E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Is bad economic news coming on Friday?... Obama talks about the economy in Racine, WI at 2:15 pm ET… It's been a VERY busy week for the president and his team… But little news comes out of the Kagan/Petraeus hearings… Why we (and you) should have little confidence in many state polls… Is there too much fuss over Bill Clinton's backing of Andrew Romanoff (Clinton ISN'T going to campaign or raise money for him)… Angle and Kirk meet the press… TV ads go up on energy/climate change… California's Senate and gubernatorial contests are competitive, it appears… And Biden stumps for Lee Fisher in OH.
From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Ali Weinberg
*** Another crisis coming? Forced having to deal with numerous crises over the last couple of months -- the BP spill, the shaky economic situation in Europe, and Gen. Stanley McChrystal's explosive comments to Rolling Stone -- the Obama White House may very well have another (and even bigger) crisis on its hands: the U.S. economy. Both Wall Street and Washington appear to be bracing for a poor jobs report on Friday, after five-consecutive months of job growth. And that, of course, raises the stakes of President Obama's 2:15 pm ET town-hall meeting on the economy in Racine, WI today. How does Obama talk his way out of this if the economy has the look and feel of something akin to a double dip or even stagnation?
*** Obama's kitchen-sink week: One other thing worth noting is how this has been a kitchen-sink week for the president. In addition to the economy, here are/have been the other issues on the president's plate this week: finishing up financial reform (trickier than it looked last week), Kagan (smooth sailing so far), Petraeus and Afghanistan (even smoother sailing), immigration (he gives a speech on the issue tomorrow to placate reform advocates, but don't expect new policy ideas), energy/climate change (meeting yesterday with senators MIGHT have created a road map on the carbon issue), the oil spill (no news), the Russian spies (weirder by the day), and Middle East peace (his meeting yesterday with Saudi Arabia's Abdullah). But guess what… it's still all about the economy.
*** When no news is bad news: As for yesterday's Senate hearings on Elena Kagan (for the Supreme Court) and David Petraeus (for the top commander in Afghanistan), the biggest news may very well have been that there was so little news. When the ranking member of Senate Judiciary Committee -- Jeff Sessions -- is devoting his questions to Harvard's military policy, and not Kagan's views on the law and the Constitution, then Republicans really do raise the appearance that this whole exercise is to score political points and raise money for interest groups, not truly vet a lifetime appointment to the court. In addition, it took just one day for the Senate Armed Services Committee to approve of Petraeus' nomination (by voice vote), but it did so without truly having a debate over the administration's Afghanistan policy. Was that good for democracy, good for the republic? May have been good politics for now for the White House, but given the problems with the war right now, perhaps a debate about the strategy wouldn't have been a bad thing?
*** Fuzzy math: In political circles, the biggest story yesterday may very well have been the news that Daily Kos is suing its former pollster, Research 2000, for allegedly fabricating its numbers. Despite the merits of the suit, the story is a reminder how little confidence we have in many state polls -- and how problematic that makes it in trying to get a handle on individual midterm races. We have tremendous confidence in our national NBC/WSJ poll, conducted by Dem pollster Peter Hart and GOP pollster Bill McInturff, which we think is the best in the business. But some of the state polling we see are robo-polls (conducted by an automated voice rather than a live person), which NBC doesn't report as a policy. Here's a little secret: Good polls are expensive to do, and if you're seeing a particular organization doing a slew of polls, you've got to ask: (1) how reliable are those numbers, or (2) where is the money coming from to conduct those polls? Nowadays, on the state level, we trust the polling we're getting from campaigns and state parties (although not necessarily those polls that are made public) more than the numbers we see from some non political polling organizations.
*** Our policy to you on state polling: One policy we're going to institute ourselves to make sure you have an idea of everything that we know is this: When we report a public poll on the state level, it will be because we think those numbers are reflecting what we know is going on in the race. We'll let you know if a pollster has a good reputation in that state, has a good track record (because a good pollster in one state doesn't mean they know the nuances of another).
