The Only Adult In The Room

[ms_m]

I placed the link to this site in another thread but decided it should have it's own separate thread. Thought it would make it easier for people who were interested in accessing positive and factual information on the Obama Administration. I also like the name of the site.

The Only Adult In The Room

About:
This blog was created out of necessity. When the best American president in decades is treated with complete disrespect and viciousness by a corrupted media and crazy racists from the right, and when many of his "supporters" simply joined them - Those who follow the facts, know the truth and understand the unprecedented hate machine that works against him - must step up and do something.

So, this is my modest effort. This blog provides news, photos, videos, links, and any available information that can help spread the truth about Barack Obama's presidency.

Comments are moderated, so if you're in the business of bashing and trashing this president - don't waste your hate here. The Internet is full with places for you.
But, if you believe in the intelligence, the decency, the grace, the courage and the big heart of Barack Obama - Please stay, enjoy and love.

Welcome,

BWD.

Obama's Achievements Center

Another extremely well sourced site by a group of volunteers

About:
We are a team of about 100 volunteers dedicated to countering the constant negative drumbeat of our mainstream media. In the past two years, over 400 steps forward have been taken by the Obama administration, yet the media continues to focus on the negative.

I like this site because it breaks up his achievements in specific categories. This makes it easy to navigate depending on your interest.

[paladin]

Thanks M, the site is like a breath of fresh air. I liked the comments by Joe Biden.......
oh hell yes.......

[ms_m]

BTW

The young lady operating, The Only Adult In The Room site
updates it rather frequently. You can sign up to receive newsletters that will come directly to your email box. This makes it handy to pass along the info to your friends and family. This also saves you the step of having to go to directly to the site.

We really are the ones we've been waiting for . Help do what MSM[[main stream media) is not doing, reporting all the facts, reporting all the truth.

Pass it on!

[ms_m]

You're welcome Kdub.

The young lady was posting on another political forum and you would not believe the hate she was receiving. It was a Democratic blog.

I'm happy she decided to break away and do her own thing.

[paladin]

Me too.........thanks again, it may be cliché but I believe the truth will set you free.....doesn't really matter if you like it or not, but as long as its available I'll take advantage of it over a lie anyday.......

[ms_m]

So many people are trying to compare the hate and vitriol, President Obama is receiving to Bill Clinton but never in my life have I seen anything like I'm seeing today. When a Democratic blog starts throwing out blatant racist rants, you know we have jumped the shark.

Sadly this sort of thing is filtering back into the media and too many people are not getting the truth. It's great to see ordinary citizens taking the time to fight back.

Much is going on out here that people are not seeing because of all the divisive tactics . Then there are all the shiny baubles being thrown our way to keep our attention diverted.

Not sure what will happen over the next two years but there isn't any reason we should have to wait for history, to validate President Obama's achievements.

[ms_m]

Weekly Address: President Obama Delivers Thanksgiving Greeting

THE PRESIDENT:
.... This is not the hardest Thanksgiving America has ever faced. But as long as many members of our American family are hurting, we’ve got to look out for one another. As long as many of our sons and daughters and husbands and wives are at war, we’ve got to support their mission and honor their service. And as long as many of our friends and neighbors are looking for work, we’ve got to do everything we can to accelerate this recovery and keep our economy moving forward.

And we will. But we won’t do it as any one political party. We’ve got to do it as one people. And in the coming weeks and months, I hope that we can work together, Democrats and Republicans and Independents alike, to make progress on these and other issues.

That’s why, next week, I’ve invited the leadership of both parties to the White House for a real and honest discussion – because I believe that if we stop talking at one another, and start talking with one another, we can get a lot done.
For what we are called to do again today isn’t about Democrats or Republicans. It’s not about left or right. It’s about us. It’s about what we know this country is capable of. It’s about what we want America to be in this new century.

A vibrant nation that makes sure its children are the best-educated in the world. A healthy, growing economy that runs on clean energy and creates the jobs of tomorrow. A responsible government that reduces its deficits. An America where every citizen is able to go as far as he or she desires.
We can do all this, because we’ve done it before. We’re made of the same sturdy stuff as the travelers who sat down to the first Thanksgiving, and all who came after – who worked, and sacrificed, and invested, because they believed that their efforts would make the difference for us.
That’s who we are. We shape our own destiny with conviction, compassion, and clear and common purpose. We honor our past and press forward with the knowledge that tomorrow will be better than today. We are Americans. That’s the vision we won’t lose sight of. That’s the legacy that falls to our generation. That’s the challenge that together, we are going to meet.

To every American, I am thankful for the privilege of being your President. To all our service members stationed around the world, I am honored to be your Commander-in-Chief. And from the Obama family to yours, have a very Happy Thanksgiving. Thank you.

[jillfoster]

I, too... have noticed the ramping up of hatred towards Obama, and you ain't foolin me, I know what's behind it. These right wing pundits just spew forth disinformation day after day after day. And their listeners march along like sheep to the slaughter. I was channel surfing yesterday, and came upon Rush Limbaugh pontificating about regulations placed on hunters and farmers... and new proposed legislation that would require small producer to be registered, so any problems with the food supply could be quickly tracked and fixed. He was of course, rallying against it... saying these sarcastic things like "What did our country ever DO! How did our ancestors SURVIVE without all the government agencies telling them what to do and how to do it??!!" Well... Rush, I'll tell you what our ancestors did:

1: They plowed up ALL the prairie without any buffer zones and created the dust bowl.

2: Subequent destruction of said prairie led to the near extinction of the prairie chicken, a bird that would be TREASURED by today's hunters as a delicacy without equal, according to my grandparents.

3: They hunted the passenger pigeon to extinction.

4: They hunted white tail deer to scarcity [[300,000 total in 1930) until the government stepped in, and today, hunters enjoy a bounty of nearly 30 MILLION animals.

5: They clear cut ALL of the old growth forest, causing the extinction of the Imperial woodpecker and Ivory Billed woodpecker [[there may be a handful of ivory bill left).

6: They let coal fired plants belch smoke into the air unregulated for decades, and now the department of conservation here warns against children and pregnant women eating largemouth bass over 12 inches long due to mercury.

And that's just a small sample.

[ms_m]

Much to often we forget the environmental destruction, thanks for the reminder JillFoster.

[ms_m]

"We All Fall Down"
by RenaRF

I was literally moved by this commercial - I saw it this morning on CNN and was riveted, waiting to find out what the commercial was for.



