A Common Sense Budget: The People's Budget

Reps. Maxine Waters, Mazie Hirono (podium) and Raul Grijalva introducing The People's Budget at the Capitol

Politicians like to support their theory's with poll results. If you look at the polls, the public's message is clear: protect Medicare and Social Security, spend less on the military, and raise taxes on the wealthy. And while we're at it, let's tax the Wall Street speculators who wrecked our economy.

If you listen to the pundits and TV commentators, the federal budget problem has a simple solution: cuts, cuts, and more cuts. They cheer politicians for making "tough choices," which usually entails taking money away from schools, stiffing public workers, and telling the poor and the elderly they need to make do with even less. Tough choices, indeed — but for whom?

Main Stream Media does not reflect Main Street.

But if you look at the newspapers or your TV screen, those ideas are rarely, if ever, part of the budget debate. Is there no one in Washington who is sticking up for what the majority of the public wants?

But wait.

The Congressional Progressive Caucus, which includes 74 House Democrats and Sen. Bernie Sanders, released an alternative budget blueprint back in April. This "People's Budget" would achieve a better balance by taxing the wealthy, reining in runaway military spending, and protecting the New Deal social safety net — just what people tell pollsters that they want

So why is it that the People's Budget isn't being discussed?

There's a good chance you've never heard about this part of the budget debate, though there's been a mountain of media coverage of the budget mess — thousands of articles and television programs. If you've paid attention to any of it, you're probably well acquainted with Rep. Paul Ryan. The Wisconsin Republican has "jet black hair and a touch of Eagle Scout to him," according to one magazine profile. The New York Times told readers about his "piercing blue eyes." It's not just his looks that impress the media. His budget plan, which pairs yet more big tax breaks for the rich with spending cuts for everyone else, is constantly touted as being "bold" and "serious."

And the People's Budget? Well, it's not even mentioned. There were no hard news stories about in the big papers. Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank wrote about the press conference unveiling the People's Budget only to mock it— right down to poking fun at one lawmaker's tie.

Here's a general overview of the People's Budget:

• Reduces unemployment—and thus the deficit—through extensive investment in infrastructure, clean energy, transportation and education;
  
• Ends almost all the Bush tax cuts, creates new tax brackets for millionaires and new fees on Wall Street;
  
• Full American military withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, along with other reductions in military spending;
  
• Ends subsidies for non-renewable energy;
  
• Lowers health care costs through a public option and negotiating Rx payments with pharmaceutical companies;
  
• Raises the taxable maximum on Social Security.

That is a very quick summary, and full details can be read here. The Economic Policy Institute has a full analysis here. At the press conference introducing the budget, economist Jeffrey Sachs praised it as the "only budget that makes sense" and "a lot more serious than everything else on the table." He's also previously written about The People's Budget on the Huffington Post.

Partisan Politics

The budget debate is locked up in a partisan stalemate. That makes it as good a time as any to tell the people about the People's Budget. Most newspapers and TV networks aren't doing that. And when you look at who stands to gain — and who stands to lose — it's no mystery why corporate-owned media are keeping us in the dark.

The budget mess is covered daily by the media. It is time to let the public know about the People's Budget.

For a discussion and analysis of the People's Budget, WATCH:

The "Not My Fault" Excuse

Once again, Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice David Prosser, a close Republican ally of Gov. Scott Walker (R) is claiming that his actions are not his fault. Justice Prosser who has been on the court since 1998, ran as the incumbent candidate in the the Wisconsin Supreme Court election in April, 2011. Assistant Attorney General JoAnne Kloppenburg ran against Prosser in the election. Prosser has a history of inappropriate behavior. In March, 2011, Prosser declared that he was goaded into insulting the Wisconsin Supreme Court Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson.

As the deeply divided state Supreme Court wrestled over whether to force one member off criminal cases last year, Justice David Prosser exploded at Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson behind closed doors, calling her a "bitch" and threatening to "destroy" her. ... "In a fit of temper, you were screaming at the chief; calling her a 'bitch,' threatening her with '...I will destroy you'; and describing the means of destruction as a war against her 'and it won't be a ground war,'" [Justice Ann Walsh] Bradley wrote in a Feb. 18, 2010, e-mail to Prosser and others.

Prosser acknowledged his outburst, but said he was justified—and then proceeded to blame it on the woman he had verbally assaulted:

"I probably overreacted, but I think it was entirely warranted.... They (Abrahamson and Justice Ann Walsh Bradley) are masters at deliberately goading people into perhaps incautious statements. This is bullying and abuse of very, very long standing."

After the April election, Assistant Attorney General JoAnne Kloppenburg had initially declared victory by a an unofficial 204-vote lead over Justice David Prosser, as reported by the Associated Press. However, Waukesha County Clerk Kathy Nickolaus, subsequently found more than 14,000 votes that had not been reported from her predominantly GOP county which gave conservative Justice David Prosser a 7,500-vote lead.

Controversy has followed Prosser since the election.

Democrats in Wisconsin were crying foul Friday after a significant vote-count change in the hotly contested Supreme Court election gave the conservative incumbent the lead in a race that could decide the fate of the state's new divisive collective bargaining law.