*** Overserved? Just askin,' but if the extent of Bill Clinton's support for Andrew Romanoff is an email -- the former president WON'T be campaigning or fundraising for him -- then isn't the Bill Clinton-vs.-the White House storyline a bit overblown regarding Clinton's endorsement (via email) of Romanoff yesterday? Yet the real Clinton action/comment that probably should raise eyebrows is his discussion of Obama and race at the Fortune/Time/CNN global forum in South Africa.
*** Angle meets the press: In her first sit-down with a non-conservative news outlet since winning the GOP nomination earlier this month, Nevada GOP Senate nominee Sharron Angle spoke at length with state political reporter Jon Ralston. In the interview, the Las Vegas Sun recounts, Angle backed away a bit from her call to phase out Social Security (saying instead she supports private/personal accounts, a la what George W. Bush proposed in 2005), as well as her statement about resorting to 2nd Amendment remedies ("I admit it was a little strong to say"). But she stuck to her views that unemployment benefits shouldn't be extended; that nuclear waste should be stored in Nevada's Yucca Mountain; and that the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision equated the government getting involved in abortion.
*** 'I wasn't thinking': Also meeting the press yesterday was embattled Illinois GOP Senate nominee Mark Kirk. Here's NBC Chicago's write-up of yesterday's presser: "On the point of most interest -- why he embellished his record and why he was avoiding the media -- Kirk said he would make himself more available to the media, and apologized several times. 'I was overbooked last week,' Kirk said, by way of explaining why he wasn't available. As for his embellishments -- 10 at last count -- Kirk said the 'scrutiny was appropriate' and that he 'wasn't thinking' when he misstated his record." The day after that press conference, Kirk's campaign is going up with two new TV ads -- one accusing opponent Alexi Giannoulias for having a top aide who was a longtime BP lobbyist, and another blasting Giannoulias over his family's bank ("Alexi Giannoulias, trust him with your money?" it concludes).
*** Here come the TV ads on energy: Today, a liberal-leaning coalition consisting of SEIU, VoteVets, League of Conservation Voters, and the Sierra Club says it's launching the first TV ads of an $11 million campaign on energy/climate change legislation. The initial $2 million buy, an SEIU source tells us, will praise Dem Sens. Harry Reid and Claire McCaskill, and target Dem Sen. Ben Nelson and GOP Sens. Richard Burr and Mike Johanns for not supporting energy/climate change legislation. Here is the ad praising McCaskill, and one whacking Burr.
*** More midterm news: In California, a Reuters/Ipsos poll of registered state voters shows Sen. Barbara Boxer (D) at 45% and challenger Carly Fiorina at 41%, while it also finds Jerry Brown (D) leading Meg Whitman (R) by six points (45%-39%) in the state's gubernatorial race. These numbers reflect private polling we're familiar with in this state. In Ohio, Vice President Biden stumps for Senate nominee Lee Fisher at 1:00 pm ET; the Ohio GOP counters the visit with this Web video… Also in Ohio, a new Quinnipiac poll has Fisher (D) at 42% and Rob Portman (R) at 40%; Obama's approval rating in the state is 45%-49%. Again, this poll reflects similar private polls we're familiar with. Bottom line: This has been a margin-of-error race for quite some time, and nothing has happened in the last month to really change that.
Countdown to AL run-off: 13 days
Countdown to GA primary: 20 days
Countdown to OK primary: 27 days
Countdown to KS and MO primaries: 34 days
Countdown to CO and CT primaries: 41 days
Countdown to Election Day 2010: 125 days
Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
Check us out on Facebook and also on Twitter.
Leave a Comment:
And as Rome burns...
Bloodiest month in the Afghan war...but great posts mocking Boner and his spray tan...
minuscule private sector job creation, continued 9+% unemployment...so, did you hear what Rachel said last night?
