BocaGuys

Congress Returns

2011-09-07T09:37:00.000-07:00

JM Ashby
Bob Cesca's Awesome Blog! Go!
09/06/2011

Artist – Dave Granlund

In other news, Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann would like for you to know that her first priority is protecting Veterans even though sheproposed cutting veterans benefits by $4.5 billion in January.

http://bobcesca.com/blog-archives/2011/09/congress-returns.html

Attack Perry With This Irrefutable Fact

2011-08-14T12:49:00.000-07:00

Bob Cesca
Bob Cesca's Awesome Blog! Go!
08/14/2011

I really hope the Obama administration and the Democrats go after Rick Perry for this recent bit of history.

Texas, which crafts a budget every two years, was facing a $6.6 billion shortfall for its 2010-2011 fiscal years. It plugged nearly all of that deficit with $6.4 billion in Recovery Act money, allowing it to leave its $9.1 billion rainy day fund untouched.
“Stimulus was very helpful in getting them through the last few years,” said Brian Sigritz, director of state fiscal studies for the National Association of State Budget Officers, said of Texas.
Even as Perry requested the Recovery Act money, he railed against it. On the very same day he asked for the funds, he set up a petition titled “No Government Bailouts.”
“Join our fight and add your voice to a growing list of several thousand Americans who are fed up with this irresponsible spending that threatens our future,” Perry wrote on his blog on Feb. 18, 2009.

Seriously, bookmark this blog entry. Use it often. Post it on Facebook. Send it to your Republican friends. Rick Perry supports wealth redistribution and he supports bailouts. Period. Irrefutable fact.

http://bobcesca.com/blog-archives/2011/08/attack-perry-with-this-irrefutable-fact.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Tea party downgrade

2011-08-07T09:21:00.000-07:00

Peter Koechley
MoveOn.org Civic Action
08/07/2011

For the first time in history, the U.S. credit rating has been downgraded.

This "tea party downgrade" is a shameful blow to our nation's honor and risks throwing us right back into recession. Worst of all? It was completely avoidable.

But when given the choice between extremist posturing and responsible leadership, tea party Republicans chose wrong. And now, amazingly, they're blaming it all on Barack Obama.¹

John Boehner and the rest of the Republicans hurt our economy and the whole country needs to know it.

We have to set the record straight.

1. "GOP 2012 Candidates Agree Obama Deserves The Blame For S&P Downgrade... But Disagree Over Why," Talking Points Memo, August 6, 2011
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=262809&id=29556-17979576-JyJ2Jxx&t=4

Copyright 2011 MoveOn.org

The Balanced Approach Versus Hedge Fund Managers Getting Off Scot-Free

2011-07-26T09:55:00.000-07:00

Winning Progressive
July 25th, 2011

The contrast between the competing approaches of President Obama and the House Republicans to the debt ceiling and deficit reduction was perfectly crystallized when both our President and House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) gave speeches on these issues on Monday night. On the Democratic side is the balanced approach that calls for everyone – including hedge fund managers, corporate jet owners, and other wealthy Americans who have made out like bandits over the past thirty years – to help reduce the deficit. On the GOP side, Speaker Boehner continues to promote his “Cut, Cap, and Balance” plan that lets the wealthy get off scot-free by requiring $0 in revenue increases while imposing $5.5 trillion in cuts on programs that benefit the middle class, working class, and poor.

Below are some highlights from President Obama’s speech. After you read them, please heed President Obama’s call and contact Congress in favor of the balanced approach:

The American people may have voted for divided government, but they didn’t vote for a dysfunctional government. So I’m asking you all to make your voice heard. If you want a balanced approach to reducing the deficit, let your Member of Congress know. If you believe we can solve this problem through compromise, send that message.

If you agree, call your Representative and Senators and let them know how you feel. We’ve heard that the Congressional switchboard is overloaded with calls, so your best bet is to try the district office numbers, which can be found here.

Here are a few highlights from President Obama’s speech.

First, the President reminded us that how our budget surplus was wasted during the W. Bush Administration, a point that is also well illustrated by this chart:

In the year 2000, the government had a budget surplus. But instead of using it to pay off our debt, the money was spent on trillions of dollars in new tax cuts, while two wars and an expensive prescription drug program were simply added to our nation’s credit card. As a result, the deficit was on track to top $1 trillion the year I took office.

Next, President Obama explains the balanced approach to deficit reduction:

The first approach says, let’s live within our means by making serious, historic cuts in government spending. Let’s cut domestic spending to the lowest level it’s been since Dwight Eisenhower was President. Let’s cut defense spending at the Pentagon by hundreds of billions of dollars. Let’s cut out the waste and fraud in health care programs like Medicare – and at the same time, let’s make modest adjustments so that Medicare is still there for future generations. Finally, let’s ask the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations to give up some of their tax breaks and special deductions.
This balanced approach asks everyone to give a little without requiring anyone to sacrifice too much. It would reduce the deficit by around $4 trillion and put us on a path to pay down our debt. And the cuts wouldn’t happen so abruptly that they’d be a drag on our economy, or prevent us from helping small business and middle-class families get back on their feet right now.

This approach goes farther on spending cuts than we here at Winning Progressive would like, especially given that the key to reducing the short term deficit is getting the economy moving again, not cutting spending. But with the GOP holding our entire economy hostage, it is clear that some cuts to government spending and deficit reduction will have to occur in order to avoid default, and this balanced approach is by far more reasonable than anything the GOP is proposing. Note also that, contrary to the unsubstantiated rumors floating around various blogs, the President has reiterated that he wants to make Medicare more sustainable by rationalizing health care spending, not by cutting benefits.

The President then contrasted his balanced approach with the ask-nothing-of-the-wealthy approach taken by the Republicans:

The only reason this balanced approach isn’t on its way to becoming law right now is because a significant number of Republicans in Congress are insisting on a cuts-only approach – an approach that doesn’t ask the wealthiest Americans or biggest corporations to contribute anything at all. And because nothing is asked of those at the top of the income scales, such an approach would close the deficit only with more severe cuts to programs we all care about – cuts that place a greater burden on working families.
So the debate right now isn’t about whether we need to make tough choices. Democrats and Republicans agree on the amount of deficit reduction we need. The debate is about how it should be done. Most Americans, regardless of political party, don’t understand how we can ask a senior citizen to pay more for her Medicare before we ask corporate jet owners and oil companies to give up tax breaks that other companies don’t get. How can we ask a student to pay more for college before we ask hedge fund managers to stop paying taxes at a lower rate than their secretaries? How can we slash funding for education and clean energy before we ask people like me to give up tax breaks we don’t need and didn’t ask for?
That’s not right. It’s not fair. We all want a government that lives within its means, but there are still things we need to pay for as a country – things like new roads and bridges; weather satellites and food inspection; services to veterans and medical research.

Next, the President explains how the debt ceiling only became a problem when the crazies who run today’s Republican Party decided that taking our economy hostage is a reasonable way to try to achieve their ideological agenda:

In the past, raising the debt ceiling was routine. Since the 1950s, Congress has always passed it, and every President has signed it. President Reagan did it 18 times. George W. Bush did it 7 times. And we have to do it by next Tuesday, August 2nd, or else we won’t be able to pay all of our bills.

Finally, President Obama reminded us all what will happen if the Republican hostage takers succeed in preventing an increase in the debt limit:

If that happens, and we default, we would not have enough money to pay all of our bills – bills that include monthly Social Security checks, veterans’ benefits, and the government contracts we’ve signed with thousands of businesses.
For the first time in history, our country’s Triple A credit rating would be downgraded, leaving investors around the world to wonder whether the United States is still a good bet. Interest rates would skyrocket on credit cards, mortgages, and car loans, which amounts to a huge tax hike on the American people. We would risk sparking a deep economic crisis – one caused almost entirely by Washington.

Increasing the debt ceiling is absolutely imperative, but we also must not give in to the pathological intransigence of the GOP on this issue. Therefore, contact your Congresspeople and let them know that you want a balance approach to raising the debt ceiling, rather than crashing our economy simply so hedge fund managers and corporate jet owners can get off scot-free.

http://www.winningprogressive.org/a-tale-of-two-speeches

Sarah Palin's Blockbuster

2011-07-25T09:20:00.000-07:00

I think it needs a new title.