Waukesha County Clerk Kathy Nickolaus said it was "human error" that resulted in more than 14,000 votes from her predominantly GOP county not being reported on Tuesday. The corrected totals gave conservative Justice David Prosser a 7,500-vote lead, according to unofficial tallies, and undid the earlier likelihood of a recount.

Rep. Peter Barca, Democratic Assembly minority leader, said Nickolaus' revelation "raises disturbing questions, particularly in light of her partisan history."

"The new Supreme Court race vote totals she 'discovered' during canvassing not only swung the election but also put the race just barely past the amount needed to trigger a state-financed recount," he said in a statement.

Recently, Prosser is being accused of chocking the Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Ann Walsh Bradley.

Justice Ann Walsh Bradley came forth with a statement late Saturday saying that fellow Justice David Prosser choked her and refuting claims that she attacked him first.

"The facts are that I was demanding that he get out of my office and he put his hands around my neck in anger in a choke-hold," she said. "Those are the facts and you can try to spin those facts and try to make it sound like I ran up to him and threw my neck into his hands, but that's only spin.

"Matters of abusive behavior in the workplace aren't resolved by competing press releases," she said.

"I'm confident the appropriate authorities will conduct a thorough investigation of this incident involving abusive behavior in the workplace."

Prosser's behavior against several female Chief Justices include both verbal and physical aggression. An unnamed source who is on Prosser's side of the argument has now accused Bradley of initiating the violence.

"She charged him with fists raised," the source told the paper, saying that Prosser "put his hands in a defensive posture" to block her, and made contact with her neck. Bradley is then said to have immediately complained of being choked, while another, unnamed Justice responded, "You were not choked."

Prosser has denied the allegations against him.

For his part, Prosser -- who had initially declined to publicly comment -- released a statement containing a denial, and that would make no further public comments: "Once there's a proper review of the matter and the facts surrounding it are made clear, the anonymous claim made to the media will be proven false. Until then I will refrain from further public comment."

There are now calls for Prosser to step down or be removed. Think Progress has Four Ways Justice David Prosser Can Be Removed from Office.

Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice David Prosser has exploded. He has cursed. He has threatened. He has choked. He has acknowledged. He has denied. He is a bully who excuses his behavior by blaming his victim.

The Koch Brothers Echo Chamber

 

Brave New Foundation with Senator Bernie Sanders [I-VT] and the Strengthen Social Security Campaign want to expose the Koch Echo Chamber.

The Koch brothers want to destroy Social Security because it is a Federal government program which has been enormously successful.  The Koch brothers are funding think tanks and other organizations which are spreading an enormous amount of disinformation about Social Security. The Koch Brothers fund organizations and you have  economist and political scientist working there. They are very good getting on TV and people not know they represent an organization that is heavily funded by corporate interest.  They are very effective of getting their message out into the media.  At the same time the Koch brothers are putting huge amounts of money into campaign contributions so you have an echo chamber that starts repeating a lot of misinformation.

Disinformation/Lie 

#1: Need to Raise the Age of Retirement
#2: Social Security is going bankrupt

#3: Privatize Social Security

Fact:

#1:  Raising the retirement age is a terrible idea and a large benefit cut.
#2:  Social Security will never go bankrupt.

#3:  Privatizing Social Security would be a disaster.

The Koch Goal is to Dismember Government

The Koch brothers want to privatize Social Security to invest your retirement funds on Wall St. and you may lose all of your retirement savings when you get old. The Koch brothers' job is to do everything they can to dismember government in general and if you can destroy Social Security you have gone a long way in that effort.

WATCH:

In Bachmann's Words

 

 

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) has recently announced that she plans to run for President.  She is a Tea Party politican and the Founder of the House Tea Party Caucus and her ideology is considered radical.

ThinkProgress has assembled 10 of the nuttiest things Bachmann has ever said:

