"Spending is the Problem", Not totally True on Closer Inspection!

I am starting to believe John Boehner is ‘stuck on “we have a spending problem lie” for sake of his Speakership and for that reason only. (linked)

 In June 2012, Fact Check Dot Org published a piece related to Mitt Romney’s claims about Obama’s spending “inferno”.  The piece is typically Fact Check long and detailed, but relevant in looking at spending going back (to the 1940s) and forward to the president’s “big” spending initiatives   In terms of Boehner and the GOP rhetoric, we continue to exclaim, “poppycock.”  I am posting a linked the the piece, here. Now, a few excerpts fro the Fact Check piece.

Fact Check   Excerpt I

Summary Is President Obama’s spending an “inferno,” as Mitt Romney claims, or a binge that “never happened” as an analysis touted by the White House concluded? We judge that both of those claims are wrong on the facts.  The truth is that the nearly 18 percent spike in spending in fiscal 2009 — for which the president is sometimes blamed entirely — was mostly due to appropriations and policies that were already in place when Obama took office.  That includes spending for the bank bailout legislation approved by President Bush. Annual increases in amounts actually spent since fiscal 2009 have been relatively modest. In fact, spending for the first seven months of the current fiscal year is running slightly below the same period last year, and below projections.  Since pictures can convey information more efficiently than words, we’ll sum up the official spending figures in this chart. It also reflects our finding that Obama increased fiscal 2009 spending by at most $203 billion, accounting for well under half the huge increase that year.  So if current spending is an “inferno,” it’s one that Bush (and Congress) is mostly responsible for starting. But it’s also true that Obama has done little to put it out.

The Summary also addresses Obama’s spending regarding Obamacare and other initiatives. (See Link above) Fact Check is apropos in pointing out that Obama has done little to shut-off the spending increases from the Bush Era. Factually correct, but I ask,”..should the president elected in 2008 and inaugurated in 2009 have spent his entire first term ONLY fighting the Bush Era governing malfeasance?” Additionally, with a inauguration day ‘obstruction meeting‘ and Mitch McConnell declaring to the nation GOP intent to obstruct the newly elected president in every way, how ridiculous is it to think Obama should have been a first term “FIREMAN” against the Bush inferno? The GOP was hell-bent on obstruction even if Obama had “stayed in his lane” and only work to relieve the nation of Bush deficit spending.

Spending in the US is a concern and must be addressed.  Hence, Obama’s frequent comments to his base that modifications must take place and many will not like the modifications to current programs: Pew States Dot Org (Subsidyscope nine charts).  The president is a realist in working to fix deficit issues as well as strategically looking forward for a good path to prosperity.

The GOP wants to cut spending  Hasn’t the Euro Nation’s (and the UK) proven ‘austerity” is not the way out of economic crisis. an international crisis in part  brought on by Bush and GOP economic incompetence.  Boehner speaks of a “spending problem” and walks away from the microphone like an angry child. 

Paul Krugman Nobel Prize winner (Economics) consistently addresses GOP “spending” rhetoric and does so very effectively 

Bush and company placed the nation in a position of fighting for our economic lives. Shouldn’t we work to establish life before addressing problems that can be fixed after life is handed-back to us? I posit , yes!

Fact Check reported that President Obama has worked to reduce the deficit, but has not done enough for major reductions.  We suggest reductions are reductions while looking through a glass half-full.  We do so knowing the half-empty glass is no reductions with continuation of spending.  ”Spending is a must,” as posited by Krugman.  

Boehner speaks for his tea party conference with the aid of an actual chart (a real rarity in GOP circles).  Did Boehner say, “put together by Paul Ryan?’  Paul Ryan has proven two things for certain int he past two years. First, he is bound and determined to get his hands on Social Security and Medicare.  Second, the man is a pathological liar.  

According to Boehner the nation’s entire economic and fiscal issues rotate around spending.  These are the very same people who had Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan redecorating offices in the White House weeks before their lose in 2012.  Many of the same legislators that supported 99% of everything Bush.  The same Boehner who in 2011, after signing the agreement to sequester, proclaimed he got “98% of what he wanted.”  I must ask,  does any of the previous speak to GOP competence and credibility? 

Fact Check Excerpt II

Analysis Mitt Romney claims President Barack Obama’s spending amounts to an “inferno.” But who is really responsible for the huge jump that took place in fiscal 2009? Here are some undisputed facts:  Fiscal 2009 began Oct. 1, 2008. That was before Obama was elected, and nearly four months before he took office on Jan. 20, 2009.  President Bush signed the massive spending bill under which the government was operating when Obama took office. That was Sept. 30, 2008. As The Associated Press noted, it combined “a record Pentagon budget with aid for automakers and natural disaster victims, and increased health care funding for veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.”  Bush also signed, on Oct. 3, 2008, a bank bailout bill that authorized another $700 billion to avert a looming financial collapse (though not all of that would end up being spent in fiscal 2009, and Obama later signed a measure reducing total authorized bailout spending to $475 billion).  On Jan. 7, 2009 — two weeks before Obama took office — the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office issued its regular budget outlook, stating: “CBO projects that the deficit this year will total $1.2 trillion. CBO attributed the rapid rise in spending to the bank bailout and the federal takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – plus rising costs for unemployment insurance and other factors driven by the collapsing economy (which shed 818,000 jobs in January alone).  Another factor beyond Obama’s control was an automatic 5.8 percent cost of living increase announced in October 2008 and given to Social Security beneficiaries in January 2009. It was the largest since 1982. Social Security spending alone rose $66 billion in fiscal 2009, and Medicare spending, driven by rising medical costs, rose $39 billion.  How Much Did Obama Add?  But it’s also true that Obama signed a number of appropriations bills, plus other legislation and executive orders, that raised spending for the remainder of fiscal 2009 even above the path set by Bush. By our calculations, Obama can be fairly assigned responsibility for a maximum of $203 billion in additional spending for that year.