Broadway Carl
Broadway Carl's Blog-O-Mania
Sunday, July 24, 2011

The Undefeated, the much-hyped Palin documentary, bombed during its second week in theaters, bringing in just $24,000 in ticket sales across 14 screens. The movie’s per theater average, touted as a relative bright spot by promoters, plummeted from $6,513 to $1,713, according to estimates by the industry website Box Office Mojo.

http://www.broadwaycarl.com/2011/07/sarah-palins-blockbuster.html

Copyright 2011 Broadway Carl's Blog-O-Mania

The GOP’s New-Old Plan to Destroy Medicare & Social Security

2011-07-19T15:30:00.000-07:00

ThinkProgress War Room
Progress Report/ThinkProgress
July 19, 2011

A Sneak Attack on Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and Everything Else

We are now frighteningly close to a default on our obligations with just two short weeks to go until Aug. 2. So what is the GOP doing? Offering up more pointless political stunts and wasting precious time by putting forward radical bills that have absolutely no chance of passing the Senate and which the president has already promised to veto.

The House of Representatives today considered and passed the so-called “Cut, Cap, and Balance” plan (more accurately described as the “Duck, Dodge, and Dismantle” plan), a plan that is just like the GOP’s disastrous budget plan passed earlier this year — except much, much worse. This new plan — the GOP budget plan on steroids — is a wolf in sheep’s clothing that would require almost immediate, deep spending cuts. And instead of merely doing this by legislation, this plan would impose the GOP’s budget on America by manipulating our Constitution. Under this plan, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security would come in for deep cuts in the years to come.

Another pernicious element of the plan worth noting is that it also includes re-writing the Constitution in such a way as to make it nearly impossible to raise taxes — ever. While Medicare and Social Security can get slashed by a mere majority vote, raising taxes would require a 2/3 vote in both the Senate and the House. (If that kind of arrangement sounds familiar, it’s because that’s how the badly broken budget process in California works.)

What It Means

The centerpiece of the plan is as devious as it is wonky — cap on total government spending at 18 percent of Gross Domestic Product, a level of spending so low it has not been seen since 1966. While this overall cap cleverly disguises the scope and scale of the plan’s cuts, here’s a chart from the Center for American Progress’ Michael Linden and Michael Ettlinger that illustrates what the GOP’s “dangerous and disingenuous plan” could mean in practice (hint: massive cuts):

Then Versus Now: Why We Can’t Run the Government Like It’s 1966

It would seem fairly obvious that we can’t go back to the level of government spending we had in 1966, given the numerous differences between then and now. Here’s how today’s America stacks up against 1966 America (click here for full size):

Instead of radical bills and half-baked gimmicks, it’s time for the GOP to support a reasonable plan — including substantial new revenues — that will reduce the deficit and save us from the economic calamity that would result from a default on our obligations.

http://thinkprogress.org/progress-report/the-gops-new-old-plan-to-destroy-medicare-social-security/

Bad News For Republicans

2011-07-18T15:07:00.000-07:00

JM Ashby
Bob Cesca's Awesome Blog! Go!
07/18/2011

According to a new CBS poll released today:

71% of respondents disapproved of Republicans’ handling of the debt talks, with only 21% approving.But beyond the lack of general buy-in to their legislative tactics, CBS reports that they even face a challenge in convincing their own base. [...]
Even half of the Republican respondents (51 percent) voiced disapproval of how members of their own party in Congress are handling the talks. Far fewer Democrats expressed disapproval of their own party’s handling (32 percent) or President Obama’s (22 percent) of the urgent quest to raise the nation’s debt limit ahead of a looming default on Aug. 2 if action isn’t taken.

Only 22% of Democrats disapprove of the president’s handling of debt-ceiling negotiations while 51% of Republicans disapprove of the their party’s handling of negotiations. So whose base is abandoning who here?

Just to add insult to injury — a Gallup poll released four days ago shows that74% of Republicans believe any deficit reduction legislation should also include new revenue.

In hindsight, it should be a no-brainer for Republicans to take the president’s “Big Deal” offer, but they won’t because tax cuts for the Super-Rich are sacrosanct.

http://bobcesca.com/blog-archives/2011/07/bad-news-for-republicans.html

Copyright 2011 Bob Cesca's Awesome Blog! Go!

Michele's Bridge to Nowhere

2011-07-16T06:18:00.000-07:00

JHW22
Broadway Carl's Blog-O-Mania!
Friday, July 15, 2011

Republicans like to say Obama is three years into his Presidency, so using their math, Michele Bachmann is one year into the new Congress -- the Create Jobs Congress. And thus far, she has sponsored seven bills in one year. Yep, seven. And none are titled "Job Creating Bill". From the way she talks, you'd think she has worked tirelessly (like the Founding Fathers on slavery) to create jobs. Nope. Seven bills. None of them job creators. Well, unless you think cutting taxes is a job creator and if you do, well, you don't need to be reading this. Or unless you think building a bridge is a job creator. (In fact, it is a job creator which is why I support federal infrastructure funding. More on that later.)

To be fair to her work ethic, she has co-sponsored 92 bills this year. But that's not really leadership, is it? I mean when you sponsor 7 and co-sponsor 92, ya look like a follower. In fact, she has only sponsored 38 bills ever. Heck, Obama sponsored 121 in only two years -- he sponsored at least one bill for every four bills he co-sponsored when he was in the Senate. In two years.

Now, about that one bill of hers, her one of her many, many (seven) bills that is a job creator. Its goal is

To facilitate a proposed project in the Lower St. Croix Wild and Scenic River, and for other purposes.

Sounds a little like earmarking to me. Hey, she did the proper thing by filing a bill and submitting it to committees. Heck, she even attached a Constitutional Authority Statement. But, still, when someone uses 1/7th of her bill-sponsoring time on a local district project, it's an earmark, because an earmark is an earmark is an earmark. Well, except when it's not. And this one is not.

This bill is not an earmark because there is no money attached to it. The bridge is estimated to cost between $334 and $373 million dollars. (Remember that other bridge that was going to cost the feds about that much?) But all THIS bill does it get permission to build it because it violates some environmental concerns. She's just asking for the green light from the federal government to be able to later ask for funding for it. So, because they can't build it, there's no need to ask for money and that means she can stick to her pledge to

not seek any earmarks this year [emphasis mine]

It seems rather easy to not seek earmarks when you're not really seeking much in general. I mean seven sponsored bills is an easy way to avoid asking for earmarks. Especially when the one you REALLY want earmarks for, isn't approved for funding yet.

Or IS it? I guess it depends on what your def... oops, sorry. Anyway, DID she avoid earmark requests for this bridge? Well, yes and no. She didn't ask for earmarks this year or even over the last two years. What she did do is send out letters requesting grant consideration for federal funding in 2009 in the ... wait for it ... stimulus!! Yes, the OBAMA stimulus. You know, the one she despises and said hasn't created jobs. She sent letters on behalf of her bridge to ask for funding from the very stimulus she spoke out against before, during and after the votes.

Is anyone really surprised? I mean the gal has a lot of "choots pa", after all.

Now, I was actually for the Bridge to Nowhere before I was still for it. It made sense to me considering the need. The problem was that it became a political football and people lost sight of the need. And, instead, they built a road to nowhere with the money. A bridge would have been the better use.

And I support more federal funding for bridges, light rail, broadband, alternate energy source conduits. I am a Democrat (although I was recently told I am not one because I don't agree with the Angry Left and I was told this by a woman threatening to vote third party so yep, I AM a Democrat). I love when the federal government employs people to make things people will use. I don't care where those things are as long as people work to make them and they make lives easier where they are.

So when a "Constitutional Conservative" who believes

that many of our problems result from the federal government's insatiable — and unconstitutional — grab for power and money

actually makes a money and power grab for a bridge in the middle of nowhere while condemning the very funding source she begs to be a part of, I think to myself, "How's that conservativey, hypocrisy thing workin for ya'?"

