual facts and honest empirical data. Then there is the fact that the Senate has set up all these crazy rules that make one side or the other jump through hoops and neither side is ready to repeal them**
So, expect to see this posted over the next 14 months… a lot:cool:
Are we paying attention?
I often see people on the left criticizing and ridiculing the POTUS and inevitably the rallying cry will be, he should be more like FDR….
Let’s take a look at a few facts.
We’ll start with the fact that FDR had a super Democratic majority
75th US Congress
Senate
Democratic [[D): 76 [[majority)
Republican [[R): 16
Farmer-Labor [[FL): 2
Wisconsin Progressive [[P): 1
Independent [[I): 1
TOTAL members: 96
House of Representatives
Democratic [[D): 334 [[majority)
Republican [[R): 88
Wisconsin Progressive [[P): 7
Progressive [[P): 1
Farmer-Labor [[FL): 5
TOTAL members: 435
BUT….even with this super majority
FDR wasn’t able to get a National Health Care Plan
http://www.pnhp.org/facts/a_brief_hi..._us.php?page=2
He didn’t fight for Civil Rights and allowed Jim Crow to continue?
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/jimcrow/stru...resident2.html
He allowed deficit hawks to influence his economic policy
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2...nkin-roosevelt
He cut benefits to veterans, funding for research, education, and slashed salaries of federal employees?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franklin_D._Roosevelt
President Obama on the other hand… Success Stories [[http://www.whatisworking.com/#)
Posted by Linda H on 3:08 PM
President Obama has accomplished all this without a super majority, [[not anywhere close to one) and while dealing with opposition from Republicans, his own party and even his base.
Are we really paying attention?
UPDATED: Barack Obama and the myth of the progressive ‘majorities’
July 16, 2011 • Posted in People, Politics, President Barack Obama, U.S. Senate
To progressives who complain about Barack Obama “squandering” the progressive majorities he supposedly had going for him when he was elected president, I refer you to the following chart [[from Wikipedia):
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/seats.jpg
What the chart shows is the actual number of Democrats and Independents in the Senate from the time Obama was sworn in, in January 2009, through the present, when Democrats hold a slim, 53-47 majority in the upper chamber.
Of the 56 Democrats and 2 Independents caucusing with the Senate majority when Barack Obama took office, [[there were two seats unfilled, due to a disputed race in Minnesota that wasn’t resolved until July, and the former Obama Senate seat in Illinois) —
17 represented red or red-leaning states:
Majority leader Harry Reid [[Nevada)
Max Baucus and John Tester [[Montana)
Ben Nelson [[Nebraska)
Mark Begich [[Alaska)
Blanche Lincoln [[Arkansas)
Jeanne Shaheen [[New Hampshire)
Kay Hagan [[North Carolina)
Kent Conrad and Byron Dorgan [[North Dakota)
Tim Johnson [[South Dakota)
Evan Bayh [[Indiana)
Jim Webb and Mark Warner [[Virginia)
Robert Byrd and Jay Rockefellar [[West Virginia)
Claire McCaskill [[Missouri)
Another 27 represented blue or blue leaning states:
Diane Feinstein and Barbara Boxer [[California)
Chris Dodd [[Connecticut)
Frank Lautenberg and Bob Menendez [[New Jersey)
Jeff Bingaman and Tom Udall [[New Mexico)
Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand [[New York)
Ted Kaufman and Tom Carper [[Delaware)
Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley [[Oregon)
Daniel Inouye and Danidel Akaka [[Hawaii)
Jack Reed and Sheldon Whitehouse [[Rhode Island)
Dick Durbin and Roland Burris [[until November 2009, when the seat flipped to Republican Mark Kirk)
Patrick Leahy and Bernie Sanders [[Democrat and Independent, respectively, from Vermont)
Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell [[Washington)
Barbara Mikulski and Ben Cardin [[Maryland)
Ted Kennedy and John Kerry [[Massachusetts [[Kennedy died in August 2010 and his
seat flipped to Republican Scott Brown in February 2010)
The remaining 12 represented swing states:
Michael Bennett and Mark Udall [[Colorado)
Sherrod Brown [[Ohio)
Bill Nelson [[Florida)
Bob Casey [[Pennsylvania, plus Arlen Specter who switched parties in April 2009)
Tom Harken [[Iowa)
Herb Kohl and Russ Feingold [[Wisconsin)
Carl Levin and Debbie Stabenow [[Michigan)
Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota
*Al Franken didn’t come on board until in July 2009.
In addition, there was Joe Lieberman, who by January 2009 was a reliable vote for the red state caucus on key legislation like healthcare, despite hailing from blue Connecticut.
Continued on next page...
Even if you generously put all of the swing state Democrats into the “progressive” group, and that’s stretching it when it comes to certain votes, that puts the president at minus 18 reliable “progressive” votes in the Senate.
And because **Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell made it clear from the start that he intended to have his caucus use the filibuster on every piece of legislation, and vote as a bloc, forcing Democrats to always need 60 votes to pass anything, those numbers really matter.
[Sidebar: In the House, Democrats had both a stronger majority and a stronger progressive majority, with the progressive caucus outnumbering the blue dog caucus by something like 83-54 in 2009 [[the blue dogs lost half their numbers in the 2010 elections.)
That's why the House was able to pass something like 400 bills, including lots of progressive legislation, fewer than a third of which ever made it to the Senate floor. The House is where ideological ideals live -- on the left as well as on the right [[witness the amount of right wing legislation that the tea party caucus, also about 83 strong, has passed, but which has gone nowhere in the Senate). The Senate is where they go to die, and actual law is made.]
Despite the myth-making on the left, Democrats actually held their tenuous 60-vote majority for only five months in 2009: from July of that year, when Al Franken was finally sworn in after winning the recount against Norm Coleman, through November 2009, when Democrats lost Barack Obama’s old Senate seat in Illinois to Mark Kirk. Then in a special election the following January, Scott Brown won Teddy Kennedy’s old seat, and was sworn in on February 4th.
Could Barack Obama have somehow rammed through the entire progressive wish list in five months? I find it hard to see how, given the unreliability of the blue dog Senators. Could he have convinced the conservative Senators to put a vote to repeal Don’t Ask Don’t Tell through, at the same time they were struggling to get a healthcare bill done? Could he have gotten them to add DOMA to their task list, given the knock-down, drag-out healthcare fight and with the rising tea party town hall rebellion brewing? Maybe, but I doubt that, too.
MORE:
http://blog.reidreport.com/2011/07/m...sive-majority/
To paraphrase a righteous comment I read…
I WILL NOT WAIT on the MSM [[main stream media) pundits or Democratic politicians, to make the case for President Obama… and if you’re serious about helping this country and it’s people, and keeping both out of the grips of the current Republican/TeaParty… neither should anyone else.
“Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we’ve been waiting for. We are the change that we seek.”
Barack Obama
...and since I'm on a "myth" busting mission....
Iraq/Afghanistan
President Obama has done pretty much what he said he was going to do in Iraq and Afghanistan. Don't buy into the myth that he said he was bringing them all home immediately?
He always promised to slowly bring troops home from Iraq, while sending more into Afghanistan. FactCheck.org [[http://factcheck.org/) fact checked him during a debate in 2008.
Going back to 2007, he said he'd remove all combat troops by that same time:
“I will remove one or two brigades a month, and get all of our combat troops out of Iraq
within 16 months. The only troops I will keep in Iraq will perform the limited missions of protecting our diplomats and carrying out targeted strikes on al Qaeda. And I will launch the diplomatic and humanitarian initiatives that are so badly needed. Let
there be no doubt: I will end this war.”
That’s pretty much like the plan we're doing so far in Iraq and “official” combat troops are gone. We only have support troops there. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38744453/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/t/last-full-us-combat-brigade-leaves-iraq/
Whether he follows through on pulling us out of Afghanistan in his stated time frame remains to be seen but anyone who thought BHO candidate said he'd pull us out of Iraq immediately and would not concentrate on Afghanistan wasn't paying attention.
Do I think it's time to go, yep but what I think and want, and what he said he would do are two different things. We should never confuse the two and obscure the truth.
... and if you have never read Audacity of Hope, you should. You may be surprised how consistent he's really been over the years. [[the book was written in 2006)
Would he have liked a PO yes indeedy, fully supported it but was more concerned with getting a Health Care Plan that would cover a large majority of Americans. A plan that would not discriminate against pre-existing conditions, a plan that would be affordable. If he had to compromise to get those things and more....so be it.
This is a man that believes that compromising and walking away with something is more preferable to swinging a stick and walking away with nothing and the irony....many of us make the exact same decisions in terms of compromising every day in our own lives. Do you go in and slap the gas station owner upside the head 'cause his gas prices are high or do you grumble, beatch and pump? If you think about it long enough and honestly enough you could come up with many examples of how you compromise daily.
Don't buy into the media meme, the pundit meme, the Repub/TeaParty meme, the left extreme meme....do your own thinking and your own research. Try and find out why something is done as oppose to harping on the fact you don't like what was done. You still may not change your mind but at least you will understand and understanding changes your perspective on things.
The man is not perfect, he never pretended to be....he never set out to be a savior or even a rock star....but he is doing what he said he would do based on the conditions he's working with and that's saying a lot. Give him credit for that...if you still want a Repub in the WH and think they will make your life better [[based on the things they are saying)...heaven help us all but at the very least....be honest about what President Obama has done to help the American people, the 99'ers.
I refuse to say what I'm actually thinking....but let me ask you a question...how is this fair to WE THE PEOPLE...how does this move the ball forward for us?
Branding 101: “American Jobs Act” Coopted By GOP Legislator
By: Noah Rothman
Okay, you may have heard the phrase “politics ain’t beanbag” before. It’s the truth. The originator of this truism, Finley Peter Dunne, essentially captured the spirit of cutthroat republican politics in the shortest amount of words and securing eternal notoriety for himself. It is an aphorism worth remembering, but you may be more familiar with another: “all’s fair in love and war [[and politics).”
With Mr. Dunne’s axiom in mind, Rep. Louise Gohmert [[R-TX), upon discovering that “The American Jobs Act of 2011” was not yet introduced to the House, decided to do it himself. Only it’s an entirely new bill and one that does not have anything to do with infrastructure spending, teacher hiring and retention or extending unemployment benefits. Nope, it’s a tax cutting bill.
Rep. Gohmert waited for a few days before he made his little power play, but made it he did. And now, Rep. Gohmert’s “American Jobs Act of 2011,” or H.R. 2911, has been introduced to the House. The text of this bill is below:
Gohmert American Jobs Act
At only two pages, Gohmert’s bill is a whole lot shorter than President Obama’s 155 page bill. Gohmert’s bill essentially repeals the alternative minimum corporate income tax on corporations and… well, that’s it. This Republican is embracing “less is more” and applying it to more than just interior decorating.
http://www.ology.com/politics/branding-101-%E2%80%9Camerican-jobs-act%E2%80%9D-coopted-gop-legislator
...I would like to add this though....always remember and never forget...when they screw approximately 12% of the population, they are also screwing approximately72% of the population....
AND YOU DO KNOW IT'S NOT THE 99'ERS TAXES THEY WANT TO CUT, RIGHT?
Here is the bill....read it for yourself.....http://www.scribd.com/doc/64966423/Gohmert-American-Jobs-Act
...now that's some serious love for approximately 72% of the population! SNARK
The White House
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
September 08, 2011
Fact Sheet: The American Jobs Act
THE AMERICAN JOBS ACT
1. Tax Cuts to Help America’s Small Businesses Hire and Grow
Cutting the payroll tax in half for 98 percent of businesses: The President’s plan will cut in half the taxes paid by businesses on their first $5 million in payroll, targeting the benefit to the 98 percent of firms that have payroll below this threshold.
A complete payroll tax holiday for added workers or increased wages: The President’s plan will completely eliminate payroll taxes for firms that increase their payroll by adding new workers or increasing the wages of their current worker [[the benefit is capped at the first $50 million in payroll increases).
Extending 100% expensing into 2012: This continues an effective incentive for new investment.
Reforms and regulatory reductions to help entrepreneurs and small businesses access capital.
2. Putting Workers Back on the Job While Rebuilding and Modernizing America
A “Returning Heroes” hiring tax credit for veterans: This provides tax credits from $5,600 to $9,600 to encourage the hiring of unemployed veterans.
Preventing up to 280,000 teacher layoffs,while keeping cops and firefighters on the job.
Modernizing at least 35,000 public schools across the country,supporting new science labs, Internet-ready classrooms and renovations at schools across the country, in rural and urban areas.
Immediate investments in infrastructure and a bipartisan National Infrastructure Bank, modernizing our roads, rail, airports and waterways while putting hundreds of thousands of workers back on the job.
A New “Project Rebuild”, which will put people to work rehabilitating homes, businesses and communities, leveraging private capital and scaling land banks and other public-private collaborations.
Expanding access to high-speed wireless as part of a plan for freeing up the nation’s spectrum.
3. Pathways Back to Work for Americans Looking for Jobs.
The most innovative reform to the unemployment insurance program in 40 years: As part of an extension of unemployment insurance to prevent 5 million Americans looking for work from losing their benefits, the President’s plan includes innovative work-based reforms to prevent layoffs and give states greater flexibility to use UI funds to best support job-seekers, including:
Work-Sharing: UI for workers whose employers choose work-sharing over layoffs.
A new “Bridge to Work” program: The plan builds on and improves innovative state programs where those displacedtake temporary, voluntary work or pursue on-the-job training.
Innovative entrepreneurship and wage insurance programs: States will also be empowered to implement wage insurance to help reemploy older workers and programs that make it easier for unemployed workers to start their own businesses.
A $4,000 tax credit to employers for hiring long-term unemployed workers.
Prohibiting employers from discriminating against unemployed workers when hiring.
Expanding job opportunities for low-income youth and adults through a fund for successful approaches for subsidized employment, innovative training programs and summer/year-round jobs for youth.
4. Tax Relief for Every American Worker and Family
Cutting payroll taxes in half for 160 million workers next year: The President’s plan will expand the payroll tax cut passed last year to cut workers payroll taxes in half in 2012 – providing a $1,500 tax cut to the typical American family, without negatively impacting the Social Security Trust Fund.
Allowing more Americans to refinance their mortgages at today’s near 4 percent interest rates, which can put more than $2,000 a year in a family’s pocket.
5. Fully Paid for as Part of the President’s Long-Term Deficit Reduction Plan.To ensure that the American Jobs Act is fully paid for, the President will call on the Joint Committee to come up with additional deficit reduction necessary to pay for the Act and still meet its deficit target. The President will, in the coming days, release a detailed plan that will show how we can do that while achieving the additional deficit reduction necessary to meet the President’s broader goal of stabilizing our debt as a share of the economy.
..........
AMERICAN JOBS ACT OVERVIEW
The American people understand that the economic crisis and the deep recession weren’t created overnight and won’t be solved overnight. The economic security of the middle class has been under attack for decades. That’s why President Obama believes we need to do more than just recover from this economic crisis – we need to rebuild the economy the American way, based on balance, fairness, and the same set of rules for everyone from Wall Street to Main Street. We can work together to create the jobs of the future by helping small business entrepreneurs, by investing in education, and by making things the world buys. The President understands that to restore an American economy that’s built to last we cannot afford to outsource American jobs and encourage reckless financial deals that put middle class security at risk.
To create jobs, the President unveiled the American Jobs Act – nearly all of which is made up of ideas that have been supported by both Democrats and Republicans, and that Congress should pass right away to get the economy moving now. The purpose of the American Jobs Act is simple: put more people back to work and put more money in the pockets of working Americans. And it would do so without adding a dime to the deficit.
Tax Cuts to Help America’s Small Businesses Hire and Grow
New Tax Cuts to Businesses to Support Hiring and Investment:The President is proposing three tax cuts to provide immediate incentives to hire and invest:
Cutting the Payroll Tax Cut in Half for the First $5 Million in Wages:This provision would cut the payroll tax in half to 3.1% for employers on the first $5 million in wages, providing broad tax relief to all businesses but targeting it to the 98 percent of firms with wages below this level.
Temporarily Eliminating Employer Payroll Taxes on Wages for New Workers or Raises for Existing Workers:The President is proposing a full holiday on the 6.2% payroll tax firms pay for any growth in their payroll up to $50 million above the prior year, whether driven by new hires, increased wages or both. This is the kind of job creation measure that CBO has called the most effective of all tax cuts in supporting employment.
Extending 100% Expensing into 2012:The President is proposing to extend 100 percent expensing, the largest temporary investment incentive in history, allowing all firms – large and small – to take an immediate deduction on investments in new plants and equipment.
Helping Entrepreneurs and Small Businesses Access Capital and Grow: The President’s plan includes administrative, regulatory and legislative measures – including those developed and recommended by the President’s Jobs Council – to help small firms start and expand. This includes changing the way the government does business with small firms. The Administration will soon announce a plan to accelerate government payments to small contractors to help put money in their hands faster. The President is also charging his CIO and CTO to, within 90 days, stand up a one-stop, online portal for small businesses to easily access government services. As part of the President’s Startup America initiative, the Administration will work with the SEC to conduct a comprehensive review of securities regulations from the perspective of these small companies to reduce the regulatory burdens on small business capital formation in ways that are consistent with investor protection, including expanding “crowdfunding” opportunities and increasing mini-offerings. Finally, the President’s plan calls for Congress to pass comprehensive patent reform, increase guarantees for bonds to help small businesses compete for infrastructure projects and remove burdensome withholding requirements that keep capital out of the hands of job creators.
..........
“Bridge to Work” Programs:States will be able to put in place reforms that build off what works in programs like Georgia Works or Opportunity North Carolina, while instituting important fixes and reforms that ensure minimum wage and fair labor protections are being enforced. These approaches permits long-term unemployed workers to continue receiving UI while they take temporary, voluntary work or pursue work-based training. The President’s plan requires compliance with applicable minimum wage and other worker rights laws.
Wage Insurance: States will be able to use UI to encourage older, long-term unemployed Americans to return to work in new industries or occupations.
Startup Assistance: States will have flexibility to help long-term unemployed workers create their own jobs by starting their own small businesses.
Other Reemployment Reforms: States will be able to seek waivers from the Secretary of Labor to implement other innovative reforms to connect the long-term unemployed to work opportunities.
Tax Credits for Hiring the Long-Term Unemployed:The President is proposing a tax credit of up to $4,000 for hiring workers who have been looking for a job for over six months.
Investing in Low-Income Youth and Adults: The President is proposing a new Pathways Back to Work Fund to provide hundreds of thousands of low-income youth and adults with opportunities to work and to achieve needed training in growth industries. The Initiative will do three things: i) support summer and year-round jobs for youth, building off of successful programs that supported over 370,000 such jobs in 2009 and 2010; ii) support subsidized employment opportunities for low-income individuals who are unemployed, building off the successful TANF Emergency Contingency Fund wage subsidy program that supported 260,000 jobs in 2009 and 2010; and iii) support promising and innovative local work-based job and training initiatives to place low-income adults and youths in jobs quickly.