Fact Check indicates Obama added $203 billion to the nations deficit crisis.  Let’s see how Fact Fact Check lays out those expenditures   We are ever mindful, spending must be addressed, but like Krugman we feel addressed in priority order.  The GOP wants to continue to wound the /democrats as we move towards 2014 and 2016.

Fact Check Excerpt III

Here’s how we arrived at our $203 billion total: We combed through all the appropriations bills signed by Obama for 2009, plus other legislation that CBO said also resulted in increased spending. We also examined the budget effects of Obama’s decision to bail out General Motors and Chrysler using funds previously appropriated under TARP. And here’s what we found: $2 billion for children’s health insurance. On Feb. 4, Obama signed a bill expanding the Children’s Health Insurance Program, covering millions of additional children (a Democratic bill Bush had vetoed in the previous Congress). “CBO estimates that the act will increase mandatory outlays by $2 billion in 2009,” CBO later stated (page 5). $114 billion in stimulus spending. Obama signed the stimulus bill Feb. 17. While headlines proclaimed a $787 billion price tag, about 27 percent of the total was actually for tax cuts, not spending. And most of the spending didn’t take place until after fiscal 2009. CBO initially put the total spent in fiscal 2009 at $107.8 billion, but the following year it revised the figure upward to $114 billion, in a report issued in August 2010 (page 13). $32 billion of the “omnibus” spending bill Obama signed on March 11, 2009, to keep the agencies that Bush had not fully funded running through the remainder of the fiscal year. The $410 billion measure included $32 billion more than had been spent the previous year, according to a floor statement by Rep. Jerry Lewis of California, the top-ranking Republican on the Appropriations Committee. (See page H2790 in the Congressional Record.) “An 8 percent—or a $32 billion—increase in 1 year on top of the stimulus package is simply unnecessary and unsustainable,” he declared. A case can be made that Obama shouldn’t be held responsible for the entire $32 billion increase. The $410 billion was only $20 billion more than Bush had requested, according to Rep. David Obey of Wisconsin, the appropriations chairman. (See page H2800.) And CBO later figured the increase amounted to only $9 billion over what it was projecting on the assumption that the levels Bush approved for the first part of the year would be extended for the entire year (page 5). But it was Obama who signed the bill, so we assign responsibility for the full annual increase to him, not Bush. $2 billion for deposit insurance. The “Helping Families Save Their Homes Act” that Obama signed May 20 had among its many provisions some changes to the federal program that insures bank deposits. CBO later estimated that would increase fiscal 2009 outlays by $2 billion (page 54). $31 billion in “supplemental” spending for the military and other purposes. Obama pushed forand signed on June 24 another spending measure. The press dubbed it a “war funding” bill, but it actually contained $26 billion for non-defense measures (including funding for flu vaccine against the H1N1 virus, and for the International Monetary Fund) in addition to $80 billion for the military. Only a portion of the total $106 billion it authorized would actually be spent during the remaining three months of fiscal 2009, however. Sen. Kent Conrad, chairman of the Appropriations Committee, stated on June 18: “ The conference report includes $105.9 billion in discretionary budget authority for fiscal year 2009, which will result in outlays in 2009 of $30.5 billion.” (See page S6776.) Here again, a case can be made that Obama isn’t responsible for the entire $31 billion. Economist Mitchell argues that $25 billion in military spending should be assigned to Bush, because “Bush surely would have asked for at least that much extra spending.” But he didn’t. So rather than speculate, we’ll assign it all to Obama, who asked for it. $2 billion in additional “Cash for Clunkers” funding. Obama signed this measure Aug. 7, providing “emergency supplemental” funding for a stimulus program that offered $3,500 to $4,500 to car owners who traded in an old car for a new one with higher fuel economy. Nearly all was spent in fiscal 2009. (See page 959.) $20 billion for GM and Chrysler bailouts. At one point the government had paid out nearly $80 billion to support the automakers. But some of this was Bush’s doing, and much has been repaid and will be in the future. Here’s how we arrived at our $20 billion figure for Obama: By the time Obama took office, Bush already had loaned nearly $21 billion to the two automakers from funds appropriated originally for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, and had committed the government to lend $4 billion more. But Bush left decisions on further aid to Obama, who poured in additional billions. By the end of the fiscal year, the Treasury had made approximately $76 billion in loans and equity investments to GM, Chrysler and their respective financing entities (some had already been repaid). But for budget accounting purposes, not all of this was counted as federal spending under the TARP law. That’s because the government stood to receive loan repayments with interest, and held nearly 61 percent of the stock of the reorganized General Motors. What was counted as spending was — in rough terms — the difference between the estimated future value of those assets to taxpayers and their initial cost. Treasury put the net cost of the GM and Chrysler support during fiscal 2009 at $45 billion (see page 110, the “Total subsidy cost” line under the heading “AIFP,” for Automotive Industry Financing Program). That’s the amount officially booked as a federal outlay for fiscal 2009. We assume — we think reasonably — that the $25 billion committed under Bush would have been lost had Obama done nothing. So we subtract the full amount of Bush’s commitment from the net total of $45 billion that Treasury initially estimated for fiscal 2009. For the record, the ultimate total cost of the auto bailout is now estimated to be lower than initially expected. It is put at $21 billion by the Treasury Department (see page 5) and and only $19 billion by CBO (see Table 3). But those lowered estimates don’t affect what was booked as spending in fiscal 2009. Other big domestic programs that don’t require yearly appropriations, including Social Security and Medicare, continued to operate as they had under Bush. One big fiscal 2009 spending increase resulted from an unusually large 5.8 percent cost of living increase that took effect just before Obama took office. That was an anomaly, as we explained in “Social Security COLA,” posted Sept. 23, 2009, and there would be no COLA at all for the next two years. The same 5.8 percent COLA also was given in 2009 to millions of federal retirees, military retirees and disabled veterans and their survivors. So by our calculations, Obama can fairly be assigned responsibility for — at most — 5.8 percent of the $3.5 trillion that the federal government actually spent in fiscal 2009, which was 17.9 percent higher than fiscal 2008.