Oh, wrong Conservative hypocrite. It's hard to keep those two straight.
http://www.broadwaycarl.com/2011/07/micheles-bridge-to-nowhere.html

Copyright 2011 Broadway Carl's Blog-O-Mania!

Why the U.S. Government Needs to Investigate News Corp

2011-07-14T09:41:00.000-07:00

ThinkProgress War Room
Progress Reports/Think Progress
July 13, 2011

Why This Scandal Matters

For more than a week now, Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation (the parent company of Fox News, among many other things) has been rocked by an ever-growing and ever more shocking scandal after it was revealed that the Murdoch-owned News of the World hacked into the phones and personal records of murdered children, the sick four month-old child of former Prime Minister Gordon Brown, victims of the 7/7 London terror attacks, the families of soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, celebrities, politicians, members of the royal family, thousands of other Britons, and even perhaps 9/11 victims. In addition, it has been widely reported that the Murdoch-owned papers bribed police in order to aid their other alleged criminal activities.

Yesterday, ThinkProgress launched a petition (you can sign it here) calling for the Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission to launch full investigations into News Corp’s potential criminal activities. Here’s why.

WHO: News Corporation, the parent company of Fox News, the Wall Street Journal, New York Post, the Times of London, the News of the World (since closed due to the scandal), the Sun, and many, many other media corporations (see chart below).

WHAT: Illegal hacking into the personal records and phones of thousands of people, potentially including Americans.

WHY IT MATTERS: In addition to being appalling in general, News Corp’s alleged actions may have violated a key U.S. law — the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. The landmark anti-bribery law, passed in 1977, bans U.S. companies AND their foreign subsidiaries from paying bribes to foreign officials. News Corporation, which is headquartered in the United States, as a corporation as well as its executives as individuals could therefore be liable under the law if bribes are indeed found to have been paid to police in the U.K. (and/or for a variety of other related offenses under the law).

The Obama administration has stepped up enforcement of the law in recent years, levying billions of dollars in fines against several major corporations and even sending corporate executives to jail.

If News Corporation and its employees are also found to have hacked American citizens on American soil, they could also potentially face a variety of other serious charges.

Finally, Les Hinton, who was previously the top executive in charge of News Corp’s scandal-plagued U.K. newspapers, is now head of Dow Jones, the publisher of the Wall Street Journal.

WHO ELSE IS ON BOARD SO FAR: Senators Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), and Robert Menendez (D-NJ) have all echoed ThinkProgress’ call for a full investigation. And Reps. Louise Slaughter (D-NY) and Bruce Braley (D-IA) have joined their Senate colleagues in calling for an investigation as well.

Late this afternoon, Rep. Peter King (R-NY), Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, became the first Republican to call for an investigation, calling the hacking allegations “disgraceful.”

Families of 9/11 victims have also called for an investigation.

NOTABLE QUOTABLE: Former British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, himself a victim of the hacking, called out News Corp today in the House of Commons for “lawbreaking on an industrial scale.”

FOR MORE: For an excellent backgrounder on the scandal (before it exploded last week), check out this piece from Vanity Fair’s Sarah Ellison. The Guardian is also an excellent resource forminute-by-minute developments in the on-going scandal.

http://thinkprogress.org/progress-report/why-the-u-s-government-needs-to-investigate-news-corp/

What class warfare really looks like

2011-07-13T08:49:00.000-07:00

Dee Dee Myers
POLITICO
July 11, 2011

Here we go again. Democrats single out glaring examples of tax preferences or spending priorities that favor the wealthy and Republicans cry “class warfare!”

The latest round came in the wake of President Barack Obama’s calls to eliminate tax breaks for corporate jet owners. Ending special deductions for the depreciation of corporate aircraft would save roughly $3 billion over the next decade. Republicans argue — correctly — that amounts to less than half of 1 percent of the current national debt. So it was striking how quickly, and passionately, conservative pols and commentators rose to defend the subsidy.

“Dangerous!” “Full-fledged demagoguery!” cried Rush Limbaugh. The president’s “aim is for one group of Americans to hate and despise another!
”

“Unprecedented class warfare!” claimed Glenn Beck. The president again showed “his sheer, unadulterated disgust for the wealthy, the successful and anyone who’s ever tried to do anything with their life here in America.”

Really? Closing a single loophole worth less than one-half of 1 percent of the national debt is all that?

The knee-jerk conservative response confirms two things. First, they know the president landed a punch. Second, they’re utterly unwilling to acknowledge how much the playing field in American life has now tilted in favor of the haves.

We know the president’s proposal was largely symbolic. He doesn’t believe that eliminating a $3 billion tax break is really going to break the back of a $14 trillion problem.

But he does believe that highlighting small, but galling, inequities can stimulate a broader conversation about fairness. In our collective effort to deal with our very real fiscal challenges, how do we share the burden? The president’s argument resonated with ordinary Americans precisely because it’s a stand-in for their growing sense that things are out of whack.

This is the conversation conservatives don’t want to have.

It’s indisputable that the gap between the rich and everyone else in this country has grown dramatically. The top 1 percent of Americans now take home nearly a quarter of all income and control more than 40 percent of the country’s wealth — roughly the same amount as the bottom 90 percent.

It’s also indisputable that that gap has gotten far bigger in the past 25 years. In the past decade alone, the wealthiest percentile has seen its income grow by a robust 17 percent, while the middle class has seen its real income fall.

What could possibly account for such gross distortions? Are the superwealthy really that much smarter and productive than the rest of us? Are the organic veggies and hormone-free meat that affluent parents feed their children paying off?

Or could it be something else?

How about the tax structure? The 400 Americans with the highest adjusted gross income saw their effective tax rates plummet from 30 percent in 1995 to 17 percent in 2007.

That’s not according to some left-wing think tank. It comes from a recent cover story in Bloomberg BusinessWeek. General Electric paid no corporate taxes in 2010. ExxonMobil, one of the most profitable companies in the world, still benefits from hundreds of millions of dollars in government subsidies — and it still couldn’t explain, let alone prevent, a devastating oil spill in the Yellowstone River.

Even tax breaks that are supposed to help the middle class too often skew toward the wealthy. Consider the mortgage interest deduction. While political leaders in both parties have long considered it untouchable, it actually helps those at the top of the income scale far more than those at the bottom.

First, low- and middle-income earners are less likely to itemize deductions, so most aren’t even eligible for the benefit. If the mortgage interest deduction were eliminated, according to the Tax Policy Center, the bottom 40 percent of earners would be virtually unaffected.

Those in the middle brackets would see a small increase in their taxes. While those in the top brackets — the same folks who have seen their incomes and wealth skyrocket in recent decades — would take the biggest hit.

Second, it provides the biggest benefit to people who buy the most expensive homes. The deduction on a million-dollar loan at an elevated jumbo rate is worth a heck of a lot more than one for a $250,000 conforming loan.

Third, because people in lower brackets pay lower rates, if a person making $50,000 a year and person making $150,000 a year bought the same house, the higher earner would get a bigger tax break.

Reducing the amount of eligible debt from $1 million to, say, $250,000 is now under discussion. That would help. But it would still provide a bigger benefit to people with bigger incomes.

So the dirty little secret is that the pool man, who’s making $30,000 a year, is subsidizing the million-dollar mortgage for the family whose pool he cleans. No wonder people want to get rid of tax breaks for corporate jets.

And no wonder the American people overwhelmingly support raising taxes on the rich — as well as cutting spending — to reduce the deficit and improve income equality. They don’t believe it’s class warfare.

For generations, Americans who aren’t rich have been generous and admiring of their wealthy compatriots — they want a country where people who work hard can succeed, where the same rules apply to everyone. They expect to have their own shot at getting rich. But increasingly, they are seeing that the game is rigged.

So as Republican congressional leaders stand their ground in the battle over raising the debt ceiling and lowering the debt — no net revenue increase! — Obama must stand his. He must ensure that any deal he may be able to strike moves us back toward a society where the burdens are shared equally — by all our people.

The U.S. now lags behind every country in Donald Rumsfeld’s “Old Europe” in terms of income equality.