Prohibiting Employers from Discriminating Against Unemployed Workers: The President’s plan calls for legislation that would make it unlawful to refuse to hire applicants solely because they are unemployed or to include in a job posting a provision that unemployed persons will not be considered.
More Money in the Pockets of Every American Worker and Family
Cutting Payroll Taxes in Half for 160 Million Workers Next Year: The President’s plan will expand the payroll tax cut passed last December by cutting workers payroll taxes in half next year. This provision will provide a tax cut of $1,500 to the typical family earning $50,000 a year. As with the payroll tax cut passed in December 2010, the American Jobs Act will specify that Social Security will still receive every dollar it would have gotten otherwise, through a transfer from the General Fund into the Social Security Trust Fund.
Helping More Americans Refinance Mortgages at Today’s Historically Low Interest Rates: The President has instructed his economic team to work with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, their regulator the FHFA, major lenders and industry leaders to remove the barriers that exist in the current refinancing program [[HARP) to help more borrowers benefit from today’s historically low interest rates. This has the potential to not only help these borrowers, but their communities and the American taxpayer, by keeping borrowers in their homes and reducing risk to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Fully Paid for as Part of the President’s Long-Term Deficit Reduction Plan.
To ensure that the American Jobs Act is fully paid for, the President will call on the Joint Committee to come up with additional deficit reduction necessary to pay for the Act and still meet its deficit target. The President will, in the coming days, release a detailed plan that will show how we can do that while achieving the additional deficit reduction necessary to meet the President’s broader goal of stabilizing our debt as a share of the economy.
..........
If you truly believe, for whatever reason, that corporate give away bill will put a dime in your pocket and the President's bill will not....you really are hopeless....and ya dayum skippy I cleaned that up so let your imagination take you wherever you like....you're probably correct!!!!!
September 12, 2011
American Jobs Act :: Impact by State
Posted by Linda H on 1:15 PM
Click on link and see how your state will benefit from the American Jobs Act
http://www.whatisworking.com/2011/09/american-jobs-act-impact-by-state.html
Please call your SENATORS [[http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm)AND REPRESENTATIVES [[http://www.congressmerge.com/onlinedb/) today and tell them to PASS THE WHITE HOUSE AMERICAN JOBS ACT BILL!
www.attackwatch.com [[http://www.attackwatch.com/tag/fiscal-policy/)
Get the facts. Fight the smears.
AND THE IDIOT STILL SPEAKS.....
Republican Louie Gohmert Blasts American Jobs Act For Banning Unemployment Discrimination
Tyler Kingkade
9/14/11 06:14
WASHINGTON -- Rep. Louie Gohmert [[R-Texas) is no fan of a proposal for the federal government to forbid employers from discriminating against the jobless based on their employment status.
"We're adding in this bill a new protected class called 'unemployed,'" Gohmert said on the floor of the House Tuesday. "I think this will help trial lawyers who are not having enough work. We heard from our friends across the aisle, 14 million people out of work -- that's 14 million new clients."
The American Jobs Act, submitted by President Obama to Congress this week, has a section that would prohibit employers from not hiring someone just because they are jobless.
According to the National Employment Law Project, Gohmert is incorrect: The proposal would not make employment status a protected class like race or sex. It simply bans hiring discrimination against the jobless, and is modeled off of legislation drafted by Democrats in Congress earlier this year.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/14/republican-blasts-jobs-act-for-banning-unemployment-discrimination_n_963021.html
"According to the National Employment Law Project, Gohmert is incorrect"...geeze, what a surprise:rolleyes:
Efraim Halevy: Obama showed "leadership of historic dimensions" to save Israelis in Cairo embassy
Israel Policy Forum
Posted September 13, 2011 - 8:14pm
“We’ve been talking these days about Turkey and about Egypt. And I would like to say something about the event which took place last Friday evening or through the night in Cairo, which I think to a large extent was a seminal event, not only in the history of the Middle East but also in the history of the relations between Israel and Egypt, and between Israel and the United States of America.
During that night, as you know, our embassy was surrounded and was on the verge of being stormed. And the Prime Minister went to the special command center in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and from there he actually ran and commanded this operation of trying to extricate our staff from the embassy. And, at the end, there were six people left, six people of the security detail of the embassy. They were there inside the last room, which had been the ultimate room in the embassy. And, they had one steel door, which was between them and the mob.
And the Prime Minister took many very, very important decisions that night. Successful decisions, very responsible decisions. And for that he has been lauded, and rightly so I think by the public in Israel and by the population at large for his cool and his measured way of handling this crisis.
But one of the decisions he had to take in the end, he wanted to take, was to find ways of extricating his people, our people, out of that embassy. And he turned to one man, to the President of the United States, and he spoke to him. And the president of the United States, without having much time to consult with Congress, and with the media, and with the analysts and with all of the other people who have to be consulted on major and grave decisions. He took a decision to take up the telephone and get on the line with the powers that be in Egypt, and get them to order the release of these six people, and the detail of the Egyptian commando forces entered and saved them.
I think that this decision by President Obama was a unique decision in many ways. Because I don’t have to tell you, and this was just said time and time and over again this afternoon/this evening, that the United States is not in a position the way it was many years ago in the Middle East, it has its problems, it has its considerations, and rightly so. But I believe the leadership that the President of the United States showed on that night was a leadership of historic dimensions. It was he who took the ultimate decision that night which prevented what could have been a sad outcome—instead of six men coming home, the arrival in Israel of six body bags.
And I want to say to you very openly and very clearly that had there been six body bags, there would have been a much different Israel today than we have been used to seeing over recent years. This would not have been one more incident, one more operation, one event. And the man who brought this about was one man and that was President Barack Hussein Obama.
And I believe it is our duty as Israelis, as citizens of the free world, to say, not simply thank you President Obama, but also we respect you for the way and the manner in which you took this decision.”
There's a video that goes with this:
http://www.israelpolicyforum.org/blog/efraim-halevy-obama-showed-leadership-historic-dimensions-save-israelis-cairo-embassy
This man, our President is doing things, amazing things behind the scenes that we don't even know about.
Since the Arab Spring, Egypt and Israel have not been on the best of terms. Whatever your feelings about Israel and all the Middle East, this could have been a disaster of major consequence....and saying not in a good way, is an understatement.
The president has submitted a bill to Congress that would create jobs building schools and repairing infrastructure. The president’s bill would also prohibit discrimination in hiring the unemployed and create new incentives to hire them. But House Republicans are balking at tax increases to pay for all this, even though the Congressional Budget Office says it will reduce the deficit.
ACTION: Call your elected representative and tell them to pass the American Jobs Act now. You can find their office phone listed here, or call the Capitol switchboard at [[202) 224-3121 and ask to be connected. Tell them to PASS THE White House Jobs BILL NOW!
http://www.osborneink.com/2011...
Congress has spent over $120 billion of U.S. taxpayer money reconstructing Iraq and Afghanistan, building schools, roads, bridges and other essential infrastructure. Today, America's infrastructure is crumbling and millions of people are out of work. Write your member of Congress and tell them it's time to rebuild America. Demand that we invest at least as much in our own communities as we did in Iraq and Afghanistan. In order to address your message to the appropriate recipient, we need to identify where you are. Please enter your zip/postal code:
http://www2.americanprogress.o...
Have you contacted members of Congress yet about the jobs bill?
Click on link and see how your state will benefit from the American Jobs Act
http://www.whatisworking.com/2011/09...-by-state.html
Please call your SENATORS [[http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm) AND REPRESENTATIVES [[http://www.congressmerge.com/onlinedb/) today and tell them to PASS THE WHITE HOUSE AMERICAN JOBS ACT BILL!
..........
GOP Attacks On Medicare Cuts In Health Care Law Prove False, Says HHS
Brian Beutler | September 15, 2011, 12:07PM
One of the most persistent GOP attacks on the new health care law is that its Medicare savings, including cuts to Medicare advantage over payments, would cripple the program.
Not true.
"On average, Medicare Advantage premiums will go down next year and seniors will enjoy more free benefits and cheaper prescription drugs," says HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius in a statement.
That's based on new data from the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which finds that premiums will decline significantly for the second straight year and enrollment will climb.
Full Article:
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/09/gop-attacks-on-health-care-law-medicare-cuts-prove-false-hhs.php?ref=fpb
GOP House Members Afraid Of Losing Their Own Seats Push Back Against Pennsylvania Gov. Corbett’s Vote Rigging Plan
By Ian Millhiser posted from ThinkProgress Justice on Sep 15, 2011 at 1:00 pm
Yesterday, ThinkProgress reported on Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett’s [[R) plan to rig the Electoral College for the GOP by guaranteeing that as many as a dozen of his state’s electoral votes go to the Republican candidate even if the state as a whole votes for Obama. Under Corbett’s plan, each of the state’s 18 congressional districts — which are being gerrymandered to overwhelmingly favor Republicans — would choose how to allocate a single electoral vote rather than having all of the state’s votes go to the winner of the state.
Corbett’s plan may have hit a snag, however. Turns out, GOP members of Congress care more about keeping their own jobs than they do about electing a president who will eliminate Medicare:
[T]o several Republicans in marginal districts, the plan has a catch: they’re worried that Democrats will move dollars and ground troops from solid blue districts to battlegrounds in pursuit of electoral votes — and in the process, knock off the Republicans currently in the seats.
Suburban Philadelphia Reps. Jim Gerlach, Pat Meehan and Mike Fitzpatrick have the most at stake, since all represent districts Democrats won in the last two presidential elections. They and the rest of the Republicans in the delegation are joining with National Republican Congressional Committee officials to respond and mobilize against the change.
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2011/09/15/319666/gop-house-members-afraid-of-losing-their-own-seats-push-back-against-pa-gov-corbetts-vote-rigging-plan/
This is interesting. These politicians are pushing back because they are afraid of losing their own jobs as oppose to knowing it’s the wrong thing to do but you know….there could be a lesson in this. If more people were made aware of how the Republican polices would hurt them as oppose to how it would help others, maybe they would pay attention more. Just a thought.
Coburn Holds FAA Bill Hostage, Claiming Trees And Bike Paths Pose ‘An Indefensible Threat Against Public Safety’
By Marie Diamond on Sep 15, 2011 at 10:50 am
Yesterday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid [[D-NV) took Sen. Tom Coburn [[R-OK) to task for blocking a critical transportation bill — an action that could put 80,000 people out of work by this weekend. The GOP-controlled House has already passed the bill, which temporarily extends funding for the Federal Aviation Administration and highway projects, in order to avert another FAA shutdown.
The bill needs to be signed by President Obama by Friday, but Coburn is threatening to let the deadline pass. He’s even found a novel excuse for holding the bill hostage — his objection to bike paths and trees:
Coburn spokesman John Hart said Wednesday that the senator “makes no apologies for doing everything in his power to force his colleagues to cut wasteful spending instead of inflicting further damage on our economy through unnecessary borrowing.
“Congress’s refusal to live within its means has created an economic disaster and a debt that is now our greatest national security threat,” he said.
Hart said Coburn was also opposed to provisions in the transportation bill designed to increase the number of bike paths and trees along roadways.
“The beautification mandate is an indefensible threat against public safety that forces states to prioritize bike paths over bridge repair,” he said.
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/09/15/319817/coburn-holds-faa-bill-hostage-claiming-trees-and-bike-paths-pose-%E2%80%98an-indefensible-threat-against-public-safety%E2%80%99/
Bike paths and trees are important to Coburn, you…not so much:eek:
Did Obama Make It Worse?
James Pethokoukis — September 2011
If you’re not interested in reading, here is the authors’ answer…
In short: without Obamanomics, it would have been worse. Much worse. You’re welcome, America. Four more years, please.
The reasons can be found in the article....
What if the president of the United States hadn’t proposed an $800 billion stimulus plan back in 2009—but one twice as large? That is the question haunting the intellectual left, led by the economist and columnist Paul Krugman, especially since the economy is mired in what might charitably be considered the doldrums. It slowed to a near-total halt in the first quarter of 2011 with a growth rate of 0.4 percent before climbing to a comatose 1.3 percent rate in the second.
For Krugman’s opposite numbers, the question is the reverse: Might the U.S. economy actually be stronger today if Uncle Sam had done nothing and just let the business cycle play out? And what might have been different had John McCain been elected the 44th president instead of Barack Obama? Would he have acted differently? Would the result have been different?
The what-if debate is not merely an intellectual exercise. It will have some effect on American policy going forward. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act was Barack Obama’s signature achievement in dealing with the most worrisome set of economic conditions since the Great Depression. It was how Obama, to use a pair of his now seemingly abandoned metaphors, sought to drag the economy out of the ditch while the Republicans were standing around sipping Slurpees.
Full Article:
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/did-obama-make-it-worse/
Let me say a little more on this. YES....President Obama could have done more in PROPOSING a LARGER stimulus package BUT....would a Republican/TeaParty Congress have passed a larger bill? That is what I don't think people are getting.
A president can't pass a bill, only propose one, talk about one, ask citizens and congress to support one but HE CAN NOT PASS A BILL....only congress can do that.
When you look realistically at the opposition can you honestly say all the President had to do was embarrass them into passing a bill, call them names to get them to pass a bill, knock them upside the head to pass a bill....come on folks...they don't care about being embarrassed or being called names and physical assault is against the law.
Seeing the President do and say all the ugly things YOU want him to do may make you feel good but will it get you a job, money in your pocket, save your home from foreclosure?
President Obama doesn't give a dayum about optics he gives a dayum about you. He compromises to do something for you. He doesn't demonize his opponent because that doesn't help you in a practical way.
You want someone to scream at the opposition, demonize the opposition, embarrass the opposition....you do it....there are blogs, newspaper editorial pages, calls to the opposition's offices, faxes....all kinds of ways you can do it but let him keep doing the job we put him in office to do....help the American people.... work for the American people....get something accomplished for you!.
Signed Legislation
http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/signed-legislation
I’m going to ask people to be fair and honest. Not for me but for yourself. I don’t need or want to know the answers.
Go through all the pages of signed legislation and ask yourself, how did this bill affect my life in a very real, NEGATIVE and personal way?
In other words, how did a bill hurt you and or your bottom line in the last three years President Obama has been in office? Don't share the info, this is for your eyes and your eyes only, so be honest and very specific.
GOP Jobs Blockade: President Obama Calls Republicans' "Job Creators" Bluff
Thursday, September 15, 2011 | Posted by Deaniac@The People's View
As President Obama goes on the offense with his jobs plan, he has now also begun to propose ideas to pay for it. The GOP has a charade they are trying to hide behind to try to block it: that the president's plan to pay for the jobs proposal, which will create 1.3 million jobs by 2012 [[and another 800,000 by 2013), is a "tax increase on job creators":
"It would be fair to say this tax increase on job creators is the kind of proposal both parties have opposed in the past," Michael Steel said in a written statement.
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor echoed that stance, telling reporters: "I sure hope that the president is not suggesting that we pay for his proposals with a massive tax increase at the end of 2012 on the job creators that we're actually counting on to reduce unemployment."
What are Eric Cantor and John Boehner talking about? This: the president has suggested paying for the jobs bill by limiting itemized tax deductions for the top 2% of American income earners, by treating hedge fund earnings as regular income rather than capital gains, and by eliminating tax loopholes for the oil companies to the tune of $40 billion. The Washington Post has a handy chart that explains this well:
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/ObamaJobsPlanpayfor.jpg
....and this is the money quote:
[B]But still, the Republicans are right that the president is talking about raising taxes on the "job creators," isn't he? Not exactly. See, the president's proposal is merely to shift the tax breaks - it would change it so that these so-called 'job creators' wouldn't be able to get the breaks just for the privilege of being called that. They would actually have to create jobs to get the credits! The oil and gas industry wants to earn that $40 billion in tax breaks back? All they have to do is create 10 million jobs for the long term unemployed, or hire enough new workers to get enough of the payroll tax break on the employer side, or some combination of it. The rich want their tax breaks back? Fine, let's see you actually create jobs and you can get the credits back.
Full Article:
http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/09/gop-jobs-blockade-president-obama-calls.html
If all these “job creators” ACTUALLY create jobs…then let’s see the jobs…is that really unreasonable or mean, or picking on people who pulled themselves up by the bootstraps?
LOL, ok that last one was snarky but that’s how a lot of people see it when you start talking about more taxes for rich people. They think it’s unfair because they feel these people worked hard to get where they are. [[I could debate that but I want)
OK, so the President is saying, you’re right, you worked hard for the money, so if you create actual jobs the way your peeps in Congress say you do….jobs that equal the amount of tax breaks you receive…. I’ll let you slide …sounds fair…sounds more than fair.
Who needs optics…bashing and name calling when you’ve got brains!!!!:cool:
The reason these calls are important is because your Senators and Representatives need to understand their jobs are on the line and folks, you have the power [[with your vote) to deny them that job. When they become inundated with calls and mail from their constituents, they worry...trust me. If they were not worried they would not do anything, zip, nada...all the compromise in the world would not move these people if they thought the could get away with doing NOTHING at all and still keep their jobs.
That's why after a bill is passed the Repubs are all in front of the cameras lying about what they did for their constituents. They get away with the lies because many of their constituents will not do their homework or research, they simply buy into the lie from the Repubs, pundits and media...AND....when they hear the lib voters complain....IN THEIR MIND...THAT SEALS THE DEAL FOR THEM....YEAH...he really did do what I wanted because the Libs are mad....another reason libs need to be mindful of what they say, how they say IT and where they say it. You may simply be venting but the other side doesn't hear it that way.
Think about it, how do we have the right to complain about messaging if OUR messaging is faulty or NON EXISTENT?
The president has submitted a bill to Congress that would create jobs building schools and repairing infrastructure. The president’s bill would also prohibit discrimination in hiring the unemployed and create new incentives to hire them. But House Republicans are balking at tax increases to pay for all this, even though the Congressional Budget Office says it will reduce the deficit.
ACTION: Call your elected representative and tell them to pass the American Jobs Act now. You can find their office phone listed here, or call the Capitol switchboard at [[202) 224-3121 and ask to be connected. Tell them to PASS THE White House Jobs BILL NOW!
http://www.osborneink.com/2011...
Congress has spent over $120 billion of U.S. taxpayer money reconstructing Iraq and Afghanistan, building schools, roads, bridges and other essential infrastructure. Today, America's infrastructure is crumbling and millions of people are out of work. Write your member of Congress and tell them it's time to rebuild America. Demand that we invest at least as much in our own communities as we did in Iraq and Afghanistan. In order to address your message to the appropriate recipient, we need to identify where you are. Please enter your zip/postal code:
http://www2.americanprogress.o...
Have you contacted members of Congress yet about the jobs bill?
