Amb. Pickering: I offered to testify and was rejected
Ambassador Thomas Pickering responds to Congressman Darrell Issa’s claim that the diplomat should testify on the Benghazi incident.
Darrel Issa has excluded witnesses frorm testimony before the Oversight Committee on a few occasions. One notable exclusion that worked against the republicans in 2012 was Sandra Fluke. The firestorm of Rush Limbaugh, GOP “Shock and Awe” and Issa’a failure to properly staff the witness pool on the Affordable Care ACA Hearings backfired on the gOP miserably. Issa’s actions generated a tsunami herded-on by Limbaugh that rivaled Mitt Romney’s 47% comments to the uber wealthy in Boca Ration Florida. You know the rest of that story? In fact, CUMULUS Media, Inc. continues to suffer revenue losses resultant from Limbaugh’s three day guttural tirades against Ms. Fluke’s accurate complaints about being denied opportunity to speak before the Oversight Committee.
It is important to keep in mind, Issa denied Fluke an opportunity to sit as a witness. In fact, not one woman sat as a witness; a fact that eventually contributed to Fluke’s appearance and led to major national attention to GOP insensitivity to issues important to he woman of our nation.
This past Sunday’s Meet The Press, noted ambassador Thomas Pickering threw a ‘knuckle-ball’ in Darrell Issa’s appearance before the nation. We offer Pickering’s remarks in two segments. As you watch the segments, note Issa’s demeanor and antics. His over-talking and stammering came across like a criminal sitting with “good guy, bad guy” detectives in a interrogation room. During the second, longer segment, David Gregory seemed to dismiss Issa’s stammering Palin-like mumblings for clarity from Pickering.
The remainder of the Meet The Press segment…..
You may have noticed Issa’s sudden willingness to move the hearings of camera. Off-camera, Issa?
Huffington Post via the AP’s Phillip Elliott provides more detail about Pickering and his comments about Issa’s investigation. I should say false investigation and political attempt at a pre-emptive attack against Hillary Clinton and continued snipping at President Obama.
The US House and US Senate are legislative bodies comprised of Democrats and Republicans (And scant Independents) who agree nothing (along party lines). When we find agreement across party lines we ask ourselves about the impetus for such strange and unusual behavior.
Concern for government abuse of the Internet: War For The Web (excerpt trailer)
On April 27th, 2012 OpenSecrets Blog (Dot Org) posted a comprehensive article on congressional measures alleged to provide protection against violation of intellectual property laws. (PIPA, SOPA, and CISPA). CISPA (Cyber Information Security Protection Act) remains an active congressional cancer a permanent host on our Internet. Over the past week the House of Representatives (The House of OZ) passed CISPA [288 (for) -127 (against) vote] and the bill moves to the US Senate. President Obama has threatened to veto the Bill, if privacy protection isn’t sufficiently developed in the bill.
The April 2012 article linked this list of companies that published letters of support for CISPA. A 2013 list of supporting companies and associated lobbying dwarfs the 2012 list and spending amounts. (See Sunlight Foundation, The Daily Dot, House of Representatives Intelligence Committee). The numbers of supporting expenditures appear much like Jonah and the Whale. One hundred and 140 times spending in support of CISPA than spending against CISPA ($605 million ”for”; $4.3 million “against”).
We have posted a Anonymous Pastebin post in supporting of direct Twitter protest to a group of companies that support CISPA.
#tweetstorm CISPA supporting companys
BY: A GUEST ON APR 18TH, 2013
Tweet them some messages like :
- @(company’stwitteradress) your company is willing to take down our privacy, then we are willing to take down your company, greeting #anonymous
- @(company’stwitteradress) Oppose Cispa if you value any privacy in our digital world
- @(company’stwitteradress) we are deeply unhappy that the House seems poised to destroy everyone’s online and by extension offline privacy
- @(company’stwitteradress) CISPA overrides existing privacy law, and grants broad immunities to participating companies.
- @(company’stwitteradress) We’re not going to sacrifice all of our liberties for the illusion of safety.
- @(company’stwitteradress) your support of CISPA shows your hypocrisy, asking everyone else to give up their right to privacy, while you remain able to hold onto yours.
—————————————————————————————–
ACCEL Partners: @accel
Akamai: @akamai
Amgen: @amgen
Apple: @apple_worldwide
Arch Ventrue Partners: ???
AT&T: @att
Bidgely: @bidgely
BloomEnergy: @bloom_energy
Broadcomm: @Broadcom
ChargePoint: @ChargePointnet
Cisco: @CiscoSystems
Craigslist: @craigslist
Covington & Burling LLP: @CovingtonLLP
Davis Write Tremaine, LLP: ????
Dell: @Dell
Dewey Square Group: @DeweySquare
ebay: @ebay
eHealth: ???
Elance: @Elance
EMC: @EMCcorp
Encryptics: @encryptics
Enernoc: @EnerNOC
etagen: ???
F5 Networks: @f5networks
Facebook: @facebook
FloDesign: ???
Gap Inc: @GapInc
Genentech: @Genentech
Gilead Sciences: @GileadSciences
Global Foundries: ???
Goodwin Procter: ???
Google: @google
GridX: ???
HP (Hewlett Packard): @HP
Intel: @Intel
Intellectual Ventures: @IVinvents
Juniper Networks: @JuniperNetworks
KPCB: @kpcb
Lee and Hayes: ???