“The more divided a society becomes in terms of wealth,” the Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz wrote recently in Vanity Fair, “the more reluctant the wealthy become to spend on the common needs. The rich don’t need to rely on government for parks or education or medical care or personal security — they can buy these things for themselves. In the process, they become more distant from ordinary people, losing whatever empathy they may once have had.”

That, my friends, is what class warfare really looks like.

Dee Dee Myers, a contributing editor for Vanity Fair, served as White House press secretary in the first two years of the Clinton administration.

http://readersupportednews.org/off-site-opinion-section/83-83/6580-what-class-warfare-really-looks-like

Informed ?

2011-07-10T05:17:00.000-07:00

Bruce Plante
Broadway Carl's Blog-O-Mania!
Saturday, July 9, 2011

http://www.broadwaycarl.com/2011/07/must-reads_09.html

Copyright 2011 Broadway Carl's Blog-O-Mania!

The GOP Plays With Fire, We All Get Burned

2011-07-08T15:01:00.000-07:00

ThinkProgress War Room
Progress Report|ThinkProgress
July 8, 2011

Why We Can’t Have Nice Things (Like Jobs)

Determining the precise reasons behind today’s extremely dismal jobs report (only 18,000 net jobs created, with unemployment inching up to 9.2 percent) is difficult, but there are at least a couple that seem pretty clear.

The GOP-Induced Default Crisis Is Creating Uncertainty for Businesses, Dragging Down the Economy: Republicans like to blame just about anything on “uncertainty,” usually attributed to President Obama and the Democrats. This is odd because it is the GOP who is creating uncertainty right now, since we are all uncertain as to whether or not the GOP is going to tank the economy next month in order to protect tax breaks for Big Oil, hedge fund billionaires, and millionaire horse breeders, among others. Michael Ettlinger, vice president for economic policy at the Center for American Progress, explains:

It’s more than a coincidence that this slowing pace began when the attention in Washington, financial markets, and the media turned from the 2011 budget to the debt limit — and when Republicans in Congress and their conservative allies started most pointedly digging in their heels on a debt limit increase, attaching extreme conditions for their votes. That’s a situation that would give any rational business pause.
It wouldn’t be at all surprising to see an economic impact given the potential effect of a failure to raise the debt limit and the chance that this scenario may play out. After all, even if one believes the chance of inaction is small, it’s a big risk. One would expect to see decisions on hiring and investment postponed until the uncertainty is relieved. That’s not to say every business and corporation has its eyes on the debt limit debate as it makes its decisions. But the doubts about the economy that the debate is creating are certainly causing greater caution.
Businesses in this country hire millions of people each month, and if that caution is causing just 100,000 or 200,000 fewer hires than would otherwise occur, that would show up as a large impact on net job creation. And that may be just what’s happening.

Defaulting on our obligations would be terrible for a lot of reasons, not the least of which would be its impact on GDP. A default would look something like this:

Draconian Budget Cuts Have Caused Massive Job Losses in the Public Sector: The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (aka the Stimulus) provided tens of billions of dollars in aid to states to help stabilize their finances. Conservative senators, however, pared back the size of the help and it ultimately proved insufficient given the depth of the economic downturn, so states and localities started sharply cutting anyway. The GOP, of course, has steadfastly refused to extend any further aid. What this means is that more than 500,000 public sector workers have lost their jobs as a result. Matt Yglesiasexplains:

For a while, temporary Census-related jobs masked the underlying trend, but we’ve been steadily shedding government work. Maybe you think that’s a good thing. Certainly most of President Obama’s critics from the right claim to believe it’s a good thing. But what happens when you shed public sector jobs amidst an already weak economic climate is the sharply reduced incomes of the former teachers and whatnot lead to them spending less in their local communities. In total, we have about 500,000 fewer people working for the government since Obama’s inauguration even though the national population is larger than it used to be.

Evening Brief: Important Stories That You May Have Missed

According to the New York Times, Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R-MN), the first candidate to announce his intention to run for president, may be the first to drop out. Sinking poll numbers, difficulty fundraising, and an inability to connect with the GOP base are among the many problems encountered by the campaign.

As new revelations appear every day about the hacking scandal allegedly perpetrated by Rupert Murdoch’s News of the World publication, the Guardian reports that Scotland Yard now believes that News Corporation employees may have tried to delete evidence of information stolen by NOTW reporters.

Jason Linkins of Huffington Post has published a voicemail from Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) to Koch Industries in which the senator solicits the company for campaign donations to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. Although Koch donates regularly to both parties, including the DSCC in the past, a top Koch lobbyist claims to be offended that Democrats have asked for a continued donation at a time when the party is now highlighting the threat of the Koch’s far right agenda.

Radley Balko reports that a woman in Michigan has been charged with a misdemeanor for the crime of planting a vegetable garden in her front yard.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) says that he has received assurances from other senators that if Obama sends a “piece of crap” debt deal, it will be defeated.

Former BP CEO Tony Hayward can’t remember the names of the men who died on the Deepwater Horizon rig.

Kentucky Gov. Steve Beshear (D) has announced that “private companies will manage care for the vast majority of Kentucky’s 815,000 recipients of Medicaid.”

Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) wants the poor to shoulder more responsibility for deficit reduction.

Steve Lacey wonders how many Republicans it takes to unscrew an (efficient) light bulb, a move that will cost consumers $12 BILLION.

http://thinkprogress.org/progress-report/the-gop-plays-with-fire-we-all-get-burned/

Tea Party Already Looking To Purge Their New Congress Members For Having The Audacity To Compromise

2011-07-06T07:17:00.000-07:00

Susie Madrak
Crooks and Liars
July 05, 2011

I've known some really good politicians in my time, people who really knew how to hammer out coalitions and get things done. It wasn't always pretty, of course, but they managed some semblance of actual governance and moved the ball down the field. The Tea Party gang has an entirely different problem: A base made up of voters who don't accept that compromise, by definition, is inherent in a political process.

That sort of binary thinking is killing this country.

Now, you have a group of freshman Congress members who won election by promising that things were black and white, and they're going to be punished for illustrating that, as extreme as they were, they have to compromise on at least some things. It would be funny if I wasn't dreading an even more extreme cropthe next time:

It is miles to go before the 2012 Congressional races begin in earnest, but already some of the 87 freshmen who helped the Republicans win back the House last year are bracing for a challenge from within the party. At least half a dozen potential primary challengers to freshmen are considering a run, and there is heated chatter about more.

In some ways, the freshmen are responsible for their own predicament. Many won their seats after successfully challenging establishment Republicans in primaries, proving that a combination of gumption and the right political climate could overcome the advantages of incumbency.

Now, to some of the impatient and ideological voters who sent them to Washington to change things, the new House members may be seen as the establishment, and they face the disconcerting prospect of immediately defending themselves in the political marketplace.

The 2012 primary “started the day I took office,” said Representative Blake Farenthold, who won last year in a heavily Democratic district in South Texas but is now likely to face a Republican primary challenger. “There is this constant pressure for fund-raising. I mean, you’re always worried about who is going to run against you, but I am willing to stand up for what I believe and on my record.”

[...] On the flip side, groups aligned with the Tea Party movement, which helped push many new-to-politics candidates into House seats, are disenchanted with some of their new hires and are pondering if they can raise the money, and the firepower, to find someone to take them on.
“I do think it is going to be more competitive,” said Jenny Beth Martin, a co-founder of the Tea Party Patriots. “With the freshmen who claim to be Tea Party or claim to support the ideas of the Tea Party movement but haven’t kept their promise, I think it will be tough for them.”

Ms. Martin said she regularly fields e-mails from New York Tea Party groups, as well as others in Georgia and Mississippi, complaining about freshmen House members who voted for a disappointing short-term spending agreement with President Obama that fell short of the party’s budget-cutting goals. “They have broken their promises,” she said. “People are dissatisfied.”

http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/tea-party-already-looking-purge-their

©2011 Crooks and Liars

Horses Versus Health Care

2011-07-05T15:18:00.000-07:00

ThinkProgress War Room
Progress Reports|Think Process
July 5, 2011

GOP Tax Giveaway of the Day: Mitch McConnell’s Bluegrass Boondoggle

As the Aug. 2 deadline for resolving the default crisis nears, we will start taking a closer look at some of the wasteful tax giveaways that the GOP is refusing to eliminate while at the same time demanding trillions of dollars in spending cuts. As President Obama has repeatedly noted, for each dollar in tax giveaways the GOP refuses to eliminate, that is one more dollar that will have to be cut from Medicare, Medicaid, student loans, or another important program.