Click on link and see how your state will benefit from the American Jobs Act
http://www.whatisworking.com/2011/09...-by-state.html
Please call your SENATORS [[http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm) AND REPRESENTATIVES [[http://www.congressmerge.com/onlinedb/) today and tell them to PASS THE WHITE HOUSE AMERICAN JOBS ACT BILL!
A message to Democratic Voters:
I'm having this conversation somewhere else so I thought I would bring it to this thread.
Have you ever heard the saying, if you can't say something good , don't say it at all? Well when it comes to getting a democratic candidate in office, you should keep that saying in mind.
Now that doesn't mean you can't criticize, heck, no one is going to do everything you want them to do and when they don't, it pisses you off...that's understandable, it's human nature but check this out....if you were trying to sell an apple, would you say to a customer....this apple taste like crap, buy it? Does that make any sense to you?
Now it could be the apple isn't very sweet and you may say, it's not as sweet as you may like but it's great for baking pies. In other words, you say what's wrong with the apple and then say what's right with it. THAT'S how you sell a candidate. Any other way and you're only helping the opposition.
I bring this up because I'm hearing a lot of negative chatter from Democrats...politicians, pundits media and it doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Do Dems want a Repub in office?
Have you ever noticed Repubs rarely put each other down, rarely admit one of their colleagues made a mistake.....that's messaging folks and it resonates with their constituents.
Again, I'm not saying anyone needs to be Mary Sunshine and say only good things all the time but...."accentuate the positive" and be honest but play down the negative.
I don't want a Perry or Romeny....neither one is the lesser of two evils they are both evil...they will both make life more difficult for the middle class and the poor ....but they will make life better for their rich buddies....is that what you want?
One more thing....and when you MUST go on the attack....attack the policy NOT the man/woman.
Did you know Jimmy Carter studied nuclear physics?
I bet you knew people called him a hick or weak though don't you?
Garbage in....garbage out....programming is programing be it man or a machine....and that's what Repubs know that Dems can't seem to figure out.
MotownSteve
09-15-2011, 08:50 PM
A humorous break. I heard this somewhere: Repeal the 21st Century. Vote Republican!
...and that's basically what life will come down to Steve. Too many people don't think it can happen but if they really pay attention to what Repubs are pushing and think of the long term implications, they would see it.
I was reading an article the other day about Reagan and how he tried to turn a lot of federal programs over to individual states...many rejected it...the ones that didn't struggled because they realized they couldn't match the federal funds they had been receiving. When they raised state taxes to try and cope, it made things worse and people were pissed because not only were they still paying the same federal taxes but even more in State taxes but were getting less bang for their buck.
People hear all these great ideas and go, yeah yeah, that's the ticket but they don't really sit down and think these things out....by the time they figure it out it's too late. What gets me....they continue to vote against their own self interest time and time again because of some ideological crap or whatever they get in their minds.
Great articles and they tie into what I’ve been trying to say only they do a better job.:)
Thursday, September 15, 2011
After the blogging...then what?
I just love it when smart people respond to each other on the internet. That's what happened recently with a particularly powerful post by Matt Ygelsias.
If you’re a progressive and you feel that the political system isn’t doing what you want, it’s misguided to look at this as a personal failure of elected officials. It’s, if anything, a personal failure of you and people like you. Justice and equality doesn’t just happen because it’s nice, people need to make it happen. If it’s not happening, then its advocates are failing. And I do think there’s a lot of wisdom to the old Le Tigre song “Get Off The Internet.” Reading and talking to like-minded people about how powerful people are failing can seem like action, but it really isn’t.
This is something that many people I talk to online and in real life have noticed. Its not true always in the particulars, but there is a general reality that those who are the quickest to poutrage are often the least likely to actually get involved in DOING anything about it.
MORE:
http://immasmartypants.blogspot.com/2011/09/after-bloggingthen-what.html
Be The Change You Want To See In The World
By Matthew Yglesias on Sep 14, 2011 at 2:30 pm
I got a great email today from a self-described “well-educated, politically literate, 30-something person with a job and a kid” who spends “let’s say 45 minutes a day that I spend thinking about politics” and who had a great question:
That 45 minutes is about 40 minutes reading you, Ezra Klein, and Steve Benen and 5 minutes talking to my husband who’s been busy reading Kevin Drum and Jon Chait. It’s all very lovely to be well-acquainted with graphs, but I’m starting to realize that I am part of the problem as well. I don’t actually DO anything besides read and fulminate in the quiet of my own home.
She wants to know what she should actually be doing to try to create change, since “[w]atching Jon Stewart tell me things I already know in funny voices is starting to seem hollow.”
More:
http://thinkprogress.org/yglesias/2011/09/14/319074/be-the-change-you-want-to-see-in-the-world/
I love this stuff....reading different ideas and opinions can open your mind to all kinds of things. We shouldn't simply settle for only things we know and believe. No matter how smart we are we can always learn something from someone else. That's one of the beauties of diversity.
You don't have to agree with something to understand it but understanding is the key to a better world and a better life...hell a better us. Not too mention, it's rather hypocritical and disingenuous to speak on things you don't or won't make an effort to understand.
Just a thought...shrugs
Political Animal
Blog
September 14, 2011 4:45 PM It’s really up to you
By Steve Benen
Matt Yglesias received a terrific email from a “well-educated, politically literate, 30-something person with a job and a kid,” who spends about 45 minutes a day thinking about politics. About 40 of those 45 minutes are spent reading Matt, me, and Ezra, and another five are spent talking to her husband, who’s been reading Kevin and Jon Chait.
She’s apparently feeling a little discouraged, though, because, as this reader put it, she didn’t “actually DO anything.”
She turned to Matt looking for suggestions. I found his response compelling.
If you’re a progressive and you feel that the political system isn’t doing what you want, it’s misguided to look at this as a personal failure of elected officials. It’s, if anything, a personal failure of you and people like you. Justice and equality doesn’t just happen because it’s nice, people need to make it happen. If it’s not happening, then its advocates are failing. And I do think there’s a lot of wisdom to the old Le Tigre song “Get Off The Internet.”
Reading and talking to like-minded people about how powerful people are failing can seem like action, but it really isn’t.
MORE:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_09/its_really_up_to_you032204.php
Ask staffers on Capitol Hill and they’ll tell you the truth — if the office is inundated with calls and letters, the member takes note.
“Conservatives write and call Congress at a much higher rate than progressives, and more-or-less ordinary people hear conservative political messages from preachers and business executives all the time.”
Right, and that should, in theory, light a fire under the butts of those on the left. Tea Partiers didn’t have the foggiest idea what they were talking about — they still don’t — but they got off the couch, got engaged, and had a major impact. Conservatives don’t have to be connected to reality to do what’s necessary to help shape the larger political landscape.
And if they have the field to themselves, they’ll keep winning.
..........
The president has submitted a bill to Congress that would create jobs building schools and repairing infrastructure. The president’s bill would also prohibit discrimination in hiring the unemployed and create new incentives to hire them. But House Republicans are balking at tax increases to pay for all this, even though the Congressional Budget Office says it will reduce the deficit.
ACTION: Call your elected representative and tell them to pass the American Jobs Act now. You can find their office phone listed here, or call the Capitol switchboard at [[202) 224-3121 and ask to be connected. Tell them to PASS THE White House Jobs BILL NOW!
http://www.osborneink.com/2011...
Congress has spent over $120 billion of U.S. taxpayer money reconstructing Iraq and Afghanistan, building schools, roads, bridges and other essential infrastructure. Today, America's infrastructure is crumbling and millions of people are out of work. Write your member of Congress and tell them it's time to rebuild America. Demand that we invest at least as much in our own communities as we did in Iraq and Afghanistan. In order to address your message to the appropriate recipient, we need to identify where you are. Please enter your zip/postal code:
http://www2.americanprogress.o...
Have you contacted members of Congress yet about the jobs bill?
..........
:cool:
Posted at 04:13 PM ET, 09/15/2011
White House seeks to reassure Senate Democrats on jobs plan
By Rosalind S. Helderman and Paul Kane
The White House sought to reassure nervous Democrats about President Obama’s $447 billion jobs package Thursday, sending senior officials to brief the party’s Senate caucus about the proposal.
Afterward, lawmakers, administration officials and others present said the huddle went better than expected, given the resistance some Democrats have shown to the plan, and Tuesday’s losses in House special elections after GOP candidates won with anti-Obama campaigns.
Sen. Charles E. Schumer [[D-N.Y.), the member of the Democratic leadership who has most frequently jousted with the White House, complimented senior Obama officials for taking 100 minutes of questions from the Senate Democrats.
Full Article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/2chambers/post/white-house-seeks-to-reassure-senate-democrats-on-jobs-plan/2011/09/15/gIQAPoaEVK_blog.html?wpisrc=nl_pmpolitics
MotownSteve
09-15-2011, 11:07 PM
I just watched The Ed Show on MSNBC. The wonderful governor of Ohio, like his colleagues in Wisconsin and NJ, and I'm sure elsewhere is trying to eliminate collective bargaining. He also wants to cut back on pensions, and health care for public employees. The firefighters in Ohio do not pay into Social Security so when they return all they have is their pensions. Of course his staff just got some nice raises. In NJ they recently passed a law saying the state has to contribute to the pension system. They have not done so since before 1994. In fact, Christy Whitman who became governor that year took money from the pension system.
Right now I'm more concerned we will see Robert Heinlein's Revolt in 2100 before we will see George Orwell's 1984.
Steve, anywhere a Republican was voted into office or there is a Republican majority in the state house you're seeing the same thing.
Hell I wish I could see a revolt, a revolt from the American people saying they will not accept this BS. A revolt saying they will not be manipulated and lied to. A revolt that signals they understand and KNOW Republicans don't give a flying crap about them and are only using them to protect their own necks and the necks of their rich buddies.
It's the politicians that will do the harm, stage the revolt....the American people can't seem to find the time to stop them. They don't have a problem with trying to stop the person that wants to help them though.
ACTION: Contact your elected representative and tell them to pass the American Jobs Act now. You can find their office phone listed here, or call the Capitol switchboard at [[202) 224-3121 and ask to be connected. Tell them to PASS THE White House Jobs BILL NOW!
http://www.osborneink.com/2011...
Congress has spent over $120 billion of U.S. taxpayer money reconstructing Iraq and Afghanistan, building schools, roads, bridges and other essential infrastructure. Today, America's infrastructure is crumbling and millions of people are out of work. Write your member of Congress and tell them it's time to rebuild America. Demand that we invest at least as much in our own communities as we did in Iraq and Afghanistan. In order to address your message to the appropriate recipient, we need to identify where you are. Please enter your zip/postal code:
http://www2.americanprogress.o...
Have you contacted members of Congress yet about the jobs bill?
Click on link and see how your state will benefit from the American Jobs Act
http://www.whatisworking.com/2011/05/contact-congress-address-phone-twitter.html
Please contact your SENATORS [[http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm) AND REPRESENTATIVES [[http://www.congressmerge.com/onlinedb/) today and tell them to PASS THE WHITE HOUSE AMERICAN JOBS ACT BILL!
If you don't want to call the easiest thing to do is send an email.
Click this link
http://www.whatisworking.com/2011/05/contact-congress-address-phone-twitter.html
and you can find an email link to your rep...click the link, copy and paste this message
PASS THE WHITEHOUSE JOBS BILLS NOW!
or say more, it's up to you but do it everyday, several times a day until they pass the bill. Make sure you pass the info to friends and family and have them pass it along to their friends and family. Got a Facebook page...pass the info to your Facebook friends ...do you tweet...that works too just tweet the URL [[LINK)
..........
Health Expert Offers Bachmann $10,000 If She Can Provide One Case Proving HPV Vaccine Causes Retardation
By Tanya Somanader on Sep 15, 2011 at 3:01 pm
On her quest for relevance, GOP former presidential front runner Rep. Michele Bachmann [[MN) is sprinting forward with her attack on fellow candidate Gov. Rick Perry [[TX) for mandating girls in Texas receive the HPV vaccine to prevent cervical cancer. Finding success in the ferocity of her first attack, Bachmann took it one step further by championing the idea that the vaccine can cause “mental retardation.”
With that, Bachmann, once again, oversteps the line. The medical community quickly shot down the idea that the HPV vaccine is dangerous. In fact, University of Pennsylvania bioethicist Art Caplan is offering $10,000 to Bachmann’s charity of choice if she can provide one case that proves her claim:
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/09/15/319281/health-expert-offers-bachmann-10000-if-she-can-provide-one-case-proving-hpv-vaccine-causes-retardation/
This is a perfect example of how misinformation spreads. My understanding is someone told Bachmann the vaccine caused mental retardation and instead of checking it out, she repeated it.
Now interestingly enough, I was reading the comment section of this article and someone said, [[paraphrasing) she should have said it kills because that’s true, 54 people have died. I decided to look it up and according to the CDC, although it’s true there have been deaths, there isn’t any conclusive evidence the vaccine caused the deaths. Not to mention, 35 million doses have been distributed in the US, 18k plus incidents reported and out of that 18k plus only 8% were said to be serious [[death is among the serious events but again, there isn’t any conclusive proof it was the vaccine that caused the deaths)
Reports of Health Concerns Following HPV Vaccination
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/vaccines/hpv/gardasil.html
Before you go on a rant about big pharma, keep in mind, drugs do save lives and these companies are regulated…although if Repubs have their way the regulations could be lifted but that’s another issue. [[a serious one but another issue)
When you have to make a decision and that decision is based on faulty info, you’re not going to make the best decision possible and although this applies to life in general I’m thinking specifically about politics.
If you believe everything a politician tells you simply because they are saying what you want to hear and you don’t check it out….you probably will not make the best decision when it comes time to vote. That goes for Dem, Repub, Indie the Media or whatever.
Bachmann’s former chief of staff said:
“Sometimes I’m afraid that she reads maybe 80 or 90 percent and leaves out or forgets the ten or 20 percent that can change the outcome.”
Many people do this, heck I’ve done it. I work at not doing it consistently but I have done it. People do make mistakes and that’s human but when they make mistakes and or lie over and over and over and over, and you want to feel confident that person will do what’s best for you once they get into office…verify before you trust.
If you vote for someone because you like them, they are cute, they are male, female, Black or White....because they say the things you want to hear, because they share your beliefs [[or act as if they do) but you don't check them out thoroughly, ask questions, seek answers....you are doing a disservice to yourself.
One Wisconsin Now: Statements on latest Walker failure: 2,300 jobs gone
9/16/2011
Contact: Cody Oliphant Phone: [[608)772-9202
Unemployment Rate Rises, Despite Millions of Dollars in Corporate Tax Breaks, Dismantling of Workers’ Rights, Education
Madison -- One Wisconsin Now Executive Director Scot Ross released the following statements regarding the latest failure from Gov. Scott Walker and the Republican-controlled legislature: a total job loss of 2,300 from July to August and the unemployment rate rising to 7.9 percent. The news comes after Walker signed into law $2.3 billion in new tax breaks for corporations and the wealthy, while gutting public and higher education and health care, as well as stripping 175,000 workers of their rights.
“Another month, another rise in the unemployment rate under Gov. Scott Walker. Given that the Republican legislature gave Gov. Walker all the tax breaks for corporations, all the tax breaks for the wealthy, all the power grabs and privatization and all the dismantling of voter rights and workers' rights he demanded, it is time for them to admit their way is a failure. Complete and total. We need to immediately scrap what they have done, erase it from the statutes and invest in the people of Wisconsin so that the people of Wisconsin have a fighting chance at undoing the historic economic damage the corporate menace which put Scott Walker into the Governor's mansion caused. If Gov. Walker's schemes were going to work, we would have seen some glimmer of hope by now as we pass nine months of this administration.”
Gov. Walker signed over $100 million in new tax breaks for corporations and the wealthy in January in addition to the massive breaks he signed in the state budget. The state’s unemployment rate had been holding steady or falling for much of the two years preceding his taking office.
http://www.wispolitics.com/index.iml?Article=247614
[...]So far, that little meme is an epic fail. In one month, Walker has cost Wisconsin 2,300 jobs, 800 of them from the private sector and unemployment rose this month to 7.9 percent. To put this in perspective, the Republicans claim Obama is a failure because there was an overall zero job growth last month for the country. However, when we parsed those numbers, we found that under Obama, we had private sector job growth that was zeroed out by public sector job losses, due in large part to Republican job killing measures of the public sector in numerous Republican led states.
http://www.politicususa.com/en/scott-walker-wisconsin-2300-jobs-lost
A Personal Editorial
I had never heard the term playing the race card until the 2008 primaries…didn't know the races had their own cards they could pull out of their pocket …or if you know anything about Bid Whisk players….slap it on their forehead to show their opponent they would NOT be running a Boston….[[ask somebody if you don't know) LOL
Now, I hear it a lot and to say it's annoying would not come anywhere close to how I feel about the term…it's dumb, stupid and nothing but an attempt to distract…a way to stop people from hearing something they don't want to hear.
I wanted to put that statement out there for anyone who thinks I'm posting this to play my imaginary race card although, I don't even own a deck of regular cards but any hoo….some of you may have heard of Tim Wise, he's been around awhile but doesn't get a lot of main stream attention [[for obvious reasons) but he does speak truth to power…not because he stands up for Blacks but because he states facts and not fiction…there's a reason people want to change and distort history books…anyway, I listen to him from time to time but never gave him a lot of props for saying things I already knew until I heard him say, he wasn't truly comfortable being the spokes person for anti-racism….he wasn't comfortable being called an authority on the subject because he knew the true spokespersons were the people who experience racism In this country. That was the day I began to respect Tim Wise.
Blacks in America are not the only people on the planet who have ever experienced racism, we know this and we understand this but when we try and get many non people of color to listen to us, many will try and shut us down with phrases like, “you're pulling the race card” ….or….they start to go into a litany about how others have been discriminated against and this is true but here is my problem with that….in order to understand where I'm coming from, you should make a concerted effort to listen to me, to hear what I'm saying but if you start to talk about someone else… you're not listening to me, you're not hearing me… you're trying to get me to listen to YOU.
If your only goal [[consciously or sub consciously) is for me to listen to YOU, how will you ever hear or understand my perspective?
I once heard someone say Tim Wise was one of the causes of the division between Blacks and Whites. I thought then and I think now that was not only an absurd statement but odd because what Time Wise is trying to do is bring us together, to show us who the true elite are and how if we come together we outnumber them.
Making 50, 60, 70, 80 grand [[or even more) a year does not make you a member of the “elite” it can make you financially comfortable and because being rich can be subjective it can also make you feel financially rich but it does not make you a member of the “elite”… the 1% club.
As a matter of fact, you could hit the lottery for a couple of mil and still not be part of the 1% club. Now hit 100 mil or more and you're on your way…you will probably be smiled on and favored by the elite [[if you find yourself in the right circles and don't get all crass) but you will never truly be accepted because the club can also be snobbish in that respect…it's not about skin color but classicism, bloodlines, pedigree and that sort of thing [[and forget the Illuminati stuff ok)…but anyhoo
It's probably a good idea to keep all that in mind when you hear people rant about the “rich” because as a general rule, those doing the ranting [[at least the fair and knowledgeable ones) are not talking about you.