LiveOps: @LiveOps
Lucid: @luciddg
Madrona Investment Group: @MadronaVentures
Marvell: ???
Microsoft: @microsoft
MIND Research: @MIND_Research
Nasdaq OMX: @NASDAQOMX
Oracle: @oracle
Palantir Technologies: @PalantirTech
pfizer: @pfizer_news
pointb: @PointB
Pokeware: @PokewarePR
Rackspace Hosting: @rackspace
Reboot Partners: ???
SalesForce: @salesforce
SilverSpring: @silverspringnet
SmartSheet: @smartsheet
Spokeo: @spokeo
Stanford University: @stanford
SV Angel: @svangel
Sillicon Valley Bank Fin Grp: @SVB_Financial
Symantec: @symantec
Synopsys: @synopsys
TechNexus: @TechNexus
T-Mobile: @tmobile
Tendril: @tendril
VeriFone: @verifone
Verisign: @verisign
Visa: @visa
WGBH: @wgbh
WSGR: @wilsonsonsini
Yahoo!: @yahoo
yelp: @yelp
TechNet: @technetnews
What is the deal on CISPA? Many corporations support the bill, or support some from on legislative corralling of the Internet. Companies that fought SOPA and PIPA appear as supporters of CISPA. Many users of the internet and people like you and me have concerns for future abuse of the legislation. Personally, I am not one who subscribes to ”….corporations are people, my friend.”
The corporation is a chartered entity, with a singular focus of providing a service or product with an exchange of some form of remuneration. The entity needs customers (people or other companies for purchasing products or services) and it needs people as employees. The relationship between corporations and people stops at that point. An exchange relationship ends at that point with proliferation of a chartered living entity with no other purpose beyond maintaining itself as an ongoing business concern.
Why is legislating the internet so critical and important to major corporations? We do not have an answer. ServInt published a piece in March of this year that is an effective appeal to people in opposition of CISPA. The piece does not pretend to address the “why” of corporate support for CISPA. ServInt’s piece echoes my perception of the Obama Administration’s concern about CISPA: erosion of individual privacy.
It should be noted and reinforced, Anonymous has published a list of supporters of CISPA to facilitate activism against CISPA. The Hacktivist group is not purporting any sort of boycott of the corporations.
While the TPI will not go dark tomorrow, we will not post any pieces to the web pages for sake of openness we do not have the technical wherewithal nor web developer savvy to affect going ‘dark’. We agree with President Obama’s threat of a veto if privacy issues are not effectively developed in the bill and we agree with the Anonymous appeal for going ‘dark’ tomorrow (April 22nd, 1013).
We realize 47% of voters last fall cast votes for Mitt Romney/Paul Ryan and a conservative agenda. Those votes cast Right leaning voters regardless Romney’s horribly comical and ineffective campaign, his utter insensitivity to issues regarding people of color, his (and Ryan’s pathological lying), his 47% video and past history of less than stellar economic performance from the Right.
Since we have consistently written and posited about those in the nation who will never find Barack Obama an acceptable denizen of the White House, there is no need to rehash those screeds. We will, however, not hesitate to screed in wonderment of how Americans can allow flawed paradigms propaganda, aversion to empirical data, and inner ghosts, to so completely cloud their judgment.
As stated by the meandering Rand Paul in his quest to win over African-Americans, “I will not give up“.
Fact Check Dot Org has published what they call a “Quarterly Update” on the Obama’s economic performance. As we prepare to post the Fact Check Quarterly Update, I will admit to a bit of ‘snark.’ I do not remember seeing such reports during the Bush Years.
Obama’s Numbers (Quarterly Update)
From jobs to debt to oil production, what’s changed since Obama took office.
Posted on April 16, 2013
Summary
Reviewing some key statistical measures of Barack Obama’s presidency so far, we find:
The economy has added more jobs since Obama took office than it did in his predecessor’s entire eight years in office.
Despite the improved economy, the number of people receiving food-stamp assistance has continued to grow, and now more people have been added to the food-stamp rolls under Obama than under any single previous president.
Federal spending under Obama has grown faster than inflation, but far more slowly than it did under President Bush.
Federal debt held by the public has grown by 90 percent since Obama took office.
Obama has ordered seven times more drone strikes than Bush in the covert conflicts in Pakistan and Yemen, according to independent estimates.
Domestic oil production has soared; oil imports have dropped by one-third; new cars are getting 17 percent better mileage; and wind and solar power have increased 157 percent.
These are some of the insights that emerge from the first in a series of regular quarterly updates of key statistical indicators of the Obama presidency.
As with our “Obama’s Numbers” article in October, and the pre-election update we posted Nov. 5, our intent is to provide accurate measures of what’s changed — for better or worse — since Obama first took office in January 2009.
President Obama proposed the Administration’s 2014 Budgetthis Wednesday. A couple of comments. I feel the publishing of the Budget is a “good thing.” There are budget items in the document worthy of praise and deep consideration and deliberation. On the other hand there are times in the Budget that cause me deep concert. Yes, I am a liberal who finds any consideration of “cutting” social Security be it via Chained CPI or raising the retirement age is a far greater pill to swallow, than is necessary.
First, Social Security is solvent for another 20 years. Beyond 2037, yes Social Social would embark on a slope to financial death. We have no argument with that as Baby Boomers and Generation ‘X’ ers move into retirement age.