Today’s nominee for elimination is just one of the more than $1 TRILLION in wasteful tax giveaways that need to be sent to the glue factory.

WHO: Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY)

WHAT: The Bluegrass Boondoggle, a special tax break for the horse racing industry

WHERE: Inserted into the 2008 Farm Bill by McConnell. McConnell, who was up for re-election in 2008, publicly took credit for it at the time by noting how much it would benefit Kentucky’s horse racing industry.

HOW MUCH IT WASTES: $126 MILLION over 10 years

WHY IT MATTERS: It is the perfect example of an industry using one politically powerful member of Congress to obtain special favors and giveaways — giveaways the rest of us pay for. This tax giveaway is particularly egregious, as it is both costly and benefits a very small and wealthy group of individuals. When it was first inserted into the Farm Bill in 2008, ThinkProgress referred to it as McConnell’s “millionaire-only earmark.”

NOTABLE QUOTABLE — Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR): “Giving Triple Crown treatment to millionaires while workers are put out to pasture – that’s not right, and it’s not the American way.”

WHAT’S NEXT: Just two hours ago, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) filed a resolution expressing that it is the sense of the Senate “that any agreement to reduce the budget deficit should require that those earning $1,000,000 or more per year make a more meaningful contribution to the deficit reduction effort.”

This resolution will give both sides a crystal clear opportunity to express whether they think millionaires need to start paying their fair share or whether they favor eliminating Medicare instead of getting rid tax breaks for millionaire horse breeders, billionaire hedge fund managers, and corporate jet owners.

Evening Brief: Important Stories That You May Have Missed

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) says he will filibuster all Senate business until they discuss the debt ceiling negotiations.

Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum mistakenly insists the U.S. economy has added 100 times more jobs than it actually has.

Anti-marriage equality groups in New York may not pose as big of a threat after all for the four Senate Republicans who voted to legalize marriage equality.

By modern Tea Party standards, Margaret Thatcher would be some kind of communist.

In 2010, 19,000 service members in the armed forces were raped or sexually assaulted — the vast majority of whom never reported it.

The New Jersey legislature voted decisively this past week to ban hydrofracking, a controversial form of natural gas drilling that is being studied for its documented dangers to the environment.

The managing director of credit rating agency S&P said if the debt ceiling is not raised and the U.S. defaults on its debt, the U.S. will lose its AAA rating and will receive a D.

The rate of American troops killed in Iraq is at 2003 and 2004 levels.

With drone wars and secret ops, is the U.S. government sliding into uncharted territory in its fight against al Qaeda and other extremists?

Numbers to Know: CEOs Got a 23 Percent Raise Last Year, What About You?

It’s like the Roaring ’20s if you’re a corporate CEO these days, reports the New York Times in a special report on skyrocketing CEO pay. Here’s the numbers you need to know:

$10.8 MILLION…the median salary of a CEO in 2010 at 200 large companies
23 PERCENT…the increase in CEO salaries between 2009 and 2010
38 PERCENT…the increase in cash bonuses between 2009 and 2010
0.5 PERCENT…the increase in the average worker’s salary ($752 a week) during the same time period, which the New York Times dryly notes actually means a net decrease for workers once inflation is figured in.

http://thinkprogress.org/progress-report/horses-versus-health-care/
© 2005-2011 Center for American Progress Action Fund

GOP Versus Itself On Default

2011-07-02T10:50:00.000-07:00

ThinkProgress War Room
Progress Reports
July 1, 2011

In Their Own Words: Republicans Explain Why We Must Not Default

The Treasury Department confirmed once again this afternoon that Aug. 2 is the do-or-default date when it comes to raising the nation’s debt ceiling. Meanwhile, Republican senators are simply digging in their heels to defend special tax breaks for corporate jet owners (among other things). Since the GOP won’t listen to reason, perhaps they’ll listen to…themselves when it comes to avoiding a default on our obligations:

“We’re at 15 percent revenue, and historically it’s been closer to 20 percent. We’ve never had a war without a tax, and now we’ve got two. … Absolute bullshit.”
-Former Sen. Alan Simpson (R-WY), yesterday

“The debt’s coming due, and they say it isn’t coming due. They’re wrong.”
-Former Sen. Pete Domenici (R-NM), former Senate Budget Committee Chairman, yesterday

“Raising the debt limit is necessary to preserve the full faith and credit of the U.S. Government. We cannot as a Congress pass spending bills and tax bills and then refuse to pay our bills. Refusing to raise the debt limit is like refusing to pay your credit card bill–after you’ve used your credit card. The time to control the deficits and debt is when we are voting on the spending bills and the tax bills that create it. Raising the debt limit is about meeting the obligations we have already incurred. We must meet our obligations. Vote for this bill.”
-Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), in 2006

“Now, how can somebody spend like a drunken sailor and then all of a sudden find religion when it comes to raising the debt limit? This is just like eating a big meal and walking out on the bill.”
-Rep. Jeff Flake (R-AZ), in 2002

“The result is that our government now needs to keep its promise to the American people, to all of various entitlement programs, but maybe most especially the program that that elderly woman asked about this morning. We must raise the statutory debt limit.”
-Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN), in 2002

“You don’t have much choice if you charge something on your credit card. You have to pay it, and that’s effectively what this debt limit is . . . [W]e’ve already spent the money. The question is now, do we shut down the government, or do we fund what we’ve already done?”
-Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC), last year. Last week, however, DeMint threatened any Republicans who vote against default.

“Let me tell you what’s involved if we don’t lift the debt ceiling: financial collapse and calamity throughout the world.”
-Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), in January

Evening Brief: Important Stories That You May Have Missed

The Heritage Foundation still doesn’t get it — corporate jets and commercial jets are not the same thing.

A recent study by UBS found a strong correlation between social inclusion, competitiveness, and economic development.

A 74-year-old gay-rights supporter was charged with assault after kissing a preacher protesting a pride event.

The American Family Association’s Bryan Fischer compared the Republican National Committee appointing the executive director of the pro-gay Log Cabin Republicans to its finance committee to inviting a pro-slavery Republican to join before the Civil War.

Despite original claims from his campaign that he did, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney did not raise $10 million in one day.

A former GOP senator turns on his old colleagues who say the debt ceiling doesn’t have to be raised, saying, “They’re wrong.”

2012 Watch: Romney’s Epic Reversal On His Campaign’s Central Theme

Even by Mitt Romney’s standards, this is whale of a flip-flop. After contending for months that President Obama had made the economy worse, Mitt Romney yesterday suddenly abandoned the central theme of his campaign when he told a crowd of reporters (including ThinkProgress’ Scott Keyes) that he never made any such claim. Truly epic video:

http://thinkprogress.org/progress-report/gop-versus-itself-on-default/

© 2005-2011 Center for American Progress Action Fund

Happy Birthday Medicare!

2011-07-01T05:31:00.000-07:00

ThinkProgress War Room
June 30, 2011

Fast Facts on Medicare

Tomorrow marks the 45th anniversary of the implementation of Medicare (July 1, 1966), following President Lyndon Johnson’s signing of the landmark health care program on July 30, 1965. Despite Medicare’s great run, House Republicans voted almost unanimously to end it in order to pay for tax more breaks for Big Oil, hedge fund billionaires, huge corporations, and corporate jet owners. And every single GOP presidential candidate also supports this disastrous plan to end Medicare. Here are some fast facts on the beloved program that the GOP has devoted itself to destroying:

47 MILLION…the number of Americans for whom Medicare provides comprehensive health care
51 PERCENT…the number of Americans 65 or older who did not have health care before Medicare was passed, while today virtually all elderly Americans have health care thanks to Medicare
30 PERCENT…the number of elderly Americans who lived in poverty before Medicare, a number now reduced to 7.5 PERCENT
72 PERCENT…the number of Americans in a recent poll who said that Medicare is “extremely” or “very” important to their retirement security

What Would the GOP Plan to End Medicare Mean?