I have many theories why some [[especially the 1% and their toadies) don't want to hear…and or want you to hear…. what Tim Wise has to say…and keep in mind, even among the 1% there are good and decent people…. But… owning the truth can be empowering, even when there are times it will also make you uncomfortable.
Tim Wise on White Privilege - The Creation of Whiteness
For years, acclaimed author and speaker Tim Wise has been electrifying audiences on the college lecture circuit with his deeply personal take on whiteness and white privilege. In this spellbinding lecture, the author of White Like Me: Reflections on Race from a Privileged Son offers a unique, inside-out view of race and racism in America. Expertly overcoming the defensiveness that often surrounds these issues, Wise provides a non-confrontational explanation of white privilege and the damage it does not only to people of color, but to white people as well. This is an invaluable classroom resource: an ideal introduction to the social construction of racial identities, and a critical new tool for exploring the often invoked - but seldom explained - concept of white privilege.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HGTPfXB2Sqk
Epilogue
Am I the only one that sees irony in the fact that once Barack Obama
descended on the national scene, “elite” became synonymous with
educated liberals?
The Republican party doesn't hold a monopoly on elites or toadies that cater to them but if you stop, look and listen; if for a moment you set aside your ideologies, beliefs and preconceived opinions...you'll begin to see a pattern among Republican politicians and if you also think, you will understand why and how Nixon's "Southern Strategy" [[http://www.suite101.com/content/the-southern-strategy-and-richard-nixon-a269466) became a pivotal moment in modern politics.
Don't allow yourself to be manipulated and that goes for both sides. Yes, racism exist in this country, don't pretend it doesn't, don't deny it, hide behind it or use it as an excuse. Don't run from it, sweep it under the carpet and expect it to disappear if you stop folks from talking about it but always remember… it was perpetrated and continues to be exploited by the true “elite”…not because of skin color but to divided and conquer.
Its simple mathematics…99er’s outnumber the elite….divide and conquer is the only way to control us.
When will we stop allowing this to continue?
Thanks for LISTENING...
:cool:
Addendum
This is additional info regarding my “Personal Editorial [[http://soulfuldetroit.com/showthread.php?1389-The-Only-Adult-In-The-Room&p=67391#post67391)" from the last page where I discuss Time Wise, racism and the need for all races to come together.
I wanted to show the actual historical content he referred to when speaking about indenture servants both Black and White, rising up together in revolt.
Bacon's Rebellion was an uprising in 1676 in the Virginia Colony in North America, led by a 29-year-old planter, Nathaniel Bacon
[…]Indentured servants both black and white joined the frontier rebellion. Seeing them united in a cause alarmed the ruling class. Historians believe the rebellion hastened the hardening of racial lines associated with slavery, as a way for planters and the colony to control some of the poor.[16]
[16]Cooper, William J, Liberty and Slavery: Southern Politics to 1860, Univ of South Carolina Press, 2001, p. 9.
Liberty and Slavery: Southern Politics to 1860. By William J. Cooper, Jr. [[New York: McGraw-Hill Publishing Company, 1983.)
Cooper begins in the colonial period, describing how Bacon’s Rebellion precipitated the ascent of African slavery in the agriculturally based Southern colonies and the development of and ideology that juxtaposed individual liberty with slavery. The American Revolution brought this rhetoric to the forefront in the South as the Americans accused the British of attempting to enslave them. What follows is an account of the antebellum period, covering all the major events, elections, and politicians in the South following along with this same theme of liberty being juxtaposed to slavery. He covers the ratification of the Constitution, the rise of the Jacksonian Democrats, the interplay between them and the Whigs and later the Republicans. Finally he comes full circle to discuss the secession crisis and how ideology was still linked to the ideas of liberty and slavery, with Southerners evoking the same message they had during the Revolution.
http://personal.tcu.edu/swoodworth/Cooper.htm
Big Effing Deal: Health Care Reform Reduces Medicare Advantage Premiums 2 Years in a Row
Friday, September 16, 2011 | Posted by Deaniac @The People’s View
Remember the Republican crocodile tears about health care reform "cutting" Medicare? Of course, what it was "cutting" was the extra subsidy taxpayers provided [[to the tune of 14%) to private insurance companies above and beyond the cost of traditional Medicare.
The poutrage wouldn't be complete, of course, without the pretend-Left on a parallel track complaining that health care reform was really only health insurance reform, and it was all in vain because you cannot really regulate insurance companies to bring down rates or costs. Well, a report from the HHS proved both types of naysayers wrong:
[[http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2011pres/09/20110915a.html)
On average, Medicare Advantage premiums will be 4 percent lower in 2012 than in 2011, and plans project enrollment to increase by 10 percent, the Department of Health and Human Services [[HHS) announced today. Of people with Medicare, 99.7 percent continue to enjoy access to a Medicare Advantage plan, and benefits remain consistent with those offered in 2011. This follows an earlier announcement that average prescription drug plan premiums will remain virtually unchanged in 2012. [...]
CMS was able to use authority provided by the Affordable Care Act to protect beneficiaries from significant increases in costs or cuts in benefits in 2012, leading to average premium declines for the second year in a row: 2012 premiums are projected to be 11.5 percent below 2010 premiums.
When have you heard this before? In two years, premiums for private insurance plans down 12%? Yes, it's happening. And yes, it's happening because of ObamaCare! Contrary to right wing demagoguery, cutting private insurance subsidies while regulating it better under Medicare is actually resulting in better coverage. And contrary to ideological Left poutrage, the Affordable Care Act is proving that insurance companies can be regulated to give better outcome to patients at a lower cost.
As I have noted on multiple occasions before, the Affordable Care Act actually increased benefits to Medicare beneficiaries in the form of collapsing and closing the drug coverage donut hole and eliminating co-pays from preventive care. Let's have another look at just how the donut hole is closed in the coming years:
Full Article:
http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/09/big-effing-deal-obamacare-cuts-medicare.html
The following comments are important to note
Comment
There are also a ton of drugs losing their patent protection over the next year -
"The cost of prescription medicines used by millions of people every day is about to plummet.
The next 14 months will bring generic versions of seven of the
world's 20 best-selling drugs, including the top two: cholesterol
fighter Lipitor and blood thinner Plavix.
The magnitude of this wave of expiring drugs patents is
unprecedented. Between now and 2016, blockbusters with about $255
billion in global annual sales will go off patent, notes EvaluatePharma
Ltd., a London research firm. Generic competition will decimate sales of
the brand-name drugs and slash the cost to patients and companies that
provide health benefits.
Top drugs getting generic competition by September 2012 are taken by
millions every day: Lipitor alone is taken by about 4.3 million
Americans and Plavix by 1.4 million. Generic versions of big-selling
drugs for blood pressure, asthma, diabetes, depression, high
triglycerides, HIV and bipolar disorder also are coming by then.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43882446/ns/health-health_care/t/drug-prices-plummet-wave-expiring-patents/
Not due to the ACA, but this will certainly drive healthcare costs down. Generics are usually around half price of the brand name drug.
I do recall something about the length of drug patents during the HCR debate though.
Response to Comment:
It's true that that's not due to the ACA,but the Obama administration has consistently resisted drug company run-of-the-mill tricks to extend their patents. That's part of the reason the patents are being allowed to expire in time. That is of course great news.
The latter comment made me curious so I decided to do some checking and sure enough one of the proposals contained in President Barack Obama's
2012 budget was one in which the Federal Trade Commission would be empowered to stop the controversial settlement of patent litigation abuse wherein a brand name drug company "pays off" the generic drug company in order to be able to extend the life of its patent.
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/untitled-8.jpg
Budget of the United States Government: Browse Fiscal Year 2012
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy12/pdf/BUDGET-2012-BUD-11.pdf
The prevailing wisdom is President Obama’s talks with pharmaceutical companies sold the American people down the drain. This puts a different [[yet very positive) spin on what appears to be faulty wisdom.
In the past, these companies would do everything possible to extend their patents which meant higher drug prices, not lower prices in the form of generic drugs…..this is NOT something you see reported in the MSM
How to Talk About Solyndra
—By Kevin Drum
| Fri Sep. 16, 2011 2:55 AM PDT
You've probably heard of Solyndra by now, right? It's the solar power company that got $500 million in Recovery Act loans from the Department of Energy and then went belly up a couple of weeks ago.
Conservatives have been trying to paint this as a big scandal of some kind, despite the fact that: the company had plenty of private investors too; it's the only DOE loan that has failed so far; and there's no real evidence that anyone in the White House did anything worse than push OMB to speed up their decision-making process a bit in 2009. Stephen Lacey has the full timeline here. [[http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2011/09/13/317594/timeline-bush-administration-solyndra-loan-guarantee/)
But I think Dave Roberts probably has the bigger picture right:
[[http://www.grist.org/renewable-energy/2011-09-14-solyndra-is-the-next-climategate)
Watching this unfold over the last week, I keep thinking back to "Climategate." When it first broke back in late 2009, lefties and bloggers and Dem lawmakers just ignored it, because it was obviously dumb. This left the field entirely open to a massive attack from the right, coordinated among ideological media, staffers, lobbyists, and pols. When the left finally stirred itself to action, all that emerged were a bunch of long, boring investigations into the details and good-faith efforts to be fair about how both sides a point. By the time five separate investigations had cleared the scientists of all wrongdoing, the damage was done. Now we're seeing the same script play out again.
…The right is going after this whole hog, trying to make the name synonymous with clean energy boondoggle. And the left is flailing around, throwing out this fact and that fact with no coherent message. Lord am I tired of watching this script play out.
Full Article:
http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2011/09/how-talk-about-solyndra
Rick Perry: Romney’s Individual Mandate Is Socialism
By Igor Volsky on Sep 16, 2011 at 2:35 pm
Texas Gov. Rick Perry [[R) likened Mitt Romney’s Massachusetts health care law to socialism during a speech at the Iowa Credit Union League in Des Moines, Iowa this afternoon, saying, “the model of socialized medicine has been tried before…whether it was in Western Europe or in Massachusetts”:
PERRY: In Massachusetts the costs have increased by more than $8 billion, that’s what that socialized individual mandated health care bill they put in place in Massachusetts did. Those who had insurance are now paying the price for an individual mandate for those without insurance who must join the system. Private insurance premiums in that state have gone up by more than $4 billion. The problem with state-sponsored health care is if you cannot contain it just within the borders of your state.
Full Article with video:
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2011/09/16/321427/rick-perry-the-individual-mandate-is-socialism/
Ultimately, the Texas governor — whose state has the highest uninsurance rate in the nation and the second-highest health care premiums — can criticize Massachusetts and “Western Europe” all he wants. The truth is, the Bay State has expanded coverage to almost all residents, successfully contained spending for the newly insured population and lowered government expenditures on uncompensated care, while European countries already spend far less of their Gross Domestic Product [[GDP) on health care and provide universal access to all of their citizens.
There is a certain irony in that one of the few things Romney did right could be the very thing that keeps him from getting the nomination, and the very thing that could make him look stupid...oops....disengenous if he were to go against President Obama and bash “ObamaCare”
What If the Tea Party Wins?
They Have a Plan for the Constitution, and It Isn’t Pretty
By Ian Millhiser | September 16, 2011
[…]It is difficult to count how many essential laws would simply cease to exist if the Tea Party won its battle to reshape our founding document, but a short list includes:
• Social Security and Medicare
• Medicaid, children's health insurance, and other health care programs
• All federal education programs
• All federal antipoverty programs
• Federal disaster relief
• Federal food safety inspections and other food safety programs
• Child labor laws, the minimum wage, overtime, and other labor protections
• Federal civil rights laws
Indeed, as this paper explains, many state lawmakers even embrace a discredited constitutional doctrine that threatens the union itself.
[…]America has long endured the occasional politician eager to repeal the entire 20th Century, but, as President Dwight Eisenhower observed nearly 60 years ago, “Their numbers [were] negligible and they are stupid.” Sadly, this is no longer the case. Tenthers increasingly dominate conservative politics and their numbers are growing.
If this movement succeeds in replacing our founding document with their entirely fabricated constitution, virtually every American will suffer the consequences.
Seniors will lose their Social Security and Medicare. Millions of students could lose their ability to pay for college. And workers throughout the country will lose their right to organize, to earn a minimum wage, and to be free from discrimination.
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/09/tea_party_constitution.html
I’ve put together research on the Constitution based on quotes from the Founding Fathers. In light of how many on the right interpret the document, an interpretation supposedly based on what they see as the thoughts and words [[which are usually taken out of context) of the Founding Fathers, one of these days I will put it all together and do a post.
Palestinians Set Bid for U.N. Seat, Clashing With U.S.
By ETHAN BRONNER and ISABEL KERSHNER
Published: September 16, 2011
JERUSALEM — The Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, announced Friday that he would seek membership for a state of Palestine from the United Nations Security Council next week, putting him on a collision course with Israel and the United States as both face an Arab world in turmoil.
Mr. Abbas’s plan, made public in a television address, follows months of failed American and European efforts to restart Palestinian negotiations with Israel. Some fear that Mr. Abbas’s move will raise expectations among his people, with nothing changing for them on the ground. Combined with alarmed reactions from Israeli settlers, violent showdowns could erupt.
Full Article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/17/world/middleeast/Abbas-Security-Council-United-Nations-Vote.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha2
I have refrained from posting anything about this issue because of the contentious nature of the I/P conflict but I keep getting updates from the NY Times that are beginning to annoy me. Not the updates but the reporting. International news from the US tends to be rather shallow imo and this is a complex issue.
There are several articles at Al Jazeera English that showcase some of the complexities and I think it’s only fair to point them out. For instance:
According to one article I read, Hamas has distanced itself from the Palestinian bid for statehood. They haven’t made any declarations pro or con and have stated they were not even consulted. They seem to see this as some type of political posturing from Fatah with whom they have yet to iron out their differences.
Hamas keeps aloof from PLO statehood bid
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2011/09/2011913124215275951.html
The other thing I find lacking in the US reporting, apparently the PA has replaced the PLO in this bid for statehood which has angered many members of the Palestinian Diaspora.
…and there seems to be disagreement as to who truly speaks for the Palestinian people, the PA or the PLO.
http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/09/201191394042383843.html
Members of the US Palestinian Community are against this bid [[http://electronicintifada.net/blog/ali-abunimah/palestinian-americans-unequivocally-reject-pas-un-statehood-bid). It’s not that they do not want to be recognized but they made a compelling statement worth noting:
USPCN statement emphasizes that fundamental Palestinian rights, not “statehood” remain the core of Palestinian efforts:
As has been recently revealed, this initiative in no way protects nor advances our inalienable, and internationally recognized, rights—fundamental of which are our right to return to the homes and properties from which we were forcibly expelled, our right to self-determination, and our right to resist the settler colonial regime that has occupied our land for more than 63 years.
The Palestinian people, wherever they are, hold these rights. They are non-negotiable. No one can barter them away for false promises of “peace” and “stability.” The cynical irony of turning a UN resolution enshrining our right to return under international law [[UNGA Res. 194) into a rhetorical ploy should give anyone pause. That it is being advanced at a time when the PA does not even have the political mandate of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza through Palestinian Legislative Council elections must also give us pause.
http://electronicintifada.net/blog/ali-abunimah/palestinian-americans-unequivocally-reject-pas-un-statehood-bid
Although the US [[eg. President Obama) is in a rather awkward position on this issue, there are way too many moving parts to try and cast the US/President Obama as either the good or bad guy for any of the parties concerned. imo
If we could turn back the hands of time and Woodrow Wilson were alive today, knowing what we do now, maybe he [[Wilson) would have made a different decision and we wouldn't even be involved in all of this...but as they say, hindsight is 20/20... shrugs
Exclusive Timeline: Bush Administration Advanced Solyndra Loan Guarantee for Two Years, Media Blow the Story
By Stephen Lacey and Climate Guest Blogger on Sep 13, 2011 at 11:10 am
It’s often claimed that the Solyndra loan guarantee was “rushed through” by the Obama Administration for political reasons. In fact, the Solyndra loan guarantee was a multi-year process that the Bush Administration launched in 2007.
Because one of the Solyndra investors, Argonaut Venture Capital, is funded by George Kaiser — a man who donated money to the Obama campaign — the loan guarantee has been attacked as being political in nature. What critics don’t mention is that one of the earliest and largest investors, Madrone Capital Partners, is funded by the family that started Wal-Mart, the Waltons. The Waltons have donated millions of dollars to Republican candidates over the years.
Full Article:
http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2011/09/13/317594/timeline-bush-administration-solyndra-loan-guarantee/
The company's backers included private investors who had diverse political interests.
The loan comprises just 1.3 percent of the Department of Energy's [[DOE) overall loan portfolio. To date, Solyndra is the only loan that's known to be troubled.
There isn’t any “big” money to be made in fair and balanced reporting. MSM journalism [[with few and too often inconsistent exception) is either dying, on life support or in many instances dead.
Advertising revenue is the new judge and juror of truth. This allows “news readers” and “news writers” to push controversial spin, mislead the public and lie with a smile, smirk or stroke of a computer keypad.
Are We Paying Attention?
Team Obama Exposes Conservative Media Bias In Poll Stories
September 16, 2011
By Jason Easley
Obama adviser David Axelrod put out a memo today that both highlighted and took to task the media’s conservative bias when reporting stories about new polls.
In the memo, Axelrod wrote, [[http://thepage.time.com/2011/09/16/axe-base-stands-firm-behind-bam/#more-245446)
Members of the media have focused on the President’s approval ratings as if they existed in a black box. Following the intransigence of the Republicans during the debt debate, the approval rating of the GOP brand dropped to a historic low. The approval rating of Congress dropped to a near historic low. Americans are still dealing with the impact of the financial crisis and recession and the long-term economic trends that have seen wages stagnate for many, and that is manifested in their anger towards Washington. There’s no doubt that Americans are calling on leaders in Washington to take immediate action to address their economic challenges — exactly what the President is advocating for.
According to a CNN poll released on Wednesday, a plurality of Americans approve of the President’s jobs plan. Two thirds believe we should cut taxes for the middle class and rebuild America’s roads and bridges. Three quarters believe we need to put our teachers and first responders back to work. More Americans trust the President to handle the economy than Congressional Republicans by a margin of 9 points.
Despite what you hear in elite commentary, the President’s support among base voters and in key demographic groups has stayed strong. According to the latest NBC-WSJ poll, Democrats approve of his performance by an 81%-14% margin. That’s stronger than President Clinton’s support among Democrats at this point in his term and, according to Gallup, stronger than any Democratic President dating back to Harry Truman through this point in their presidency. 92 percent of African Americans approve. And a PPP poll out this week showed the President winning 67 percent of Hispanics against Romney and 70 percent against Perry, a higher percentage than he captured against Senator McCain in 2008.