Year 2014 proposed cuts to social Security during periods of battling a return to a Great (Bush) Recession is both ridiculous and factually unnecessary. Improve our economic lives and move to dealing with deficit drains in a few years. wait! Social Security is not a drain on the deficit. Some conservative economist and conservative think tanks like The Heritage Foundation, frequently deploy a weak and tired argument as to how Social Security is a deficit drain. Consider the source. Conservatives have been against Social Security since before its inception. FDR campaign speech segment (1.16 minutes) “Let Me Warn You!” The Congressional Budget Office projections (pdf). One last projection grpahic3.bp.blogspot.com tiff. I do not see many arguments that Social Security is not solvent until after 2033. Why do we have to apply cuts to the meager benefits to our older citizens at this point?
Why does the President continue to avoid consideration of and proposals related to removing or reducing the impact of the Social Security Cap? In other and more basic words, when the high income earners compensation reaches $113,700 (Effective 1.1.2013) why are they excuse for contributions to the life sustaining program? It is time to rethink that provisions of the Payroll Tax law. Yet, it is absent from the Administration’s Budget!
In 1983, a commission chaired by Alan Greenspan recommended a number of changes to Social Security. The changes enacted under President Reagan put Social Security on a sound footing for the subsequent decades. At that time, Social Security collected payroll taxes on 90 percent of wages and salaries. By 2004, this ratio had dropped to 84.9 percent as high-wage earners saw above average wage increases that led to more of their money
moving beyond the cap above which earnings are no longer subject to Social Security taxation, currently $90,000. Thus, because a small number of high-wage earners have experienced above average wage growth, they effectively receive a hidden tax cut.
A closer look at the data shows:
• Rising earnings inequality accounts for half of Social Security’s shortfall. That is, had earnings inequality remained the same since 1983, such that a constant share of wages and salaries – 90 percent – had been subject to Social Security taxation, Social Security’s shortfall would be 47.7 percent smaller.
• If the cap is raised immediately, Social Security’s solvency would improve markedly. An increase to 90 percent of wages and salaries would reduce Social
Security’s shortfall by 35.4 percent, while the complete elimination of the cap would make Social Security solvent for the next 75 years.
• Raising or eliminating the cap would restore tax fairness for Social Security. In 2002 – the last year for which data are available – 5.4 percent of taxpayers earned more than the Social Security cap. While the share of taxpayers with earnings above the cap has declined, the share of earnings above the cap has grown.
“Removing the cap entirely, thereby imposing a flat tax of 12.4 percent on all earnings — essentially a $100 billion a year tax increase on the wealthy — would more than completely close the funding gap” More recently (Septempter 2010), here’s what Janemarie Mulvey wrote in a report for the
Congressional Research Service:
“If all earnings were subject to the payroll tax, but the base was retained for benefit calculations, the Social Security Trust Funds would remain solvent for the next 75 years.”
For those readers who don’t fully grasp the question, or my answer, here’s Ms. Mulvey’s statement of the problem, upon which I can’t much improve:
Social Security taxes are levied on covered earnings up to a maximum level set each year. In 2010, this maximum — or what is referred to as the taxable earnings base — is $106,800. [For 2012, the cap will be $110,100.] The taxable earnings base serves as both a cap on contributions and a cap on benefits. As a contribution base, it establishes the maximum amount of each worker’s earnings that is subject to the payroll tax. As a benefit base, it establishes the maximum amount of earnings used to calculate benefits.
Since 1982, the Social Security taxable earnings base has risen at the same rate as average wages in the economy. However, because of increasing earnings inequality, the percentage of covered earnings that are taxable has decreased from 90% in 1982 to 85% in 2005. The percentage of covered earnings that is taxable is projected to decline to about 83% for 2014 and later. Because the cap was indexed to the average growth in wages, the share of the population below the cap has remained relatively stable at roughly 94%.
Read more linked above.
Second, It did not take much of an imagination to guess that the following would ooze from someone in the GOP.
Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR), the Chairman of National Republican Congressional Committee and his now famous CNN remarks. (The first 2 minutes of the video are specifically relevant to my screed, the remainder is just CNN air-time gabble-de-goop).
President Obama’s Budget Proposal posed as a compromise proposal is instantly became campaign mantra for a GOP Member of the House of OZ (see below).
After 24 hours of complete quiet from the GOP, Some in the Grand OLD Party are starting to speak out against Walden’s Campaign mantra. While, Speaker of the House (Of OZ) Boehner has indicated a lack of full support for Walden’s remarks the Party is again revealing in its quietness. Quiet when it should be very vocal in opposition to Walden’s sleazy attack. The real problem with the “quiet”, it can indicate GOP agreement with Walden’s tactic.The DCCC, The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, released a videoon Thursday in response to Walden and the GOP reaction to his ‘campaign mantra’.
And, that would not surprise me in the least bit.House of OZ The Road to OZ is not a road paved with Yellow (Gold) bricks.