CLICK HERE FOR VIDEO


I have been literally appalled at the vitriol I've seen - particularly on the right - about the GM Bailout. At a time when unemployment was rising precipitously, the Obama Administration made the decision to give GM - and auto workers across the American auto industry - a hand up.

It is estimated that the bailout saved 1.14 million jobs. It's a shame that the American public doesn't really do nuance - it's a shame that proving a negative in jobs NOT lost, doesn't resonate. It's a shame further that the hatred the Republican party shows for the working middle class in America stands largely unchallenged on a broader stage.

In addition to being a supporter of the saving of the US auto industry, I was really relieved to hear President Obama's remarks on the subject:

So here’s the lesson: Don't bet against America. [[Applause.) Don't bet against the American auto industry. Don't bet against American ingenuity. Don't bet against the American worker. Don't bet against us. [[Applause.) Don't bet against us. [[Applause.)

I don't agree with everything this President has done and/or, sometimes, the way he's chosen to do it - but I have been and remain solidly behind the assistance given to GM and I am thrilled to see the President taking it to the Republicans on this issue. The short version of his speech, to me, could be this: "Why do the Republicans hate the American middle class?"

Indeed. That's the frame I hope is shaping up over the next two years - and one we should all be focusing on and repeating.

[jillfoster]

"We All Fall Down"
by RenaRF

I was literally moved by this commercial - I saw it this morning on CNN and was riveted, waiting to find out what the commercial was for.



CLICK HERE FOR VIDEO


I have been literally appalled at the vitriol I've seen - particularly on the right - about the GM Bailout. At a time when unemployment was rising precipitously, the Obama Administration made the decision to give GM - and auto workers across the American auto industry - a hand up.

It is estimated that the bailout saved 1.14 million jobs. It's a shame that the American public doesn't really do nuance - it's a shame that proving a negative in jobs NOT lost, doesn't resonate. It's a shame further that the hatred the Republican party shows for the working middle class in America stands largely unchallenged on a broader stage.

In addition to being a supporter of the saving of the US auto industry, I was really relieved to hear President Obama's remarks on the subject:

So here’s the lesson: Don't bet against America. [[Applause.) Don't bet against the American auto industry. Don't bet against American ingenuity. Don't bet against the American worker. Don't bet against us. [[Applause.) Don't bet against us. [[Applause.)

I don't agree with everything this President has done and/or, sometimes, the way he's chosen to do it - but I have been and remain solidly behind the assistance given to GM and I am thrilled to see the President taking it to the Republicans on this issue. The short version of his speech, to me, could be this: "Why do the Republicans hate the American middle class?"

Indeed. That's the frame I hope is shaping up over the next two years - and one we should all be focusing on and repeating.

I tell you why the republican hatred for the middle class doesn't resonate. It's because they are blinded by the smokescreen of abortion and other social issues. Many people don't care if the republicans screw them financially, they vote the straight abortion ticket. They think that the republicans are all about God and guns, and saving babies, and keeping those fags from getting married. And as long as most of them have jobs to go to, they don't give a crap. Even if the money is coming out of their back pocket, as long as it's not coming out of the front, they seem to not notice.

[soulster]

I tell you why the republican hatred for the middle class doesn't resonate. It's because they are blinded by the smokescreen of abortion and other social issues. Many people don't care if the republicans screw them financially, they vote the straight abortion ticket. They think that the republicans are all about God and guns, and saving babies, and keeping those fags from getting married. And as long as most of them have jobs to go to, they don't give a crap. Even if the money is coming out of their back pocket, as long as it's not coming out of the front, they seem to not notice.

In short, most people are morons. No wonder I don't like people.

[ms_m]

JillFoster I agree but IMO, it goes beyond what you've stated. All those things you talk about are true, they exist but they are wedge issues.

Here is a wiki entry explaining wedge issues. I think it's a pretty decent breakdown on the subject.

I also think it's an interesting read, something to think about for a day or two because, in order to see and understand the big picture, you need to see and understand all the underlining issues that contribute to the big picture.

A wedge issue is a social or political issue, often of a divisive or otherwise controversial nature, which splits apart or creates a "wedge" in the support base of one political group. Wedge issues can be advertised, publicly aired, and otherwise emphasized by an opposing political group, in an attempt to weaken the unity of the divided group, or to entice voters in the divided group to give their support to the opposing group. The use of wedge issues gives rise to wedge politics.

Wedge politics are the key to understanding the behavior of both candidates and voters during political campaigns. Among the voters most likely to be responsive to campaign information are those with conflicting predispositions—partisans who disagree with their party on a policy issue. For these cross-pressured partisans, campaign messages from the opposition can be persuasive if they are focused on the incongruent issue. Politicians look for wedge issues to emphasize in the campaign so that they can exploit the very tensions that create the opportunity for campaigns to “matter.” We argue that recent changes in the amount and type of information available about the mass public has increased the use of wedge politics and contributed to more fragmented and polarized issue agendas as candidates now micro-target different issue messages to different groups of voters in an effort to win over cross-pressured swing voters.

Political parties are usually fairly diverse groups though they will always try to project a united front. A wedge issue may often be a point of internal dissent within the opposing party, which that party tries to suppress or ignore talking about because it divides "the base." Such issues are typically a cultural or populist issue, relating to matters such as crime, national security, sexuality [[e.g. gay marriage), or race. Another party may exploit this dissent by publicly supporting the issue, and in effect align itself with the dissenting faction of the opposing party. A wedge issue, when wielded against another party, is intended to bring about such things as:

* A debate, often vitriolic, within the opposing party, giving the public a perception of disarray.
* The defection of supporters of the opposing party's minority faction to the other party [[or independent parties) if they lose the debate.
* The legitimizing of sentiment which, while perhaps popularly held, is usually considered inappropriate or politically incorrect; criticisms from the opposition then make it appear beholden to special interests or fringe ideology.
* In an extreme case, a wedge issue might contribute to the actual fracture of the opposing party as another party spins off, taking voters with it.

To prevent these three consequences from occurring, the opposing party may attempt to take a "pragmatic" stand and officially endorse the views of its minority faction. However, this can lead to the defection of supporters of the opposing party's majority faction to a third party, should they lose the debate.

[ms_m]

JillFoster, after you have gotten a handle on the wedge issues, Here are a few more topics I’d like to share.
I’m not trying to tell you or anyone what to believe or not believe, my only goal is to share information.