If Fact Check is accurate, and the generally are accurate, Boehner and company should join the president via working towards a balanced approach to deficit reduction.  Boehner and his tea party continue to practice ”shut-er-down” strategies and they do so for sake of political gain and protectionism for the nation’ wealthy.

The spending problem in the US did not start with Obama. We will join others in stating increased during Obama’s early years (in office) as he fought Bush ERA failure.

 A Gallery of Spending

Additional Sources related to Deficit Reduction

Usgovernmentspending.com  (This site offers a complete ‘candy store’ of spending information;  sample by clicking a category in the chart below.

Total Budgeted¹ 2013 Government Spending

Total

Federal

State

State & Local

Local

$ billion nom$ trillion nom$ million nom$ bln 2005$2005 per cappercent GDPpct federalpct state totalpct total179218001810182018301840185018601870188018901900191019201930194019501960197019801990200020012002200320042005200620072008200920102011201220132014201520162017full screen

Total 2013 Spending by Function

Function -yr 2013 +yr Total Spending $6.3 trillion Pensions $1.1 trillion Health Care $1.2 trillion Education $0.8 trillion Defense $0.9 trillion Welfare $0.6 trillion Spending: guesstimated2

Click chart for table of Spending or click: 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Note: 1. Federal spending after 2011 is budgeted. 2. State spending after 2011 and local spending after 2010 are “guesstimated” by projecting the latest change in reported spending forward to future years Data Sources: GDP: US Gov. Budget: Hist. Table 10.1 Federal: US Gov. Budget: Hist. Tables 3.2 and 7.1 State and Local: State and Local Gov. Finances “Guesstimated” by projecting the latest change in reported spending forward to future year

Talking Points Memo

Madvilltimes.com

The nation has been duped by the GOP into thinking it is the party of the fiscally conscience. From years of obscene spending under Reagan and Bush II, through giving GM and Chrysler the finger, to September of 2008 with, ” our economy is fundamentally sound”, haven’t we follow the GOP down the wrong path all too often.

And now, the sequester is all Obama’s problem! The Facts just+ do not match the rhetoric.

Sequester: Boehner Unaware Of Video Archives? Hypocrite And Liar.

John Stevenson writes…..

This man is third in ascendancy to the Presidency of the United States of America.

How’s this for hypocrisy? 

Listen to U.S. House Speaker Boehner (R-OH) on the sequester:

In a Wall Street Journal op-ed published Tuesday evening, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) blamed President Obama for the nearly $1.2 trillion in across-the-board spending cuts set to go into effect next month, labeling the looming cuts as “the president’s sequester.”

“Most Americans are just hearing about this Washington creation for the first time: the sequester,” Boehner writes. “What they might not realize from Mr. Obama’s statements is that it is a product of the president’s own failed leadership.”

Boehner continues, 

“There is nothing wrong with cutting spending that much — we should be cutting even more — but the sequester is an ugly and dangerous way to do it.”

Huffington Post

The sequester stems from the Budget Control Act of 2011, which mandated the cuts if a congressional “super committee” failed to reach an agreement on how to reduce the deficit.

_______________________________ 

Now, the truth:

When the Budget Control Act of 2011 was passed in the House of Representatives, 218 Republicans voted for it; zero (that’s right, no Democrats) voted for it. Boehner bragged then that, “I got 98% of what I wanted.” Now he calls it “the president’s sequester”. 

More on Boehner and is failing strategy….

Man, if liars get degrees he has a doctorate in lying.

Obama: Data, Information, Leadership And The Right Side Of Issues

 

“No war is won without effective INTEL.” The Pardu

“If you know the enemy and know yourself you need not fear the results of a hundred battles.”

Sun Tzu , The Art of War (Read more) 

Do you think the Obama Administration knows the value of public preferences, inclinations and likes/dislikes (e.g., public opinion)? 

Do you think President Obama and his staff are ‘dim-witted’ enough to simply wing-it on issues, or more seriously not know, or ignore,  public opinion?

Remember, this is the Administration that eliminated Osama bin Laden to close a strategy-based plan ordered,  ”to his (Obama’s) desk within 90 days of his Inauguration”.  Your answer to the questions above should be a resounding, “No and No.”

Since Obama’s first inauguration, we have witnessed, almost without fail, decision making that has moved the nation forward.  And, that decision-making has been undertaken, executed and analyzed for effectiveness  despite major obstruction from Republicans and the nation’s conservatives.

During the 2013 SOTU Speech, President Obama threw the nation a curve ball unanticipated by all, but his inner staff.  

The president actually proposed a Minimum Wage of $9.00 per hour; an increase to the federally required minimum by $1.75 per hour.  Did you notice in the video above, as soon as Obama spoke of CEO pay, Boehner took that ever-present GOP ‘perfunctory’ and often fake sip of water?  We assume Boehner’s sip was H2O. The Minimum Wage speaking point, surprised the nation.  We feel that Boehner’s timely sip (?) was all he could do to provide moisture for what must have been a Richter Scale sphincter contraction and the largest of 2013. Actually, we suspect a major sphincter attack via the 291 Republicans in the 113th congress; we could only observe Boehner. Of course, you and I noticed no Republicans stood nor dared applaud at the mention of the $9.00 per hour Minimum Wage.  Sphincter attack?