"Consumers' view on the present situation and their expectations deteriorated in June, with both reaching the lowest levels since March, according to the Conference Board. Their view on the present situation fell to 25.5 in June from 29.8 in May, while the expectations barometer declined to 71.2 from 84.6."
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-consumer-confidence-plummets-on-job-worries-2010-06-29-102500?dist=countdown
They must all be republican/conservative/teabaggers, cause it's all good from here...
Day 72 of oil gushing into the gulf of Mexico, now a storm on the way, and continued incompetent disarray in the containment and clean-up process...did you know that Bobby isn't REALLY Jindal's first name? Let's mock him by using it in the same way we condemned everyone else for using the president's middle name.
G-20 failure...another resounding success for our president!
Failure to pass unemployment benefit extension for millions on the precipice...those darned republicans! If only we democrats were the MAJORITY, then you'd see some action!
When the only "journalist" asking tough questions is on "Comedy Central", it's time to take out the ol' fiddle and watch the pyro-technics...who needs fireworks when the whole thing is going up in flames?
There was once a progressive movement in this country...now it's a hypocritical, farcical joke.
Renditions?
Gen Betray-us and the "surge"
Signing statements?
Denial of Habeas Corpus?
Arresting whistle blowers?
But great posts!
Let us know when you figure out what we should do about all of your complaints.
Nash ~ I suspect his answer might be "Something, anything." I have some problems with a few of those things, myself. It's tough to be a liberal in these times and watch while all the things you thought were going to change just seem to stay the same. Or don't you feel that,. too?
Anna Molly:
In response to your comment of things staying the same I am reminded of a recent post by Mix Bag where he/she note a list of things on Obama's agenda, and he/she relays to another blogger how most people are against these items. ( I hate that phrase "most people"). But the fact is that the items noted on Mix Bag's list are exactly the agenda on which Obama was elected and which the majority of people at one time supported. Health Care Reform, Immigration Reform, Regulation of Wall Street practices, Eliminating Terrorists, on and on. Now the question is Mix Bag correct. Have the people changed their minds as to what they support and that which they do not support. It seems that in some cases they have. But is this a result of not supporting what they originally supported or is it due to the fact that most people do not like change, and in order to attend to these very same issues requires change.
It is the same dilemma Obama faces when criticized by some for not doing enough but then criticized by others for trying to take on too much. Those who think he is trying to take on too much it would seem are those who are most opposed to change. For who in their right mind would not want a President who can multi-task and to be able to attend to many of those items that were on Obama's agenda list, as well as the voter's agenda list when he was elected President? And that reminds me of the female tea partier who joined others to demand that we end this march towards socialism and for government to get out of people's lives, but later recanted when asked did that mean the government should also eliminate the social security program that she depended on.
It is intersting how Obama won the election promising change yet after the election many people decided they did not want change afterall. It took to much effort and in some cases sacrafice.
Anna Molly,
I share your frustration, however I have noticed a phenomena - when "something, anything" is done, that quite often is not good enough either.
I mean, on issue after issue, the President looks at the political landscape, plots a course based on the political realities, and tries to move forward.
And then he is criticized for not doing more - but rarely is the path to do more available in our current climate.
To pretend that more can be done, but presenting no logical path to support that feeling, seems to me to be a recipe for disappointment and failure.
I am disappointed daily by the snails pace of progress, the misplaced priorities of our society in general, and the short sightedness we all share.
My problem is not with the disappointment - but with the need to place the blame for that disappointment in places where they don't always belong.
CA and Nash ~ I hope you don't mistake me. There are many contributing factors to why we haven't achieved the "change" many of us hoped for. It's like you've said before, CA ... all the President can do is lead, and if we the people refuse to drink the water, then that's on all of us. And it's certainly on Congress. For Congress nowadays -- with some notable exceptions -- keeping your eye on the prize usually means looking after the special interests who support you and making sure no one steals the next election from you while you're distracted by real issues.