How you analyze and process the info, is up to you. [[collective you)

This is a small excerpt from Michael Moore, film maker [[I get email updates from his organization from time to time) I’m sure the entire message is on the net but I only wanted to highlight one point.

This is key point in IMO
They were, in fact, scared of you. They were afraid YOU would end up pushing them over their own greedy cliff.

Last Thoughts Before the Turkey Comes Calling
Michael Moore

As I head off for Thanksgiving, I wanted to share a final thought with you about this past week's news regarding the health care executives who sat around that table in Philadelphia four years ago and decided on a course of action to, if need be, "push Michael Moore off a cliff."

Having spent the week reading all their secret documents [[and the book "Deadly Spin"), it's clear that there was something far more scary to these companies than me.
They were, in fact, scared of you. They were afraid YOU would end up pushing them over their own greedy cliff.

if you’re not familiar with what Moore is referring to, check out this Bill Moyer video.

Wendell Potter on Profits Before Patients


JillFoster my belief is, what happened to Michael Moore is important to understand because what the Insurance Industry attempted to do to Moore, is not an isolated incident. It spreads throughout all Corporate Powers and I’m not talking about, Illuminati, Bilderberg Group , conspiracy theory stuff , I’m talking about out in the open, substantiated issues, that are not being reported in the MSM on a wide basis.

Covert Operations
The billionaire brothers who are waging a war against Obama.

Now although the above link focuses on President Obama, I think it's a lot deeper than the President or even politics. Again, no conspiracy theory, but plain old fashion GREED!

More info to come but this is enough to get those brain juices flowing.

[ms_m]

The Kochs are longtime libertarians who believe in drastically lower personal and corporate taxes, minimal social services for the needy, and much less oversight of industry—especially environmental regulation. These views dovetail with the brothers’ corporate interests.

The Republican campaign consultant said of the family’s political activities, “To call them under the radar is an understatement. They are underground!” Another former Koch adviser said, “They’re smart. This right-wing, redneck stuff works for them. They see this as a way to get things done without getting dirty themselves.” Rob Stein, a Democratic political strategist who has studied the conservative movement’s finances, said that the Kochs are “at the epicenter of the anti-Obama movement. But it’s not just about Obama. They would have done the same to Hillary Clinton. They did the same with Bill Clinton. They are out to destroy progressivism.”

JillFoster, the Koch Brothers are not the only players in the game




Justice Defends Ruling on Finance

Justice Thomas responded to several questions from students at Stetson University College of Law in Gulfport, Fla., concerning the campaign finance case, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. By a 5-to-4 vote, with Justice Thomas in the majority, the court ruled last month that corporations had a First Amendment right to spend money to support or oppose political candidates.

The ruling quoted above unleashed what could be considered one of the most unprecedented moments in our history. This ruling opened up the door for ANY major corporation to influence elections with their money and, it also opens the door for interested parties outside this country to influence our elections.

4billion dollars was funneled into the midterm elections, the largest amount of money spent ever, in an election in the US. Let me repeat 4 Billion dollars. I’ll give you one guess which party this money was funneled to, and it wasn’t the party that lost, or as the President would say, took a “shellacking.”

In another post I said, I thought this went beyond politics and in many ways I do believe that because not everyone throwing money at the Republicans is a Republican. There are many different political agendas and ideologies in the mix. The one thing the majority of them have in common is GREED, but whoever is on top is the greediest. Who do you think that would be? I’ll give you another hint the folks at the top of the food chain are not the…Republican Party, Democratic Part or Tea Party.

The folks at the very top of the food chain, are manipulating all of us because as Michael Moore said, they are scared of us [[the American People) If we the people finally wake up and stop letting things divide and distract us, we will turn on these corporations like white on rice. They are not afraid we will finally wake up and start a revolution; they are afraid we will wake up and start thinking instead of reacting to those emotional hot buttons they keep throwing out to keep us divided and distracted.

They are afraid we will wake up and realize, there really is a way for us to take back our country. Wake up and realize that although right now, neither party is totally free of corruption there is one party that is more likely to be less greedy than the other.

JillFoster, I truly believe in a two party system. In theory and the way it was set up, it should work. In reality and in practice, that hasn’t always been the case.

A way to help change that is to take money out of the equation. If neither party is receiving money from major corporations, they will not be beholden to corporations, but to we the people. If you really want to know what’s going on out here, follow the money!

For those of you who think President Obama is a sell out, a corporate shill, a Bush Jr wanna be, then riddle me this.

Who in their right mind spends 4 billion dollars to defeat a man and his party, if that man and his party are doing what they want him to do????? WHO?

No one, that cares about money….

and the Corporate Powers care more about money than they will ever care about you or me.

[jillfoster]

Ms. M... thanks for the info on the Kochs, that was stuff I certainly was not aware of. the Bill Moyers piece I had seen before, and I was shouting AMEN the whole time it was on. I however, feel Obama made a crucial mistake in trying to get all this health care legislation passed all at once. It gave the opposition the strategic advantage of having large, bungelsome legislation that is difficult for the general public [[especially stupid ones) to wrap their minds around. And the reupblicans pounced on it like a cat on a mouse... using the public's FEAR OF THE UNKNOWN as the greatest weapon against Obama. If that health care bill would have been dissected into about 12 parts, and for instance... if the pre-existing condition bill was it's own entity, then it would have been much more simplistic for the public to grasp, and much more difficult for the opposition to shoot down. And considering the apathy and lack on intelligence of the general public, you've got to make things so an Orangutan can understand it, and then you still run into trouble. And nobody EVER talks about corporate policies that drive up health care costs, I read that over 70 percent of american companies now REQUIRE a doctor's note when an employee calls in sick. So you have tens of thousands of people every day sucking up valuable resources and driving up helath care costs for something as simple as a HEAD COLD, because youe employer REQUIRES a doctor's note. Nobody did this 40 years ago, and somehow corporate america survived. And you have a generation of people who all have employer health coverage and go to the doctor for every little thing, neccesary or not.

[ms_m]

JillFoster I disagree, a good negotiator always ask for more, always.
BTW, please keep in mind, the Koch Brothers are not the only players. There are many.

Here is something else you might be interested in.

Campaign Finance Reform.
It’s not a major issue with Americans [[they are too busy being distracted and divisive to care) so Congress tends to ignore the issue and, or play lip service to it.

I need to make it abundantly clear; CFR is not the only issue facing this country. There are many, many other issues that need to be addressed. However, I think you will find the following post to be intriguing.