The Land of OZ(The OZ skyline, and a place of conservative happiness and glee…Ah such a beautiful place. Few minorities, no LGBTs; just enough poor people for servants; Predator Drones have replaced chirping birds; thoughts of climate change are illegal, collective bargaining is non-existent; private schools proliferate, public schools are no longer funded; women do not dare think of an Equal Rights Amendment; Minorities based solely on skin color have voter ID cards, whites do not have voter ID cards; women votes are counted 1 actual vote for for three women votes (the 1/3rd Rule); Medicare and Medicaid are extinct entitlement programs, Food Stamps is a by-gone thing of the past, Images of starving Americans are prohibited; the national minimum wage is no longer a federal requirement; corporate CEO is worshiped on Sundays, the President of the United States is subordinate to the nation’s CEOs; Pat Buchanan is the Minister of Information and Cultural Preservation; Sarah Palin is the Minister of Education Programs, Communications Curriculums and Historical Studies; Education programs include mandatory attendance in “why the nations new minority (whites) are granted s “Super Privilege” status; Entitlement Programs have been banned w/the elderly as the wards of the core family; The Keystone XL Pipeline is a national monument denoted by Canada (It no longer pumps filthy oil derivatives but cost too much to dismantle); national media is a monolithic FOX NEWS; Fox News has officially been anointed FOXPEN (Fox Propaganda and Entertainment Network and the GOP Land of Oz is a place where cognitive abilities are only exercised in gaining and preserving personal wealth…AHH such a wonderful place)
Mitch McConnell, Minority Leader U.S. Senate, has via another electronic recording reveal an under-belly of thuggery and disgust in US politics.
The Young Turks Cenk Ygur (We selected this version for captions of the McConnell meeting. After the 3:07 minute mark, nothing of real significance in this video. Full transcript (Mother Jones)
Questions from the press and McConnell’s response to the leaked Ashley Judd audio tape (surrounded by the Court of The Prevaricate, hereafter referred to as The court): Thune, Blount, Cornyn and Barasso)
Did you notice the body language and facials from The Court? Quite unlike the bravado buoyancy exhibited as The Court reaped obstruction on President Obama and the nation.
The The Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) has entered the fray. CREW’s entry with request for ethics committee and FBI investigation undoubtedly generate a dual effect in the US Senate. McConnell without doubt suffered a tsunami “butt-pucker.” And, the The Court may just show a great deal of reticence in standing alongside likely tarnished Leader.
According to Huff Post the ethics complaint are as follows.
“Using taxpayer-funded resources to pay staffers to dig up dirt on political opponents isn’t just an ethics violation, it’s a federal crime,” saidCREW Executive Director Melanie Sloan. “As Sen. McConnell requested, the FBI is investigating the recording. A thorough and fair investigation necessitates the bureau also inquire into whether Sen. McConnell himself violated the law.”
“Obviously a recording device of some kind was placed in Senator McConnell’s campaign office without consent,” McConnell campaign manager Jesse Benton said in a statement.
Huff Post is reporting a Progress Kentucky PAC is responsible for the surreptitious recording. Apparently, officials for the Democrat Party revealed the source of the audio tape. The motive for revealing the source, ’to defray allegations of Democratic Party involvement in the recording’.
Could it be Judd’s non-candidacy may have deleterious impact on McConnell as a Senate leader and future candidate for the Kentucky Seat?
In early March, the Rachel Maddow Show ran a segment on popular interest in gun control background checks for guns purchases. The results echo all other survey results I have seen since December 2012.
Maddow’s research team asked about survey respondent interest in (gun purchase) Background Checks, Capitalism, Italian Food, Vacation. To my personal surprise background checks finish at 91% (preference) over vacation at 61% preference.
Fifty-two percent of respondents to a Washington Post Poll (March 26, 2013) supported stricter gun controls while forty-five percent opposed stricter controls.
The 13 Republican senators who have vowed to filibuster any attempt at tightening gun controls. Photograph: guardian.co.uk
When President Obama made his state of the union address in February, he had a simple message to deliver to Congress. In the wake of the Newtown shooting, in which 20 children aged five and six were killed, it was time for Congress to debate commonsense proposals to reduce the threat of gun violence and at the very least to vote for them.
“The families of Newtown deserve a vote,” he said.
Read More
UPDATE: 14 GOP Senators have increased to over fourteen.
McConnell ,Senate Minority Leader, joins the flock.
Oh, Mitch…better be careful!!!
Joe Scarborough will end this piece…..
To be Continued: Part II from the Obamacrat Dot com web page.
You may have seen the article from Huffington Post regarding a solid block of resistance to the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The southern states, in all of their compassion for people, are concrete-solid in opposition to enacting a key provision of the ACA. Yes, the humane and forward thinking US South again shows it continues to disregard life-sustaining compassion and has moved very little from the days of the US Confederacy.
Despite the fact the Affordable Care Act has been enacted and adjudicated as constitutional, conservative America continues to throw-up barriers to implementation. Conservative America? GOP politicians (state and federal government) expend more energy resisting President Obama’s signature legislation, makes one wonder to what extent they will accept and induce harm to people for sake of conservative 3P’s (Philosophy, policy and practice.) You wonder about the perfect example?
A region of the nation that includes the highest number of medically uninsured has come together like their seditious predecessor confederacy against working to provide life saving or life-sustaining medical care. In most cases, their confederacy hurts the chronically unemployed and poor families including children. A quick glance at the pre-Civil War confederacy is virtually mirrored by States that have joined in solidarity against the ACA. The US Confederate States and border states
Red- Confederate States, Blue-Union states that banned slavery, Yellow- Border Union states, permitting slavery, Sky Blue- Union territories not permitting slavery.
A revealing look at the “Uninsured 2011″
Closely read the legend for the Confederacy map above. While, this piece is not centrally focused on slavery, human bondage was core to the US Confederacy (and affiliated border states). It appears the US Confederacy is existentially very much alive and well in the United States. Alive and well and still very much insensitive to most things humane. The resistance to the ACA, especially refusal to accept federal expenditures for providing proper coverage to US citizens is as perplexing (Yet not surprising).