(1) BACHMANN WARNED ‘THE LION KING’ WAS GAY PROPAGANDA: At the November 2004 EdWatch National Education Conference, Bachmann said the “normalization” of homosexuality would lead to “desensitization”: “Very effective way to do this with a bunch of second graders, is take a picture of ‘The Lion King’ for instance, and a teacher might say, ‘Do you know that the music for this movie was written by a gay man?’ The message is: I’m better at what I do, because I’m gay.”
(2) BACHMANN CLAIMED ABOLISHING THE MINIMUM WAGE WOULD CREATE JOBS: While testifying in front of the Minnesota Senate in 2005, Bachmann said, “Literally, if we took away the minimum wage — if conceivably it was gone — we could potentially virtually wipe out unemployment completely because we would be able to offer jobs at whatever level.” This isn’t remotely true. Even simply reducing the minimum wage would, as Paul Krugman noted, “at best do nothing for employment; more likely it would actually be contractionary.”
(3) BACHMANN CLAIMED THAT SCIENTISTS ARE SUPPORTERS OF INTELLIGENT DESIGN: During a 2006 debate, Bachmann said, “There are hundreds and hundreds of scientists, many of them holding Nobel Prizes, who believe in intelligent design.” This was, and is, not true.
(4) BACHMANN CLAIMED TERRI SCHIAVO WAS ‘HEALTHY’: Not long after Terri Schiavo died, Bachmann said she would have voted for the Palm Sunday Compromise because Schiavo “was healthy. She had brain damage — there was brain damage, there was no question. But from a health point of view, she was not terminally ill.” An autopsy found that Schiavo had suffered irreversible brain damage and her brain, said the medical examiner, was “profoundly atrophied.”
(5) BACHMANN LIKENED VISITING IRAQ TO VISITING MALL OF AMERICA: In 2007, Bachmann returned from a junket to Iraq and told her colleagues, “[T]here’s a commonality with the Mall of America, in that it’s on that proportion. There’s marble everywhere. The other thing I remarked about was there is water everywhere.” As ThinkProgress documented at the time, the comparison was preposterous.
(6) BACHMANN CLAIMED THAT CARBON DIOXIDE IS ‘HARMLESS’: In 2008, a Stanford scientist revealed “direct links” between increased levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and “increases in human mortality” — globally, he found that as many as “20,000 air-pollution-related deaths per year per degree Celsius may be due to this greenhouse gas.” The next year, Bachmann, who is not a scientist, said that “carbon dioxide is portrayed as harmful. But there isn’t even one study that can be produced that shows that carbon dioxide is a harmful gas.”
(7) BACHMANN CALLED FOR A CONGRESSIONAL WITCH HUNT: Pivoting off the news of Barack Obama’s alleged relationship to former Weather Underground member William Ayers, and his former pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Bachmann accused the candidate of having “anti-American views.” She then suggested that Congressional liberals — including Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid — ought to be subject to “an exposé” by the media because of their views. “I think people would love to see like that,” she told a stunned Chris Matthews.
(8) BACHMANN SUGGESTED GAY SINGER SHOULD REPENT AFTER GETTING CANCER: Bachmann saw Melissa Etheridge’s cancer as a teachable moment: “Unfortunately she is now suffering from breast cancer, so keep her in your prayers,” she said in November 2004. “This may be an opportunity for her now to be open to some spiritual things, now that she is suffering with that physical disease. She is a lesbian.”
(9) BACHMANN BOASTED ABOUT BREAKING THE LAW: In advance of the 2010 national Census, Bachmann told The Washington Times that she would break the law by not completing the forms. “I know for my family, the only question we will be answering is how many people are in our home,” she said. “We won’t be answering any information beyond that, because the Constitution doesn’t require any information beyond that.”
(10) BACHMANN CLAIMED THAT GLENN BECK COULD SOLVE THE DEBT CRISIS: During a February trip to South Carolina, Bachmann told a South Carolina audience, “I think if we give Glenn Beck the numbers, he can solve this [the national debt].”

Secret Money Scandal

Michael Winship at Salon War Room has an interesting article, Secret Cash, The worst political scandal of all.

Sometimes I feel like Gus, the father in "My Big Fat Greek Wedding" -- you know, the guy who thinks you can cure all maladies with a spritz of Windex and declares, "Give me a word, any word, and I show you that the root of that word is Greek."

Only in my case, it’s give me a scandal, any scandal, and I’ll show you how the corrosive influence of money on politics is at its root and makes what’s bad even worse (okay, maybe not in the case of Anthony Weiner -- yet). It’s not an especially effective party trick, I know, unless you’re at a really dreary policy wonk picnic, but you work with what you’ve got.

John Edwards’ illegitimate child? The legal case being built against the freshly indicted former presidential candidate isn’t about paternity or custody or any of that kind of stuff, but revolves around felony campaign finance charges; whether or not two wealthy backers -- his now deceased fundraising chair Frederick Baron and 100-year-old heiress Rachel "Bunny" Mellon -- provided hundreds of thousands in contributions that in reality paid for the hiding of Edwards' mistress, Rielle Hunter, and their baby.

Gingrich and Tiffany

Newt Gingrich and his wife Callista’s big fat, revolving, no interest credit account at Tiffany's? It might be tin-eared and wrong for someone who purports to be a fiscal conservative and a man of the people to throw around big bucks for expensive bling, but that ain’t necessarily the scandal. Look a little deeper. On May 24, Jeff Stein of The Washington Post blog "Spy Talk" reported:

"At the same time Tiffany & Co. was extending Callista (Bisek) Gingrich a virtual interest-free loan of tens of thousands of dollars, the diamond and silverware firm was spending big bucks to influence mining policy in Congress and in agencies over which the House Agriculture Committee -- where she worked -- had jurisdiction, official records show."

Until 2006, Ms. Gingrich was chief clerk at the committee. During the years between 2005 and 2009, Tiffany's annual lobbying costs shot up from around $100,000 to $360,000, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.

The jewelry giant strongly denies any connection: "We had no reason to lobby the Agriculture Committee and we did not… Our focus has been on the Natural Resources Committee." The company also said it had never spoken with Newt or Callista Gingrich about federal mining policy.

But hang on, there’s more.

Tim Carney of The Washington Examiner reports:

"Christy Evans, formerly a top staffer to then-whip Newt Gingrich, is a registered lobbyist for Tiffany’s, the high-end jeweler where Gingrich and his wife enjoy an extraordinary line of credit. Evans, former floor assistant to Gingrich and now a lobbyist at the legendary K Street firm Cassidy & Associates, has represented Tiffany's on mining issues since 2000, according to lobbying filings."