[...] Axelrod’s memo did point out a disturbing trend in the media’s recent coverage of their own polling. It is kind of hard to miss the fact that editors and headline writers have been playing up the negative, even when other data in their own polling undercuts the negativity. Axelrod mentioned the recent CNN story that emphasized Obama’s sinking approval rating without mentioning the fact that the same poll found that he is still more trusted than his opponents on the number one issue of the economy.
Full Article:
http://www.politicususa.com/en/obama-conservative-bias-poll
Take from this article and David Axelrod’s memo what you will but I do think he makes
a very strong case that can easily be proven. The passage above is a perfect example.
When you look at many articles that talk about polling numbers [[some will link back to the poll, some will not) the first thing you notice when you click on the actual poll itself, there is data supporting the fact that the polls are not as negative [[sensational) as the article makes it out to be.
This goes back to two things I spoke about earlier, one being, MSM will often mislead the reader and two, controversy generates readers, which in turn generates advertising dollars.
In our culture and politics I find it intriguing how often the saying, “follow the money” can apply to a thought, action or opinion.
Another example is the article I posted on Palestine’s bid for statehood. The Times article didn’t have any coverage on any of the issues I spoke about. A lot of information that can change a person’s perspective on the issue is omitted.
There could be several reasons for that, including time restraints. A 24 hour news cycle is not on the side of “journalists” who have to get an article out ASAP but whatever the reason, it doesn’t change the fact the info is omitted. I personally don’t see a compelling excuse for the ommission, other than an attempt to heavily influence the reader’s thinking.
Posted at 09/16/2011
John Boehner’s misfire on pending federal regulations
By Glenn Kessler
“At this moment, the Executive Branch has 219 new rules in the works that will cost our economy at least $100 million. That means under the current Washington agenda, our economy is poised to take a hit from the government of at least $100 million — 219 times.”
[…]The Facts
The federal government is required to identify regulations that could have an economic impact of more than $100 million, but people frequently misunderstand what that means. It does not necessarily mean $100 million in costs; in fact, it can also mean more than a $100 million in benefits.
The Congressional Research Service earlier this year made this clear when it examined the 100 major regulatory rules issued in 2010. The report — which is actually posted on the speaker’s Web site — found that 37 of the 100 rules were deemed “major” because they involved the transfer of federal funds to recipients [[such as grants, food stamps, or crop payments). In most cases, this meant more money in people’s pockets, not costs to businesses. [[There were another nine rules that decreased transfer payments.)
Six of the rules were labeled major because they triggered economic activity by consumers; these all had to do with hunting seasons and bag limits for certain types of migratory birds. Four other rules established new fees [[such as increased costs for passports) to fund government operations; others were considered “major” for a variety of reasons.
Full Article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/john-boehners-misfire-on-pending-federal-regulations/2011/09/15/gIQAufuhVK_blog.html?wprss=fact-checker
After Claiming To Support Infrastructure Investments, House GOP Blocks Infrastructure Investment Plan
By Travis Waldron on Sep 17, 2011 at 4:32 pm
Despite their recent exclamations of support for improving American infrastructure, House Republicans circulated a memo this weekend informing members that the caucus would oppose the majority of President Obama’s jobs plan, particularly the proposed infrastructure bank that would make large investments into the nation’s crumbling roads, bridges, and other forms of infrastructure.
In the memo, House Speaker John Boehner [[R-OH) laid out opposition to Obama’s proposed $30 billion to keep teachers and law enforcement officers in their jobs, rejected money for school construction, and again claimed Republicans supported spending on infrastructure. But Boehner wrote that the GOP opposed the way Obama’s plan would make those investments, as Republicans continue to base their opposition to new stimulus plans on the misguided, false belief that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act didn’t work, as The Hill reported:
“Rather than adding more money to a broken system,” Boehner and his deputies wrote, “Congress and the president should spend the next few months working out a multi-year transportation authorization bill that fixes these problems.”
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/09/17/321775/gop-jobs-plan-infrastructure-hypocrisy/
UPDATE: A re-post with additional info added
What If the Tea Party Wins?
They Have a Plan for the Constitution, and It Isn’t Pretty
By Ian Millhiser | September 16, 2011
[…]It is difficult to count how many essential laws would simply cease to exist if the Tea Party won its battle to reshape our founding document, but a short list includes:
• Social Security and Medicare
• Medicaid, children's health insurance, and other health care programs
• All federal education programs
• All federal antipoverty programs
• Federal disaster relief
• Federal food safety inspections and other food safety programs
• Child labor laws, the minimum wage, overtime, and other labor protections
• Federal civil rights laws
Indeed, as this paper explains, many state lawmakers even embrace a discredited constitutional doctrine that threatens the union itself.
[…]America has long endured the occasional politician eager to repeal the entire 20th Century, but, as President Dwight Eisenhower observed nearly 60 years ago, “Their numbers [were] negligible and they are stupid.” Sadly, this is no longer the case. Tenthers increasingly dominate conservative politics and their numbers are growing.
If this movement succeeds in replacing our founding document with their entirely fabricated constitution, virtually every American will suffer the consequences.
Seniors will lose their Social Security and Medicare. Millions of students could lose their ability to pay for college. And workers throughout the country will lose their right to organize, to earn a minimum wage, and to be free from discrimination.
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/09/tea_party_constitution.html
The C-Span video which can be viewed by clicking on the link below is spell binding.
It is a 3 hour long interview and talk so you may or may not be able to watch in one sitting, but it is well worth watching from beginning to end.
Pauline Maier gives a riveting account of the founding and framing of the Declaration of Independence, Constitution and the Bill of Rights. She answers questions from viewers and dispels myths surrounding the issues of church and state, our monetary system and more. Her interpretation and perspective is based on numerous historical documents that are rarely discussed or known, including many of the individual State Constitution’s of the various colonies, before the adoption of the Federal Constitution.
She paints a picture of the political climate of the time. A climate which very much mirrors the angst of the US and its citizens, involving the discussions, debates and ratification of the Constitution, through the modern political system and debates and discussions we have now.
This is not the study of the Constitution we learned in school. It is a much more rich and compelling account and explains the context of the many writings we often refer to including the Federalist Papers, letters between the Founding Fathers and Thomas Paine’s, “Common Sense.”
Although our Founding Fathers didn’t have anyway of knowing what a world would look like beyond the one they were living in at the time, they wanted to craft a document that would be able to change and adapt with an ever changing world; a document that formed a government to protect the rights and freedoms of its citizens, a government that provides security and prosperity. A government ruled by and for the people through elected officials and representatives.
In Depth with Pauline Maier
Mar 6, 2011
C-SPAN | BookTV
Author and historian Pauline Maier talked about her work and her life and career. She responded to telephone calls and electronic communications.
A Massachusetts Institute of Technology history professor, she has written several text books on the Revolutionary period and four popular books on the era: From Resistance to Revolution: Colonial Radicals and the Development of American Opposition to Britain, 1765-1776 [[1972); The Old Revolutionaries: Political Lives in the Age of Samuel Adams [[1980); American Scripture: Making the Declaration of Independence [[1998); and Ratification: The People Debate the Constitution, 1787-1788 [[2010).
WATCH VIDEO HERE:
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/298016-1
Helloooooo….any millionaires out there…if so…oops:p
Obama Tax Plan Would Ask More of Millionaires
By JACKIE CALMES
Published: September 17, 2011
WASHINGTON — President Obama on Monday will call for a new minimum tax rate for individuals making more than $1 million a year to ensure that they pay at least the same percentage of their earnings as middle-income taxpayers, according to administration officials.
The Caucus
The latest on President Obama, the new Congress and other news from Washington and around the nation. Join the discussion.
With a special joint Congressional committee starting work to reach a bipartisan budget deal by late November, the proposal adds a new and populist feature to Mr. Obama’s effort to raise the political pressure on Republicans to agree to higher revenues from the wealthy in return for Democrats’ support of future cuts from Medicare and Medicaid.
Mr. Obama, in a bit of political salesmanship, will call his proposal the “Buffett Rule,” in a reference to Warren E. Buffett, the billionaire investor who has complained repeatedly that the richest Americans generally pay a smaller share of their income in federal taxes than do middle-income workers, because investment gains are taxed at a lower rate than wages.
Full Article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/18/us/politics/obama-tax-plan-would-ask-more-of-millionaires.html?_r=1&emc=na
Addendum
This is additional info regarding my “Personal Editorial [[http://soulfuldetroit.com/showthread.php?1389-The-Only-Adult-In-The-Room&p=67391#post67391)" from the last page where I discuss Time Wise, racism and the need for all races to come together.
I wanted to show the actual historical content he referred to when speaking about indenture servants both Black and White, rising up together in revolt.
Bacon's Rebellion was an uprising in 1676 in the Virginia Colony in North America, led by a 29-year-old planter, Nathaniel Bacon
[…]Indentured servants both black and white joined the frontier rebellion. Seeing them united in a cause alarmed the ruling class. Historians believe the rebellion hastened the hardening of racial lines associated with slavery, as a way for planters and the colony to control some of the poor.[16]
[16]Cooper, William J, Liberty and Slavery: Southern Politics to 1860, Univ of South Carolina Press, 2001, p. 9.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacon%27s_Rebellion
Liberty and Slavery: Southern Politics to 1860. By William J. Cooper, Jr. [[New York: McGraw-Hill Publishing Company, 1983.)
Cooper begins in the colonial period, describing how Bacon’s Rebellion precipitated the ascent of African slavery in the agriculturally based Southern colonies and the development of and ideology that juxtaposed individual liberty with slavery. The American Revolution brought this rhetoric to the forefront in the South as the Americans accused the British of attempting to enslave them. What follows is an account of the antebellum period, covering all the major events, elections, and politicians in the South following along with this same theme of liberty being juxtaposed to slavery. He covers the ratification of the Constitution, the rise of the Jacksonian Democrats, the interplay between them and the Whigs and later the Republicans. Finally he comes full circle to discuss the secession crisis and how ideology was still linked to the ideas of liberty and slavery, with Southerners evoking the same message they had during the Revolution.
http://personal.tcu.edu/swoodworth/Cooper.htm
Paul Ryan Calls For Increasing Taxes On Middle Class But Dismisses Millionaires Tax As ‘Class Warfare’
By Zack Ford on Sep 18, 2011 at 11:01 am
Rep. Paul Ryan [[R-WI) resumed his attacks on President Obama’s economic policy Sunday morning, suggesting that the President’s plan to tax millionaires’ profits from capital gains in order to fund job creation efforts constitutes “class warfare”:
RYAN: It adds further instability to our system — more uncertainty — and it punishes job creation and those people who create jobs. Class warfare, Chris, may make for really good politics but it makes for rotten economics. We don’t need to divide people and prey on people’s fear and envy and anxiety. We need to remove the barriers so entrepreneurs can hire people. These tax increases don’t work. [...]
This is a double tax… If we tax investment and tax more you will get less of it. It looks like to me not a very good sign. It looks like the President wants to move down the class warfare path. Class warfare will simply divide this country more, will attack job creators, divide people, and it doesn’t grow the economy.
More with video:
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/09/18/321875/paul-ryan-calls-for-increasing-taxes-on-middle-class-but-dismisses-millionaires-tax-as-class-warfare/
"Republicans, keeping millions out of work to put one man out of a job."
House GOP Rejects Tax Cuts For Middle Class
By Alex Seitz-Wald on Sep 17, 2011 at 4:44 pm
In a sudden move, House Republicans rejected President Obama’s week-old jobs plan, including about $240 billion in payroll tax cuts. In a memo to their caucus, Speaker John Boehner [[R-OH), Majority Leader Eric Cantor [[R-VA), and other leaders dismissed the bill’s largest spending and tax cutting portions, leaving little of the bill intact. In the memo, the leaders explained their concerns on the tax:
There may be significant unforeseen downsides to large temporary tax cuts immediately followed by large tax increases. Compounding this negative effect is the scheduled increase in all individual tax rates, capital gain and dividend rates, and the elimination/reduction of various individual credits and deductions. In short, we are creating significant new uncertainty in an already uncertain economy. [...]
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/09/17/321786/house-reject-payroll-tax/
"Republicans, keeping millions out of work to put one man out of a job."
Anyone remember the Debt Ceiling deal?
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/
Obama Plan to Cut Deficit Will Trim Spending by $3 Trillion
By HELENE COOPER
Published: September 18, 2011
WASHINGTON — President Obama will unveil a deficit-reduction plan on Monday that uses entitlement cuts, tax increases and war savings to reduce government spending by more than $3 trillion over the next 10 years, administration officials said.
The Caucus
The latest on President Obama, the new Congress and other news from Washington and around the nation.
The plan, which Mr. Obama will lay out Monday morning at the White House, is the administration’s opening salvo in sweeping negotiations on deficit reduction to be taken up by a joint House-Senate committee over the next two months. If a deal is not struck by Dec. 23, cuts could take effect automatically across government agencies.
Mr. Obama will call for $1.5 trillion in tax increases, primarily on the wealthy, through a combination of closing loopholes and limiting the amount that high earners can deduct. The proposal also includes $580 billion in adjustments to health and entitlement programs, including $248 billion to Medicare and $72 billion to Medicaid. Administration officials said that the Medicare cuts would not come from an increase in the Medicare eligibility age.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/19/us/politics/obama-plan-to-cut-deficit-will-trim-spending.html
also this
Under Mr. Obama’s proposal, $800 billion of the $1.5 trillion in tax increases would come from allowing the Bush-era tax cuts to expire. The other $700 billion, aides said, would come from a combination of closing loopholes and limiting deductions among individuals making more than $200,000 a year and families making more than $250,000.
Mr. Obama’s plan will hover over Congressional budget-cutting negotiations that are under way over the next two months. A bipartisan Congressional committee is charged with coming up with its own cuts by Dec. 23; otherwise $1.2 trillion in cuts to defense and entitlement programs will go into effect automatically in 2013.
Looks to me the Repubs are being backed in a corner..do they fight for the rich and defense or fight for the middle class and poor?
"Republicans, keeping millions out of work to put one man out of a job."
Paul Ryan Insults Our Intelligence Yet Again
—By Kevin Drum
| Sun Sep. 18, 2011
Oh look. What a surprise.
After three decades of public policy that led to the super-rich doubling their share of national income while paying tax rates a fifth lower than before — yes, folks, that's way more money and way lower tax rates —
After three decades of policies that lavishly rewarded the super-rich — and produced wage stagnation for everyone else, a massive financial collapse that ravaged the middle class, and enormous deficits that they'll be asked to pay off eventually —
After three decades of that, what do Republican leaders call President Obama's plan to raise taxes a bit on millionaires?
Class warfare, of course. The sheer gall is staggering. Still, why should they stop? They'll never get ashamed of hawking that old-time snake oil as long as hawking it keeps working.
More:
http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2011/09/paul-ryan-insults-our-intelligence-yet-again
"Republicans keeping millions out of work to put one man out of a job."
Multi-Millionaire Rep. Says He Can’t Afford A Tax Hike Because He Only Has $400K A Year After Feeding Family
By Alex Seitz-Wald posted from ThinkProgress Economy on Sep 19, 2011 at 11:13 am
Rep. John Fleming [[R-LA) appeared on MSNBC with Chris Jansing this morning to attack President Obama’s new deficit reduction plan, which includes some tax increases on the wealthy. Taking up the typical GOP talking point, Fleming said raising taxes on wealthy “job creators” is a terrible idea that kills jobs because many of these people are small business owners who pay taxes through personal income rates.
Fleming is himself a businesses owner, so Jansing asked, “If you have to pay more in taxes, you would get rid of some of those employees?” Fleming responded by saying that while his businesses made $6.3 million last year, after you “pay 500 employees, you pay rent, you pay equipment, and food,” his profits “a mere fraction of that” — “by the time I feed my family, I have maybe $400,000 left over.”
Full Article:
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/09/19/322405/gop-rep-whines-400k/
"Republicans keeping millions out of work to put one man out of a job."
Perry Brags About Texas’ Tax System That Charges The Poor Four Times As Much As The Rich
By Pat Garofalo on Sep 16, 2011 at 12:00 pm
Texas Gov. Rick Perry [[R) was on the campaign trail in Newton, Iowa today, reviving his stump speech promise to make government “as inconsequential in your life as I can.” At one point, Perry bragged about the Texas tax system and its light burden on “job creators”:
We had a tax policy in place that allowed for our job creators to not be burdened, still delivering the services that the people desire in the state of Texas. So have a tax policy that is as light on the job creators as we can.
Texas Gov. Rick Perry [[R) was on the campaign trail in Newton, Iowa today, reviving his stump speech promise to make government “as inconsequential in your life as I can.” At one point, Perry bragged about the Texas tax system and its light burden on “job creators”:
We had a tax policy in place that allowed for our job creators to not be burdened, still delivering the services that the people desire in the state of Texas. So have a tax policy that is as light on the job creators as we can.
As Matt Yglesias has noted, in reality Perry’s tax system “has done a great job of soaking the poor.” In fact, according to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, someone in the poorest 20 percent of Texans can expect to face a tax rate four times as high as a Texan in the richest 1 percent:
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/texasregressivetaxes.jpg
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/09/16/320975/perry-texas-regressive-taxes/
Raising taxes on "job creators" will not force them to lay off workers but...
...if there is not a demand for goods and services, a business does not have a reason to hire. If the middle class and poor cannot afford to pay for goods and services, there will not be a demand.
The “job creators” myth the Republicans are pushing has been debunked, over and over for more than a year but they keep pushing it and many voters continue to believe it.
Republicans are willing to destroy our economy in order to see President Obama fail.
Voters will vote against their own best interest, in order to see the President fail.
If the President fails, so does the economy, the middle class and the poor but the irony is this….if customers can not afford goods and services, eventually “job creators will fail as well because they will no longer be able to make a profit.
Even if you have a job, you will be affected by all of this because if there isn't a demand for goods and services, businesses will raise their prices.
Anyway you try and spin the Republican myths or justify them, the logic will be flawed.
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/09/16/320975/perry-texas-regressive-taxes/
"Republicans keeping millions out of work to put one man out of a job."
Despite Internal GOP Opposition, Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett Stands By His Election Rigging Scheme
By Ian Millhiser on Sep 19, 2011 at 9:50 am
Last week, Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett [[R) announced a plan to rig the 2012 presidential election by effectively giving up to a dozen electoral votes away to the Republican presidential candidate for free. Under Corbett’s plan, each of the state’s 18 congressional districts — which are being gerrymandered so that as many as 12 of them favor Republicans — would choose how to allocate a single electoral vote rather than having all of the state’s votes go to the winner of the state. The plan is opposed by several GOP congressmen, who fear that its new set of rules will cause the Obama campaign to shift resources from bluer parts of the state into their districts.
Nevertheless, Corbett and his chief ally in the legislature, GOP Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi, are not swayed by these congressman’s claim that it is more important to protect their seats than it is to steal the election.