But in the end, it seems to me that President Obama could do better. If nothing else has changed, times sure have. You can't govern from the middle any more and expect the right -- or the left, for that matter -- to come to you. Because they won't. Too much polarization has occurred and too much water has gone under the bi-partisan bridge. You can't go to them, either, because when you start from a compromised position you just end up being like them on issues like Afghanistan and deep-water drilling. And, in the end, I guess this is where my disappointment is rooted.
By the way, CA, Mixed Bag never objects when I call him(her) "boy," so I hope he/she hasn't been offended all this time and is just too polite to say so.
On second thought ... never mind. ;)
"Also, lets not forget why the economy is heading for a double-dip recession, it's because of the economic policies of Barak H. Obama and his friends in Congress." JoAnna Smith
The economic meltdown was caused by the republicans with thier deficit increases caused by Reagan and GW Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, Medicare for wealthy people to benefit big pharma, adding trillions to the deficit and their systematic deregulation of everything they could get their hands on leading to the worst economic meltdown since the Great Depression which resulted in the economic policies of more debt to keep us afloat.
The republicans are intent on destroying the middle class and enriching themselves and the top 5% of wealthy individuals in this nation. Not to mention thier plans to take us back 50 years socially.
The results of thier policies are obvious! The republicans and their policies don't work for the middle class. Trickle down means pi$$ed on sister.
Now where should I send your tin foil hat?
And as Rome burns...
Bloodiest month in the Afghan war...but great posts mocking Boner and his spray tan...
minuscule private sector job creation, continued 9+% unemployment...so, did you hear what Rachel said last night?
"Consumers' view on the present situation and their expectations deteriorated in June, with both reaching the lowest levels since March, according to the Conference Board. Their view on the present situation fell to 25.5 in June from 29.8 in May, while the expectations barometer declined to 71.2 from 84.6."
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-consumer-confidence-plummets-on-job-worries-2010-06-29-102500?dist=countdown
They must all be republican/conservative/teabaggers, cause it's all good from here...
Day 72 of oil gushing into the gulf of Mexico, now a storm on the way, and continued incompetent disarray in the containment and clean-up process...did you know that Bobby isn't REALLY Jindal's first name? Let's mock him by using it in the same way we condemned everyone else for using the president's middle name.
G-20 failure...another resounding success for our president!
Failure to pass unemployment benefit extension for millions on the precipice...those darned republicans! If only we democrats were the MAJORITY, then you'd see some action!
When the only "journalist" asking tough questions is on "Comedy Central", it's time to take out the ol' fiddle and watch the pyro-technics...who needs fireworks when the whole thing is going up in flames?
There was once a progressive movement in this country...now it's a hypocritical, farcical joke.
Renditions?
Gen Betray-us and the "surge"
Signing statements?
Denial of Habeas Corpus?
Arresting whistle blowers?
But great posts!
President Obama has dealt with more crises than any president since FDR, even FDR wasn't fighting two unfinished wars inherited from a cowboy president. Despite everything, he just keeps working for the people and doing a great job even though many refuse to accept that and do their best to undermine everything he does. What the President should repeat is what he said before Jan 20, 2009, this recovery will not be easy and it will take a long time.
I imagine the jobs report won't be great. But what people need to understand is that we did suffer the closest thing to the Great Depression since the 1930's. The financial meltdown affected every aspect of the economy, throw in the housing crisis which began several years ago and getting out of this mess won't happen in 18 months. We must be more patient and allow Government to do what is necessary to help and ignore the debt for a little longer. Caught Chris Matthew's closing comment last night--he is right, the Government should throw itself into funding renewable energy and high-speed rail. Those two things will help us manufacture again providing good jobs for the American people and that would result in reduction of our debt as well as spurring the economy of the 21st century.
Had some problems getting on here this morning so my deep thoughts (don't laugh, I do have them) have disappeared. Not sure if it was the FR site or what.
