Monday, May 30, 2011

Democrats: Do not negotiate with hostage-takers!!

RJ Matson - The St. Louis Post Dispatch - Ransom Notes From The Republican Revolution-COLOR - English - Ransom Notes From The Republican Revolution, Federal Budget, Budget Deficits, Budget Cuts, National Debt, Debt Ceiling, Tax Cuts, Medicare, ObamaCare, Health Care Reform, Republican Party, Congress, President Obama

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!"

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!!

Saturday, May 28, 2011

Palin Pushes, Puffs and Plans

Dave Granlund - Politicalcartoons.com - Palin bus tour and 2012 - English - Palin, GOP candidates, publicity, attention, PR, 2012, presidency, white house, election, Republicans, conservative, Fox, cameras, spotlight, celebrity, race,

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.

Thursday, May 26, 2011

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

David Fitzsimmons - The Arizona Star - dumb and dumber - English - republicans, oil, tax breaks, subsidies, medicare

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!

Tuesday, May 17, 2011

The Republican Hopefuls?

RJ Matson - Roll Call - Bestselling Republican Buttons For 2012-COLOR - English - Bestselling Republican Buttons For 2012, 2012 Presidential Campaign, Republican Nomination, Republican Party, Obama, Gingrich, Romney, Huckabee, Palin, Trump, Bachmann, Paul, Huntsman, Daniels, Roemer, Cain, Bolton, Santorum, Pawlenty

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:



Sunday, May 15, 2011

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

Screen_shot_2010-11-01_at_9.34.35_AM.png




About Taxes





About the Economy


Thursday, May 12, 2011

YO FOX, Listen to this Rap!


PHOTO: Common performs at the Only The Brave event presented by Diesel at Gotham Hall in this Oct. 12, 2010 file photo in New York City.

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:


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:



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.

Saturday, April 30, 2011

When is a Pig Not a Pig?

When it's a Republican Plan....with lipstick!!



Robert Reich says that there is a new bipartisan proposal regarding the budget. Although it approaches the budget from the angle of capping spending while not taxing the rich, it would still have the same disastrous results on the economy. Reich says this is The Republican Plan with Lipstick.

Republicans figure that if they can’t sell the pig, they’ll just put lipstick on it and find some suckers who will think it’s something else.

That’s the proposal emerging in the Senate from Republican Bob Corker of Tennessee and also Democrat Claire McCaskill of Missouri. It would get the deficit down not by raising taxes on the rich but by capping federal spending.

If Congress failed to stay under the cap, the budget would be automatically cut.

According to an analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the McCaskill/Corker plan would require $800 billion of cuts in 2022 alone. That’s the equivalent of eliminating Medicare entirely, or the entire Department of Defense.

Obviously the Defense Department wouldn’t disappear, so what would go? Giant cuts in Medicare, Medicaid, education, and much of everything else Americans depend on.

It’s the Republican plan with lipstick. It would have the same exact result. But by disguising it with caps and procedures, Republicans can avoid saying what they’re intending to do.

The McCaskill/Corker spending cap would also make it impossible for government to boost the economy in recessions. Which would mean even higher unemployment, lasting longer.

Other Senate Dems are showing interest in the lipsticked pig, including West Virginia’s Joe Manchin. Not surpringly, Joe Lieberman is on board.

But don’t be fooled, and don’t let anyone else be. McCaskill/Corker is the same Republican pig.

Republicans figure that if they can’t sell the pig, they’ll just put lipstick on it and find some suckers who will think it’s something else.

That’s the proposal emerging in the Senate from Republican Bob Corker of Tennessee and also Democrat Claire McCaskill of Missouri. It would get the deficit down not by raising taxes on the rich but by capping federal spending.

If Congress failed to stay under the cap, the budget would be automatically cut.

According to an analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the McCaskill/Corker plan would require $800 billion of cuts in 2022 alone. That’s the equivalent of eliminating Medicare entirely, or the entire Department of Defense.

Obviously the Defense Department wouldn’t disappear, so what would go? Giant cuts in Medicare, Medicaid, education, and much of everything else Americans depend on.

It’s the Republican plan with lipstick. It would have the same exact result. But by disguising it with caps and procedures, Republicans can avoid saying what they’re intending to do.

The McCaskill/Corker spending cap would also make it impossible for government to boost the economy in recessions. Which would mean even higher unemployment, lasting longer.