The revolving door between government and corporate interests, revolving credit… the saga of Newt "Holly Golightly" Gingrich spins on. The whole affair is reminiscent of the preferential loan treatment now-collapsed subprime mortgage giant Countrywide Financial Corporation reportedly gave a few years ago to Fannie Mae CEO Jim Johnson (he resigned as a result), North Dakota Senator Kent Conrad (chair of the Senate Budget Committee), former Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd (who served as chair of the Senate Banking Committee), and former cabinet secretaries Alphonso Jackson and Donna Shalala.

The Supreme Court decision in Citizens United

Yet all this greed and venality pales against the dark heart of the worst political scandal of all, the continuing nightmare caused by Citizens United and other court decisions that have unleashed a monster of unlimited and frequently anonymous private and corporate campaign cash against a nearly defenseless citizenry.

The recent disclosure that the conservative, "grass roots" advocacy organization American Action Network received first year revenues of $2.75 million from fewer than a dozen unnamed, wealthy donors (and 82% of the money from only three of them) led Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethic in Washington, to cite AAN as just one example of how "very few people are having a disproportionate impact on our country’s elections." (The group, affiliated with Karl Rove’s American Crossroads political action committee, raised another $24 million in the four months before the 2010 midterms, funding attack ads against Democratic Senate candidates in Wisconsin, Florida, Washington State and Florida described by progressive watchdog Media Matters as "bogus," "deceptive" and "stripped of the facts.")

Secret Donors and Corporate Money

This revelation follows superb investigative reporting by a Bloomberg News team last month headlined "Secret Donors Multiply in U.S. Election Spending." They found that outside, or non-party organizations, including "trade groups, unions and non-profits started by political operatives that raise and spend money for advertising" spent $305 million on the 2010 elections, four times more than similar groups spent four years ago. They plan to raise even more money for the 2012 campaign. Contrary to law, five of those groups have failed to report to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) more than $4 million spent on attack ads in last year’s races.

"The organizations face little scrutiny from the FEC, where split votes between Republican and Democratic commissioners have stymied enforcement in case after case for almost three years," Bloomberg reported. "As a result, voters may find themselves choosing the next U.S. president knowing less about those trying to shape their views of the candidates than they have since secret money helped finance the Watergate burglary and re-elect President Richard Nixon in 1972."

The journalists quoted Donald Simon, a director of pro-disclosure organization Democracy 21: "The amounts of corporate money involved in Watergate will look quaint by the standards of secret corporate funding that will take place in 2012."

Republicans and many Democrats oppose all new attempts at campaign finance reform, including a proposed White House executive order requiring corporations seeking government contracts to reveal their political contributions. On May 26, a federal district court in Alexandria, Virginia, ruled that a long-standing ban on corporate contributions to federal candidates is unconstitutional. Unless the composition of the Supreme Court shifts in a new direction, a constitutional amendment that reverses Citizens United and other federal rulings may be our only prayer, the solitary hope we have to prevent the total usurpation of representative government by big businesses with bottomless pockets.

Economic dominance, it’s the biggest scandal of all

The Greeks had a word for it -- "oligarchy" -- political clout based on economic dominance. It is, in the words of economist Simon Johnson, "an antithesis to democracy… a small group with a lot of wealth and a lot of power. They pull the strings. They have the influence. They call the shots."

No accountability, no scruples, no shame. It’s the biggest scandal of all; a republic struck down by a possibly fatal malady that even Gus the Greek’s magic bottle of Windex can't cure.

It is always the wealthy who are continually complaining that the poor are getting things they haven't worked for and therefore don't deserve. But it is only the rich who work hard to buy the votes they want because they truly don't trust our system of democracy.

It's The Facts. Stupid!

Via rsn:

In the video, which was taken at Boston's Old North Church, Palin gives a bizarre version of Revere's 1775 ride. Addressing an unknown person, Palin remarks:

He who warned the British that they weren't going to be taking away our arms by ringing those bells and, um, making sure as he's riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that, uh, we were going to be secure and we were going to be free.

A couple of things are wrong with that interpretation, but one central main point seemed to be lost on Palin: Revere wasn't warning the British about anything. Indeed, he was warning the Americans about an impending British attack - as his celebrated historical catchphrase "The British are coming!" made abundantly clear.

Of course, Palin isn't the only politician who has had the facts wrong and has muddled history.

Last month, Michele Bachmann - Palin's likeliest rival for the tea party vote should they both elect to run for president in 2012 - told a crowd in New Hampshire that they came from the state where the first "shot heard round" helped set off the American Revolution in Lexington and Concord. Lexington and Concord, of course, are in the neighboring state of Massachusetts.

WATCH:

The media has had a hay day from her blunders. Bill Maher thinks that Palin "shouldn't be on vacation, she should be in summer school! WATCH:

Lipstick and Jewelry

Is it a show of solidarity or a photo opportunity?

You couldn't miss it, the big Star of David hanging around Sarah Palin's neck as she toured the Statue of Liberty and Ellis Island on Wednesday.