Wow. [[updated)
by RenaRF
Just... Wow. I hadn't checked into Daily Kos since Saturday afternoon, and I return to rec list showdown, a clash of Titans about what we're here for, what we know to be "true", and what we should do about it.

I've read the expatriation diary, the first unauthorized "redefinition" of Daily Kos, the second authorized "redefinition" of Daily Kos, and I just thought - "Wow. That really misses the point and the problem."

But you know what? Both really miss an honest appraisal of the root cause of both of their issues [[a better country run by better Democrats and all the effort required to affect that outcome). They are taking divergent emotional and intellectual paths towards the same goal - yet both will be continually frustrated and turned away in pursuit of that goal because neither addresses what's really going on.
Money. Money is going on.

So here's how I see it. There are certain rules that law, the courts, and the American public have set forth to even give an individual a chance at affecting change. That individual may [[and likely), in their heart of hearts, have a solid set of personal ideals in which they believe strongly. When they undertake their first run for office, they carry those ideals with them, likely with the intent of stolidly pursuing policies and programs that underscore, amplify, and promote those ideals.

And then reality descends, articulated as follows:

1. It is rare to impossible to get elected without money.
2. Without money, it is rare to impossible to get your message out there sufficiently for a marginally engaged populace to make a choice.

"Them's the rules", as I am fond of saying. And they're the rules that have been laid down by the American people. They almost never elect someone who has no money and no ability to get their message out. It's the playing field upon which both teams are forced to play. Because having one's ideology is a wonderful thing - and deciding that that ideology can benefit other people is also a wonderful thing. But having zero chance of implementing that ideology because you can't ever get elected because you have no money [[see rules above) is NOT a wonderful thing.

This is a particularly frustrating course for Democrats in particular. Republicans are pretty above-board about which master they serve. I don't sense an awful lot of underlying moral conflict with the choices they have to make to get elected and then try to push their ideology. One serves the other, one follows the other. It's a much straighter line given "them's the rules" for Republicans. Not so for Democrats - because at our core and our heart, we ARE about the poor and the working class and unions and minorities of every stripe. We always have been - it runs through what we campaign on and the grand ideas we seek to implement once elected. But "them's the rules". And Democrats know that it's impossible to get elected without money and that without money, they can't get their message out there sufficiently for a marginally engaged populace to make an informed choice that best aligns with their needs, wants and hopes. Their moral dilemma in having to accept lobbyist and industry money is a much more difficult row to hoe given what they generally believe overall. But hoe it they do - to the wrath of the non-politician Democrats who see them "selling out". Yet to me, the choice, right now and given "them's the rules", is simple: It's better to get elected and try to affect some of the changes you think are necessary than to never get elected and be very unlikely to affect even tiny part os the changes you think are necessary. It's a shitty deal, most of all for us - the non-politicians. But it's a deal I can understand them taking, even with pure intentions.

So my assertion is simple: The only way you accomplish buhdydharma's and Kestral9000's and countless other Kossacks' goals [[even allowing for the divergent paths to those goals) is by changing the rules.
Yet - searching popular tags for either "Campaign Finance Reform" or "CFR" yields - wait for it - ZERO popular tags. Not one for either of those terms. Ditto for "Campaign Finance". Searching All tags gives this:

Total diaries [[ever) with tag "Campaign Finance" - 778
Total diaries [[ever) with tag "Campaign Finance Reform" - 385
Total diaries [[ever) with tag "CFR" - 63
Contrast that to this:
Total diaries [[ever) with tag "Sarah Palin" - 12,722
Total diaries [[ever) with tag "Tea Party" - 2,412
Total diaries [[ever) with tag "Rush Limbaugh" - 2,816
Total diaries [[ever) with tag "Glenn Beck" - 2,403
Total diaries [[ever) with tag "Bill O'Reilly" - 2,367

ALL campaign finance tagged diaries, combined, comes to only slightly more than HALF of all Bill O'Reilly tagged diaries. Am I saying that talking about Sarah Palin, the teabaggers, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly is not a fit discussion for Daily Kos? Of course not. But in context, it should be clear that the attention paid to the root cause of the problem that we are currently ALL lamenting in our different ways is infinitesimal compared to the attention paid to these other gasbags. The gasbags need to be held to account for their lies, no doubt - but it misses this key point:
With real campaign finance reform, the ability of the gasbags to co-opt the message and spread lies would be greatly reduced.

Exclamation point. And that's only a tiny part of why campaign finance reform should matter.

[ms_m]

This is the second part of the diary and for some reason it's telling me it's too short....grrrrrrrrr...need to work the bugs out admin folks....anyway, I'm trying to add more characters so it will allow me to post.

When the teabaggers were invading and astroturfing healthcare town halls across the nation, a well-meaning group of folks started the Coffee Party, a counter [[a sane one) to rabid teabaggerism everywhere. I went to a Coffee Party meeting in my district. Great people - motivated, rational, reality-based, you name it. My kind of folks. But we came to one point in the initial, inaugural meeting of my local Coffee Party: we were all asked to articulate our single key primary item which bore attention. Of more than 30 people at my local meeting, I was the only one to list "campaign finance reform" as THE single most important issue on our plate.

My logic is simple - without campaign finance reform, everything else is an exercise [[to varying degrees) in frustration.
- We [[Americans writ large) dictate the rules on the playing field.
- The current rules require money to affect any change, let alone good change.
- Money corrupts, and change becomes corrupted.
My bottom line: Rail and flail, criticize and lambaste all you want. Pie fight each other until the cows come home. But if you keep doing all of that without acknowledging that the only REAL game changer is to get money out of politics, you're fighting losing battles.

Citizens United certainly set back the goal of meaningful Campaign Finance Reform - but maybe, just maybe, it also opened a door where this particular issue and its necessity can break into the public consciousness. I'm woe to type this out loud [[as it were), but maybe Russ Feingold's loss can help bring his focus and knowledge to the issue to try to affect real, game-changing, rule-changing campaign finance reform.

I'll guarantee you this: the "better" part of "more and better" will only go to a certain point without campaign finance reform. But I'll also say - if we can struggle and fight for that day when special interests and corporate money doesn't dominate elections, our message resonates with 95% of Americans who are poor, working class, minority, disaffected, etc. etc. It will be a massive fight to affect this key, root cause change - and we'll have to swim against every powerful entity in trying to achieve it. It will take more time than we can possibly envision. But it won't start until WE start it. And imagine this if you will - elected representatives free to espouse and then follow their ideals without worrying about raising money and paybacks and raising more money to stay long enough to make some of the change you wanted.