Other Senate Dems are showing interest in the lipsticked pig, including West Virginia’s Joe Manchin. Not surpringly, Joe Lieberman is on board.

But don’t be fooled, and don’t let anyone else be. McCaskill/Corker is the same Republican pig.

It is time to tell you Congressperson or Senator that the only budget plan that makes sense is the People's Budget, an alternative budget proposed by the Progressive Caucus. It's proposals will generate a government surplus by 2021.

Unlike the Ryan Roadmap to Ruin or the new bipartisan McCaskill/Corker spending cap, this plan creates millions of twenty-first century jobs, makes everyone pay their fair share and protects the social safety net that's kept this country strong for generations. You can learn more by reading this outline or selecting "FY2012 Progressive Budget" under "Issues" at the Progressive Caucus Web site.
It would get the deficit down not by raising taxes on the rich but by capping federal spending.
It would get the deficit down not by raising taxes on the rich but by capping federal spending.
McCaskill/Corker
McCaskill/Corker
McCaskill/CorkerV
McCaskill/Corker
McCaskill/Corker
McCaskill/Corker
the McCaskill/Corker plan
the McCaskill/Corker plan
the McCaskill/Corker plan

Saturday, April 23, 2011

When a Tough Question is Deemed Disruptive

Think Progress has the story: More Republican Congressmen Face Town Hall Backlash Over Tax Breaks For Wealthy And Medicare Privatization.
Earlier this week, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) held town halls across his district to defend his budget’s plan to end Medicare and extend tax cuts for the wealthy. During a stop in Milton, WI Ryan’s constituents made their feelings apparent, booing down the seven-term congressman when he defended tax breaks for the rich, as Think Progress first reported. Yesterday, Rep. Lou Barletta (R-PA) received the same hostile reception from his constituents for voting to end Medicare.

Here's Ryan during a town hall meeting where he is asked a question about his budget.

During a town hall meeting in Milton, a constituent who described himself as a “lifelong conservative” asked Ryan about the effects of growing income inequality in our nation. The constituent noted that huge income disparities contributed to the Great Depression and the Great Recession, and thus wanted to know why the congressman was “fighting to not let the tax breaks for the wealthy expire.”

Ryan argued against “redistribut[ing]” in this manner. After the constituent noted that “there’s nothing wrong with taxing the top because it does not trickle down,” Ryan argued that “we do tax the top.” This response earned a chorus of boos from constituents:

CONSTITUENT: The middle class is disappearing right now. During this time of prosperity, the top 1 percent was taking about 10 percent of the total annual income, but yet today we are fighting to not let the tax breaks for the wealthy expire? And we’re fighting to not raise the Social Security cap from $87,000? I think we’re wrong.

RYAN: A couple things. I don’t disagree with the premise of what you’re saying. The question is what’s the best way to do this. Is it to redistribute… (Crosstalk)

CONSTITUENT: You have to lower spending. But it’s a matter of there’s nothing wrong with taxing the top because it does not trickle down.

RYAN: We do tax the top. (Audience boos). Let’s remember, most of our jobs come from successful small businesses. Two-thirds of our jobs do. You got to remember, businesses pay taxes individually. So when you raise their tax rates to 44.8 percent, which is what the president is proposing, I would just fundamentally disagree. That is going to hurt job creation.

WATCH:


This town hall backlash is now spreading to other districts across the country. As Huffington Post reports, freshmen Reps. Robert Dold (R-IL) and Charlie Bass (R-NH) got an earful from their constituents for voting in favor of the Republican budget this month. During a Buffalo Grove, IL town hall, Dold caught a lot of flack for supporting corporate tax breaks and voting to end Medicare:

But Dold couldn’t even get to the end of the presentation before audience members began peppering him with questions about the Ryan budget, named after House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, a Republican from Wisconsin. It began with audience members telling Dold they don’t believe chopping 10 percentage points off the highest corporate tax rate will create jobs. A handful of people in the audience identified themselves as business owners and accountants who said their effective corporate income tax rate is already lower than the lowest rates proposed in the Ryan plan. They pointed to companies such as GE that pay almost no taxes despite billions in profits as evidence. [...]

Some in the audience then told Dold they don’t like the idea in the Ryan budget plan of Medicare becoming a voucher program that makes senior citizens buy private health insurance about 10 years from now. Audience members said buying private insurance is a shell game where no one really knows what costs a company will cover or to what degree.