NBC New York asked Palin about the significance just as she boarded her bus outside Fox Newschannel to head off to Boston.

"Today is the 44th anniversary of Jerusalem being reunited," she said. "We want to call attention to that."

The pendant is in every photo she took with fans and supporters and can be seen in every sound-bite captured by television crews.

This is not the first time that Palin, a non-Jew, has donned a large Star of David. Of course wearing a Star of David on a chain generally marks the wearer as Jewish. But with Palin, there are other reasons.

So what was the most decidedly not-Jewish Palin doing wearing one in Israel? Not appealing to American Jews -- that's for sure. Most American Jews, being Democrats, can't stand her. And one visit to Israel, a nation many American Jews have mixed feelings toward, anyway, isn't going to change that.

Rather, by wearing the Star of David, Palin was reaching out to American evangelical Christians -- and also being one herself. [emphasis added]

According to David Brog, the (Jewish) executive director of Christians United for Israel, "it is increasingly common" for evangelical Christian supporters of Israel -- who follow a fairly common Israel-centric strain of American biblical interpretation -- to wear Stars of David as symbols of solidarity with the Jewish state

Of course, the last few times Palin wore her large Jewish Star was when the TV cameras were rolling.

View more videos at: http://nbcnewyork.com.

Democrats: Do not negotiate with hostage-takers!!

The decision for Democrats is stark but unequivocal. The Republicans are not negotiating. The GOP has boxed its party into a position of, "Do it my way or no way." The path for the Republicans is that they will not support raising the debt ceiling unless big Medicare cuts are part of the deal. That means gutting Medicare.

That also means that the Democrats needs to have guts and say "NO!"

TPM believes that a "Cornered Animal is A Dangerous Animal."

Public polling, the NY-26 outcome, and other objective indicators make it clear Republicans have boxed themselves into a political corner with their plan to end Medicare. It's a big problem for them politically, and there's no easy way out, especially since virtually every Republican in Congress is now on the record, with a vote, that they favor gutting Medicare.

So how are they gonna get out of this jam? Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) just made it clear in a briefing with reporters on the Hill: They're going to hold the government's debt limit as hostage in order to back their way out of this political tight spot.

How? McConnell just announced he will not support raising the debt ceiling unless big Medicare cuts are part of the deal. Translation: Unless Democrats get us off the hook by agreeing to deep Medicare cuts (meaning Democrats can no longer attack Republicans for wanting to eliminate Medicare), then we're going to force the federal government into default on its debt.

What if McConnell extracted substantial other cuts from the White House to achieve the GOP's spending cuts goal? No matter, McConnell says. If Medicare cuts aren't part of the deal, then no dice on the debt ceiling -- U.S. economy and world financial system be damned.

It's as stark as that. And the decision for Democrats is equally stark: Do you negotiate with hostage-takers?

McConnell went so far to say that all negotiation is off the table. Medicare cuts must be part of that deal to get his support.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) says substantial Medicare cuts must be part of a spending and deficit cut package to get his support to raise the debt limit.

In a Capitol briefing with reporters Friday, McConnell declared affirmatively that unspecified Medicare cuts are on the table in bipartisan debt limit negotiations, led by Vice President Joe Biden, and he expects they'll be part of the final deal. But in response to a question from TPM, he went further than he has in the past in laying down a marker on that issue. Medicare cuts must be part of that deal to get his support, he says -- even if negotiators manage to find trillions of dollars in savings elsewhere, even if his other priorities are met.

"To get my vote, for me, it's going to take short term [cuts, via spending caps]... Both medium and long-term, entitlements.," McConnell said. "Medicare will be part of the solution."

To clarify, I asked "[I]f [the Biden group] comes up with big cuts, trillions of dollars worth of cuts, but without substantially addressing Medicare, it won't get your vote?"

"Correct," McConnell said.

The question now is whether Democrats will be on board with this, or whether they'll try to call the GOP's bluff.

In response to TPM's report on Mitch McConnell's uncompromising position, Jon Summers, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) issued the following statement.

"Republicans are holding the United States' credit hostage to ram through their plan to end Medicare. They are now saying they won't accept any plan to reduce the deficit unless it also cuts Medicare. Voters have resoundingly rejected this ideological agenda. Republicans should drop it and move on."

Good response.! Let all Democrat politicians know to stand strong in their response to this Republican nonsense. The GOP debt reduction plan is nothing more than "a smoke screen obscuring a dangerous far-right agenda."

Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wisconsin, is waging radical class warfare and ideological privatization schemes and selling it as a debt reduction plan. His newly released FY12 budget proposal, The Path to Prosperity, ought to have the subtitle: "A Windfall For the Already Prosperous."

As Dean Baker of the Center for Economic and Policy Research reminds us, the economic policies of the last three decades, by favoring corporations and the wealthy over average Americans, have achieved the world's most breathtaking upward redistribution of wealth. America's richest 1 percent are getting about $1.5 trillion richer each year. Studies also show that the richest 5 percent hold almost 64 percent of our wealth while and the bottom 80 percent of scrape by on just 12.8 percent of the pie.