The resistance is more evidence of a deteriorated state of US politics, more evidence of obstruction against liberal (compassionate) policies at the state and federal level. And yes, without doubt more GOP evidence of resistance the nation’s African-American President.
The deteriorated state of US politics? Simply, stated all things Democrats means mixing like oil and water for the GOP. In fairness I will suggest if roles were reverse Democracity resistance would be similar. However, I say such considering GOP politics is almost without exception against the grain of core Democratic principles. With 45 to 50 million people uninsured, we would expect (and appreciate) Democrat resistance to GOP politics and practices that work against people and for big business. Despite GOP resistance. A look at the US diversity of a free health clinic lines should send messages to rational and compassionate people.
Irrefutable American diversity. A message for a political party that is 92% white.
“….more evidence of obstruction against liberal (compassionate)policies at the federal level.”
Let’s look at the resistance against the ACA and “march-in-step” obstruction. We are taking it to where it is needed most: The Affordable Care Act and the needs of human beings with no medical coverage.
Conservative America and a look at the role women are playing in obstruction to the ACA.
A glimpse at a pathetic memory of the SCOTUS decision on the ACA. History looks ugly.
Rep “Mean Jean” Schmidt Wigs Out thinking Supreme Court Struck Down The ACA
How about a quick look at state obstruction. Watch the Governor of the GREAT State of South Carolina as she introduces Mitt Romney (the man who would not be president). The first 200 seconds of theclip clear shows obstruction for sake of obstruction as Haley moves towards ACA obstruction she declares as long as she is governor there will be no expansion of Medicaid as long as Obama is president.
“Not in South Carolina,” Gov. Nikki Haley declared at the recent Conservative Political Action Conference. “We will not expand Medicaid on President Obama’s watch. We will not expand Medicaid ever.”
A short time ago The Atlantic Citiespublished a piece which included a map posted above.
A few months back, our own Richard Florida broke down the geography of America’s uninsured, noting the “uninsured belt” he saw running through much of the South and the Sunbelt.
Nationwide, 17.1 percent of Americans lacked health insurance in 2011, according to the Gallup Healthways Well-Being Index, which also produced the map below. But there are stark differences between the states. More than one in five people are uninsured in roughly a dozen states, starting with Texas (27.6 percent), Mississippi (23.5 percent), Florida (22.9 percent), Oklahoma (22.1 percent), California (22.0 percent) [non-confederate state] , and Nevada (21.9 percent)[non-confederate state] . Compare those figures with Massachusetts, which boasts the lowest rate of uninsured people in the nation, at less than five percent. Massachusetts, of course, already has an individual mandate thanks to the health-care reform efforts of former governor Mitt Romney. (Highlight added by The Pardu)
Click map for larger image
Here’s Richard Florida on some of his findings on the geography of the uninsured:
Uninsured states are significantly more religious, based on the percentage of state residents who say that religion plays an important role in their everyday life. The correlation between the two is .51.
Politics and ideology factor in as well. Conservative states (based both on the percentage of state residents who identify as conservatives (.58) and the percentage of who voted for McCain in 2008 (.60) have a higher percentage of uninsured citizens. Economics also comes into play. There is a positive correlation between the percent of a population that is uninsured and the poverty rate (.58). Blue-collar and working class states also boast a higher level of uninsured (.40).
Not surprisingly, the share of the population that is uninsured is lower in more affluent and more highly educated states. The share of uninsured people is negatively associated with state income levels, the percentage of college grads, and the percentage of workers in professional, knowledge, and creative occupations.
South Carolina’s Haley speak volumes about GOP ACA obstruction. She also spoke with words that instantly induce a question as to why not expand Medicaid on “Obama’s watch?” GOP governors in states with high levels of uninsured are practicing administration malfeasance in political solidarity against the ACA.
…deals with one of the Right’s more asinine and ridiculous mantra. ”Obama the Socialist.”
If President Obama is a socialist, then he is the worst socialist ever! The stock market recently hit record highs over 14,200 (way up from the low 6,000s when he took office); corporations are hoarding more than $3 Trillion in cash; and corporate after-tax profits hit a record high of 11.1% of the U.S. economy (GDP) in the third quarter of 2012 (= $1.75 Trillion).
Unfortunately, the prosperity is not trickling down: Wage and salary income was the lowest ever at only 43.5% of GDP. Let’s face it folks, corporations aren’t building a better mousetrap (innovating) or selling more products/services, they’re just increasing profits by squeezing workers. That’s the lazy, unpatriotic way to make more profit. With high unemployment, it’s a labor buyer’s market. The rich are getting rich by making the rest of us work harder for less money.
I am reminded of this “joke”: What’s the difference between Communism and Capitalism? In Communism, man is exploited by man. In Capitalism, it is quite the reverse.
Communism stifles growth and innovation because no one is incentivized to do more. Unbridled capitalism — because it inevitably leads to extreme concentrations of wealth and power — also stifles growth and innovation.
Like highways and sports, every economic system needs basic rules of the road to reduce reckless behavior and ensure fair play. I like my capitalism with speed limits and guard rails.
After surviving eight disastrous years of the Bush – Cheney Regimeand the near apocalyptic consequences of that, the nation decided to do something different for a change. Instead of electing the next fool in line, we decided to actually put some thought into it. We went with a young African-American Senator. Some might say, he had “limited experience” but he was extremely gifted. He was highly educated. In touch with the youthful vitality of our nation. Full of infectious hope, he would bring new ideas to the table.