So having said that - my stance on CFR is a simple one. It's not to limit Corporate or individual contributions. It's to eliminate them. Completely. Go to fully publicly financed campaigns. No TV advertising. No money, trade missions, gifts, meals, not even a coffee to the elected. The budget for national [[Congressional, Presidential) races should be apportioned out of public monies and only specific things could be included as allowable expenses for candidates.

I'm meeting with some resistance to not necessarily the idea, but the potential of that in the comments. I welcome that - this is about fleshing out the idea to see if there's even enough to be the seed of an impetus of a movement to be found. But I would assert this, strictly as my opinion: everything that you find personally important as a matter of legislation or policy will always fall short of what you desire as long as CFR is allowed to be unattended. Everything. You will always fall farther down the list of "masters" in the current campaign finance climate. And you will always be frustrated.

I'm willing to be wrong here. I'm wanting to be wrong here. Because CFR isn't sexy. It doesn't currently meet, in my mind, the bar of a high value "single issue". Therefore, getting people together around this will be hard. Leaders won't change the rules - rules that they understand and operate within every day - unless they are MADE to change them, and only a bonafide movement can get that from thought to reality.
Just my $.02.

[ms_m]

JillFoster, the reason I wanted to start this conversation is because there is a lot more going on out here than meets the eye. We the people need to wake up and pay attention. We need to let go of the "talking points" being thrown at us and THINK for ourselves.

There are a host of issues facing us and THE ONLY ADULT IN THE ROOM seems to be the only one trying to tackle them. The Repubs are trying to take him down, his own congress is not standing up behind him, and his base is acting like whiny little children, expecting him to change something in 2 years, that was 30 years in the making. YET, he has done more for the middle class in this country in two years, than any president in my life time.

He's not perfect, he's made mistakes but he's doing something while everyone else is fighting amongst themselves and falling for every piece of BS that come their way.

We THE PEOPLE definitely have an enemy to fight but it is NOT President Obama.

We are being asked

1] To work longer hours
2] To work until we drop.
3] To expect less in return for those years of hard work.
4] To cut the services we pay for.
5] To hurt the least fortunate amongst us by removing our support.
6] To make education once more a privilege.

We are being taught to be small minded and petty; and in the meantime our societies so hard fought for are being eviscerated and sacrificed at the fallacious alter of 'fiscal responsibility'. Our common dreams are turning into a collective nightmare.
We in fact are held responsible for the years of greed.
Whilst those who drove us over the cliff once more swill champagne and laugh in our faces.

[ms_m]

In other news:

Here is a Reuters article that is based upon the CBO assessment of the Stimulus programs [[both the Bush and Obama sponsored) and its assessment of the net impact of those programs.

It is perhaps in stark contrast to what most Americans would have thought. The biggest thing the stimules did NOT do was bring down the unemployment which is still uppermost on most peoples minds. The CBO contents, however, that unemployment would have been substantially higher IF the simulus efforts had not gone through.

Also, one of the most interesting statements of the CBO is in the last sentence here which recaps the effectiveness of each piece of the stimulus.



From the article

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act put between 1.4 million and 3.6 million to work in the third quarter of this year, a time when more than 15 million Americans were unemployed, CBO said.

It also boosted national output by between 1.4 percent and 4.1 percent during that time, the CBO said.

During the third quarter, the economy grew by an annual rate of 2.5 percent. Economists say a rate faster than 3 percent is needed to make any noticeable dent in unemployment.

The CBO's estimates have consistently shown that the $814 billion package of tax cuts, state aid, construction spending and enhanced safety-net provisions has blunted the impact of the worst U.S. recession since the 1930s.

But it has failed to prevent the unemployment rate from rising above 8 percent, as the Obama administration promised when it was crafted in 2009.

The unemployment rate, currently 9.6 percent, would have been between 10.4 percent and 11.6 percent without the Recovery Act, the CBO said.

The stimulus created the equivalent of 2 million to 5.8 million jobs during the third quarter as part-time workers shifted to full-time work, or employers offered more overtime work.

Voters by wide margins say the stimulus has been ineffective, and they handed a big victory to the Republicans who opposed it in the November 2 elections.

Republicans have proposed rescinding the $12 billion that remains unspent when they take control of the House of Representatives in January.

The Recovery Act has already had its greatest impact on the economy and its effects will continue to wane into 2011, CBO said.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke has called on Congress to take additional measures to stimulate the economy, but analysts say his plea will probably go unanswered as Republicans eye sharp spending cuts for next year.

Not all elements of the Recovery Act got the same bang for the buck, the CBO said.

Direct spending on highway construction, water-system upgrades and energy efficiency were among the most effective, the CBO said, while tax breaks for businesses and higher-income people cost more in lost revenues than they made up for in increased economic activity.

while tax breaks for businesses and higher-income people cost more in lost revenues than they made up for in increased economic activity.

translation: tax breaks for the rich don't work!

[jillfoster]

That's certainly alot to digest and consider. I think Obama needs to make a "dirty" move on this chess board. I think he needs to propose that all senators and congressmen, including himself.... take a 50% pay cut. Truly it won't make a dent in the deficit, but it would be quite the symbolic gesture, and let's see what the "cut spending" Repulbicans have to say about it. It would fascinating, to be sure.

[ms_m]

With all due respect Jill Foster,do you really believe the American people give a flying fig tree about symbolism, especially now?

None of what I have written is about what President Obama should do, but what WE THE PEOPLE should start doing.

He's doing his job, are we doing ours, or are sitting back playing armchair quarterback and criticizing and crying about what he hasn't done instead of shouting to the rafters about what he has? Cause heaven knows, the media sure "ain't" doing it.

[MotownSteve]

I read somewhere that a very significant percentage of the members of the senate and the house are millionaires. Some several times over. Taking a 90% cut for some of them would hardly be felt.

[ms_m]

BTW, the deficit is another one of those "talking point" issues the media and Republicans are throwing out there, trying to keep us distracted.

Funny how neither the Republicans or the media, or even the American people gave a crap about Jr taking a surplus and turning it into an albatross around our necks.

NOW, everyone is soooooooo concerned about the deficit. PLEASE!

The money being spent is what will help us in the future, not hurt us.