“Raise the Minimum Wage?”

Do you think Obama knew the win-win of raising the Minimum wage?  Win one, polling data indicating wide support for upping the Minimum Wage.  Win two, past history of support for raising the rate and the fact raising the rate doe snot kill jobs. 

Rachel Maddow Blog (Steve Benen) Pew Research Poll

Huffington Post: Minimum Wage public opinion

Minimum Wage aside, the Obama Team is aware of public polling for contraception, for gun control, and against changes to Medicare/Social Security. Lawrence O’Donnell, The Last Word, is reporting on a new poll that (on certain issues) shows the majority of Republicans support President Obama.  The Administration is as good as its ability to seek and assimilate information and its cache of information is good.

The following is a bit detailed, but relevant in understanding the significance of a competent president who is smart enough to use data and public opinion to advance a fair and advance agenda.  Information is critical as we consider the basic serious need for a President, Commander-in-Chief, and Leader who can competently manage a vast management team including supportive and committed software engineers as well as polling professionals in the information trenches. 

Let’s go back and explore how the Obama Team uses data and public opinion for 21st Century decision-making and politicking. 

______________________

Within weeks of the November 2012 General Elections a number of articles about campaign backroom technology, software geeks, Information/polling specialists and voting system hacking popped-up like white “high-end (aged)” Baby Boomers at early Tea Party rallies.  

As I perused many of mid-November 2012 articles, I was a bit surprised at the true extent of polling effectiveness or the opposite ineffectiveness.  As Rasmussen, NPR, Gallup Tracking, ABC/WAPO, PPP/Daily KOS & SEIU, Gallup Tracking  and few other polls completely missed the mark. The “other polls” link shows comprehensive poll data is much more representative of 2012 election results.  

Other articles explored the business of electoral college predictions.  Two noted examples included the highly effective Nate Silver (Obama 313; Romney 225) and the completely blown-out (allegedly accurate since 1980) Colorado University professors Ken Bickers from CU-Boulder and Michael Berry from CU-Denver (Romney 320; Obama 218).  Even Nate Silver blew a state! Neither public voter polling or electoral college predictor truly represented the backroom battles of what I call “deep voter” polling.

Of the articles read in Mid-November, none intrigued as much as Obama’s Narwhal Team.

Three of the 40 Narwhal Engineers.

The President hugging Harper Reed as shown on his Instagram feed.

Out of the 2008 election, very smart Obama campaign staffers realized an abundance of voter related data deserved serious attention and deeper scrutiny. (Details linked via  article Narwhal Team link above). Karl Rove (Romney’s) ORCA system was literally gored by the Obama Team’s (Narwhal).

Arstechnica.com  article Link

The Horror of a Loss! The NARWHAL Team contributed battle winning support for the Obama Campaign.  Conversely, Romney’s campaign (the ramble keystone cops) and Rove’s ORCA system failed in its mission with a specific failure (crash) the evening of November 6th, while we awaited Ohio poll results. The Hacktivist group Anonymous has taken credit for allegedly crashing the Rove ORCA.  It is impossible to verify the Anonymous claim, as all things hacking has a cover of secrecy. We do know the Rove’s ORCA crashed the evening of November, 6th. The NARWHAL system and team was vital to and effective in contributing to an Obama Campaign (Axelrod, Cutter, et al)  level of confidence that became clear as election results came-in and electoral votes declared.  The “ground game” technology system yielded a landslide victory.   We have no way of knowing if the NARWHAL Team was disbanded or still contributes to the president’s decision-making data resources.  What we do know is the Obama Administration is rarely, if ever, on the wrong-side of polling majorities.  Conversely, Mitt Romney campaigned on electing someone who has run a business.  Hell, did the man even effectively run a two year campaign  His campaign did absolutely nothing right throughout the entirety of 2007/2008. Additional resource:

Communitiesdominate  (ORCA Vs. NARWHAL direct comparison and analyst)

Obama’s "Sequester"….Mantra and Sloganeering To The Uninformed

How many times since January, 2013 have you heard the following.

“…his sequester”
“Obama’s sequester”
“The Administration’s sequester”

You have heard it haven’t you? In fact, it seems to be a newly coined RNC/GOP talking point phrase.  The problem is, the majority of Americans are informed, avoid Fox News, and are not easily manipulated by slick GOP oratory.

First and foremost, if the Cantor, Boehner and McConnell obstructionist did not attempt to setback the nation via opposition to raising the Deb Ceiling (payments we already owed, not new debt), the word “sequester” may have been held for another day and another GOP induced fight.

The GOP trick of taking a “facilitation” word suggested by the White House, and twisting the word (they also accepted) into talking point mantras, is cheap, bush league (no pun intended)  and very much Andrew Breitbartish.

As I have frequently stated, one problem with Right-wing dogma manifest via supporting oratory is the Right has not grown to understand technology. There is a record of everything these days.  They also forget there is always a person who either will accept pay to ‘reveal’, or who will ‘do the right thing’ via revelation for other reasons. Ultimately, the GOP fails to realize the days of the Memo-graph machine and eight-track audio tape have long passed into history.

                 

The Daily Beast and Talking Points Memo are reporting a PowerPoint presentation John Boehner used in 2011 Boehner as he apparently worked to secure approval of an agreement with the White House, that, if I am correct, became known as the ‘sequester.”

An excerpt from the TPM piece.

PowerPoint Presentation Shows Boehner Selling The Sequester To His Members In 2011 SAHIL KAPUR FEBRUARY 20, 2013, 11:10 AM 

House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio arrives to meet with reporters on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Feb. 14, 2013. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

Although he now blames President Obama for the draconian spending cuts set to take effectMarch 1, just days before it passed House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) characterized the so-called sequester as a way to hold the president accountable.