Yet under the guise of debt reduction, the chairman of the House Budget Committee's budget proposal would take from the already poor, give to the already rich and attempt to achieve debt reduction not by cutting real costs, but by privatizing entitlement programs and shifting costs from the wealthy and corporations to struggling states, seniors, disabled, sick and low-income Americans. And the additional revenues necessary for serious debt reduction is glaringly absent, with proposals that would actually decrease tax-revenue from those most able to pay.

From start to finish, this budget is a smoke screen.

Will Republicans stop at Medicare and Medicaid?

This reverse-Robin Hood scheme cynically claims to "Strengthen the Social Safety Net," yet it eviscerates an already tattered net by privatizing Medicare and converting Medicaid and SNAP (food stamps) from successful, guaranteed benefits programs to limited block grant programs.

It would devastate lives of the at least 44 million Americans living in poverty by slashing spending on critical human needs to below 2008 funding levels and freezing it there for 5 years. At the same time, it would boost the luxurious lifestyles of the tiny percentage of Americans who are genuinely rich by repealing estate and corporate taxes, slashing the income taxes the wealthiest among us pay and instituting a regressive national sales tax that would most likely increase tax obligations for poor, working-class, and middle-class Americans.

Even though this GOP FY12 Budget Resolution doesn't specify details of a plan to privatize Social Security, stay tuned. Privatizing Social Security is another essential piece of Ryan's (and the GOP's) dangerous agenda.

The GOP 's new mantra is that they have a plan to reduce the budget and the Democrats don't. But there are alternatives to the extreme measures the Republicans are all supporting. One answer is a single-payer Medicare system nation-wide.

Under Ryan's health care schemes, beneficiaries would increasingly bear the burden of soaring costs with no guarantee of receiving the remedies prescribed by their doctors. A better and fairer approach would expand the single-payer Medicare system nation-wide, achieving cost-savings, implementing real cost control and retaining guaranteed healthcare for all Americans.

The GOP is right about one thing: We should be serious about long-term debt reduction. Ryan's dangerous and seriously flawed scheme, however, is nothing more than an ideological ploy to shrink government programs that help poor and middle-class Americans while rewarding the already wealthy.

The moral of the story is: Do not negotiate with hostage-takers!!

Palin Pushes, Puffs and Plans

Is Sarah Palin planning on joining the GOP presidential race? This speculation is consuming the media elites.

SarahPAC, the former Alaska governor's political action committee, recently announced that Ms. Palin would tour "historical sites that were key to the formation, survival and growth of the United States of America." The former vice presidential nominee will launch a tour of the East Coast on Sunday.

Her choice of where her tour will be launched has resulted in controversy. It was announced that Palin had accepted an invitation to participate in the annual Rolling Thunder memorial ride. Palin’s decision to participate in the motorcycle rally, which raises awareness of prisoners of war and soldiers missing in action, came as a surprise to some Rolling Thunder officials.

One day after Sarah Palin announced her bus tour, a group sponsoring a Memorial Day weekend event she plans to attend said they never invited her.

"She wasn't invited. We heard yesterday she came out with a press release she was coming to Rolling Thunder," Ted Shpak, national legislative director of Rolling Thunder, told "Andrea Mitchell Reports." Shpak is one of three members of Rolling Thunder's current leadership who says he had no idea Palin was coming until it was posted on her website.

On Thursday, the former governor of Alaska and potential GOP presidential candidate announced her bus tour on her political action committee's website, Sarahpac.com. The tour is to begin in Washington, D.C., where Palin plans to participate in the Sunday motorcycle rally sponsored by Rolling Thunder Inc., a group that raises awareness of prisoners of war and those missing in action.

"She's not invited to speak. We're not endorsing her ... (but) we can't stop her from coming to ride, if she wants to ride," Shpak continued.

Anyone can join in on the Rolling Thunder ride. Palin can also ride in the parade. But for her to use this event as a political tool has been shot down by the members of Rolling Thunder.

So will she or won’t she run? Her staff has deflecting questions about a possible run, saying she’s going on the bus tour “because she wants to see how this nation was built and get fired up about that.

The GOP Today: No Credibility, Mucho Money & A Vast Propoganda Network

The GOP is ignoring the political analysis of David Frum. Frum is the editor of FrumForum.com which is "dedicated to the modernization and renewal of the Republican party and the conservative movement."

The MinistryOfTruth | Via Daily Kos thinks that:

David Frum sees the writing on the wall.

I used to worry that Sarah Palin would be the Barry Goldwater of 2012. My bad. Paul Ryan is the Barry Goldwater of 2012.

~snip~

. . . The big issues of 2012 will be jobs and incomes in a nation still unrecovered from the catastrophe of 2008-2009. What does the GOP have to say to hard-pressed voters? Thus far the answer is: we offer Medicare cuts, Medicaid cuts, and tighter money aimed at raising the external value of the dollar.