[ms_m]

MotownSteve, people like the Koch Brothers are multi BILLIONAIRES. Forgive my crassness but, who do you think can piss farther?

[jillfoster]

I know, Ms. M... but grand, sweeping gestures are something that the amrecian people can understand. they don't care about the details. They never have, and I don't think they ever will. Do you think a re-introduction of the fairness doctrine would help matters?

[ms_m]

If grand sweeping gestures that don't do anything for the people's bottom line will make folks happy....well, imo that would mean people in this country on both sides of the political fence, are dumber than a box of rocks and we're screwed.

Good question JillFoster but here is the deal, how do you get the genie back in the bottle when billionaires like Rupert Murdoch are one of the puppeteers pulling the strings?

Kind of hard to get around a lot of this crap under the current system which is why I get so frustrated with peole.

Considering what the President is up against he is kicking arse and taking names. Again, why do you think 4 billion dollars was spent to bring the Dems down whereby trying to bring the President down?

Fairness Doctrine in this day and age is err body versus Olbermann , Maddow and 2 comedians,[[Stewart/Colbert)

hell, even NPR is beginning to go off the rails.....all that money is not coming from "public donations"....anyone is free to research that and call me on it if I'm wrong.

JillFoster in away we have to play catch up and start paying more attention, start making the effort to check this crap we are being fed. The links I provided for the President's accomplishments is a good start and there is always whitehouse.gov

Even if people don't have the time to do heavy research at least KNOW what your President is doing. Don't let pundits sell you [[collective you) their spin.

[jillfoster]

Dumber than a box of rocks.Yes, I believe that.

[ms_m]

True, but there isn't any reason we have to stay that way JillFoster.
I guess that's what frustrates me the most.

[ms_m]

BTW JillFoster, if folks TRULY are concerned with the deficit, then no one over 250K should be getting a tax cut or an extra tax cut which seems to be what the Repubs are trying pull now. But is the public really paying attention and pushing back against the Repubs?

Do they even know that if the 2% get their continued tax cuts and then some, the 98 percenters [[us) get less not more?
Nothing has trickled down in the 9 years these tax cuts for the rich have been in place, hello are we paying attention?

while tax breaks for businesses and higher-income people cost more in lost revenues than they made up for in increased economic activity.

translation: tax breaks for the rich don't work!

[ms_m]

Public Service Message for Service Members [[military) please pass it on



President Obama signed legislation in September extending the deadline. In a public service message released by the White House, the President said, "You served with honor. You did your duty. And when your country called on you again, you did your duty again. Now, it's time to collect the special pay that you deserve....

I know there's been some confusion and skepticism out there. Some veterans think this is some sort of gimmick or scam, or that it's a way for the government to call you back to service. Nothing could be further from the truth.

As your commander in chief, I'm here to tell you that this is no gimmick or trick. You worked hard. You earned this money. It doesn't matter whether you were active or reserve, whether you're a veteran who experienced ‘Stop Loss’ or the survivor of a servicemember who did - if your service was extended, you're eligible."

[MotownSteve]

MotownSteve, people like the Koch Brothers are multi BILLIONAIRES. Forgive my crassness but, who do you think can piss farther?

ms_m, they are not in congress. However, one night wonder how much they control.

[ms_m]

True they are in Congress but the money, and the people who give it to them, control many of them and their actions in many instances. To be fair, I don't think it's all about personal gain for many in congress but about being reelected. That takes money and lots of it.

It's the main reason I would like people to understand the importance of CFR. [[campaign finance reform)

If we take the control out of the hands of the corporate powers, we have a better chance at a more level playing field. Congress would be more focused on their constituents.

I think the article I posted breaks it down very well. We have a lot of issues in this country that need to be dealt with but until we get the purse strings under control, anything we do will have an air of not being enough because our legislators will continue to bend to the will of the corporate powers.

Dems in congress screwed us on HRC just as much as Republicans. Clinton screwed us by repealing the Glass-Steagall Act which repealed restrictions on the financial market.

Now it can be argued Clinton intentions were in the right place and it could be argued as the opposite. It really doesn't matter at this point because the fact is, it lead us to where we are today with even more help from Bush Jr.

To be honest, you can go back as far a Reagan to see how the dominoes were all stacked up and eventually fell. But money was behind it all, the greed of corporate powers. We need to get them and their money out of our legislative process.

4billion was spent to elect Republicans, that's a bad thing, 4 billion could have easily been spent to get Dems in office so we could continue a Dem agenda. On the surface, that could be seen as a good thing, but it's not because it means corporate powers have a seat at the legislative table either way it goes.

[ms_m]

Oh and one of the biggest "screw you" to dates has come from the Supreme Court.

Don't know if you remember the President's State of the Union Speech when he admonished them for their decision. Alito wasn't happy about it and it showed on his face. He even said something back about it under his breath if I recall. The President was right, it was a huge mistake, and will bite us in the arse for decades, if we don't find someway to fix it.

[ms_m]

BTW MotownSteve, I think it's also important to remember that a lot of congress critters were wealthy before they became congress critters. It might be interesting to see how they became wealthy in the first place...LOL...and I'm sure through their contacts with many people they have received a lot of inside tips and help but their personal wealth isn't the real issue here. The real issue is the control, the corporate powers have. That's what I think we need to focus on.

[MotownSteve]

ms_m, one of the problems with the Democrats is that they do not have the good sense to brag about the good they have done. They just let the republicans dump on them. Also this country would be in much better shape if the Supreme Court had not passed that bill that allows corporations to hide their donations. We could vote much more intelligently if we knew who was accepting money from whom.

[ms_m]

I agree the Dems have a messaging problem and as much as I admire the President, so does the WH.

A lot of Dems stayed home during the midterms, I don't care if they were kids, frustrated voters or who they were. I don't even care why they stayed home but if we want better, we have to participate in the process. That means voting as well as being aware if what's happening.

Here is the way I see it though MS, the longer we keep a Dem in the WH [[and give him/her a Dem congress) the better chance we have at flipping the Supreme Court more to the left. The President's last two appointments were a step in the right direction. So the way I see it, you may have to hold your nose and vote to keep Dems in control until more of the public starts to connect the dots in terms of CFR. But connect the dots we must!

[ms_m]

Motown Steve, I just noticed I misread something you said further up and I apologize for that. Fortunately it all worked out in the conversation.LOL

I read this differently than how it was written. Again, my apologies.

ms_m, they are not in congress. However, one night wonder how much they control.