A PowerPoint presentation that Boehner sent to his conference on July 31, 2011, obtained by The Daily Beast’s John Avlon, cast the sequester and the rest of the deal in favorable terms. The seven-slide PowerPoint was titled “Two-Step Approach To Hold President Obama Accountable” and the final slide made the case for sequestration.

 Click for all slides.

Within two days, the Budget Control Act — a debt limit hike, a wave of nearly $1 trillion in spending cuts, and the sequester — was overwhelmingly passed by Congress and signed into law by Obama. “When you look at this final agreement that we came to with the White House, I got 98 percent of what I wanted,” Boehner told CBS News at the time. “I’m pretty happy.”

Read more

“Used with permission from the TPM websites, a service of TPM Media LLC.” All rights not expressly granted herein are hereby reserved.

Of course, a member of Boehner’s staff addressed the presentation as having no significance regarding use of the word sequester.  As stated above the GOP is ‘word-smithing’ the issue. Their actions may entertain their supporters and contribute to solace in the scope of their obstruction, but the acts are counter-productive and surreptitious.  

Now, take a second or two and look at another example of archived information.  http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2011/roll677.xml

Ed Schultz: Postal Service Dying, Boehner Lies and FOX NEWS Doocy Disgusts

Enjoy while the caffeine kicks-in!!!!

Ed Schultz, MSNBC to go along with your Sumatra,  Kopi Luwak Indonesian, Kenya AA, Tanzanian, French Roast, Kona Coast, ‘Black Ivory’ [ Thai Elephant Dong],  Jamaica Blue Mountain, Ethiopian Yirgacheffe, Costa Rican, Espresso,  Moyobama Peruvian Organic, Indonesian Blend, Coffee Latte, Kauai Blend (often bitter), Colombian Red Lips, or your Folgers 100% Colombian.

Coffees of the World

_____________________________

Ed Schultz explores the background of a dying Postal Service. Is it not enough that we are mailing few ‘slow mail’ times. Why do we have a political party that has declared war on one of the nations most reliable, dependable, and longstanding institution?  The Postal Service works!

The GOP is most assuredly trying to kill another Democratic voting bloc.

Th following video is 15 minutes plus in length, but I wager you will not find an idle moment.

The party that consistently speaks about “strict interpretation” of the US Constitution bails on the one service clearly delineated in the historic document. Do you vote Republican?  ____________________ 

Ed tackles GOP phoniness that is simply stupefying   The following segment leaves me with thoughts of , “how could anyone vote for these people?”

 

We are fortunate Mitt Romney’s 47% of people who feel entitled to food, housing and healthcare  exercise our right to vote. Boehner and his party agreed to a deal in 2011, and what do they do. They typically backtrack and bob and weave to avoid their own avoidance strategy.

____________________________

Finally Ed address yet another disgusting example of Fox News entertainment and propaganda. Is the network via its chief idiot Doocy, attempt to compete with Comedy Central or SNL? 

Steve Doocy, did not write the segment that he quickly attempted to weasel out of in a tweet.  The writers at Fox should avoid attempts at humor and satire. Unless, Fox is using interns to develop material for the obviously dim-witted Doocy. 

Louie Gohmert Via Mario Piperni

Cross posted from Mario Piperni Dot Com. The man and his artistry…and he has exceeded himself this time.

Crazy Louie Gohmert Does It Again

Simply knowing that Louie Gohmert was a member of your political party should be a good enough reason for any sane person to switch. His latest:

Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas said Monday night that President Barack Obama had a poor understanding of the Constitutional despite teaching constitutional law at one of the most prestigious universities in the country.

Gohmert, along with Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), appeared on Fox News’ Hannity to discuss a recent court ruling that found Obama had violated the Constitution when making recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The three-judge panel said the Senate remained formally in session when Obama made the appointments during Christmas break.

“It is part of the Constitution,” Gohmert said. “I think one of the big legal ramifications that should come out of this is a class-action lawsuit by all of those who had him as a constitutional law instructor to get their money back. I think it would be a lay-down case for them.”

Obama was a professor of constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School before launching his political career.

I’m quite sure that Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert is the benchmark by which stupid is measured. If he isn’t, then someone should make it so. We can start by declaring LG as a unit measurement of stupid. Members of congress could then be assigned an LG value. Michele Bachmann : .96 LG, Sarah Palin : 2.6 LGs, etc.

A few more election cycles to let demographics work its magic and rural Texas will hopefully catch up with the state’s urban areas – Dallas and Austin went Obama in both general elections. Unfortunately, gerrymandering will guarantee that Congress will always have its share of Louie Gohmerts.

Maybe stupid can’t be fixed but it can be slowed down.

___

Follow MarioPiperniDotCom on Facebook, Twitter and Google+.

Mario’s post garnered a few responses.  I am posting-up a response from a regular visitor to Mario Piperni Dot Com…the visitor (commenter) is one of those folk I read whenever I see the name. Enjoy…..

E.A. Blair says:

January 30, 2013 at 7:52 pm

The recess appointments the President made were supposedly invalidated because a single republican senator entered the senate chamber, banged a gavel, announced to an empty room that the US Senate was “in session”, hung around for a while and, being a Republican, probably told a few lies, called for a voice vote to repeal the ACA, and make abortion and being gay capital crimes, then banged the gavel again, announced that the “session” was over, and left.

That’s what “invalidated” those appointments.

Well, if that’s a session, than one kid showing up for classes constitutes a school day.