I caught some of Jeff Sessions questioning yesterday and marveled at his ability to beat dead horses. Kagan did a great job explaining the Harvard policy and that military recruitment actually increased but there was Session ignoring the answer to make his point that Kagan must be anti-military. I realize he was trying to trip up Kagan on DADTbut he's so out of her intelligence league as to be laughable. There are many smart legislators on both sides of the aisle but Session isn't one of them. Now that Keith O has mentioned the Keebler Elf, I'm doomed to view Session as just that. He should be in that tree baking cookies and not representing the good people of his state.
Caught a bit of Morning Joe. Thank goodness for the intelligent journalist who pointed out that Joe was wrong about torture; and who later took on the libertarian professor touting the wonders of the late 19th century when there were no regulations, no safety nets and the world and country were just fine; ignoring that it was just fine for those who had and all the other horrible things that took place in industry. Purist ideology looks great on paper but it is unworkable in the real world--greed and corruption will always prevail. No thanks to sweat shops, unsanitary meat and food industries, child labor, abuse of workers--yes, those regulations are industry killers but killing the workers and consumers is just part of the free market.
FR is right about the polls. I recently had a Rasmussen robo poll, there was no person asking questions and the questions were often leading to get the answers they were pushing. Iowa's own wing nut, Steve King has polled me 5 times via robo call, most recently last week--guess he thinks if he calls me often enough, I'll answer the way he'd like. He asks the same questions everytime, Iowa's gay marriage ruling, do I agree how bad Obama, Pelosi and Reid are, etc. His questions are leading to get certain answers just as many of the Rasmussen questions were. My opinion is there are too many polls done too often. Those polls reported nationally help form low-information voters' opinions--if according to the polls, people think Obama is or isn't doing a good job, well, that must be true.
Have a good day everyone.
You have a good day as well Jody. Nice to see you here every morning. It's a gorgeous day today here in MA, simply gorgeous. Windy but sunny and picture perfect blue sky.
Nice post Jody. You are spot on about Obama having to deal with crisis than just about any other president before him. I said it before the election and I'll say it again, whoever wins (we all know he won now) is going to pretty much up the creek with everything that needs to be handled. Not only Bush era policies, etc....but IMO about 30 years of desimation of this country by politicians.
These confirmation hearings have really become nothing more than a grand standing dog and ponie show. I really saw nothing of value for me while I watched.
My problem with polling and polls in general is that I'm 35 and I don't own a land line. I never get polled and neither do a significant number of people my age and younger....add to that push polling...well, I don't give them a whole lot of attention.
8 years of the Bush presidency including the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression is not going to be fixed in less than 2 years.
Steeler - I think it goes back even further than that. Look at the last 30 years...and I'm not in anyway saying the Dems are infalible...totally awesome....or anything like that, and would also add that I'm not realy a partisan guy. What I am is a relatively young guy (35), so the last 30 years is pretty interesting to me especially when I've pretty much heard my entire life how everything is the Dems fault, etc. Let's take a look since President Reagan 1980 (roughly 30 years); here's the score card:
Control of White House: Republicans 20 years.....Democrats 9 1/2 years..ok, we'll call it 10
Congress: Republicans 12 years.....Democrats 18 years
Senate: Republicans 18 years.....Democrats 12 years
So in using a simple score here for control of gov't over the last 30 years it is easy to see the score is 50 - 40 in favor of Republicans....and here we are. I've voted for both in the past and am sure I will in the future, but Republicans really need to get over this 1980 mentality of blaming the Dems because they've had so much control. It worked in the 80's because it was true...now it's just living in the distant past.
caught a segment last night on Rachel Maddow which featured Congressman Boehner and it was hilarious! It was funny until I caught myself… realizing that this man could become the Speaker of the House is downright frightening!
He is definitely not an intellectual heavyweight. So uninformed when speaking to the journalist in the clip, that he made a case for and against the same issue at the same time without realizing he was doing so!
Huh!
Boehner and Palin. God help us!
caught a segment last night on Rachel Maddow which featured Congressman Boehner and it was hilarious! It was funny until I caught myself… realizing that this man could become the Speaker of the House is downright frightening!