Here is Rep. Lou Barletta (R- PA) trying to support his position in support of Ryan's budget while being asked tough questions:




Barletta spokesman Shawn Kelly said that the activist who challenged the Congressman at a town hall, Linda Christman, deliberately set a raucous tone as part of a coordinated effort by Democrats to disrupt the event. Linda Christman merely charged that Rep. Barletta didn't run on changing Medicare but then voted to change the Medicare system.

Christman dismissed the suggestion that she was part of an organized effort.

“I’ve been politically active in this community for a long time and I had heard that Rep. Barletta had voted for the Ryan budget. As far as being part of a larger group, there was only one other person there that I knew.”

She said the group Moveon.org had emailed her and encouraged her to attend.

“I got an email from Moveon.org, saying they were trying to get people to go. I don’t think they were very successful. There were only one or two people there who raised objections.”

Moveon.org did send an email to local activists encouraging them to attend the town hall. However, the email contained no mention of disruption. This was the call to action:

“Late last week, Representative Lou Barletta voted in favor of gutting Medicare and Medicaid. Join us on Wednesday, April 20 to ask the congressman why he voted for a budget that that puts millions of seniors, children, and people with disabilities at risk of losing their health care, so we can give millionaires trillions in tax cuts.”

It makes one wonder who are politicians representing. Do they want a town hall meeting comprised of solely those people who don't question their political positions? Are we at a point where asking questions and supporting a political position is called 'organized' and 'disruptive'?

Friday, April 15, 2011

SILENCE Please!

On April 14th, Rep. Joe Crowley (D-NY) delivered a one-minute presentation on the House floor. It was a unique speech. This is more of a visual than audio video. WATCH:



Using tear sheets to illustrate his rebuttal to the Republican budget plans that would slash hundreds of thousands of public jobs and effectively eliminate Medicare, Crowley concluded that he was simply “speechless.”
Here is his speech!


LAST FALL THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

GAVE US OUR MARCHING ORDERS

JOBS JOBS JOBS

100 DAYS OF GOP RULE

0 JOBS BILLS

SO, IF NOT JOBS...

WHAT HAS THE GOP BEEN UP TO?

GOP'S PRIORITY #1:

Cut more than 700,00 American Jobs

GOP PRIORITY #2:

Take away healthcare for the people...

but keep it for themselves

Surely, a jobs bill must be priority #3

GOP'S PRIORITY #3:

Manipulate tax code to pursue ideological agenda...

at the expense of women $ small businesses

REALLY GOP? REALLY?

100 DAYS IN AND GOP STILL DOESN'T GET IT

I'M

SURPRISED
STUNNED
SHOCKED


SPEECHLESS

Monday, April 11, 2011

Michelle Bachmann's Inner Marxist

Taylor Jones - Politicalcartoons.com - Congresswoman Michele Bachmann - COLOR - English - bachmann,republicans,conservative,congress,tea-baggers,minnesota,michelle bachmann,caricature

Yasha Levine says that Rep. Michelle Bachmann [R-MN], the anti-government tea-bagger queen, is really a Welfare Queen.....Oh My!!!!

Government handouts in the form of a farming subsidy

Michele Bachmann has become well known for her anti-government tea-bagger antics, protesting health care reform and every other government “handout” as socialism. What her followers probably don’t know is that Rep. Bachmann is, to use that anti-government slur, something of a welfare queen. That’s right, the anti-government insurrectionist has taken more than a quarter-million dollars in government handouts thanks to corrupt farming subsidies she has been collecting for at least a decade.

And she’s not the only one who has been padding her bank account with taxpayer money.

Attempted socialist takeover of America vs. profiting from taxpayer largesse

Bachmann, of Minnesota, has spent much of this year agitating against health care reform, whipping up the so-called tea-baggers with stories of death panels and rationed health care. She has called for a revolution against what she sees as Barack Obama’s attempted socialist takeover of America, saying presidential policy is “reaching down the throat and ripping the guts out of freedom.”