I checked my copy of the Constitution, and while Article II (which defines the powers of the Executive Branch) Section 2 states:

“The President shall have power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate, by granting commissions which shall expire at the end of their next session.”

and Article I (which defines the powers of the Legislative Branch) Section 2 states:

“The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall be on the first Monday in December, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.”

there is nothing in the document that defines a quorum for either the Senate or the House. That leaves the matter up to the rules of either body, which makes it subject to the abuse of the Republican filibuster, which can be used to block changes in the rules.

Personally, I think it’s a very weak point in the Constitution that allows a single legislator to block the workings of an entire other branch of the government. One way to fix this is to make it necessary for the President of the Senate (who is the Vice President or, if he is not available, the President Pro-Tem of the Senate, currently Patrick Leahy, D-VT) to call the body into session or for a significant percentage of the senators of both parties to be present to constitute a quorum (at least ½, maybe 2/3).

P.S. (Awakening the Grammar Nazi in me):

“President Barack Obama had a poor understanding of the Constitutional…”

I’m pretty sure President Obama knows how to take a walk.

.__________________________________

There are times when our commenters add critical value to the work…..  The Pardu

John Liming: Fiscal Cliff

Cross Posted from Blue Heart Chronicles….John Liming

An Inconvenient Slap In The Face!

December 28, 2012 – - My Opinion – -

Some  of our more obstructionist and intransigent Republicans, Democrats and other assorted and varied nork-wallowers on the farthest reaches of the extremist political cess pools in this country do not seem to be, to my way of thinking, so much concerned about growing the economy or saving our fiscal rear ends as they are about preserving and protecting their own over-massaged egos, their political careers and their many perks as electeds.

Of course I am the perennial cynic, I guess! 

Here we are supposedly going over some kind of “fiscal cliff” and there is, as of yet, little or no reported movement (other, perhaps than little oral theatrical bowel movements) from either the left who keeps on “waiting for the right to make a move” or the right who keeps on accusing the left of not being reasonable.

Even with all this gridlock, some of the newsies are reporting that the nation views the Republicans as the culprits who will, as the cliff comes and goes, be seen as the responsible party for everybody’s taxes going through the roof and for milk costing $8 a gallon.

Whether that is a fair assumption or not is, in my opinion – -  a matter of . . . opinion! (snark..snark!) 

  

It is strange to me that Republicans – - who cannot seem to sell their rather indistinct and sometimes mysterious agenda to the American Voter – - always seem to me to be harping about the dire need to control spending at the Federal Level and who are more than willing to throw thousands of needy folks under the bus with their continued insistence on cutting the guts out of every social safety net program they can get the cumulative fingers on have shown they are more than capable of running up exponential budgets through uncontrolled spending habits  - – - ala “The Bush Years” during which they created the biggest and most expensive government bureaucracy ever known to this country.

And some of them still have the mentally ejaculatory moxie to accuse the Left of these same idiotic things?

But then what is someone like me supposed to think when I observe  some of the Liberals, democrats and progressives spending just as wildly as their rightie counterparts and perhaps even a little more so?

Why do some of our elected geniuses appear more interested in throwing blame around than in finding workable solutions for problems?  Has anyone figured that one out yet? 

It is all too awe inspiring to someone like me who, like most “opinion” bloggers has no great amount of expertise in the affairs of high finance or in the nuances of Government machinations.

This should please the trolls who are always accusing me of lacking facts for my presentations.  Of course I lack facts for my presentations because there are too many facts and those facts are too varied in this present governmental mess – - and if the elected experts can’t figure it out, how does anyone expect me to? I can’t do it and neither can the arrogant a-wads who are so quick to challenge me whenever I write a blog post.  So, in a word – - ”Up yours, a-wads!”

But I am wondering if perhaps the Left does not deserve a little verbal butt kicking too for being weak enough to let them get away with it and I am wondering if they were given the same chance to overspend the national treasure, would the Left spend just as much or even more? And, in matter of fact – -  have they actually done so?

Is it all a matter of degrees?  Some people claim they have done exactly that!

But do the ones who make such claims have the foggiest notion of what they are talking about or are they talkingmore from the resounding chambers of some of their physical orfices than from common sense contained in reasoning noggins?

I imagine it depends on which side of the creek one stands on whether Lefties are more spendy than righties or the other way around.

Even though I believe there are some circumstances and some historical factualizations that need further perusal if one is to arrive at a safe, sane and valid conclusion:  

The world does not need to consult the phantasmagoric wastelands of right wing mythology to understand which of our political entities is responsible for our current “down- the- crap hole” fiscal situation.  The whole civilized world has now had the opportunity to observe as conservatives spun this web and they cannot deny culpability regardless of the amount of horse manure they try to shovel onto it in an attempt to hide it.

Well – - that is one of the arguments floating around out there anyway. 

Oh I am sure to catch hell from my favorite trolls on this one

So, basically – - “up theirs” with their phony little “fact-seeking” expeditions onto the comment section of my blog.

I cannot fathom, in the remotest stretches of my fertile imagination, exactly why the richest 1% of Americans at the top of the national food chain seems to always feel so poor, put off, neglected and vulnerable whenever anyone asks that they pay a few dollars more in taxes to help keep this nation afloat.

So far, as I see it, these 1% are the ones who have been getting the free ride on the backs of the fabled (and now somewhat notorious 47%) and if they have any kind of patriotism at all they should not object to seeing their first tax raise in more than 13 years.  Even some of their own kind who just happen to be billionaires have already publicly stated that it is time for the rich to pay a little more.

But some of the meatheads on the right wing extreme- – the effluvient ignoramuses who vomit propaganda and lies, who wallow in greed and ignorance, who hate and detest the commoners among the 47% of us peons- – they steadfastly keep their noses to the manure-scented winds of their governmental and fiscal fantasies (because they cannot seem – - in my view – - to escape the bonds and boundaries of their self-imposed mental blocks… their locked-in-thinking!) (The chains forged by the affliction of being enamored of the idea they are legends in their own minds.)