[..]here are the three factions within the Pennsylvania GOP.
• Just Rig The Election Already: Gov. Corbett and Sen. Pileggi fully support the plan. In Pileggi’s words, they have heard “nothing” indicating that this election rigging scheme “does not have the right objective.”
• Protect Me First: GOP Reps. Jim Gerlach, Pat Meehan and Mike Fitzpatrick care more about keeping their own jobs than they do about electing a president who will eliminate Medicare, so they oppose a plan which might endanger their ability to get reelected in what have traditionally been Democratic-leaning districts.
• Be More Coldly Calculating: Perhaps the most despicable faction is captured by Matthew Brann’s statement that Corbett should only rig the election if he is not sure the GOP can carry the state. This faction apparently believes that the biggest problem with Corbett’s election rigging scheme is that it could backfire and benefit the Democrats
Sadly, there does not appear to be any faction within the Republican Party that opposes rigging elections because rigging elections is wrong.
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2011/09/19/321970/tom-corbett-still-loves-vote-rigging/
"Republicans keeping millions out of work to put one man out of a job."
Sunday, September 18, 2011
GOP Walks into the Trap
Only Jim DeMint sees it. He's the blithering idiotic, far-right Senator from South Carolina. But he is smart enough to see the trap Obama has set for the GOP. No one in the media or among Obama's Democratic critics has apparently caught on yet.
The trap is the American Jobs Act. In proposing it, Obama has put the GOP in a lose-lose position. As DeMint notes, if the GOP adopts it, they co-own blame if the economy doesn't improve. If they refuse to adopt it, Obama can - and rightly so - blame them for the economy not improving. Note, however, that DeMint won't even consider the joy for America if the GOP helps enact the proposal AND it works. He and his GOP buddies only care about how the proposal hurts the GOP politically and helps the Democrats.
Beyond the politics, the American Jobs Act is also a good proposal for the American people. It would immediately put teachers and firemen back to work and would fix our dangerous bridges, crumbling roads and school houses. Even John McCain's economics advisor from 2008 says the proposal could raise the GDP significantly and put a million-plus people back to work. What's not to like?
READ MORE:
http://outfrontpolitics.blogspot.com/
I Told You So: President Obama to Use Veto Pen to Force Congress' Hand on Revenue
Monday, September 19, 2011 | Posted by Deaniac
When on August 1, I wrote that the debt limit deal was an unvarnished win [[http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/08/paul-krugman-is-political-rookie-or-how.html) for the President and called out Paul Krugman for being a political rookie, TPV got acclaims good and ill - Stephanie Miller picked up and read the piece live [[http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/08/stephanie-miller-reads-tpv-on-air-audio.html) on her radio show approvingly, Huff-and-Puff Post [[http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/08/too-bad-for-huffington-post-but-dumbest.html) and Keith Olbermann [[http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/08/keith-olbermann-is-blogistan-rookie.html) were very upset at our establishment of the phrase "firebagger Lefty blogosphere" to descrive the knee-jerk pretend-Leftists, and ABC News [[http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/08/obama-campaign-email-with-criticism-of-krugman-liberal-blogs-triggers-ire/) did a rather factual story about the controversy.
At that time, I told you that the president, by taking social security, programs for the poor and students, and Medicare and Medicaid benefits off the table, would force the 'supercommittee' to come up with revenue increases; with the threat of the Bush tax cuts expiring at the end of 2012. I told you at the time that the president would use his veto pen to force Congress' hands.
Well, guess what just happened [[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/us/politics/obama-vows-veto-if-deficit-plan-has-no-tax-increases.html?_r=2&hp)...
President Obama called on Monday for Congress to adopt his “balanced” plan combining entitlement cuts, tax increases and war savings to reduce the federal deficit by more than $3 trillion over the next 10 years, and said he would veto any approach that relied solely on spending reductions to address the fiscal shortfall.
“I will not support any plan that puts all the burden for closing our deficit on ordinary Americans,” he said. “And I will veto any bill that changes benefits for those who rely on Medicare but does not raise serious revenues by asking the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations to pay their fair share.
Full Article plus video:
http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/09/i-told-you-so-president-obama-to-use.html
My only quibble, I could live without the tar and feather tag “firebagger.” Dems need the progressive vote whether they like it or not.
I’d rather the venom be turned on the right but the term is in reference to a Dem/Progressive political blog war fight thingy so I’m not sure if it matters in the general scheme of things….although, the Progressive Left were very active in calling for their coalition not to vote in the 2010 elections….that didn’t work out too well for Dems when all was said and done….people on both sides of the political divide can be exasperating….shrugs
I Am Not 'Scared' of our President. I am 'Scared' of our Media
Monday, September 19, 2011 | Posted by sepiagurlsweetspot
"It is not about class warfare. It is about math," President Obama said in his speech on Jobs and the deficit this morning in the Rose Garden. He is right. However, right after his speech I tuned into MSNBC only to see a morning anchor asking a guest on his show why the President had to apologize in his speech. I threw my hands up in the air, turned off the television and walked away in frustration.
I skimmed through an article on The Daily Beast yesterday titled "The Scared President". I am not going to link to it because it just made me very angry and I will not give it undeserved traffic in my post. Basically, it was just a bunch of talking points thrown together, as far as I am concerned, based on what they have read from the new Ron Suskind book about 'behind the scenes" in the Obama White House.
Everywhere I look nowadays there seems to be this theme on how weak and scared the President is. There is no rest from this message anywhere I go whether on the internet, in newspapers, on blogs or on television. Sometimes I wonder if I am in a Twilight Zone episode because I just do not get it.
This is the President who killed Bin Laden, who gave us healthcare, who worked towards getting Don't Ask Don't Tell stopped, who signed a bill for equal pay for women, who is fighting hard to help our Veterans. Yet, he is scared, ineffective, effete, weak, gullible and I can go on with the adjectives describing how he is such a loser. Really, does he sound scared to you?
But I have to ask, what about our 'scared' media. The media in this country has held and coddled the rich and the republicans for far too long. When Bush got in they did nothing to help this country fight against his harsh and divisive leadership. They became his cheerleaders for war and led us down a rabbit hole for 8 years, which has continued under President Obama and the Republican talking points. They carry water for the Republicans. I refuse to watch any Sunday Political shows anymore because they are packed with Republican shills. Every news channel has a Republican person mouthing off talking points all day everyday. CNN now follows Fox's lead and so do the other media outlets. I also have to say that some Democrats do not help themselves by running around with the hair on fire because they are so scared of the Republicans and the media. They need to grow a pair!
Full Article:
http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/09/i-am-not-scared-of-our-president-i-am.html
Are We Paying Attention?
Deaniac
[...] Congress needs to hear from us - I know it sounds like a broken record, but it really does work. Congress hates it when constituents call - it means people are paying attention and are going over the heads of lobbyists. Especially right now that they are scared out of their wits that people are pissed off and ready to throw their own Congresscritters out of office.
The other thing we can all do is work like there's no tomorrow to re-elect the president. The best revenge is success.
While It's On My Mind
I've been meaning to thank everyone for following the thread. It's very much appreciated.
I have a rather weird schedule [[for a variety of reasons) and as a result I'm usually up in the wee hours of the morning. I notice the page views often go up during that time. I use to think it was weird until it dawned on me it's probably West Coast folks checking in... so to all of you....thanks...you rock!:cool:
They Will Serve in Silence No More
At midnight eastern time tonight [[that is within a few hours from the time of this writing), the United States will finally relegate to the dustbin of history the Don't Ask, Don't Tell discriminatory policy against gay Americans being able to serve openly. It will never come back. And so, history will be made, marking another milestone in America's struggle for equal rights for all of our people: regardless of sexual orientation, color or race, national origin or religion, gender or gender identity. Beginning at midnight Eastern Time tonight, Americans who love their country enough to literally put their lives on the line will no longer be told that they are unfit to serve because they are gay.
On this occasion, the Servicemembers Legal Defense Fund put together a video highlighting the trial and triumph of this hard-earned victory:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qw8RYELruP0&feature=player_embedded
http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/09/they-will-serve-in-silence-no-more.html
Thank You for Your Service To Our Country!
Multi-Millionaire Congressman: ‘I Don’t Want To Raise My Taxes…Don’t Ask Me’ To Pay More
Responding to an ad produced by the group Patriot Millionaires calling for raising taxes on the wealthy, Rep. John Campbell [[R-CA) — who was worth up to $37 million in 2009, the most recent year available — said he doesn’t want to pay anymore in taxes. “I don’t want to raise my taxes,” Campbell said, “I don’t want to raise anybody’s taxes.” Campbell added that billionaire Warren Buffet, who has called for raising taxes, can pay more to government if he wants to, “but don’t ask me and a whole lot of other Americans” to pay too. Watch it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zwq_Hsd47tQ&feature=player_embedded
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/09/19/323145/campbell-dont-raise-my-taxes/
I’ve been meaning to address this and always forgot but several weeks ago there was a claim that Warren Buffet owed billions in back taxes.
The problem with the reporting, it wasn’t true. Berkshire Hathaway the company Buffet owns had been in a dispute with the IRS over how much taxes they actually owed. Apparently someone wanted to discredit Buffet and turned that dispute into; he owes…..yada, yada
Now here is the irony of the story, if you notice, the story suddenly stopped being news…..any guesses why?
IRS lost the case and the court said they [[IRS) had to pay BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY.
oops
Berkshire Hathaway Victorious In Tax Dispute With IRS
by Glen Shapiro, LawAndTax-News.com, New York
Ruling on Friday in a long-running dispute between Berkshire Hathaway and the US Internal Revenue Service, Judge Lyle Strom of the US District Court of Nebraska found in favour of the investment firm.
The firm's major shareholder, billionaire investment guru Warren Buffett in September testified in the suit, which was brought by Berkshire over the tax authority's decision to disallow $16.3 million in tax deductions.
The legal wrangle between the two parties began in 2002, and involved the taxes paid by the organization in 1989, 1990 and 1991.
Berkshire Hathaway alleged that the IRS made an "erroneous, wrongful and illegal" interpretation of the US tax code. The tax body's decision was based on the discovery that Berkshire Hathaway had borrowed $750 million to buy dividend-paying stock.
It was interpreting a piece of legislation passed by Congress to address concerns that organizations were employing such tactics to convert pretax losses into after-tax gains, which therefore stipulated that deductions be reduced if borrowed money is directly attributable to the investment that pays the dividend.
However, the holding company argued that the money in the account which received IRS scrutiny came from several sources, and was used for thousands of transactions. It further stated that the purpose of buying stocks was to enhance the company's overall financial strength, rather than to purchase the stocks in question because they paid dividends.
According to reports in the national media, in his 38 page decision, Judge Strom ordered the IRS to pay Berkshire Hathaway $23.1 million plus interest.
Read More:
http://www.tax-news.com/news/Berkshire_Hathaway_Victorious_In_Tax_Dispute_With_ IRS____21618.html
Great POV [[point of view)
A little long but excellent commentary.
There is No Such Thing as "The Media."
http://pleasecutthecrap.typepad.com/main/
UPDATE:
Replaced the initial video with the entire speech
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdqxBrKZmUw
Did Obama Just Kill Congress' Budget-Cutting Super Committee?
—By Andy Kroll
| Mon Sep. 19, 2011 10:10 AM PDT
In his feisty speech on Monday, President Obama first decried Republicans' habit of signing pledges, and then made a pledge of his own: "I will veto any bill that changes benefits for those who rely on Medicare but does not raise serious revenues by asking the wealthiest Americans or biggest corporations to pay their fair share." And with that, the president all but killed Congress' bipartisan deficit reduction Super Committee.
Why? Because the 12-person Super Committee, tasked with trimming $1.2 trillion from the federal deficit in the next 10 years, consists of six Republicans and six Democrats, and none of those Republicans is going to sign off on a bill that raises taxes on corporations and the wealthy. Although reforms to Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security are said to be on the table, new taxes are not. Not a chance. Know this: All six Republicans on the Super Committee signed anti-tax zealot Grover Norquist's pledge to never raise taxes for any reason. Good luck getting that crew—Reps. Jeb Hensarling [[R-Texas), Dave Camp [[R-Mich.), and Fred Upton [[R-Mich.), and Sens. Jon Kyl [[R-Ariz.), Pat Toomey [[R-Penn.), and Rob Portman [[R-Ohio)—to sign off on higher taxes for rich people.
[…]All of which is to say: RIP Super Committee. We hardly knew ye.
http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/09/obama-veto-speech-deficit-congress
The White House
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
September 19, 2011
Remarks by the President on Economic Growth and Deficit Reduction
Rose Garden
10:56 A.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Good morning, everybody. Please have a seat.
A week ago today, I sent Congress the American Jobs Act. It’s a plan that will lead to new jobs for teachers, for construction workers, for veterans, and for the unemployed. It will cut taxes for every small business owner and virtually every working man and woman in America. And the proposals in this jobs bill are the kinds that have been supported by Democrats and Republicans in the past. So there shouldn’t be any reason for Congress to drag its feet. They should pass it right away. I'm ready to sign a bill. I've got the pens all ready.
Now, as I said before, Congress should pass this bill knowing that every proposal is fully paid for. The American Jobs Act will not add to our nation’s debt. And today, I’m releasing a plan that details how to pay for the jobs bill while also paying down our debt over time.
And this is important, because the health of our economy depends in part on what we do right now to create the conditions where businesses can hire and middle-class families can feel a basic measure of economic security. But in the long run, our prosperity also depends on our ability to pay down the massive debt we’ve accumulated over the past decade in a way that allows us to meet our responsibilities to each other and to the future.
During this past decade, profligate spending in Washington, tax cuts for multi-millionaires and billionaires, the cost of two wars, and the recession turned a record surplus into a yawning deficit, and that left us with a big pile of IOUs. If we don’t act, that burden will ultimately fall on our children’s shoulders. If we don’t act, the growing debt will eventually crowd out everything else, preventing us from investing in things like education, or sustaining programs like Medicare.
So Washington has to live within its means. The government has to do what families across this country have been doing for years. We have to cut what we can’t afford to pay for what really matters. We need to invest in what will promote hiring and economic growth now while still providing the confidence that will come with a plan that reduces our deficits over the long-term.
These principles were at the heart of the deficit framework that I put forward in April. It was an approach to shrink the deficit as a share of the economy, but not to do so so abruptly with spending cuts that would hamper growth or prevent us from helping small businesses and middle-class families get back on their feet.
It was an approach that said we need to go through the budget line-by-line looking for waste, without shortchanging education and basic scientific research and road construction, because those things are essential to our future. And it was an approach that said we shouldn't balance the budget on the backs of the poor and the middle class; that for us to solve this problem, everybody, including the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations, have to pay their fair share.
Now, during the debt ceiling debate, I had hoped to negotiate a compromise with the Speaker of the House that fulfilled these principles and achieved the $4 trillion in deficit reduction that leaders in both parties have agreed we need -- a grand bargain that would have strengthened our economy, instead of weakened it. Unfortunately, the Speaker walked away from a balanced package. What we agreed to instead wasn’t all that grand. But it was a start -- roughly $1 trillion in cuts to domestic spending and defense spending.
Everyone knows we have to do more, and a special joint committee of Congress is assigned to find more deficit reduction. So, today, I’m laying out a set of specific proposals to finish what we started this summer -- proposals that live up to the principles I’ve talked about from the beginning. It’s a plan that reduces our debt by more than $4 trillion, and achieves these savings in a way that is fair -- by asking everybody to do their part so that no one has to bear too much of the burden on their own.
All told, this plan cuts $2 in spending for every dollar in new revenues. In addition to the $1 trillion in spending that we’ve already cut from the budget, our plan makes additional spending cuts that need to happen if we’re to solve this problem. We reform agricultural subsidies -- subsidies that a lot of times pay large farms for crops that they don't grow. We make modest adjustments to federal retirement programs. We reduce by tens of billions of dollars the tax money that goes to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. We also ask the largest financial firms -- companies saved by tax dollars during the financial crisis -- to repay the American people for every dime that we spent. And we save an additional $1 trillion as we end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
These savings are not only counted as part of our plan, but as part of the budget plan that nearly every Republican on the House voted for.
Finally, this plan includes structural reforms to reduce the cost of health care in programs like Medicare and Medicaid. Keep in mind we've already included a number of reforms in the health care law, which will go a long way towards controlling these costs. But we're going to have to do a little more. This plan reduces wasteful subsidies and erroneous payments while changing some incentives that often lead to excessive health care costs. It makes prescriptions more affordable through faster approval of generic drugs. We’ll work with governors to make Medicaid more efficient and more accountable. And we’ll change the way we pay for health care. Instead of just paying for procedures, providers will be paid more when they improve results -- and such steps will save money and improve care.
Full Text:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/09/19/remarks-president-economic-growth-and-deficit-reduction
Living Within Our Means and Investing in the Future
The President’s Plan for Economic Growth and Deficit Reduction
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/jointcommitteereport.pdf
This pdf also includes the American Jobs Bill Act which is part of the overall package
I find it rather impressive and don’t see anything that stands out in terms of hurting the middle class and poor. The cuts to Medicare and Medicaid are aimed at providers and there are not any cuts in benefits that I can find.
I also found the section referring to Federal Employee Benefits and it’s pretty uneventful in terms of decreased benefits. [[page 19)
The section on restructuring the tax code is outstanding.
Overall it’s a kick arse plan and I can understand why the Repubs don’t want to see it enacted.….it’s a winner for, We the People, the Country and the President.
The PDF LINK:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/jointcommitteereport.pdf
The more I think about this it's a sad commentary on the times we live, in that the Republicans can't get behind this. It really is a win for the nation.
If they [[Repubs) wanted to make it political all they would have to do is spin it to seem as if it was all their idea in the first place [[they've done it before) and the two competing parties could fight it our that way, while the people were reaping the benefits and rewards.
ACTION: Contact your elected representative and tell them to pass the American Jobs Act now. You can find their office phone listed here, or call the Capitol switchboard at [[202) 224-3121 and ask to be connected. Tell them to PASS THE White House Jobs BILL NOW!
Contact Elected Officials - Address, Phone, Twitter, Email
Posted by Linda H on 7:58 AM
A list of websites, email addresses, twitter accounts and phone numbers for the Senate, members of the House of Representatives, and the White House:
White House
President Barack Obama - [[Democrat) Twitter BarackObama
1600 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE NW WASHINGTON, DC 20500
Web Form: http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/barackobama
Phone: 202-456-1111
Click link for your state to contact your Senators and Representatives
http://www.whatisworking.com/2011/05/contact-congress-address-phone-twitter.html
Please note, the links from previous pages have inexplicably been changed and or disabled, please refer back to this page and I'll monitor the links periodically to make sure they are still working.