The end to Medicare’s affordable package of guaranteed benefits
Immediate increase in prescription drug costs for seniors because the notorious “donut hole” would be re-opened
A massive shift of health care costs to seniors, more than doubling their out-of-pockets costs:

http://thinkprogress.org/progress-report/happy-birthday-medicare/

Like A Business

2011-06-30T19:46:00.000-07:00

JM Ashby
Bob Cesca's Awesome Blog! Go!
06/30/2011

Artist – Jeff Parker

In other news, Senators Rand Paul (R-KY), Jim DeMint (R-SC) and Mike Lee (R-UT) introduced a bill this week to bring back gold and silver coins as a means of solving the nation’s fiscal problems, and 750,000 government employees went on strike today in Britain to protest their conservative government’s harsh austerity measures.

http://bobcesca.com/blog-archives/2011/06/like-a-business.html

Nothing To Show For It

2011-06-30T05:59:00.000-07:00

JM Ashby
Bob Cesca's Awesome Blog! Go!
06/29/2011

Artist – Mike Keefe

In other news, a new poll shows that Governor Rick Perry would lose his home state of Texas in a matchup against President Obama, and Boeing has been found to be overcharging the government by as much at 177,000 percent.

http://bobcesca.com/blog-archives/2011/06/nothing-to-show-for-it.html

Karl Rove’s $20 MILLION Distraction

2011-06-29T08:32:00.000-07:00

Josh Dorner
Progress Reports/ThinkProgress
June 28, 2011

Don’t Forget–The GOP United Behind Plan to End Medicare, Give More Tax Breaks to Big Oil, Billionaires

Late last Friday, Karl Rove’s attack group, Crossroads GPS, announced a $20 million attack ad campaign going after President Obama. Crossroads says the ads, initially showing on cable and in 10 states, are meant to “frame the national debate” on jobs and the economy. What they really want to do, of course, is re-frame the national debate away from the GOP’s disastrous and spectacularly unpopular plan to end Medicare in order to give more tax breaks to millionaires, billionaires, and Big Oil (three groups that just so happened to fund a related Rove attack group last year).

Here’s a reminder of what’s in the GOP plan and where the 2012 candidates stand on it. (Hint: they all support it.)

What’s Included in the GOP Plan:

the end of Medicare as we know it
a massive new tax cut for Big Oil and other huge corporations
a massive, hidden tax increase on the middle class
a massive tax cut for millionaires and billionaires
huge cuts to government programs and services that millions of Americans rely on each day, including student loans, food safety, and unemployment benefits

All the 2012 Candidates Support the GOP Plan:

Mitt Romney: Romney said he was “on the same page” as Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), author of the GOP’s budget plan, before going all in on the plan to end Medicare and adding that he “appreciate[s] what Paul Ryan has done.”
Michele Bachmann: In February 2010, Bachmann said the GOP’s 2012 nominee would need to be forthright with the American public about the need to “wean everybody off” Medicare and Social Security. Bachmann voted for the GOP’s plan to end Medicare, even though she later admitted she was concerned about the $6,000+ in additional annual health care costs that the plan would shift to seniors.
Tim Pawlenty: Pawlenty refused for weeks to say whether or not he supported the details of the GOP plan, including the part that ends Medicare. The former Minnesota governor eventually said “of course” he would sign the plan to end Medicareif presented to him as president, noting separately that he also supports cuts to Social Security.
Jon Huntsman: Huntsman’s support for the plan to end Medicare is crystal clear. He told Good Morning America: “I would’ve voted for it. Including the Medicare provisions.”
Herman Cain: The former pizza mogul is a strong support of the plan to end Medicare, having said: “I absolutely support Paul Ryan’s plan. It is exactly the kind of bold restructuring that we need in order to get our hands around the entitlements issue.”
Ron Paul: He voted against the GOP budget plan in the House — but only because it does not go far enough. The Texas congressman believes Medicare and Social Security are both unconstitutional and even compared them to slavery.
Rick Santorum: He strongly supports the plan to end Medicare, but with one caveat: he wants the end of Medicare to come even sooner than in the GOP plan.
Newt Gingrich: Gingrich’s presidential campaign imploded after he admitted on Meet the Press that the GOP’s plan to end Medicare is “radical right-wing social engineering.”After taking intense fire for days from his fellow Republicans, Gingrich eventually apologized to Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) and said he would have voted for the plan after all.

Evening Brief: Important Stories That You May Have Missed

The Ohio House today passed a potentially unconstitutional measure that would effectively outlaw abortions six or seven weeks into pregnancy. The so-called “heartbeat bill” is the most radically restrictive anti-abortion legislation in the nation.

The Senate Judiciary’s Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees and Border Security held itsfirst hearing today on the DREAM Act, with Education Secretary Arne Duncan and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napalitano among those testifying in support of the bill alongside DREAM activists and representatives from the Defense Department. The hearing was packed with students, many of whom were wearing trademark caps and gowns, supporting the bill that has been continually reintroduced since 2001. The bill came closest to passage last year during the lame duck session, but fell five votes short of overcoming a Senate filibuster.

Google estimates the cost of delaying clean energy innovation and smart energy policies for just five years could cost the U.S. economy trillions of dollars.

A shocking new audit was leaked today by the Defense Department’s Office of Inspector General that found Boeing is overcharging the US Army by up to 177,000 percent on helicopter parts. All told, this has resulted in millions of dollars of overspending on the taxpayers dime.

After Michelle Bachmann’s latest gaffe, in which she falsely claimed John Quincy Adams was a founding father, people have tried to edit Adams’ Wikipedia page. Bachmann’s latest gaffe comes after her former chief of staff wrote an op-ed in the Des Moines Register, saying she does not have the “judgment, the demeanor, and the readiness to serve as president.”

Eighty-one corporations are lobbying Congress in an attempt to block a new requirement that companies disclose the ratio between their CEOs’ pay and the pay of their median worker.

The Roosevelt Institute’s Mike Konczal notes, “if you look at the 10 states in the U.S. that rely the most on private prisons, they incarcerate a percentage of their population in privately-owned facilities roughly equivalent to what Europe does in all their facilities.”

After taking a $10 billion bailout, Goldman Sachs is sending 10,000 jobs to Singapore. As ThinkProgress’ Scott Keyes pointed out, “Goldman is firing American workers at a time of record profits for the company, which raked in $2.7 billion in profits in the first three months of 2011 alone.”

http://thinkprogress.org/progress-report/karl-roves-20-million-distraction/

Marriage Equality: After New York, What Now For The GOP?

2011-06-28T10:35:00.001-07:00

Amanda Peterson Beadle

Progress Reports/ThinkProgress

June 27, 2011

After the 33rd “yes” vote was counted in New York’s Senate Friday night, it was momentous not in the least because the Legislature had passed marriage equality – the state House had already approved the measure — but also because they passed it with four Republicans voting in favor of the historic measure in the Republican-controlled Senate. New York became the sixth state to allow marriage equality, and certainly not the last as polls show more Americans now favor marriage equality than who oppose it. And many across the nation celebrated with New York after Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) signed the marriage equality legislation into law on Friday night.

But there was one group that wasn’t cheering but who seemed like they should be – the Tea Partiers who champion the 10th Amendment and want states to take control of their own matters. That is, until the issue is whether states would be taking charge of their own marriage laws.

For the past few years, the Republican Party seems to be following a more libertarian path instead of claiming the moral high ground, as did prior to the economy bottoming out at the end of the Bush era. In fact, Bush’s views on marriage equality and morality were viewed as a key contributing factor to his re-election in 2004. So how do the states’ rights-championing tenthers mesh with the previously embraced Religious Right?