Is there any doubt in any body’s mind why it is that most of America soundly rejected the rightist-proferred mind-sex and took the more Liberal path to their hearts in the most recent test of Voter Will Power in this country?  

These damnable tax cuts for the rich have yet to produce the first viable job for workers in the United States as far as I can tell.  I think that most of the money gained through those tax cuts was probably invested (squandered)  in the markets in order to make more money or it may have been invested in overseas industrial adventures  - – the kind of adventures known for sucking American jobs away to overseas climes.

The bitch slapping of America by the far right extremist nut wagon may just be on the verge of doing it to us all again but I have a sneaking suspicion that if they don’t get off their fur-lined crap pots and get their collective asses in gear to do something to avoid this fiscal cliff and if they cause the American Voters to suffer any more than they already have – - there may be a new brand of hell to pay when the next opportunities to vote roll around in the mid terms of 2014 and beyond.

I am under the sneaking impression that if the Lefties don’t get their acts in gear, they may see similar unhappy results when the ire of America gets vented at the polls the next time around also.

The time for gridlock is over; the time for working together has returned with an immediate urgency that dare not be neglected! 

In my opinion, both collections of politicos over there in D.C., have joined hands – - either wilfully or through weakness – - to create this damned “cliff” thing and I think sinice they are the recognized “experts” in governing us all,  I think it is their collective responsibility to get us all out of this mess they have created.  

Posted by John R. Liming  

Picture Credit:  Illustration from DonkeyHotey ( Click Here ) is used under creative commons license. ( Click Here )        

Facebook Journey: Boehner Shows GOP Core Values

……and the Journey begins!

A political party that is 92% white, well, can we really expect much more? The alarm should be rung for sake of women here. But, that would mean Michelle Bachmann and Virginia Foxx… Oh man!

Slightly off topic but very relevant!

The next Journey will show-up here in a couple of days.

Gerrymandering 101 And Boehner’s House

It goes to show that when you get to choose the ground on which electoral battles are fought, you’re very likely to win them.~~ Nick Bauman, Mother Jones

John Boehner spoke to the nation the day after President Obama won re-election. His message in a few words, “Mr. President, you do not have a mandate, despite the overwhelming Electoral vote.  The voters gave a mandate to the GOP via holding onto control of the House.”  He finished his well crafted talk with what amounted to conciliation, defiance, and self-serving bravado  Bravado, or course, mixed with clear indications of ‘things will be different’ than in 2011.  Immersed in his words was the message, ‘hands off raising taxes”. While, he used words about small business owners, the voting publicly clearly now knows they wish to protect the nation’s wealthy at all and any cost.

Boehner and Cantor’s mandates could be the result of a process in Us political that has both good and bad potential with consideration of the party that holds the reigns of Power in the House of Representatives.  Such power was granted the Republicans in the House in the year 2011.  The 2010 Census and the elections of 2010, gave the GOP opportunity for re-districting congressional districts, after decade of population census change.  The GOP pursued redistricting as veraciously as they work to placate and massage the will of big business and the nations wealthy.

Through the re-districting process commonly known as “Gerrymandering”, Boehner and Cantor ensured control of the House through the 2014 Congressional elections.

Gerrymandering 101

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8r7qJvprHXw

WikiPedia on Gerrymandering… 

In the process of setting electoral districts, gerrymandering is a practice that attempts to establish a political advantage for a particular party or group by manipulating geographic boundaries to create partisan or incumbent-protected districts. The resulting district is known as a gerrymander (/ˈɡɛrimændər/, alt. /ˈdʒɛriˌmændər/); however, that word can also refer to the process.

Gerrymandering may be used to achieve desired electoral results for a particular party, or may be used to help or hinder a particular demographic, such as a political, ethnic, racial, linguistic, religious, or class group.

When used to allege that a given party is gaining disproportionate power, the term gerrymandering has negative connotations. However, a gerrymander may also be used for purposes that some perceive as positive, such as in US federal voting district boundaries that produce a majority of constituents representative of African-American or other racial minorities (these are thus called “majority-minority districts“).

Jeff Reichert in 2010 released a documentary on Gerrymandering that is an eye-opener.  The documentary is a full 77 minutes, thus less desirable for those who like a quick shot of information and the euphoria of moving on to the next brain entertainment  The documentary is revealing in its depiction of a political practice that needs a serious revisit and a fix.

Jeff Reichert’s Gerrymandering 

A said, how does re-districting, gerrymandering, benefit the GOP and maintaining a majority in the House of Representatives?

Why John Boehner Has Gerrymandering to Thank for His Majority…Mother Jones

Excerpt

Because the census was taken in 2010, GOP control of state legislatures and governors mansions around the country gave Republicans the power to draw congressional district lines largely as they chose. They seized that chance, aggressively gerrymandering so as to protect Republican incumbents and endanger any remaining Democrats. The Dems would have done the same thing, of course, had they won control of these crucial states in 2010. But they didn’t. Nick Bauman.

Excerpt

Here are the numbers for states that Obama won or came close and where Republicans drew the congressional map:

• North Carolina, which Obama lost by around 2 percentage points: 9-4 GOP

• Florida, which Obama won by around half a percentage point: 17-10 GOP

• Ohio, which Obama won by nearly 2 percentage points: 12-4 GOP

• Virginia, which Obama won by around 3 percentage points: 8-3 GOP

• Pennsylvania, which Obama won by more than 5 percentage points: 13-5 GOP*

• Wisconsin, which Obama won by 6 percentage points: 5-3 GOP

• Michigan, which Obama won by 8 percentage points: 9-5 GOP

It goes to show that when you get to choose the ground on which electoral battles are fought, you’re very likely to win them.