No candidate, not even if he or she is born in a log cabin, would be able to sell that message to America’s working class. [Bold text added]

Reagan's 11th Commandment is a hard sell

Now, we all know that Reagan's 11th Commandment was "No Republican shall ever attack another Republican", so it makes sense to see the GOP and RW media trying to double down on the disastrously unpopular Paul Ryan plan. They are just going to pretend that this isn't happening. But in reality world, outside of their controlled media environment, people aren't buying the GOP's bullshit on this. Rush can say whatever he wants, Fox can reframe it and Paul Ryan can call his plan "premium care" or "voucher system" or whatever the hell he likes, the voters aren't buying it, and why should they? As Frum admits himself, the real problems are jobs and declining and stagnant wages and incomes, and so far the GOP plan is to cut everything, including our noses off to spite our faces. I think Frum is 100% right. No candidate, not even if they host a reality show or have adonis dna, would be able to sell that message to America's working class.

I think David Frum is one of the very few voices on the right who is smart enough not to believe everything Rush Limbaugh says. Frum can see the tide shifting against the GOP with one of their core constituencies, older voters. Between seniors turning against the GOP, an energized Dem base that is fired up to protect Medicare and recall several already massively unpopular GOP Governor's, and a GOP Presidential field of uninspiring crumudgeons and gaffe prone half wits, what I see is a perfect storm of an electoral ass kicking heading the GOP's way. The best part? The perfect storm of bad things heading the GOP's way is entirely of their own making.

Giving the rich bigger tax breaks while cutting middle-class entitlements

In dissecting the "NY-26 debacle" as Frum puts it, he quotes Henry Olsen of AEI, who Frum calls "as smart a political numbers guy as can be found on the political right." Olsen says of the Ryan Plan to end Medicare so we can give the rich bigger tax breaks . . .

. . . blue-collar voters react differently to issues than the GOP base does. They are more supportive of safety-net programs at the same time as they are strongly opposed to large government programs in general. These voters crave stability and are uncertain of their ability to compete in a globalized economy that values higher education more each year. They are also susceptible to the age-old Democratic argument that the secret Republican agenda is to eviscerate middle-class entitlements to fund tax cuts for the wealthy.

Myth? When your budget call for huge tax cuts for the rich and deep budget cuts to everything that the middle class depends on it isn't a myth. It's pretty damn obvious that the "the secret Republican agenda is to eviscerate middle-class entitlements to fund tax cuts for the wealthy" is hardly a myth, and it isn't even a secret anymore. The ONLY thing you need to know about the Ryan Plan is that it will eviscerate middle-class entitlements to fund tax cuts for the wealthy.

A policy askew

My favorite part of this story? Frum will be totally ignored for breaking Reagan's 11th Commandment and daring to challenge another Conservative. Just as Newt was torched for calling the Ryan plan "right wing social engineering that goes a step too far.", I think Frum will get torched by Rush and the Foxaganda Network and the GOP will continue their self imposed death march towards the fountain of true conservatism. They can't help themselves. They can't appeal to moderates without looking like they are compromising to the fire breathing knuckledraggers in teabaggerstan, and the more they pander to the cruel and heartless far right and the rich special interests who rule their world the harder it will be to win votes outside of the farthest right wing of the political spectrum. Of course, I love the schadenfreude of all of this, because I think the GOP should have zero credibility on jobs after the Bush years, they should have zero credibility on balancing budgets, managing the economy or keeping our country safe as well. The GOP has no credibility, just lots of money and an outstanding propaganda network. If they played moderate and then governed to the far right they can get power and run amok, as they did in 2010 in states like Wisconsin, Ohio and Michigan, but that will not last too long before the middle class figures out that the only thing the GOP of today care about is the not so secret Republican agenda to eviscerate middle-class entitlements in order to fund tax cuts for the wealthy. Good luck running on that message, boys. You see, it's not just GOP Presidential Candidates who suck and are uninspiring, it's their whole message, their every policy screws the little guy and pats the billionaires on their backs. And now the American public is waking up to that fact again.

As David Neiwert at CrooksAndLiars points out . . .

And even after this disaster, their tune will not change one iota. Because they cannot budge from the ideological corner into which they've painted themselves. Ryan's Path to the Poorhouse is not just an economic and social disaster in the making for Americans, it's one that ordinary, common-sense voters can see coming a mile away. Democrats don't have to "demagogue" to make a clear case that it would be disastrous.

So count me in with others who are watching this unfold and cheering on the GOP to double down on being stupid. When David Frum shouts out DO. NOT. SEEK. THE TREASURE. in the movie theater, I am rooting for the GOP to go for it and see how far this "Trade you your Medicare for Tax Cuts for the Rich" plan can take them. If my hopes are correct, Obama will blow these guys out at every level of government in such a way that will make Barry Goldwater's disaster look less threatening than a current GOP presidential nominee.

The GOP agenda is exceptionally generous to rich, powerful and corporate interests but totally devoid of comprehending issues relevant to the middle class and poor. A definite issue for the GOP candidates in the 2012 election.

DO NOT seek the treasure!

The Republican Hopefuls?

The list of potential Republican candidates is shrinking in light of the recent announcements by political pundit Mike Huckabee and talk show host Donald Trump that they will not run for the office of the President in 2012. Rachel Maddow commented that many of the possible Republican candidates aren't viable other than Gov.Tim Pawlenty (R-MN) and Gov. Mitch Daniels (R-IN). Although Gov. Daniels has not even announced that he is a contender for the position, Maddow focused on Daniels and his social conservative policies.