No matter how great he is, he still needs blockers.
The weed of racism has deep roots in our American garden and we had to work mightily to overcome the choke hold of it’s grip on our politics. We refused to take “no” for an answer and beat back the doubters with the mantra of “yes we can.” And we did it! Then we all took a rest from our labors. It was almost as though we had passed our star “Running Back” the ball and we headed to the bench to watch the game. Politics like football is a team sport. No matter how gifted one might be, they cannot defeat the opposing team all by themselves. Did everyonereally believe that the Republican opposition was going to join us on the benches and sit back and watch President Obama run up the score? Based on our actions, or more correctly inactions, that seems to be exactly what we thought.
Obstruct
The very night of President Obama’s first inauguration, while we wept, danced and celebrated, Republicans were behind closed doors plotting our downfall and destruction. Their primary objective as expressed by Mitch McConnell, “was to make President Obama a one term President.” They purposefully decided not to govern and to obstructany and everythingPresident Obama has attempted to do.
I’m beginning to suspect the real problem Republicans have is our President happens to be Black!
We have had a record number of filibusters since President Obama took office. They’re on track to shatter that record again this year. We’ve seen Republicans sponsor a bill, then when President Obama says “it’s a good idea” they’ve voted against and killed their own bill. Even bills that used to be proforma – no brainers – such as VAWA – The Violence Against Women Act – have met with stiff opposition. Whom in their right mind wouldn’t vote to pass the Violence Against Women Act? If you’re reading this, you’ve got a mother… guaranteed. That’s a bill you’d vote for if for no other reason than you’ve got a mother.
Racism Exposes Stupidity
Here’s the thing everyone needs to remember. The Republicans control the House of Representatives. Thus there is no need for even one filibuster in the Senate over a bill!If you need to, read that again. Before a bill ever makes it to the President’s desk for his signature, it must first make it through not one, but both Houses of Congress. Thus merely for the sake of seeming reasonable, why wouldn’t you let it pass the Senate with no opposition and let the Republican controlled House of Representatives take the hit for blocking it? Senate Republicans could act responsibly and give the impression that they were reasonable and above the fray. However their innate racism causes them to do things that simply make no common sense and ultimately, are bad strategically. I fully expect Mitch McConnell to lose to Ashley Judd in his next election and it will be his own fault. For those who need a refresher course on how our legislative process works, I present a classic “School House Rock.”
Given that Republicans have all lined up to be fitted with their patriotic, red, white and blue straight jackets, you would think that the Democratic Progressives would be pressing their advantage and mopping the floor with a Republican party in full disarray… They are not!
Have Progressives Lost Their Damn Minds?
When your foe has shot himself in the foot, you don’t rush over and bandage his wounds, give him a shot of morphine and a crutch so he can continue the fight. You put him away… efficiently and with finality. This is not a sport. This is a fight for the future of our nation. If you have the strength of convictions in your political philosophy and ideologies, you have but one objective and that is to shape this nation in accordance with your principles. Make no mistake, the Republicans – if they were not busily engaged in cutting their own throats – would press their advantage without hesitation if the roles were reversed.
Senate Majority Leader – Harry Reid
With the initiation of this most recent Congressional session, the Senate – under the control of the Democrats and Harry Reid – had the opportunity to change the rules and hamstring the rampant abuse of the filibuster process. No need to totally get rid of it. Just return it to the way it used to be. If you want to filibuster a Bill, hold the floor until you either cannot hold it any longer or until you persuade your fellow legislators to come over to your side. The way it currently is, a Senator can filibuster a Bill and the public might not even know which Senator had done this… or why! Have Progressives lost their damn minds? This one is a no-brainer!
The Subtle Bigotry Of Back Seat Driving
Ed Schultz
Have you noticed that there are an awful lot of Progressives offering free advice to President Obama via their talk shows? I’ve been paying attention to politics ever since the first Presidential election I was old enough to participate in. To be sure, there have been Presidents I have thought were excellent and Presidents with whom I had strong disagreements with… of both political parties.
To be sure, the media coverage fell along the lines you might expect. Pundits took issue and disagreed with Presidential positions and other Pundits defended those positions. What I have not noticed, up until now, has been every Tom, Dick and Harry with access to a television camera, telling the President of the United States how he ought to do his job. This is a new phenomenon. Yes, we’ve taken issue with a lot of the policies of nearly each and every President there has been. However, there was always the ever present, silent acknowledgement that the President had access to information that common people simply do not have access to.
Chris – I voted for Bush – Matthews
The game has changed with our first Black President. Progressives have now developed a cottage industry built around telling our President what he ought and ought not do. It is one thing to take issue with his decisions, it is quite another thing to proffer step by step instructions. I even heard Chris – yeah, I voted for Bush – Matthews saying that the President ought to have the Republicans over to the White House more for dinners and get-togethers. Really? Evidently he hasn’t been paying attention to the numerous times the President has done that very thing only to be rebuffed and snubbed by the likes of Boehner and McConnell.
How quickly we forget, the night before President Obama announced to the World the capture and execution of Osama Bin Laden, he was at the annual Press Club dinner, laughing and joking and being the butt of a joke about having forgotten all about Osama Bin Laden. While he laughed at the joke, he knew that an operation was under way to bring Osama to justice.