*Correction: This post originally said that Pennsylvania was 8-5 GOP. It’s actually 13-5 GOP.

Down With Tyranny Dot Blogspot Dot Com

Ohio Redistricting before and after the GOP Gerrymandeering.

Pennsylvania Redistricting before and after the GOP Gerrymandeering.

 

New York State Re-redistricting post 2010

Emily Brazelon  of Slate Dot Com writes…

It’s Appalling that Gerrymandering Is Legal

And if the Supreme Court guts the Voting Rights Act, it’s going to get a lot worse. 

By Emily Bazelon|Posted Friday, Nov. 9, 2012, at 5:14 PM ET

The maps are amazing: Ohio and Pennsylvania, states that went blue for Barack Obama, have congressional delegations that are heavily red. As David Weigel pointed out Wednesday, the maps show how gerrymandering saved the Republican majority in the House. (Even though Obama won Pennsylvania by 5 points, Republicans took 13 of 18 House districts. In Ohio, Obama won by two and the GOP kept 12 of 16 House seats.*) It’s outrageous. It’s also perfectly legal, and Democrats do it too, when given the chance—just ask the Republicans in Illinois. Gerrymandering is an American game both parties play because the courts allow it and the voters don’t punish them for it.

On Friday, the Supreme Court agreed to hear a challenge to the Voting Rights Act, the only real bulwark against gerrymandering still standing. With the election over, it was inevitable that such a case would move onto the court’s docket. That doesn’t make it good news.

Re-districting can prove beneficial for either party.  It has been used to distribute black votes to the positive for district citizens and their representatives   It is factually the way the game is played whenever opportunity prevails. The 2010 Census handed the GOP the line drawing leverage, and the GOP ‘drew’.  

The problem in terms of the November 6th General Election, GOP Gerrymandering handed the party opportunity to hold a majority in the House.  There is something about the picture that takes away the foundation of Boehner’s claim of a mandate to stand tall as the protector of the nation’s wealthy and uber wealthy. 

Fox News Reveals "Greedy Former Seal’s" [bin Laden Raid] Name

Image: FOX NEWS

Think Progress – SECURITY is reporting on the ongoing story of a quest form money born of the Osama bin Laden Raid in may of 2011.  As I have now written three pieces on stories related to alleged Obama Administration leaks related to the raid, I am finding great solace in developments over the past week.

Earlier today I published a piece about a book that written by one of the  Seal Raiders. The relevance the book related directly to accusation by many GOP members of Congress that operational secrets emanated from the White House. Yes, the White House approved a film related to the raid, but not one republican produced information that top secret information was divulged via the White House. 

As last weeks “Dishonorable Disclosure” 22 minute video was released, it was easy to see the genesis of the exhibition. Republicans in Congress, especially John McCain  accused the President of fostering an environment of leaks, a moneyed tea party supporter aligns with a noted former “SEAL” anti-Obama group, and  hires an anti-Obama former Seal GOP official to sit before the camera: flawed 22 minute video ensues.  The sad state of conservative anti-Obama hatred. 

Since I have written about ”Dishonorable Disclosure” (No completely discredited) I will forgo further.   The latest in the now disgusting story of all things related to the bin Laden Raid: Fox News has blown the writer of the book and they have divulged his state of origin. Are you at all surprised that Ruppert Murdoch’s Fox News would place the greedy former Seal book writer at risk?

The Progressive Influence
[Linked 1; Linked 2.] 

Think Progress (see ‘published’ link below)

Fox News Publishes Name Of SEAL Who Led Bin Laden Raid

By Ben Armbruster on Aug 23, 2012 at 12:35 pm

Fox News today published the name of a U.S. Navy SEAL who led the raid on Osama bin Laden’s compound in Pakistan last year that ended up in the al-Qaeda leader’s death. The SEAL under the pseudonym Mark Owen is the author of a book set to be released on Sept. 11 detailing the events of the raid. The book’s publisher says Owen “was one of the first men through the door on the third floor of the terrorist leader’s hideout and was present at his death.”

Fox News said that “multiple sources” told the news outlet Owen’s real name but Fox did not provide any details about its decision to publish it. The book seemingly provides some clues as to the SEAL’s real identity as, according to the New York Times, Owen “recalls his childhood in Alaska.”

The details of the foolish and greedy Seal and FOX News’ lack of journalistic competence, or journalistic integrity, are left for you to read, if you so choose. My concern is much more about shady politics.  

Shady politics that appear clear as more and more information about alleged leaks comes forth. After the dust settles on what is probably the real security leaks related to the bin Laden Raid, it will be both intriguing and sad if the same GOP ‘mouthpieces’ do not climb-up on the Senate and Hose Chamber Floors to speak about the book writer. Of much more significance, “will those mouthpieces take Murdoch’s Fox News to task?”  McCain, Boehner and many others railed until ‘pink-in-the-face’ as they attacked a phantom leak from the White House. Fox News not only printed the ‘foolish greedy’ book writer’s name, the Public Relations and Entertainment Network published the location of his high school years. 

Question?  Who puts the future of Seal missions (A false mantra to begin with) at risk. It appears Fox News wins that honor! Let’s hypothetically allow that the writer is located by Bin Laden sympathizers, taken into their custody, and tortured till died, but after revealing all he knew of the raid.  As we consider Fox New’s revelation, is that hypothetical not more dire than White House approval for a film related to the bin Laden raid. Is it hard to imagine that the Administration consulted with Leon Penetta, Admiral McRaven (Seal Commander) and others as to what was fair game for the filmmakers   

The entire issue is one of GOP politics and desire to deny the president all rightful ’props’ related to avenging 9/11.