THE DONORS: In New York, it was a matter of following the money. Cuomo pulled together Republican donors who could help him win over senators in the Republican-controlled Senate. Using donors from the other party who were sympathetic — the New York Times reported that one of the donors has a gay son — helped sway some votes. “A major target was James S. Alesi, a Republican from suburban Rochester, who seemed tormented by his 2009 vote. […] The coalition approached him from every angle. The Republican donors invited him to a meeting on Park Avenue, telling him they would eagerly support him if he backed same-sex marriage.” Alesi eventually became the first Republican senator in New York to publicly support marriage equality.

But beyond just the politicians, it was a broad, unlikely group of allies who pushed for marriage equality. Labor unions rallied people while Republican donors funded lobbying efforts. Sean Avery, a hockey player for the New York Rangers, publicly spoke out in support of marriage equality, as did New York City MayorMichael Bloomberg.

Cuomo and the unified coalition of marriage equality supporters potentially created a roadmap for how they passed the bill in their state. The question now is whether such a bipartisanship force can be assembled again.

THE TEA PARTY: Tea Party darling Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) is having trouble figuring out how to phrase her opinion about marriage equality. First, responding to a question about marriage equality during the Republican presidential debate, she showed her Tea Party roots and said, “I don’t see that it’s the role of a president to go into states and interfere with their state law.” But she also said marriage should be between a man and a woman, and added at the end that she would support a constitutional amendment preventing marriage equality.

She gave a similar answer in an interview with Chris Wallace on this week’s Fox News Sunday, saying she supports New York’s right to enact marriage equality into law because the 10th Amendment gives states that right. But again, she also reiterated that she favors a constitutional amendment against marriage equality.

For a group that favors states’ rights, no national Tea Party figure has stood up in favor of marriage equality. When Archbishop Timothy Dolan of New York spoke out against the measure before the Senate’s vote, he even described it as a form of government tyranny — using some Tea Party-style language rather than sticking to a strictly religious argument.

While Bachmann’s flirtation with embracing New York’s decision lines up with her Tea Party-favoring, states’ rights campaign mores, it doesn’t line up with the official views of the party whose nomination she seeks.

THE REPUBLICANS: Eight years have greatly changed the political field since Bush won re-election on social issues in a year when 11 states had ballot initiatives to create state consitutional bans same-sex couples from getting married. Now, the Republican candidates all still say they oppose marriage equality, but, as in New York, some Republican donors are standing on the other side of the issue. And nationwide polling suggests a majority of Americans favor marriage equality.

So where does that leave the Republican party?

While preserving traditional marriage was a tenet of the Republican party’s platform in 2008, it is not an issue mentioned prominently on the Republican National Committee’s website in 2011. Prominent Republicans including former Vice President Dick Cheney and Bush’s daughterBarbara Bush now support marriage equality, but Republican presidential candidates arefocusing on their economic plans rather than their social views. In the all-important Iowa caucus, supporting marriage equality or civil unions could be trouble for a campaign in Iowa, with 58 percent of Republican Iowa caucus-goers polled saying they would not vote for a candidate who even supported civil unions.

Former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman (R) supports civil unions, while former Gov. Mitt Romney (R-MA) only says people in nontraditional relationships should be given some rights. Meanwhile, openly gay Republican presidential candidate Fred Karger has been all but ignored by the media and shut out of the presidential debates and other key events. As for the rest of the crowded Republican field, the candidates are playing to their base, either opposing marriage equality outright or saying only that it is up to the states to decide. (A comprehensive rundown of the 2012 candidates and their positions on LGBT issues can be found here.)

That opinion may work for now among conservative primary voters and entrenched marriage equality opponents, but the tide is turning the other way – potentially leaving the Republicans behind.

Evening Brief: Important Stories That You May Have Missed

After reports surfaced that Chief Justice David Prosser choked his colleague, fellow Justice Ann Walsh Bradley, while arguing with her last week, Fox News called for the justice’s resignation. No, not Prosser’s. Fox’s Greta Van Susteren thinks that “Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson is not doing her job to lead the court and to give confidence to the people of Wisconsin.”

The recent Republican fix-all for the economy — cut spending to create jobs — may be supported by the GOP’s presidential candidates, but the facts sure don’t. The states that have cut back the most on their spending have watched their economies lose the most jobs.

Calling the fight for gay equality “one of the most urgent and important human rights struggle of all times,” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spoke in favor of the New York vote to legalize same-sex marriage today at State Department LGBT pride event and asked her colleagues “to look for ways to support those who are on the front lines of this movement.”

Rep. Michele Bachmann was off to an aggressive start to her official presidential campaign today in Iowa as she unwittingly compared herself to John Wayne Gacy of Waterloo, Iowa, who achieved notoriety for murdering of 33 people in the 1970s. “That’s the kind of spirit that I have, too,” Bachmann said.

A host of industry emails examined by the New York Times show that the buzz over natural gas as a replacement energy source may not be warranted and calls forth questions about the amount of natural gas that can be successfully extracted, the economics of such extraction and the safety of the shale fracking process.

http://thinkprogress.org/progress-report/marriage-equality-after-new-york-what-now-for-the-gop/

Sarah Palin "Trademark": The Backlash

2011-06-26T09:04:00.000-07:00

The Week

25 June 11

t looks like Alaska's most famous politician will get her name trademarked after all. Cue the mockery!

Sarah Palin took some ribbing earlier this year for failing to sign an application to trademark her name. But now, after she and daughter Bristol resubmitted their paperwork, and nobody challenged it, the names Sarah Palin and Bristol Palin will be trademarked within three months. Sarah Palin is claiming a trademark for both references to "political issues" online and "educational and entertainment services," including "motivational speaking." Entertainment and politics? Bloggers and the Twitterati couldn't resist such a big target:

Only in America!
"Sarah Palin will soon be making people pay for trying to cash in on her name"? says David Gardner in Britain's Daily Mail. "Unflippingbelievable!"

Totally reasonable
I guess "every great vice presidential candidate-turned-professional public speaker needs a registered trademark attached to their name," says Alistair Murray at his blog. "Such normal people," the Palins.

How was this so easy?
Given how contentious everything about Palin is, "amazingly, nobody seems to have challenged" the trademark application, says Joshua Green at The Atlantic. Regardless, "better hold off on those bootleg Palin T-shirts you were thinking about printing up."

Poor Tina Fey!
Forget merchandise. "I wonder how this will impact Sarah Palin impersonators?" says Chris Menning at Buzzfeed.

At least we know her 2012 plans
Because "you know people who trademark their names for commerce are serious about running for president," tweets The Nation's Ari Melber.

Nice try, haters
Actually, "if Palin is running she just bought herself one powerful weapon against those who want to smear her," says Clifton B. at Another Black Conservative. People who want to write "nasty things" about Palin now have a choice: "Either pay up or they shut down."

Thank goodness she can't trademark nicknames
I get that the Palins are trying to censor their critics, says Gryphen at The Immoral Minority. But "unless Sarah also plans on trademarking 'Granny Grifter,' 'Snowdrift Snooki,' 'The Grizzled Mama,' and 'Klondike Kardashian,'" her war on snark is doomed.

We protest!
And here we were thinking this was just "another dumb-fool thing the Palins would do," says Honolulu Notes. Well, if they think "this means we have to put TM after their name each time we use it," let us be the first to say, "that ain’t happening in the blog-o-sphere, we promise."

http://readersupportednews.org/news-section2/318-66/6386-sarah-palin-qtrademarkq-the-backlash

The GOP’s Plan for (Un)Shared Sacrifice

2011-06-25T04:38:00.000-07:00

ThinkProgress War Room
Progress Report
June 24, 2011

What the GOP Really Means by ‘Shared Sacrifice’

Yesterday, we covered the GOP’s temper tantrum, as the New York Times called it, in which Republican leaders bailed on negotiations to avert a default on our obligations — a default that is only on the table as a result of the GOP’s willingness to keep paying the bills we started racking up as a result of Bush-era policies. While GOP infighting certainly played a role in yesterday’s shenanigans, the core issue is the GOP’s unwavering devotion to protecting (and even expanding) tax giveaways for the wealthy, Big Oil, and other special interests. These giveaways have been put on the national credit card, and now the GOP wants to forward the bill to the rest of us or simply not pay it at all. (Good luck getting a decent loan for a new house, a car, or a student loan if they go down that road.)