To emphasis her point, especially to the men in the audience, Rachel equated preventative medicine with preventative maintenance. This was Rachel's way of bringing out the fact that Daniels has prevented all money in the state of Indiana to fund Planned Parenthood. This is Daniels' way to appeal to social conservatives. His actions have absolutely nothing to do with abortion, because abortions cannot be paid for with federal funds, The lack of funding realistically prevents any woman on medicaid from going to Planned Parenthood for any medical reason. It has to do with maintenance.

Rachel took to the man cave last night in an effort to explain to guys the real-world effects of Mr. Daniels' decision to pull all funding from Planned Parenthood:

"Every 3,000 miles, you know what I'm talking about, right? Every 3,000 miles, oil change. Every 6,000 miles, rotate your tires. At a certain number of miles, you check the brakes, you check the differential maybe the spark plugs you can check at home depending on your skill level.

"But when it comes to getting an alignment, rebalancing your wheels and all that stuff, basically speaking, you take it in. Not because there's anything wrong with your vehicle, fellows. It's just preventive maintenance. Preventive maintenance, Planned Parenthood Oil change, breast exam. Rotate your tires -- can I say pap smears on TV?

"Imagine that Governor Mitch Daniels of Indiana is the fleet manager of, say, 9,000 cars in the state of Indiana. And he's just decided that those cars -- no more oil changes, no more checking the spark plugs, no more tire rotations, no more preventive maintenance.

"There are more than 9,000 people in Indiana whose health insurance is Medicaid, and who get their preventive care, who get their 3,000-mile check ups at Planned Parenthood.

"Because Mitch Daniels can mess with that as a governor and because he wants social conservatives to like him for president, those 9,000 Indiana patients have just been cut off from their preventive care. Breast exams, STD screenings, pap smears, birth control, all of it. This is not about abortion. There's not any public funding for abortion. It's not about cutting off abortion services in Indiana.

"This is about cutting off the proverbial oil changes, preventive care. If you want to be irresponsible with your vehicle, if you want to be penny wise and pound foolish, you stop going to Jiffy Lube, stop doing any preventive maintenance on your car. When your car inevitably breaks down, you will know why it happened."

Watch the entire episode. The first part deals with the field of potential Republican contenders. The information about Gov Daniels begins at about 7:30. The man cave moment begins at about 10:30. WATCH:

The Signs of the Times

A few of the signs displayed at the Stewart/Colbert Rally to Restore Sanity in October 2010 really do reflect the signs of the times.

About the News






About Taxes




About the Economy

YO FOX, Listen to this Rap!

AlterNet acknowledges, Jon Stewart on Fox's Freakout Over Rapper Common: 'I Just Feel Sorry For You Guys Now.'

This week, Fox News' Sean Hannity had a freakout over the fact that Michelle Obama invited the rapper Common to last night's poetry night at the White House, saying Common's lyric about Bush was 'vile.' Here's the lyric:

"Burn a Bush cuz for peace he no push no button/ killing over oil and grease/ no weapons of mass destruction/ how can we follow a leader when this is a corrupt one?"

Anyone who even casually listens to hip-hop knows that targeting Common, of all people, is the most ridiculous and absurd thing imaginable -- this is a dude who's practically one step away from quoting bell hooks, and who took crap in the rap community for years for being perceived as a peace-and-love hippie (the crocheted caps helped). Not to mention that the above 'offensive' lyric is hardly that, a fact perceivable by anyone who can read.

So last night on the Daily Show, Jon Stewart took on Fox hypocrisy to brilliant effect, not only pointing out that the so-called inflammatory language Hannity was raging over is blatheringly common on their channel -- Sarah Palin, anyone? -- but that musical guests that Bush honored when he was in office had much more violent lyrics than Common. Two words: Johnny Cash.

Check it out:

The Daily Show

Tags: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

Another flip-flop position for Fox on the issue of rapper Common.

Since his appearance at the White House, News today, with the Fox Nation website are referring to Common as a "vile rapper." However, Eric Hananoki at MediaMatters notes, this is an abrupt change of heart:

But roughly half-a-year ago, Fox News had a different tone about Common. In an October 2010 report for FoxNews.com, reporter Jason Robinson interviewed the "rap legend" and told him, "your music is very positive. And you're known as the conscious rapper. How important is that to you, and how important do you think that is to our kids?"

Common replied that it's a "significant role. I just try to show who we are as well-rounded people and I'm happy to be known as the conscious artist."

But rap music and politics isn't new to the Obama White House. Other rap artists have been invited to perform. Here is one involving Eazy-E, from legendary gangsta-rap outfit N.W.A.:

In March 1991, Eazy-E accepted an invitation to a lunch benefiting the Republican Senatorial Inner Circle, hosted by then-President George H. W. Bush. A spokesman for the rapper claimed that Eazy-E supported Bush for overseeing Operation Desert Storm.

Once again, Jon Stewart puts this whole issue into perspective....something FOX doesn't have. WATCH:

The Daily Show

Tags: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

Can we just note the obvious.? The GOP talking heads have flip-flopped, have contradicted themselves and have created an issue where there isn't an issue because this involves a decision related to President Obama.