Moaning About Drones
Katt Williams – Perhaps not as crazy as we think?
This issue is simply stunning in it’s insipid stupidity! When Anwar al-Aulaqi met his richly deserved fate, the first thing by way of an epitaph that popped into my mind were the words of that great philosopher and fount of all things wise – Comedian Katt Williams - “you shouldn’t of been talking shit!” Yes, Anwar al-Aulaqi was born in these United States. At one time he was a United States citizen with all the rights and privileges pertaining thereto. For the sake of this discussion, let us presume that he had at no time renounced his citizenship and was a citizen in good standing.
Anwar al-Aulaqi gone to his own personal Jihad in the sky.
What seems to have gotten the Progressive panties in a knot is the fact that our government killed a United States citizen with “malice aforethought,” and without according to this citizen(?) the due process guaranteed under the United States Constitution. I hope you’ll find my summary of the issues satisfactory. Here’s the point. This happens every damn day in these United States, most often it happens to a Black or minority citizen. When a police officer – agent of the government – guns down an unarmed Black or minority person, that person is just as dead as Anwar al-Aulaqui! That person got just as much due process as Anwar al-Aulaqui. In almost every instance, there was far less justification for this murder at the hands of our Government than there was for the execution of Anwar al-Aulaqui.
I direct your attention to the Constitution of the United States of America.
Article 3 – The Judicial Branch Section 3 – Treason
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
I personally saw video tapes of Anwar al-Aulaqi calling for the overthrow of the United States and attempting to foment violent uprisings. This is beyond dispute. Had Anwar al-Aulaqi been on United States soil or in a nation with whom we have extradition treaties, he would have been brought to justice in one of our courts of law. He was in Yemen. Our relationship with the government of Yemen is strained to put it mildly. We couldn’t really pick up the phone and have him delivered to us.
Could we have sent in Seal Team 6 to retrieve him? Perhaps. However, that would have been extremely costly and risked not only the lives of some of our nation’s finest, it would have put a lot of civilian lives in peril. Could we have sent in an attack helicopter to take him out? Of course! But what’s the difference? The fact of the matter is, Mr. Al-Aulaqi was brought to justice, efficiently and with the least amount of collateral damage possible. We did not put the lives of our military personnel at risk and we did it for a fraction of the cost of putting boots on the ground. So what’s your complaint? Have Progressives lost their damn minds?
My Rights Are Better Than Your Rights
Rachel Maddow
One of the most surrealistic examples of idiocy occurs five nights a week on MSNBC at 9 pm. eastern time. That is when “The Rachel Maddow” show airs. Ms. Maddow is unabashedly lesbian. She has a partner or wife or whatever they term their relationship to be, and has referenced this fact on her show… usually in passing. You can almost guarantee that a segment of her show each evening will be devoted to the struggle for “Gay Rights.” Usually it is either the first or second segment.
I get it! Rachel is a lesbian activist and the issues which impact her lifestyle are very important to her. She is a tireless campaigner for Gay equality. The right to marry, the right to adopt children, up until President Obama did away with DADT – Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell – the right to serve openly in the military. These were issues that we’d hear night after night after night. All of it was under the aegis of the recognition of Rights and equal protection under the law.
The problem becomes apparent when the subject of firearms comes up. Rachel is as virulently anti-gun as she is pro-Gay rights. Although she is a Rhodes Scholar and has attended Oxford University on a full scholarship and holds the equivalent of at least one doctorate degree, possibly more, Rachel seems oblivious to the fact that if gun Rights are open for review and removal, so are Gay Rights. Rachel, if you cannot respect and support my Rights, why should I support and respect your Rights? The Second Amendment is not in the Bill of Privileges. It is in the Bill of Rights. Have Progressives lost their damn minds?
When Faking Ignorance Becomes Stupidity.
Lawrence O’Donnell
Lawrence O’Donnell is another blight on the ass of common sense. Although Mr. O’Donnell frequently gives the impression of being a lawyer – he references writing legislation for the Senate Finance Committee – it turns out he never actually went to Law School. Perhaps that might explain some of the cockamamie nonsense he spews when it comes to gun Rights and other legal matters.
On this evening’s show he was bawling yet again about guns. He recounted the story of a woman going through a divorce who was threatened by her husband. In particular, the husband told her that the did not want her new boyfriend anywhere near his young son. She ignored his advice. He subsequently showed up with one of his firearms and threatened her life. The police were called. He was arrested.
I sat in stunned amazement while Lawrence carped about the Police not removing this man’s firearms while he was under the protective order filed by his soon to be ex-wife. You do not have to be a lawyer to know, this isn’t the movie “Minority Report” we’re living in. We do not punish people for what they might do. Anyone can get a protective order. Here in Indiana, a protective order is filed as a matter of course whenever a divorce is filed for. Whether it is needed or not. As a matter of fact, in the right court, I could get a protective order against Lawrence O’Donnell. Chances are, he wouldn’t have to be present and may never even know I’d filed for one.
His guest attempted to allude to this fact, to wit: you cannot punish someone for something they haven’t done, but Lawrence soldiered on by pointing out that people have their passports taken even though they have not been convicted of a crime. Evidently Lawrence equates a criminal indictment with a request for an order of protection. It just occurred to me, perhaps Lawrence isn’t faking? Have Progressives lost their damn minds?