But data compiled from federal records by Environmental Working Group, a nonprofit watchdog that tracks the recipients of agricultural subsidies in the United States, shows that Bachmann has an inner Marxist that is perfectly at ease with profiting from taxpayer largesse. According to the organization’s records, Bachmann’s family farm received $251,973 in federal subsidies between 1995 and 2006. The farm had been managed by Bachmann’s recently deceased father-in-law and took in roughly $20,000 in 2006 and $28,000 in 2005, with the bulk of the subsidies going to dairy and corn. Both dairy and corn are heavily subsidized—or “socialized”—businesses in America (in 2005 alone, Washington spent $4.8 billion propping up corn prices) and are subject to strict government price controls. These subsidies are at the heart of America’s bizarre planned agricultural economy and as far away from Michele Bachmann’s free-market dream world as Cuba’s free medical system. If American farms such as hers were forced to compete in the global free market, they would collapse.

Confused on the issues: She receives a farm subsidy and government medical benefits, but voted NO on foreclosure relief and health care legislation

However, Bachmann doesn’t think other Americans should benefit from such protection and assistance. She voted against every foreclosure relief bill aimed at helping average homeowners (despite the fact that her district had the highest foreclosure rate in Minnesota), saying that bailing out homeowners would be “rewarding the irresponsible while punishing those who have been playing by the rules.” That’s right, the subsidy queen wants the rest of us to be responsible.

Bachmann’s financial disclosure forms indicate that her personal stake in the family farm is worth up to $250,000. They also show that she has been earning income from the farm business, and that the income grew in just a few years from $2,000 to as much as $50,000 for 2008. This has provided her with a second government-subsidized income to go with her job as a government-paid congresswoman who makes $174,000 per year (in addition to having top-notch government medical benefits). “If she has an interest in a farm getting federal subsidy payments, she is benefiting from them,” Sandra Schubert, director of government affairs for the Environmental Working Group, told Gannett News Service in 2007, when the subsidies to Bachmann were first publicly disclosed.
Not the only politician on the public dole

But Bachmann isn’t the only welfare recipient on Capitol Hill. As it turns out, there is a filthy-rich class of absentee farmers—both in and out of Congress—who demand free-market rules by day and collect their government welfare checks in the mail at night, payments that subsidize businesses that otherwise would fail. Over the past couple of decades, welfare for the super-wealthy seems to be the only kind of welfare our society tolerates.

In the 11 years for which the Environmental Working Group has compiled data, the federal government paid out a total of $178 billion to American farmers. We’re not talking about the Joads here. The bulk of subsidies go to the wealthy, not small farmers, as Ken Cook, the group’s president, explained to the Central Valley (Calif.) Business Times:

American taxpayers have been writing farm subsidy checks to wealthy absentee land owners, state prison systems, universities, public corporations, and very large, well-heeled farm business operations without the government so much as asking the beneficiaries if they need our money. ... Even if you live smack in the middle of a big city, type in a ZIP code and you’ll find farm subsidy recipients.

Sen. Chuck Grassley [R-IA]

Chuck Grassley, the longtime Republican senator from Iowa who warns his constituents of Obama’s “trend toward socialism,” has seen his family collect $1 million in federal handouts over an 11-year period, with Grassley’s son receiving $699,248 and the senator himself pocketing $238,974. Even Grassley’s grandson is learning to ride through life on training wheels, snagging $5,964 in 2005 and $2,363 in 2006. In the Grassley family they learn early how to enjoy other people’s money.

Sen. Grassley railed against government intervention in the health care market, telling The Washington Times, “Whenever the government does more ... that’s a movement toward socialism.” As the top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, he ought to know, especially because the government has done more for him and his kin than for Americans struggling with high medical bills and mortgages. Even the free-market think tank the Heritage Foundation criticized Grassley on his deep connections to farming interests and his stubborn lack of transparency.

Sen. Sam Brownback, [R-KN]

Then there’s Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., whose family has been on the government take for at least the past 11 years, pocketing some $500,000. The senator recently held a “prayercast” with Michele Bachmann to beseech God to kill health care reform as soon as possible because it would bring an evil socialist spirit into America. Like Bachmann, Brownback has a fierce belief in God, the free market and a two-year limit on all welfare benefits—unless it’s welfare to rich Republicans who don’t need it.

Blue Dog, Sen. Max Baucus [D-MN]

Not surprisingly, Blue Dog Democrats are on board with this welfare-for-the-rich thing. Max Baucus, the fiscally conservative Democratic senator from Montana who did his best to sabotage the health care reform process before it ever began, collected $250,000 in taxpayer subsidies to his family’s farm while fighting to keep Americans at the mercy of free-market health insurance.