Additional Contact Info
Take Action to Support President Obama’s Jobs and Deficit Reduction Proposal
President Obama on Monday gave a speech outlining his Administration’s proposal for the Congressional deficit super-committee. The President’s plan calls for $3 trillion in deficit reduction to be achieved through enacting the American Jobs Act, asking the wealthy to pay their fair share, ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and rationalizing health care spending rather than cutting Medicare or Medicaid benefits. Overall, it is a very good proposal that is being praised by the leaders of the Congressional Progressive Caucus and MoveOn.org, and is being credited with likely pushing the deficit committee discussions to the left. Keep reading for details on the President’s proposal and for ways to contact the twelve members of the deficit super-committee.
The deficit super-committee is charged with proposing by November 23, 2011 $1.5 trillion in deficit reduction over ten years through spending cuts and/or revenue increases. If the Committee is able to agree to a proposal, it would then receive an up-or-down vote, with no filibusters or amendments, in both houses of Congress and must be either signed or vetoed by President Obama. The Committee has twelve members, with six from each party. Any proposal that goes to Congress would have to be approved by at least a 7-5 majority, so at least one Democrat or one
Republican member of the Committee must end up siding with the other party in order to avoid a deadlock. If the Committee does not make a proposal, or Congress rejects the proposal, $1.2 trillion in cuts over ten years starting in 2013 would automatically go into effect. Those automatic cuts would include nearly $500 billion reduction in military spending, but no cuts to Social Security, Medicaid, or beneficiaries of Medicare.
The President, however, has proposed to go much larger than the $1.5 trillion amount required by the previous deficit reduction deal, and to instead seek $3 trillion in deficit reductions and enough budget savings to pay for the American Jobs Act. To achieve this, the President:
* called for passage of the American Jobs Act, which would help stimulate economic recovery by preventing the layoffs of teachers and firefighters; investing $30 billion rebuilding schools and $50 billion in rebuilding rails, roads, and airports; and by extending the payroll tax cut
* proposed $1.5 trillion in additional revenue by asking the wealthy to pay their fair share and closing corporate loopholes
* acknowledged the $1.1 trillion savings that will be achieved through ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan
* sought $320 billion in savings from Medicare and Medicaid achieved through rationalizing health care spending rather than cutting benefits to beneficiaries. The President specifically ruled out increasing the eligibility age for Medicare, and took Social Security off the table
* called for $257 billion in cuts to mandatory government spending programs, including a 50% cut to agricultural subsidies
* vowed to veto any plan that seeks to cut Medicare benefits while not asking the wealthy to pay their fair share
In short, the President’s proposal echoes the three core principles for the deficit reduction super-committee that Winning Progressive discussed previously – prioritizing job creation, increasing revenue from the wealthy, and ensuring there are no cuts to Social Security or Medicare beneficiaries.
Now is the time for us progressives to make our voices heard in support of President Obama’s strong proposal to create jobs and reduce the deficit in a balanced way. Here are the DC phone numbers, and links to other contact information, for each of the twelve members of the deficit super committee. Please contact the members of the deficit and write a letter to your local newspaper editor in support of President
Obama’s American Jobs Act and deficit reduction proposal.
Senator Max Baucus [[D-MT) – [[202) 224-2651
Senator Patty Murray [[D-WA) – [[202) 224-2621
Senator John Kerry [[D-MA) – [[202) 224-2742
Rep. Chris VanHollen [[D-MD)- [[202) 225-5341
Rep. Xavier Becerra [[D-CA) – [[202) 225-6235
Rep. James Clyburn [[D-SC) – [[202) 225-3315
Senator Rob Portman [[R-OH) – [[202) 224-3353
Senator Jon Kyl [[R-AZ) – [[202) 224-4521
Senator Patrick Toomey [[R-PA) – [[202) 224-4254
Rep. Dave Camp [[R-MI) – [[202) 225-3561
Rep. Jeb Hensarling [[R-TX) – [[202) 225-3484
Rep. Fred Upton [[R-MI) – [[202) 225-3761
http://www.winningprogressive.org/take-action-to-support-president-obamas-jobs-and-deficit-reduction-proposal
to be continued...
Letters to the Editor Campaign
One of the best ways to make your voice heard in support of progressive values is to write a letter to your local newspaper editor. If your letter gets published, you will be sending the progressive message to thousands or more of people in your community. And even if it is not published, letters from progressives will help newspaper editors – who also dictate what the newspapers’ editorial slant will be – to realize that the majority shares our progressive values.
Here are some tips for writing letters to the editor [[http://www.winningprogressive.org/tips-for-writing-letters-to-the-editor) and here are some good sample letters [[http://www.winningprogressive.org/published-letters-to-editor)to the editor that got published. Below are links for submitting letters to the editor to newspapers in 23 states – we plan over the near future to post links here for all 50 states.
http://www.winningprogressive.org/letters-to-the-editor-campaign
How To Help
This blog is all about ignoring the Republican media circus. Instead we are spotlighting for the general public the effective legislation and policies that progressives have enacted, and explaining how progressive positions can address the major issues facing our nation. We need you to help us do it:
1.Contact Your Elected Officials
If we want progressive policies to be enacted, it is absolutely critical that we make our voices heard by our elected officials. We will help you do that by providing links to elected officials, and information about policy issues that they need to hear from us on.
2. Write Letters to The Editor
We make it really easy by providing a list of links and e-mail addresses for submitting letters to the editors at newspapers in communities throughout key battleground states. And we recommend key races, issues, and points to write letters about.
3. Contribute To This Blog
Know of an issue that you think we should write about? Want to add a media outlet to our growing list? Have you read a great article or letter to the editor that will encourage others to write one too? We want to hear from you. Send us an email.
4. Spread the Word
Tell others about our blog via Twitter and Facebook. Encourage your family, friends, and neighbors to write letters to the editor too.
http://www.winningprogressive.org/how-to-help
Five unexpected ideas in Obama’s deficit plan
Posted by Brad Plumer at 04:56 PM ET, 09/19/2011
Even if the major elements of President Obama’s jobs-and-deficit proposal don’t pass Congress, the plan still puts forward a flurry of ideas for whittling down the deficit here and there. And some of these policies, since they’re sufficiently off the beaten path, could find their way into law eventually. Here are five of the more unexpected ideas in Obama’s proposal:
Reform the Postal Service. The U.S. Postal Service is teetering on the edge of default, and Congress will need to deal with this issue soon. So the White House is laying out its vision of how to provide relief. Obama’s proposal would ease the USPS’s cash crunch by refunding $6.9 billion in overpayments that the Postal Service has allegedly made to federal retirement programs. The USPS would then get the authority to tackle its long-term financing by restructuring benefit payments, eliminating Saturday mail service and offering “non-postal products” [[whatever that means). Republicans have blasted the proposal as an “accounting gimmick” that wouldn’t do enough to tackle labor costs — remember, the USPS has asked for permission to cut more than 100,000 postal jobs.
Pare back flood insurance. As my colleague Suzy Khimm has reported, plenty of groups have raised questions about the federal government’s habit of subsidizing homeowners who live in flood-prone areas. Why encourage people to live in disaster zones? There are counterarguments here [[some flood-prone coastal areas are economically vital), but the Obama administration comes down somewhere in the middle. The plan would cap certain payments and boost premium payments for second homes or new homes. The result? About $4.2 billion in additional revenue over 10 years.
Full Article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/five-unexpected-ideas-in-obamas-deficit-plan/2011/09/19/gIQAPpm4fK_blog.html
A Challenge:
The Republicans keep insisting tax increases to the wealthy and small businesses will mean a loss of jobs.
1st challenge: Find one Republican who has submitted the name of one business , large or small that has been forced to lay off any workers because of a tax increase or threat of a tax increase.
2nd challenge: Find one Republican who has submitted the name of one business , large or small that has created one job as a result of tax cuts.
Paul Ryan Endorses ‘Unemployment Reform’ That Asks The Jobless To Work More For Less
By Marie Diamond on Sep 19, 2011 at 6:20 pm
In an interview yesterday with Fox News’ Chris Wallace, House Budget Committee Chairman Rep. Paul Ryan [[R-WI) had almost nothing but criticism for President Obama’s jobs plan. “This looks like to me not a very good sign, because it looks like the president wants to move down the class warfare path,” he commented. Ryan did, however, express his support for a program that asks the unemployed to work for no wages while receiving unemployment benefits.
Under the Georgia Works program, Georgians receiving unemployment benefits are matched with employers who provide them with up to eight weeks of training during which they work for free. Instead of being paid by the employer, workers continue to receive their unemployment checks and a $240 stipend to help cover transportation, child care, and other expenses.
According to Ryan, this state program is “something we’re looking at” to replicate on the national level:
[...]
Numbers from the Georgia Department of Labor reveal that there is little to recommend [[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/26/georgia-works-jobs-program_n_937771.html)about the program. Between 2003 and 2010, only 16.4 percent of people that participated in the program were hired by the company that trained them during or at the end of the training period. As of late August, there were only 19 trainees enrolled in Georgia Works.
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/09/19/322861/paul-ryan-endorses-unemployment-reform-that-makes-the-jobless-work-more-for-less/
I’ve stopped being surprised by Republicans but I will forever be perplexed by people who will continue to believe in and vote for folks like this dude.
By the end of 8 years of Bush, many voters seemed to have finally gotten it but some turkey like this comes along that makes Bush look like a “Democratic choir boy” and there are folks falling for his crap like rain from the sky.:rolleyes:
Nebraska GOP Backs Mini-Electorial College Rigging Plan
By Ian Millhiser on Sep 19, 2011 at 5:30 pm
hiser on Sep 19, 2011 at 5:30 pm
Nebraska is one of just two states which allocates its Electoral College votes by congressional district — a fact that enabled President Obama to win one electoral vote in the state despite losing the state as a whole in 2008. The Nebraska Republican Party, however, just voted to twist its own lawmaker’s arms to prevent this from happening again in 2012:
[T]he [Republican state central] committee approved a resolution that would deny party support to any Republican state senator who fails to support legislation returning Nebraska to a winner-take-all presidential electoral vote system.
An ancillary effect of that action, primarily designed to wipe out any Democratic opportunity to pick up the 2nd Congressional District electoral vote for the second presidential election in a row, could be depression of Democratic activity in the Omaha district to [Sen. Ben] Nelson’s disadvantage.
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2011/09/19/322560/nebraska-gop-backs-mini-electorial-college-rigging-plan/
September 17, 2011 10:28 PM What Rick Perry Did to Texas, He Can Do to the Country
By Jonathan Zasloff
Texas unemployment rises to 8.5%, the highest in 24 years. [[h/t TPM).
Meanwhile, in Massachusetts, clearly a basket case due to liberal policies, the unemployment rate has dropped to 7.4%, the lowest in two and a half years.
It should be mentioned that Texas job losses stem from public sector reductions. Since public sector workers like teachers, police officers, and fire fighters don’t count as real people, this should not count against Perry. One of Josh Marshall’s commenters puts it well:
1. Is a Dem trying to take credit for creating jobs by creating public sector jobs? If so, they do not count and must be subtracted from the math.
2. Is a GOPer trying to take credit for creating jobs by creating public sector jobs [[as Perry has done)? If so, then they count, but you must ignore that they were public sector jobs and never speak of it.
3. Is public sector job loss causing a Dem to look like his/her policies are causing unemployment to go up? If so, then they count, but you must ignore that they were public sector jobs and never speak of it.
4. Is public sector job loss causing a GOPer to look like his/her policies are causing unemployment to go up? if so, then they do not count and you must refer to it as controlling the size of and shrinking government.
There is an important point here: current GOP ideology holds that public goods are nonexistent. Police, fire, education, transportation, public works, etc. etc. have no value and add nothing to productivity. Thus, creating these jobs does not count. Simply put, that is a recipe for national decline.
[Cross-posted at The Reality-Based Community]
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/ten-miles-square/2011/09/what_rick_perry_did_to_texas_h032274.php
The Great Regulation Charade
—By Kevin Drum
| Tue Sep. 20, 2011 10:05 AM PDT
So how about that crushing regulatory burden that our business-hating president has imposed on the American economy? Well, not so much, actually: [[http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/09/federal-regulations-are-american-businesses-unduly-burdened/)
During Obama’s first two years in office, 555 new “significant” regulations, or ones that have a cost or benefit of at least $100 million in a year, have been enacted, according to the Office of Management and Budget. Over the eight years that former president George W. Bush was in office about 2,380 regulations were enacted, an average of 595 every two years.
Granted, these are just raw numbers, and some regulations are more onerous than others. But it sure doesn't sound like Team Obama has been a whirlwind of regulatory activity, does it?
[…]
One more time, then, this time with feeling: the big problem faced by businesses today is economic uncertainty, not regulatory uncertainty. Business owners may not like new rules [[who does?), but their real problem is a lack of customers. That's something we could go a long way toward fixing if we really wanted to.
More:
http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2011/09/great-regulation-charade
Hey GOP 2012ers: You Lie!
Edmund D. Fountain/St. Petersburg Times/Zuma
How many times can a candidate peddle falsehoods before it’s okay to use the L-word?
—By David Corn
Tue Sep. 13, 2011 8:45 AM PDT
Let's cut to the chase: The GOP presidential field is a pack of liars.
That sounds like a rather intemperate assessment, the sort of statement that is motivated by bitter partisanship or blinding ideology. But taking a clear-eyed look at both the false statements hurled at Monday's Republican debate [[brought to you by the odd merger of CNN and the Tea Party Express) and those deployed at other times in this still burgeoning primary race, it's difficult to reach any other conclusion. Most of these presidential wannabes are shoveling lies—and forcing fact-checkers to work overtime.
Glenn Kessler, who writes the Washington Post's Fact Checker column, spotted numerous whoppers at Monday's debate. [[It was easy work.) Some examples:
http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/09/hey-gop-2012ers-you-lie
…and yes "Virginia," President Obama has had a few whoppers but compare them to what these folks are saying 24/7…and when they [[Republicans) are presented with the truth, they ignore it, flip flop or move on to another lie. The President on the other hand, is the adult that owns up to mistakes.
Again, and again I will say no one is perfect and when you talk as much as these folk do it’s reasonable to expect something to come out that’s not correct but geeze, louise the lies the GOP tell are deliberate, calculating and harmful to anyone that falls for them. [[and those of us who don't)
Three Years After The Financial Crash, GOP Candidates Revive Desire To Privatize Social Security
By Tanya Somanader on Sep 20, 2011 at 9:30 am
Since jumping in the race, GOP presidential front runner Gov. Rick Perry’s [[TX) radical views on Social Security have garnered the most attention. And for good reason, as Perry lands far to the right of even his most right-wing opponents in calling the entitlement program a unconstitutional “Ponzi scheme.” A fan of secession, Perry even suggested letting individual states “secede” from Social Security altogether.
But Perry’s extremism is taking focus away from the fact that most of the top contenders also embrace a radical idea: Social Security privatization. As the AP reports, most of the top Republicans running are reviving President George W. Bush’s unpopular plan to create private investment accounts for young workers — believing that “workers could get a better return from investing in publicly traded securities.” Indeed, the idea of risking retirement funds in the stock market — three years after the financial crash on Wall Street — is finding a champion in almost ever Republican candidate:
Read More:
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/09/20/322713/gop-candidates-privatization/
What Conservatives Won’t Tell You: Higher Taxes Equal Reinvestment And Jobs
September 20, 2011
By Ray Medeiros
The debate over whether or not to raise taxes on corporate America is about to get a little tense. President Obama laid down his proposal in a steadfast speech yesterday at the White House. He called out Speaker John Boehner, by name regarding his inability to compromise even though he called for compromise.
Also we had Congressman John Flemming [[R-LA) complaining that he only had four hundred thousand dollars left over after using two hundred thousand to feed his family.
What the conservatives do not know or don’t reveal is, higher taxes make businesses re-invest most of their profits into the corporation. Let’s take Congressman Flemming for example, the 400K dollars he has after feeding his family. If he buys another building to expand, or buys a new stove to cook his sandwiches, that 400k is no longer taxable.
His reinvestment creates more jobs. It puts construction guys on the job, or stove manufacturers back on the line etc.
What conservatives never tell you is the only reason a business, like Congressman Flemming owns, hires a person to make sandwiches or work in his UPS store is if there are customers. If there aren’t any customers, he doesn’t hire, and if his business realizes a drop in customers he may even get rid of some of his employees.
This is one of the reasons President Clinton had a booming economy. He raised taxes on the wealthy. Rather than pay the higher tax rate by extracting profits for personal use and having it sit on the sidelines, they re-invested it, creating a chain reaction of jobs.
What we are seeing today is lower taxes leading to owners extracting money rather than reinvesting it. The cash sits on the sidelines in bank accounts, or in their wallets. So let’s raise taxes, and “force” this idle cash back into businesses for reinvestment and create the jobs this country needs.
http://www.politicususa.com/en/higher-taxes-jobs
FDR returns to warn us about Republicans :cool:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUZGkNAUSvY&feature=player_embedded
A few months back I wrote a post about why I choose to be [[and remain an Indie)
this article is an example of another reason.
…and fyi….the title to this article is SNARK!
Talk about folks needing to wake up and smell the coffee, buy a vowel and get a clue…and note the news outlets that are picking up on this crap and pushing it.
Fine, you want to criticize the policies of the President, than do it but when you act like…and I quote “di#ks” doing it, you’re only giving fuel to the enemy.
This is why you so often hear people say, Dems do not know how to win elections and the kicker, it’s not always the candidates fault.
These folks could not sell a tall, cool glass of water to a thirsty man but they think they know how to “push” the President to do what they want….lawd love a duck!!!!!!!!!
CAUTION: Geniuses at work…
by Dennis G.
There are a group of people who sell themselves as “progressives” who have proven over the years that they are complete fools. These are folks with a serious strategic thinking problem. Time after time all they do is rack up failure after failure. Worst of all, they provide wingnuts everywhere perfect foils who can be presented as proof that all folks who believe in progressive goals are idiots.
The damage these clowns do day in and day out is substantial. Like Upper Class Twits from a Monty Python sketch, they just keep walking into the same wall over and over again with gusto. All the while, their comic failure works to make any effort at progress all the more difficult. These fools regularly repeat whatever wingnut talking point they are fed and then think they are having an original thought. Even racist framing is OK if they think it will help them hit the same wall with a little more force. These fools would be worthy only of derisive laughter if they hadn’t proven to be such effective tools for destruction.
Full Article:
http://www.balloon-juice.com/2011/09/19/caution-geniuses-at-work/#comment-2786177
...geeze and after going though some of the comments I'm even more amazed....
Anyone who thinks these folks can't do any harm can't remember history.
Kennedy primaried Carter...Carter lost
heck Reagan primaried Ford....Ford lost to Carter
It is NOT strategically sound to primary a sitting president, even if you're only doing it as a protest.
THINK about all the impressionable voters out here, all the ones that fall for anything they are told...