[jillfoster]

ms_m, one of the problems with the Democrats is that they do not have the good sense to brag about the good they have done. They just let the republicans dump on them. Also this country would be in much better shape if the Supreme Court had not passed that bill that allows corporations to hide their donations. We could vote much more intelligently if we knew who was accepting money from whom.

You'd think.... but unfortunately, here in Missouri, we now have a senator who was involved in HUGE campaign contributions from big oil, amongst others... and was freaking mentored by Tom Delay, who as we know, was just convicted on money laundering charges. but the bastard won anyhow. All because everyone in the state was scared of the daughter of a former governor [[who was well liked)? And the political commercials TOLD US over and over again that he was dirty, and didn't care about the common man. But HIS commercials kept acting like Robin Carnahan was exectly like Nancy Pelosi, every single commercial from his camp mentioned Obama and Pelosi, and kept drilling people that if you want our country to "go back to what it was" you need to vote for HIM. Of course, those halcyon days of 50 years ago also included the fairness doctrine, but I'm sure they don't want THAT part of the past restored.

[ms_m]

You've summed up pretty much what I'm trying to get across JillFoster. We are being inundated with tons of bogus info. It's being repeated over and over until people are taking it as the truth without question.

We have to start questioning but we also have to stop this sort of messaging from getting out in the first place.

CFR would help rectify that. Without tons and tons of money to spread this BS, politicians would have to be more prudent and use more judgment in how they reach voters.

Instead of negative campaigning they would be forced to reach people with things that would not only resonate but actually help them. Things that would make voters THINK and not react.

THEN they would have to go to Washington and actually follow through. They could do this if they are answering ONLY to voters and not corporate interests.

Very few politicians talk issues these days, they simply throw out rhetoric and negative ads. They do it because they have the money to fight the other candidate, who has the money to do the same thing. It's a vicious cycle that keeps going around and around.

It needs to stop.....Campaign Finance Reform is the only way I can see that happening. If there is any other logical and rationale way, I'm all ears.

[ms_m]

Things that would make voters THINK and not react.

To be clear, and repeat.... few politicians are talking issues that will help us think critically. What they are doing is pushing our hot buttons. [[abortion, racism, immigration, LGbt rights and the list goes on)

ALL these things are important, Each and everyone but the negative campaigning uses these issues to divide and distract us instead of finding ways to solve the problems these issues bring.

The one exception I've seen not following this formula is, The Only Adult In The Room

He refuses to let himself get caught up in all the crazy. I know it makes people frustrated he doesn't fight fire with fire but someone has to be the adult in the room. He's it.

[MotownSteve]

Well put ms_m. What I'd like to have some some politician tell us where he his money from. By that I mean, family excepted, what corporation and how much. What individual and how much. But, I'm not going to hold my breath on this one.

[ms_m]

LOL
I hear ya
I just want to put an end to the money flow and call it a day.

[ms_m]

Medicare Advantage provision going smoothly

One of the most significant savings envisioned in the new health- care law – limiting payments to the private health plans that cover 11 million older Americans under Medicare – is, so far, bringing little of the turbulence that the insurance industry and many Republicans predicted.

The law, which sets in motion the broadest changes to the U.S. health-care system in decades, will hold down the amount of money the government gives to Medicare Advantage plans, which are available to patients who prefer a managed-care version of the program. The savings is forecast to amount to $145 billion by the end of the decade.

Before the Affordable Care Act, Medicare Advantage insurance companies were paid more than $1,000 per person on average than seniors in traditional Medicare. All seniors on Medicare – even the 77 percent not enrolled in Medicare Advantage – helped subsidize the additional payments to insurance companies. The Affordable Care Act protects guaranteed Medicare benefits for seniors in Medicare Advantage plans and levels the playing field by ending overpayments to big insurance companies. Whether the payment changes are warranted was a contentious subplot in the protracted debate over the legislation. Democrats argued successfully that the private plans were being overpaid and could withstand the changes. Republicans warned that such plans would raise prices, lower benefits or cause defections from the program, stranding the elderly people who rely on them.Early clues to the actual effects have now materialized, as elderly Americans may sign up for a health plan for 2011 during an enrollment period through the end of the year, and the warnings of swift, serious damage to the program are not borne out. Fewer health plans are available for the coming year, but the decrease is largely for reasons unrelated to the new law. Premiums have not jumped substantially, and benefits have not tended to erode.

[ms_m]

Remarks by the President on the Federal Employee Pay Freeze

THE PRESIDENT:

Hello, everybody. Good morning, everybody.

Let me begin by pointing out that although Washington is supposed to be a town of sharp elbows, it’s getting a little carried away. For those of you who are worried about my lip, I should be okay. The doctor has given me a clean bill of health, and I will continue to be playing basketball whenever I get a chance. In fact, I played yesterday with Sasha and Malia and they took it easy on me because they were feeling pity.

I hope everybody had a great Thanksgiving, but now it’s time to get back to work. Congress is back in town this week. And I’m looking forward to sitting down with Republican leaders tomorrow to discuss many issues -- foremost among them the American people’s business that remains to be done this year. My hope is that tomorrow’s meeting will mark a first step towards a new and productive working relationship. Because we now have a shared responsibility to deliver for the American people on the issues that define not only these times but our future -- and I hope we can do that in a cooperative and serious way.

Our two most fundamental challenges are keeping the American people safe and growing our economy -- and it’s in that spirit that I look forward to sitting down tomorrow and talking about urgent matters like the ratification of the New START treaty, which is so essential to our safety and security; and the status of the Bush-era tax cuts that are set to expire at the end of this year. And this is just one of the many economic issues we’ve got to tackle together in the months ahead.

As I said a few weeks ago, the most important contest of our time is not the contest between Democrats and Republicans; it’s between America and our economic competitors all around the world. Winning that contest means that we’ve got to ensure our children are the best educated in the world; that our research and development is second to none; and that we lead the globe in renewable energy and technological innovation.

It also means making sure that in the future we’re not dragged down by long-term debt. This is a challenge that both parties have a responsibility to address -- to get federal spending under control and bring down the deficits that have been growing for most of the last decade.

Now, there’s no doubt that if we want to bring down our deficits, it’s critical to keep growing our economy. More importantly, there’s still a lot of pain out there, and we can’t afford to take any steps that might derail our recovery or our efforts to put Americans back to work and to make Main Street whole again. So we can’t put the brakes on too quickly. And I’m going to be interested in hearing ideas from my Republican colleagues, as well as Democrats, about how we continue to grow the economy and how we put people back to work.