Blue Dog, Sen. Blanche Lincoln [D-AK]

Sen. Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, another Democrat, also helped hold the line against so-called socialized medicine for Americans who need assistance, even though her family farm business follows the socialized subsidy playbook to a T. The Lincolns pocketed $715,000 in farm subsidies over a 10-year period, and the senator even admitted to using $10,000 of it as petty cash in 2007.

Conservative Dem, Rep. Stephanie Sandlin [D-SD]

Democratic Rep. Stephanie Sandlin of South Dakota stayed true to her conservative free-market roots by voting against the public option. Meanwhile, her daddy, Lars Herseth, a former South Dakota legislator, collected a welfare jackpot of $844,725 paid out between 1995 and 2006.

Profit off taxpayers while denying voters

That’s just the way the game is played these days. Republicans and conservative Democrats bitch and moan about the allegedly Marxist underpinnings of universal health care and do everything they can to deny struggling Americans access to social services. Meanwhile, many of them profit off taxpayers in a massive welfare program.

Farm subsidies have become so corrupt that payments sometimes go to dead people for years. Federal farm subsidies, which were originally meant to help struggling farmers survive, are now little more than taxpayer robbery, taking taxpayer wealth from working Americans and sending it to the have-mores. According to 11 years’ worth of Environmental Working Group data that tracks $200 billion in subsidies, the wealthiest 10 percent of “farmers” have collected 75 percent of the money. That’s exactly the kind of socialism that Rep. Bachmann and her elite ilk like.

This line of thinking falls in with the conservative worldview, of the strict father model as explained by George Lakoff.

The conservative worldview, the strict father model, assumes that the world is dangerous and difficult and that children are born bad and must be made good. The strict father is the moral authority who supports and defends the family, tells his wife what to do, and teaches his kids right from wrong. The only way to do that is through painful discipline - physical punishment that by adulthood will become internal discipline. The good people are the disciplined people. Once grown, the self-reliant, disciplined children are on their own. Those children who remain dependent (who were spoiled, overly willful, or recalcitrant) should be forced to undergo further discipline or be cut free with no support to face the discipline of the outside world.

While, the progressive worldview is modeled on a nurturant parent family. Briefly, it assumes that the world is basically good and can be made better and that one must work toward that. Children are born good; parents can make them better. Nurturing involves empathy, and the responsibility to take care of oneself and others for whom we are responsible. On a larger scale, specific policies follow, such as governmental protection in form of a social safety net and government regulation, universal education (to ensure competence, fairness), civil liberties and equal treatment (fairness and freedom), accountability (derived from trust), public service (from responsibility), open government (from open communication), and the promotion of an economy that benefits all and functions to promote these values, which are traditional progressive values in American politics.

Michelle Bachmann applies the conservative worldview for everyone else but really likes the social safety nets of the government, provided by the progressive worldview, for herself and her family. The motto of the Republican/Tea Party seems to be focused on 'don't do as I do, just do as I say.'

Friday, April 8, 2011

Senate Women Fighting Back

The government shutdown was averted. A temporary agreement was reached by Democrats and Republicans. But several Senate Democratic women explain that the budget impasse by the Republicans and the Tea Party was not on fiscal issues but on social issues. WATCH:


This agreement will be short lived. It is a temporary fix. The Republicans will continue their fight to reduce health care for women, cut Pell grants, eliminate the EPA, reduce aid to the poor and cause extreme loss of jobs. The Senate women are right when they say that it's not about fiscal responsibility. It's really about fiscal irresponsibility!

Thursday, April 7, 2011

The Red Snake Republicans

The Blue Dog Democrats were the cog in the wheel on the issue of a public option during the health care debate. Now it is the Red Snake Republicans who are saying no to any compromise that would avoid a government shutdown in the budget negotiations.

Wednesday, April 6, 2011

Spinning the Loss in Wisconsin

Taylor Jones - Politicalcartoons.com - Anti-union goon Scott Walker - COLOR - English - scott walker,wisconsin,unions,public employee unions,collective bargaining,republicans,conservatives,tea party,koch brothers

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker has an agenda. Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice David Prosser was vocal in his support of Walker and the Governor's measures to bust unions and deny collective bargaining. While the Republicans are trying to claim that their plan for the country is bold, others might be more accurate in calling it extreme or radical. PR Watch found that the win for a liberal judge in the state of Wisconsin has thrown the conservative plan off its track.

While Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan prepares to shut down the federal government to prove that government is bad, analysts say the radical agenda of Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker suffered a major set back today as his good friend incumbent Justice David Prosser was defeated for Wisconsin Supreme Court. The AP unofficial vote count, with 100 percent of the precincts reporting, puts challenger Joanne Kloppenburg ahead by slightly more than 200. A recount is doubtless on the way.

In a state that has never unseated a conservative Supreme Court justice, people power fueled a concentrated effort to deny the Imperial Walker one branch of government. Walker’s opponents hope a Kloppenburg victory will swing the Supreme Court in a more independent direction and set the stage for the court to strike down Walker’s controversial collective bargaining law. While the fate of the law is uncertain, Kloppenburg’s three week sprint from dead-in-the-water to victor may give Walker, Ryan and other Wisconsin politicians pause as they rush to radically reshape government to benefit the privatizers and profiteers.

Sleepy Court Race Electrifies the State

While it may seem odd to many Americans, Wisconsinites like to elect their judges. Although an elected judiciary has its problems (namely, unseemly high-dollar elections), the ballot box sometimes hands citizens a rare opportunity to un-elect judges -- and that is what many Wisconsinites decided to do today. Prosser, a former Republican Assembly Speaker, stumbled when his campaign embraced Walker’s election.

The Kloppenburg victory is stunning. Six weeks ago, sitting Judge David Prosser was a shoo-in and the challenge by Assistant Attorney General Kloppenburg was a snooze fest. But something happened on the way to the high court. A governor, who was elected to create jobs, took office and quickly moved to disenfranchise voters and kneecap unions so they could no longer be a viable force in state elections. The raw power grab sparked a spontaneous uprising, the likes of which this state has never seen, and the Supreme Court race was the next vehicle for people to have their voices heard.

As noted in Salon, this judicial race was very important to Walker in order for him to fulfill his political agenda.

The best evidence of what was at stake in this election, ironically, comes from the Walker camp. The night before the election, Walker's chief counsel, Brian Hagedorn, sent out an email, obtained by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, outlining the dire consequences of a Kloppenburg victory.

"If Justice Prosser loses:

* The Supreme Court will shift from a 4-3 conservative majority to a 4-3 liberal majority.

* Governor Walker's agenda could be stopped in its tracks by this new activist majority.

* Union bosses and their allies will be emboldened and further push to recall the brave Senators who voted for Governor Walker's budget repair bill.

* (Chief Justice) Shirley Abrahamson and her allies will continue to drag down the reputation of the Court, with an additional vote to further push through their radical agenda."

One could argue about who really has the "radical" agenda in Wisconsin, but the gist of Hagedorn's email shouldn't be in dispute. Walker's opponents will be emboldened. And so will anyone else looking for evidence of what can happen when enough people get out and vote.

Walker is now blaming the liberals in Madison for Prosser's loss.

Gov. Scott Walker (R-WI) reacted Wednesday afternoon to the super-close state Supreme Court race -- in which liberal-backed challenger JoAnne Kloppenburg now leads incumbent conservative Justice David Prosser, thanks to popular reaction against Walker's anti-public employee union legislation. Walker's response: Blame it on Madison -- which he said is in a "very different world" from the majority of the state.

WisPolitics reports:

Gov. Scott Walker said this afternoon that the spring election results show there are "two very different worlds in this state."

"You've got a world driven by Madison, and a world driven by everybody else out across the majority of the rest of the state of Wisconsin," Walker said at a press conference in the Capitol.
Of course, the proof is in the numbers that show Prosser's loss was more widespread.
Adding fuel to liberal euphoria, a Democrat also won election to the county executive seat in Milwaukee vacated by Gov. Scott Walker. But perhaps the most important result is the one offering the biggest hint as to what happens next: Kloppenburg decisively trounced Prosser in the district currently represented by Republican state Sen. Dan Kapanke, the first legislator for whom Democrats have accumulated enough signatures to force a recall vote. With one victory -- at least for now -- notched on their belt, Wisconsin's Democrats will be eager for more.
The Republicans claim that they received a mandate from the voters in the last election. However the platform they ran on is not the message that they now claim is bold. The voters in Wisconsin decided to change the course of the Republicans and have embolden the message of the Democrats in this judicial race.