We thought we’d keep it real simple and break down who gets to sacrifice and who gets off easy if the GOP gets its way.

ON the GOP’s chopping block:
Medicare
Medicaid
Social Security
Tax cuts for people making less than $500,000
Government programs and services that tens of millions of Americans depend on each day
NOT on the GOP’s chopping block:
Tax giveaways to Big Oil
Tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas
Tax loopholes for hedge fund billionaires
Wasteful tax loopholes used by huge corporations to avoid paying their fair share
Tax breaks for yachts and vacation homes
Tax breaks for people making more than $500,000

In one sentence: The GOP is willing to risk another economic calamity when we can least afford it if that’s what it takes to protect tax breaks for the wealthy, Big Oil, and huge corporations — tax breaks paid for by ending Medicare, slashing Medicaid and Social Security, and cutting the government programs and services we depend on each and every day.

Evening Brief: Important Stories That You May Have Missed

Just hours after ThinkProgress reported Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) would be signing his controversial budget into law at the business of a convicted tax felon, his office claimed they knew nothing about his background. A Walker spokesperson has since announced the bill will now be signed in a new location.

Conservative Tea Party activists have started their own production company to combat the raging liberalism of Hollywood. Colony Bay Productions will release its first film straight to DVD following an initial screening.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s son, Yair Netanyahu, made racist comments about Muslims and Arabs on his Facebook page, writing “The Arab sons-of-bitches desecrated our holiest day… it is our duty to do the minimum to save our honor and boycott ever Arab business or product.” +972′s Noam Sheizaf reminds his readers that two years ago, the prime minister’s aids were scrambling to explain racist comments made by his 99 year old father Ben-Zion Netanyahu.

The Obama administration’s Libya intervention could have avoided recent congressional backlash had the administration been more proactive about briefing Congress on Libya and if White House aides “not been too physically exhausted to pay a little more attention to Capitol Hill,” reports the Cable’s Josh Rogin.

President Obama’s Afghanistan withdrawal plan is “insufficient” and the “anti war movement in Congress is going to continue to grow and intensify,” Reps. Walter Jones (R-NC) Jim McGovern (D-MA) told ThinkProgress. McGovern criticized both neoconservatives and the editorial page of the Washington Post for pushing for continuing the war in Afghanistan.

Rep. Chris Murphy (D-CT) says Justice Clarence Thomas’ many ethics scandals are starting to rise to the level where there should start to be some real investigations as to whether Thomas can continue to serve as a justice on the Supreme Court.

Privatizing Medicare is a terrible idea that has already failed.

If President Obama decides to save the world economy by ignoring the debt ceiling, it’s likely that no one can stop him.

Vote suppression guru Hans von Spakovsky claims to have the smoking gun proving voter fraud is a real problem that has to be stop. Turns out Spakovsky’s gun shoots blanks.

News You Can Use: The GOP is Now Refusing To Pay the Bills Their Policies Racked Up

Why do we have to raise the debt ceiling at all? In order to pay the bills we’ve already racked up as a result of failed Bush-era policies — namely massive tax cuts that overwhelmingly benefited the wealthy and two wars. This chart says it all:

As our friends at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities note, “Without the economic downturn and the fiscal policies of the [Bush] Administration, the budget would be roughly in balance over the next decade.”

http://thinkprogress.org/progress-report/the-gops-plan-for-unshared-sacrifice/

© 2005-2011 Center for American Progress Action Fund

The GOP’s Budget Blame Game

2011-06-24T08:05:00.000-07:00

ThinkProgress War Room
Progress Reports
June 23, 2011

Republicans Take Their Ball and Go Home

Vice President Joe Biden has been leading negotiations among a bipartisan group of lawmakers to hammer out a long-term deficit reduction package in time to avert a U.S. default on its obligations caused by the GOP’s refusal to raise the debt ceiling (more on that here) — something that must happen by Aug. 2.

Today, just hours before the group was to hold another meeting, the Republican negotiators abruptly pulled out of the talks. Here’s the rundown of what happened and why:

Who: Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) and Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R-AZ), the Republican negotiators taking part in the bipartisan budget talks being led by Vice President Biden.

What: Republican negotiators bailing on the bipartisan talks being led by Vice President to avert an economically calamitous U.S. default on its obligations.

Why: Republicans offered two complaints today. The faux process complaint, offered by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell on the Senate floor this morning, was that president has been not involved enough, which apparently somehow justifies the Republican negotiators becoming completely uninvolved.

Their substantive complaint was that Democrats are insisting on “tax hikes” to balance out the trillions in entitlement and other spending cuts being demanded by Republicans. What Republicans don’t tell you is that when they say “tax hikes,” they really mean things like closing tax loopholes and taking away the billions in wasteful subsidies lavished on Big Oil every year.

What’s really going on: Republicans are playing a game of political musical chairs, knowing full well that they will have to eventually concede to some revenue increases (e.g. a recent poll found that 64 percent of voters would be in favor of eliminating the oil tax breaks). It seems that Cantor would rather have Speaker John Boehner (R-OH), whom Cantor suggested needed to be brought in to resolve the tax issue, be the one without a chair when the music stops and a Republican leader has to agree to some revenue increases — something that is bitterly opposed by Boehner’s fractious, Tea Party-dominated caucus in the House of Representatives. The Washington Post’s Ezra Klein explains:

Cantor has the credibility with the Tea Party that Boehner lacks. But that’s why Cantor won’t cut the deal. The Tea Party-types support him because he’s the guy who won’t cut the deal. He can’t sign off on tax increases without losing his power base. But if he’s able to throw it back to Boehner, and Boehner cuts the deal, that’s all good for Cantor: Boehner becomes weaker and he becomes stronger. Which is why Boehner will also have trouble making this deal. It’ll mean he made the concessions that Cantor, the true conservative, didn’t. That’s not how he holds onto the gavel in this Republican Party.
[...]
Cantor is putting personal power before country here, and in a very dangerous way. If Boehner actually does manage to cut a decent deal despite Cantor’s effort to throw him under the bus, he may not hold on as leader of his party, but unlike Cantor, he’ll deserve to. For better or worse, this is when we learn whether anyone on the Republican Party’s leadership team is actually prepared to lead.

In one sentence: Republicans are not only willing to risk economic calamity to preserve billions in tax breaks for Big Oil, the wealthy, and other special interests, but now it seems they may also be willing to do so just to maintain their own personal political power.

Evening Brief: Important Stories That You May Have Missed

In light of the gift scandal growing around Justice Clarence Thomas, Rep. Chris Murphy (D-CT) is asking his fellow members of Congress and the public to sign a letter asking the House Judiciary Committee to hold a hearing on the Supreme Court Transparency and Disclosure Act.

There actually is a Republican governor who supports Medicaid.

Koch-sponsored House energy chairman Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI) shills for the Keystone XL pipeline and Alaska drilling at the Heritage Foundation.

On Tuesday, a bill that would allow pesticide users to bypass the Clean Water Act and spray pesticides over waterways passed through the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee.

Is the jobs crisis Evan Bayh’s fault? The former governor and senator now has five jobs all to himself — a director of Fifth/ Third Bancorp, partner at lobbying firm McGuireWoods LLP, Fox News contributor, anti-regulation speaker for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and adviser to private equity firm Apollo Capital Management.

While the total number of people in prison increased less than 16 percent, the number of people held in private federal facilities increased by 120 percent, thanks largely to millions of dollars worth of lobbying efforts by the private prison industry.

On the campaign trail in Iowa, GOP presidential hopeful Herman Cain told ThinkProgress that he would put coal and oil CEOs in charge of a commission to dismantle Environmental Protection Agency regulations.

The youth leaders of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood broke from their party to form Egyptian Current Party, which advocates for a more centrist and liberal version of Islamist politics.

Key Democrats criticized President Obama’s speech on Afghanistan last night for falling short of his promise for more a more “significant” withdrawal.

http://thinkprogress.org/progress-report/the-gops-budget-blame-game/