Snatching Defeat From The Jaws Of Victory
The Republican party is in disarray. They have no real leader. The crazy wing has taken over the Republican party. Now is not the time to join them. Now is the time to press our advantage. The NRA is not the problem. Most people who have owned firearms for any length of time consider the NRA to be a toothless lion. We own firearms for various reasons. The protection of ourselves and our families being primary.
The dirty little secret is, citizens of these United States really take the whole “land of the free, home of the brave” thing seriously. It is not a Republican thing nor a Democrat thing, it’s an American thing. As Democrats we realize that Government does and should play a vital role in advancing the quality of life. However, when Government begins to flex it’s muscle and tell us what we can eat and drink – Michael Bloomberg – we begin to find this as repugnant as Republicans wanting to insert government into a woman’s womb. There is not a lot of difference.
Each piece you run on gun violence doesn’t say we need to be disarmed. If anything it proves how dangerous society has become and why weneed to be armed!After eight years of the “Bungling Brothers Circus” there is a lot that needs fixing. We have a competent and capable President in the White House that needs our support on the things that matter. This faux issue ginned up by the Progressives – not the Republicans – over Drones, is a waste of time, a distraction and only serves to weaken our position. Instead of attempting to tell our President how to do his job, how about we get behind him and help him? Or have Progressives really lost their damn minds?
It’sfine to be a conservative who disagrees with Obama politically. He is a fallible human being. Like any politician, he deserves criticism now and then. Progressives criticize him all the time because his policies are more conservative than many thought he would be.
If you would say “Obama is wrong on this issue and here’s why”, I could respect that. But it’s something else to be a hard-core Glenn Beck parroting, Bush-was-God, Obama-is-Satan, damn-the-facts, anyone-who-disagrees-with-me-is-a-communist, conservative.
Sometimes it’s hard to comprehend the level of hatred you have for President Obama. This hatred is not about dissent and it began long before he even took office and doesn’t seem to stem from anything he’s done as president.
From the day he was inaugurated, all over the country you began protesting Obama’s tax increases even though he had only lowered your taxes. Although he’s offered more proof of his origin of birth than any president in history, nearly half of you still believe Obama was not born in America, 57% believe he is Muslim, and 24% said he may be the Anti-Christ.
Before Obama took office, congressional Republicans decided that they would oppose every single bill that Obama supported. They used the filibuster to prevent all legislation from being voted on, including bills that Republicans themselves had co-sponsored. When president Obama decided to embrace a lot of Republican ideas like Cap and Trade, the individual mandate for health insurance and the Dream Act, these Republican ideas suddenly were denounced as Socialism and received zero Republican votes.
Even normally routine matters that Congress usually deals with on a bi-partisan basis, like a transportation bill or raising the debt ceiling, were held up by Republicans who didn’t want anything to get done during Obama’s presidency. By nearly letting America default on its debts, Tea Party Republicans even managed to lower our country’s credit rating, and then blamed Obama for it.
You even blamed Obama for the worst recession in 80 years even though it began over a year before he took office.
You have totally immersed yourself in anti-Obama hate speech, you can’t even state the man’s name, calling him O-BUM-a. You just repeat whatever you hear from right wing hate sites without exercising independent thought:
“Obama is a (pick one) Socialist/Marxist/Muslim/Communist/Nazi/Fascist/Kenyan/Anti-colonialist” or “Obama is trampling the Constitution”, “Obama hates America”, “Obama wants to control our lives”, “Obama has declared war on religion”, etc.
These are not facts or even fact-based opinions; they are examples of hate speech.
Back when Bush was president, his critics said things like “Bush allowed higher levels of arsenic and mercury in our drinking water”, “Bush violated the 4th Amendment by illegally authorizing warrantless wiretaps on American citizens”, “Bush used false information to start an unnecessary war”, “Bush started the two longest wars in our nation’s history, presided over two recessions, increasing poverty rates, a collapse of our financial system, and turned a huge budget surplus into a trillion dollar deficit”.
These criticisms of Bush resulted from things he actually said or did, not by what we thought about him personally. Every President of the United States has been loved by some people and hated by others and progressives certainly criticized Bush harshly. But that criticism was not out of a personal hatred of the man, it was about his policies and his actions as president. I don’t recall when anyone questioned his citizenship, claimed he hated the country, or suggested he sides with our enemies.
You actually accuse Obama of hating white people, of siding with the terrorists who attacked our country and wanting to euthanize the elderly, even though you have no facts or even a rational argument to support these claims.
You don’t seem to see the difference between hate-driven opinion and fact-based opinion.
You still worship at the altar of George W. Bush and refuse to acknowledge that he was anything less than God-like in his perfection, while attack Obama as “un-American” for doing some of the exact same things you praised President Bush for doing.
I’d hate to conclude that this is all based on race. Republicans hated Bill Clinton too, but we didn’t see quite this level of loathing toward him. Republicans did not filibuster every single bill to keep it from being voted on or actively work to halt the economic recovery like they have done with Obama. When Clinton was president, Republicans actually did reach compromises with him. When Obama pleads with Republicans to work out a compromise with him, they outright reject even the use of the word “compromise”.
Warning: Video has profanity
Your hatred of Obama is not an act of patriotism. Quite the opposite, by immersing yourself in all your right wing Obama-hating web sites you’re unable or unwilling to have any kind of meaningful political discussion. You are preventing this country from making any kind of positive progress by letting your personal hatred of this man allow anything positive to get done in this country. And you are doing your country great harm.