THINK about all the progressive who urged Dems not to vote in 2010....look what that got ya
In a democracy people should stand up for the principles they believe in but when you deliberately try to sink a candidate from your own party and call it teaching him a lesson or pushing him in the direction YOU want them to go.... your principles could get you a Republican....so much for your principles.
Progressives DO NOT make up a majority in this country, if they did you would have more Left Progressives in politics and in office. Pushing the country backward while you're trying to get more progressives is a very ineffective strategy...the math isn't going to work in your favor.
It takes hard work and years to move the consciousness of the American electorate...if you can't put in the effort and time than get the heck out of the game...because you're not the solution only part of the problem.
I'm going to say one last thing about this and then I'm going to move on.
Young people played a MAJOR role in getting President Obama elected. You may not think internet chatter is important but these kids do. They get a great deal of their info from the net and they pass it on to their friends, who pass it on to their friends.
These kids are young, impressionable and idealistic as heck. Understanding grays areas or the need to compromise is not something they have learned to grasp yet. So when I see this kind of thing I get annoyed as all heck. Dems need these kids...they helped work to build the Obama grassroots organization and they came out in droves. If they continue to be fed crap and BS, the Dems will lose their votes and with all the rigging and voter reg laws being changed or efforts made to change things....every vote will count in 2012....every vote will be needed.
I'm not half as annoyed with the kids though, I was young and idealistic once so I get it but Nader and West and even that fool Tavis Smiley should know better....and somehow, I think they do!
People will rant about all the "broken" campaign promises of the Obama Admin. Closing Gitmo is one of them but have you noticed the reasons are not pushed as much as the "broken promise meme"?
Are We Paying Attention?
Holder: We're Still Trying To Close Gitmo
—By Adam Serwer
| Tue Sep. 20, 2011 9:15 AM PDT
The Obama administration is still committed to closing the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Attorney General Eric Holder told the European Parliament's civil liberties committee on Tuesday:
"We will be pressing for the closure of the facility between now and then - and after that election, we will try to close it as well," Holder said. "Some people have made this a political issue without looking at, I think, the real benefits that would flow from the closure of the facility."
This seems optimistic on Holder's part, and not just because it assumes Barack Obama will be reelected. He's certainly right that partisan politics is a big reason the facility remains open.
Although there was once bipartisan agreement between 2008 candidates Barack Obama and John McCain on closing Gitmo, opposition to moving the detainees to American soil turned out to be even more bipartisan. Shortly after Obama's election Democrats voted to deny the administration funds for closing the facility, and since then Congress has tried to impose more restrictions on the administration's abilities to transfer detainees out of the facility, whether to third countries or to federal courts for trial. Civil liberties groups also balked at the administration's decision to retain and therefore ratify the Bush-era policy of indefinite detention, and panned the administration's plan to move the detainees to a federal prison in Illinois as "Gitmo North."
More:
http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/09/holder-were-still-trying-close-gitmo
VIDEO: Message Discipline — The GOP Wages ‘Class Warfare’
By Jeff Spross on Sep 20, 2011 at 4:15 pm
Yesterday, President Obama put forward a new plan to reduce the federal deficit by $3.2 trillion over the next decade. One highlight of the plan — along with the expiration of the Bush tax cuts for the top two tax brackets — is a new minimum tax for millionaires. This has been termed “the Buffet rule,” in honor of billionaire investor Warren Buffet, who often highlights the injustice of our current tax code with the example that he pays a lower tax rate than his secretary.
The plan had not even been officially unveiled when a number of politicians, including Sen. Lindsey Graham [[R-SC) and Rep. Paul Ryan [[R-WI), emerged on the Sunday news show circuit to denounce the new rule as “class warfare.” From there, a whole host of both conservative politicians and media personalities coalesced around the talking point with remarkable speed, ubiquitousness, and consistency.
Read More:
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/09/20/323536/video-message-discipline/
I’m willing to bet many of the people coming to this thread and seeing this crap, KNOW it’s stupid. So why do the Republicans keep pushing this crap?
Because they are NOT TALKING TO YOU.
I post it because you should be aware of what they are feeding their base. The same base that will vote in the national election. How can you counteract a talking point, without knowing what the talking point is?
Natural Trade Cycle.
For a long time it was felt that economic growth was subject to a natural cycle of high growth [[booms) followed by low growth or recession. It was felt that it was not possible for intervention to prevent these cycles. However, in recent decades, it appears that economic cycles have become less pronounced; i.e. booms less noticeable, but recessions shorter and deeper. Therefore, although it is not possible to smooth the business cycle, it is possible to minimize fluctuations so as to avoid an actual downturn.
http://www.economicshelp.org/2008/07/can-recessions-be-avoided.html
Basically what this says to me, it’s natural for an economy to have a boom and bust cycle but it’s also possible to minimize the affects of both.
Well the question could be asked, why would anyone want to minimize a boom cycle? My answer would be to quote Newton’s Law of Motion: “To every action there is always an equal and opposite reaction.”
During the Clinton years, we saw an incredible booming economy…an extreme that was unprecedented…people were basically happy and prosperous; home ownership skyrocketed and crime went down. However the keyword is extreme…
"To every action there is always an equal and opposite reaction”
What was the extreme action that initiated the extreme boom and the opposite and equal extreme action that triggered the bust? That’s not an easy question to answer because there are many complex, as well as not so complex reasons but there is one action that seems to be consistent to both extremes.
The video may help to explain:
FRONTLINE: The Warning - Long before the meltdown, one woman tried to warn about a threat to the financial system.
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/BrookslyBornTheWarning-1.jpg
Click here for video:
http://video.pbs.org/video/1302794657/#
I’m not trying to assign blame. Sometime we get too caught up in pointing fingers [[and that includes me) but I think it’s important to understand the events that lead us here. This understanding, I hope will give us a different perspective. I’m also hoping if we can find ways to look at an event like our economy through a different perspective and or lens, we will also find ways to broaden our perspective in other areas and events.
Techies, the Whitehouse and Winning the Future
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/9b6c7e78.jpg
This is too cool. I don’t have an iphone but a friend of mine does and she’s all excited because an ad came through on her iphone Pandora app
She said;
It was complete with the President's voice asking me to call Congress to urge them to pass his jobs bill. "Learn about it, fight for it!"
It’s paid for by the Democratic National Committee
THAT’S how you use social media.:cool:
ACTION: Contact your elected representative and tell them to pass the American Jobs Act now. You can find their office phone listed here, or call the Capitol switchboard at [[202) 224-3121 and ask to be connected. Tell them to PASS THE White House Jobs BILL NOW!
Contact Elected Officials - Address, Phone, Twitter, Email
Posted by Linda H on 7:58 AM
A list of websites, email addresses, twitter accounts and phone numbers for the Senate, members of the House of Representatives, and the White House:
White House
President Barack Obama - [[Democrat) Twitter BarackObama
1600 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE NW WASHINGTON, DC 20500
Web Form: http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/barackobama
Phone: 202-456-1111
Click link for your state to contact your Senators and Representatives
http://www.whatisworking.com/2011/05/contact-congress-address-phone-twitter.html
..........
Fact-Checking The Fact-Checkers: The AP Releases Misleading Analysis Of Obama’s Tax Plan
By Pat Garofalo on Sep 20, 2011 at 5:05 pm
As part of his deficit reduction plan, President Obama has proposed some tax increases on the wealthiest Americans, which would come via allowing the Bush tax cuts for the two highest tax brackets to expire and implementing the “Buffett rule,” which stipulates that millionaires and billionaires shouldn’t pay a lower tax rate than middle-class Americans.
Republicans have predictably, blown their collective top over the Buffett rule. And today, they were aided by a bizarre Associated Press “fact-check,” [[http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iP3lhS4ZQ-UhyUvFfUgdPCiu-jJA?docId=47a565563a294b2bad96544a7f0ddc1b)which purported to reveal something disingenuous about Obama’s plan.
“President Barack Obama says he wants to make sure millionaires are taxed at higher rates than their secretaries. The data say they already are [[http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iP3lhS4ZQ-UhyUvFfUgdPCiu-jJA?docId=47a565563a294b2bad96544a7f0ddc1b),” the AP wrote, noting that the average tax rate for those in the highest tax brackets is, of course, higher than the average rate for middle-class or low-income Americans.
This is not surprising, and it certainly doesn’t make the Buffett rule any less relevant. After all, as Center for American Progress Action Fund Director of Fiscal Reform Seth Hanlon wrote, “tons of data — including data cited in the AP article itself — confirm the compelling need for a Buffett rule because large numbers of super-rich individuals are indeed paying lower taxes than middle-class families“:
[[http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/09/millionaire_tax_rates.html)
– 1,470 households reported income of more than $1 million in 2009 but paid zero federal income tax on it.
– The average federal income tax rate of the richest 400 people in the country in 2008 was 18.11 percent. In 2007 it was 16.62 percent. [...] The tax rates paid by the “Fortunate 400” have plummeted since the mid-1990s, when their average effective rates were about 30 percent. [...]
– Due to the so-called carried interest loophole, managers of hedge funds and private equity funds pay 15 percent capital gains rates, and no payroll taxes, on their profits from managing other people’s money. That’s less than what middle-class families pay just in payroll taxes on their wages — let alone what they pay in income taxes.
As Hanlon noted, “AP’s ‘fact check’ misses the point [[http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/09/millionaire_tax_rates.html)of the Buffett rule. The point is not to ensure that rich people on average pay higher taxes than middle-class people on average,” but “to ensure that all households with incomes above $1 million pay at least what middle-class families are paying.”
This is not the first time this month that the AP’s “fact-checkers” have bungled the facts [[http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/09/09/315760/associated-press-fact-checkers-bungle-the-facts-about-obamas-jobs-plan-being-paid-for/)regarding Obama’s economic plans. At this rate, they should think about opening a new division to fact-check the fact-checkers.
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/09/20/324189/ap-fact-check-obama-taxes/
Someone needs to ask the Republicans....why are they not "fact checking" and fighting as hard for the middle class, as they are for the rich?
Fox's Brit Hume: Who Cares If Income Inequality Is High? [[VIDEO)
David Taintor | September 20, 2011, 9:56AM
Bill O'Reilly isn't buying President Obama's push for the wealthiest Americans to pay their "fair share." In fact, "it's really starting to annoy" him.
"I just think the whole thing is bogus," O'Reilly said on his show Monday. And worse, Democrats just want to "take from people who have," he said. "They believe that's moral and that's right."
Fox News analyst Brit Hume agrees, saying that Democrats want to close the income inequality gap in order to create a more "just society."
"Sometimes it can appear that the Democrats -- some Democrats -- would rather have everyone equally poor than unequally rich," Hume said. "That's obviously an exaggeration on my part, but you do that get that sense because of their obsession with this question of inequality. If [[income) inequality is at a very much higher level, who cares?"
http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/09/brit-hume-who-cares-if-income-inequality-is-high-video.php?ref=fpc
In a general sense one could say these two are irrelevant until you remember the people that watch them VOTE!
99% of the people in this country are either middle class or poor
1% of the people in this country are neither but…
To these folks…
Equality = bad
Inequality = good
…and creating a “just society” is a big no, no
At what point will we get the message? How many times do we have to be slapped upside the head with this type of thinking before we do something about it? How many excuses can we make not to get involved, pick up a phone, send an email, a fax?
I was reading something earlier about Nader and West and apprently the reason they don't care if the country goes to hell is because they think that's the ONLY way people will wake up, get the message and the consciousness of the American electorate will finally change.
I don't know what's more pathetic, their thinking, or the fact they may be right!
Part II: Middle class hanging by thread as rich get richer, poor get poorer
By David Giffels
Beacon Journal staff writer
THIS COULD BE YOU.
This could be you sitting in the living room of a house that you'd never notice otherwise, a low brick suburban thing, the inside walls painted with care by the people who've made it their home, with a dog resting on the floor and a pair of cats trolling for attention.
This could be you telling your story, about a husband and wife who tumbled off their middle-class foundation, who thought they did everything right, who keep spreadsheets and budgets, who pay all their bills, who work hard and bring home a decent paycheck, whose debt is not out of the ordinary.
Not out of the ordinary. You don't read much of that in the newspaper. You read about victims and fools, people who lost everything or screwed up big time — people nothing like you.
But these two — there's nothing unusual about them at all. They get up in the morning, they go to work, they work hard, their effort is valued by their employers, they bring home their money and they pay it into their house and their cars and their taxes and their groceries and their medicine.
There's no American dream in that. It's the standard agreement. They went to college, they work in offices, they each bring home thirty-some thousand dollars a year. They bought a house for $150,000; in the two-car garage is a 12-year-old SUV and a 6-year-old economy sedan with eight payments left.
There's no fancy jewelry, no steroidal television set. They play by the rules.
This could be you agreeing to tell your story as long as the newspaper doesn't use your name, asking to be anonymous because you are anonymous — that's all you ever wanted — and you want to stay that way, because you are so ordinary that no one would ever suspect you'd gone bankrupt, a condition you describe as ''the dirty little secret of the middle class.''
You're ashamed. You're embarrassed. You, the one who does the household finances, you feel like you've let the other down. You look at your preschooler and you wonder whether you've cost him some future you never even got a chance to plan.
You look at each other, and even though you know with cold hard reason exactly how you got here, you still wonder:
How did we get here?
Full Article:
http://www.ohio.com/news/middle-class-hanging-by-thread-as-rich-get-richer-poor-get-poorer-1.65248
Part I: Meet the family: Census data form American portrait
This is the story of an American family three generations, in fact.
It's a tale spanning more than five decades. But the ending hasn't been written yet.
Don't expect a photo album of snapshots. There aren't any cameras in the world where this family is found. That's because its members exist only in the millions of records of data collected by the U.S. Census Bureau.
But these people are as real as the individuals who dutifully answer the scores of questions on census forms.
More:
http://www.ohio.com/news/meet-the-family-census-data-form-american-portrait-1.65250
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/image-1.jpg
Video- Martin Bashir: The battle is over and the middle classes have lost.
http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/2011/09/20/video-martin-bashir-the-battle-is-over-and-the-middle-classes-have-lost/
Martin Bashir has never been on any of my lists of respected journalists and I disagree that the middle class have lost….as long as you’re breathing, you are winning…although I do suspect many folks are in a coma…but be that as it may…and aside from the defeatist comment, Bashir is right on! Are We Paying Attention?
In the late 1970’s, 1% of the population received 9% of the nations income
Now, 1% of the population receives 23.5% of the nation's income.
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/untitled-9.jpg
Did they play by the rules more than you?
Did they work harder than you?
President Obama is proposing a higher tax on households in which $1 million or more per year is earned.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/09/19/michael-tomasky-obama-out-to-expose-gop-s-class-warfare-sham.html
It boggles the mind when I hear people say President Obama is the worse president ever , he hasn’t done anything or he has no spine and is weak…..Hell…if a person of that description can accomplish the following….I wish there were more like him
“The campaign for some form of universal government-funded health care has stretched for nearly a century in the US On several occasions, advocates believed they were on the verge of success; yet each time they faced defeat.”
http://www.pnhp.org/facts/a_brief_history_universal_health_care_efforts_in_t he_us.php?page=all
And then, along comes an obscure first term US Senator, who defeated the wife of a popular former president, a popular, long term senator, and in 2009 was sworn in as President…the first Black President of the United States.....
His first MAJOR piece of legislation is what?...... Universal Health Care....
He also stopped the bleeding of the worst economic recession since the great depression
Saved the collapse of the American automotive industry
Shifted the focus of the war from Iraq to Afghanistan and gave the order to take out Bin Laden
Appointed the first Latina to the Supreme Court
Authorized construction/opening of additional health centers to care for veterans
Closed offshore tax safe havens
Ended media “blackout” on war casualties; reporting full information
Ended previous policy of awarding no-bid defense contracts
Ended previous policy of cutting the FDA and circumventing FDA rules
Ended previous practice of forbidding Medicare from negotiating with drug manufacturers for cheaper drugs; the federal government is now realizing hundreds of millions in savings
Ended previous policy of not regulating and labeling carbon dioxide emissions
Ended previous policy of offering tax benefits to corporations who outsource American jobs; the new policy is to promote in-sourcing to bring jobs back
Ended previous policy on torture; the US now has a no torture policy and is in compliance with the Geneva Convention standards
Ended previous practice of protecting credit card companies; in place of it are new consumer protections from credit card industry’s predatory practices
Ended previous “stop-loss” policy that kept soldiers in Iraq/Afghanistan longer than their enlistment date
Implemented a program whereby energy producing plants must begin preparing to produce 15% of their energy from renewable sources
Established a National Performance Officer charged with saving the federal government money and making federal operations more efficient
Established a new cyber security office
Expanded the SCHIP program to cover health care for 4 million more children
Expanding vaccination programs
Made sure families of fallen soldiers receive expenses
Provided the Department of Veterans Affairs [[VA) with more than $1.4 billion to improve services to America’s Veterans.
Established Federal support for stem-cell and new biomedical research
Established funds for high-speed, broadband Internet access to K-12 schools
Immediate and efficient response to natural disasters
Launched Business.gov – enabling conversation and online collaboration between small business owners, government representatives and industry experts in discussion forums relevant to starting and managing a business. Great for the economy.
Improved housing for military personnel
Donated his $1.4 million Nobel Prize to nonprofits.
Increased pay and benefits for military personnel
Increased student loans
Instituted a new policy on Cuba, allowing Cuban families to return “home” to visit loved ones
Provided tax credits to first-time home buyers through the Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act of 2009 to revitalize the U.S. housing market.
Cracked down on companies that deny sick pay, vacation and health insurance to workers by abusing the employee classification of independent contractor. Such companies also avoid paying Social Security, Medicare and unemployment insurance taxes for those workers.
Protected 300,000 education jobs, such as teachers, principals, librarians, and counselors through the Recovery Act that would have otherwise been lost
His Children’s Health Insurance Re-authorization Act on February 4, 2009, provides quality health care to 11 million kids – 4 million who were previously uninsured.
Lowered drug costs for seniors
Made more loans available to small businesses
Signed the Christopher and Dana Reeve Paralysis Act, the first piece of comprehensive legislation aimed at improving the lives of Americans living with paralysis
Negotiated deal with Swiss banks to permit US government to gain access to records of tax evaders and criminals
Is phasing out the expensive F-22 war plane and other outdated weapons systems, which weren’t even used or needed in Iraq/Afghanistan
Provided tax credit to workers thus cutting taxes for 95% of America’s working families
Provided attractive tax write-offs for those who buy hybrid automobiles.
Returned money authorized for refurbishment of White House offices and private living quarters
Sent envoys to Middle East and other parts of the world that had been neglected for years; reengaging in multilateral and bilateral talks and diplomacy
Signed national service legislation; expanded national youth service program
Signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act
Gave the order that ensured the successful release of US captain held by Somali pirates;
Increased US Navy patrols off Somali coast
Negotiated the release of 6 Israeli’s in Egypt
….and I will be happy to post more upon request;)
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.