But we do have to correct our long-term fiscal course. And that’s why earlier this year I created a bipartisan deficit commission that is poised to report back later this week with ideas that I hope will spark a serious and long-overdue conversation in this town. Those of us who have been charged to lead will have to confront some very difficult decisions, cutting spending we don’t need in order to invest in the things that we do.

As President, I’m committed to doing my part. From the earliest days of my administration, we’ve worked to eliminate wasteful spending and streamline government. I promised to go through the budget line by line to eliminate programs that have outlived their usefulness, and in each of the budgets I’ve put forward so far, we’ve proposed approximately $20 billion in savings through shrinking or ending more than 120 such programs.

I’ve also set goals for this government that we’re on track to meet: reducing improper payments by $50 billion, saving $40 billion in contracting, and selling off $8 billion of unneeded federal land and buildings.

I’ve also proposed a three-year freeze on all non-security discretionary spending -- a step that would bring that spending to its lowest level as a share of the economy in 50 years. And we’ve brought unprecedented transparency to federal spending by placing all of it online at USAspending.gov and Recovery.gov, so Americans can see how their tax dollars are spent.

The hard truth is that getting this deficit under control is going to require broad sacrifice. And that sacrifice must be shared by the employees of the federal government.

After all, small businesses and families are tightening their belts. Their government should, too. And that’s why, on my first day as President, I froze all pay for my senior staff. This year I’ve proposed extending that freeze for senior political appointees throughout the government and eliminating bonuses for all political appointees.

And today I’m proposing a two-year pay freeze for all civilian federal workers. This would save $2 billion over the rest of this fiscal year and $28 billion in cumulative savings over the next five years. And I want to be clear: This freeze does not apply to the men and women of our Armed Forces, who along with their families continue to bear enormous burdens with our nation at war.

I did not reach this decision easily. This is not just a line item on a federal ledger. These are people’s lives. They’re doctors and nurses who care for our veterans; scientists who search for better treatments and cures; men and women who care for our national parks and secure our borders and our skies; Americans who see that the Social Security checks get out on time, who make sure that scholarships comes through, who devote themselves to our safety. They’re patriots who love their country and often make many sacrifices to serve their country.

In these challenging times, we want the best and brightest to join and make a difference. But these are also times where all of us are called on to make some sacrifices. And I’m asking civil servants to do what they’ve always done -- play their part.

Going forward, we’re going to have to make some additional very tough decisions that this town has put off for a very long time. And that’s what this upcoming week is really about. My hope is that, starting today, we can begin a bipartisan conversation about our future, because we face challenges that will require the cooperation of Democrats, Republicans and Independents. Everybody is going to have to cooperate. We can’t afford to fall back onto the same old ideologies or the same stale sound bites. We’re going to have to budge on some deeply held positions and compromise for the good of the country. We’re going to have to set aside the politics of the moment to make progress for the long term. And as I’ve often said, we’re going to have to think not just about the next election, but about the next generation, because if there’s anything the American people said this month, it’s that they want their leaders to have one single focus: making sure their work is rewarded so that the American Dream remains within their reach. It would be unwise to assume they prefer one way of thinking over another. That wasn’t the lesson that I took when I entered into office, and it’s not the lesson today.

So while our ideas may be different, our goals must be the same -- growing this economy, putting people back to work, and securing the dream for all who work for it; to summon what’s best for each of us to make lives better for all of us. And that’s why we are here and that’s why we serve. That’s how we’ve moved this country forward in the past -- and I’m absolutely confident that that is how we are going to move this country forward once again.

Thank you very much, everybody.

[ms_m]

A Federal Employee had this to say about the freeze. Coming from someone who the freeze affects directly, I thought he made very interesting points.

There's a lot of hullabaloo how President Obama's federal wage freeze is so very bad, bad bad for the US.

Well, I AM a federal employee, and I don't see it that way.



I have three main positive points that I see coming from the President's announcement to freeze federal pay for two years.

The first one is a matter of simple expediency. For those of you not in the know, we lowly federal employees get raises based on 1) time and 2) a base raise that congress has to vote on every year anyway. So, I ask you, considering the current make up of congress, what are the odds that we would get raises anyway? Considering how obstructionist that the GOP has been, and will continue to be, I'd say the odds were pretty much zero anyway. All Obama has done is taken that power away from Congress by not trying to push through a raise. He's taken something that could only be negative and turned it into a potential positive, which leads me to point two.

By freezing wages, Obama has basically said, "OK, you campaigned on cuts, and I've just made one. What are YOU going to do?" By leading by example, he's called the Republican fiscal-conservativism bluff. The best part of it is, there's no way for Republicans to spin this negatively. Anyone who criticizes this move is going to seem unserious about deficit reduction. Seeing as pretty much every Republican [[especially tea-partiers) campaigned on this, this seems unlikely.

The last thing is by showing a willingness to actually be that Republicans are attempting to portray themselves as, he might just peel some of the teapartiers off from their party when it comes to budgetary votes, or at the very least, make them very, very unhappy having to tow the party line. Admittedly, this one seems less likely, considering how Republicans usually act, but we'll see what the infusion of tea-partiers does in the coming congress [[pun fully intended).

Am I happy about a wage freeze for me in the next two years? Hell no. But I refuse to be caught up in the wailing, moaning and gnashing of teeth.

[ms_m]

Another Federal Employee was a tad more philosophical

I’ll just increase my naps by 5%, take home a few more ink pens, surf a little longer …….and put in a requisition for a Very Expensive Comfortable Ergonomic chair to be used while I'm sitting at my desk.

[MotownSteve]

Hi ms_m,
I spent 28 years working for the State of NJ. My son just started a few months ago for the Fed Govt. One thing I can say for sure is outsiders have no idea at all what it is like on the inside!
BTW, I tried sending you an email the other day and got an error message basically saying your mail box was full.
Regards,
Steve

[ms_m]

Hi MS

Sorry about the email message. If you're referring to my SDF mailbox, I tend to forget about it but it's now empty. My personal email is never full. [[loves me some gmail)

Yeah, I thought the last comment from a Fed Employee was particularly..... errrrrrrr.... poignant.
There was actually more but I didn't want to deal with the "Black Helicopters" hovering over my house) hahaha

[ms_m]

MS,
Check your email, it's done. Sorry fOr the confusion!