He is definitely not an intellectual heavyweight. So uninformed when speaking to the journalist in the clip, that he made a case for and against the same issue at the same time without realizing he was doing so!
Huh!
Boehner and Palin. God help us!
Good thing Boehner doesn't repeat everything he says!!
Joe,
I am not sure Boehner REMEMBERS anything he says...
Feisty
Now if we could just get rid of Gotcha Gregory...lol
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm no fan of Dylan Ratigan either.
Hey GF! Nice to see you landed in the new & improved FR zone safely!
Ditto that on Ratigan!
Hope all is well with you & yours!
BEVERLY!
You landed! Have you been out here long? Maybe I've had my head down at work and hadn't noticed. We've got a party going on with about 20 'friendlies' and I will send you an 'invite' through Newsvine - I call us "Libs R Us" so don't be surprised when you get the email! whoo hoo. I am headed out for vaca tomorrow, so if I don't get to this,...look for it around the 9th or 10th. Take care!
Disastocrats, the Golf is filling up with oil. Compliments of Oilbama. He's always on the Gulf course putting his foot in his mouth. Now, Alex is hitting it and others are on the way.
Juven,
Last I heard, the well was leased by BP and has their name all over it. BP is also the one that is paying for the cleanup. It was the LAST president that was the oil baron remember?
Every once in a while, it helps if you come up for air and take a few deep breaths. Then you can stick your head back in the sand for even longer next time. See you in a few weeks.
Disgusted in PA, for your information, Obama received more political donations from BP than any other politician. Also BP is a big backer of Obama's "cap and trade" bill. Now because of the spill, Obama will again throw a backer under the train.
sfcret
Disgusted in PA, for your information, Obama received more political donations from BP than any other politician. Also BP is a big backer of Obama's "cap and trade" bill. Now because of the spill, Obama will again throw a backer under the train.
_________________
For your information the MAJORITY of campaign contributions received by President Obama came from BP EMPLOYEES!
No matter how many times you and the right wing nut jobs repeat the BS it WILL NOT magically become TRUE!
Feisty, quit believing everything you hear or read on MSNBC. Go and check the contributions made by BP to the Obama campaign. Also I noted you didn't have an answer about BP is one of the biggest supporters of Obama's "cap and trade" bill. You are nothing more than an Obama mouth piece and a troll for the left.
Oh no you don't... Why is it that us 'Obama mouth pieces' always have to do the homework for you lazy ass right wing nuts?
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201005240042
You're welcome...
Oh and one more thing... haven't you heard that this is a 'left leaning' blog? So tell me again who's the troll?
Media matters is a left wing organization and is so one sided that it is unbelievable. It's as bad as MSNBC. Don't even bother to reply as you have no idea what you are saying.
Media Matters puts it out their exactly as the numbers are and exact quotes from people....oh yeah, facts have a left leaning bias since they are in FACT factual....as in not fantasy or fiction. I've said it before, I'm no partisan; I've voted for both parties....but man it seem like lately, Ummmm maybe the last 10 years or so, Repubicans have lost their collective minds. You guys need to get out of the bubble sometime and take a look around; when you live in an echo chamber....all you hear is the echo.
Here... maybe this is more suited to your 'taste' it is from FAUX & Freaks or do you think they're a left wing organization as well?
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/23/palin-links-bp-donations-obama-explain-gulf-spill-response/
So I'll ask again... who exactly is the troll? lol
I know someone isn't quoting MediaMatters......You may as well quote my damn dog. That is one of the most biased sites on the net.
MediaMatters..now that is the funniest sh!t I have seen all day.
That is worst than quoting; ThinkProgress, Daily Kos, Huff Post, etc.
First Read, its not so much a crisis is coming: Its more hurricans are coming. Seems we have to rename the gulf as the Gulf of Mexioil!
Wow! That was a really clever one Juven! Did you come up with that one all by yourself or did Mommy help you with it this morning?
Some have expressed concern that a small percentage of the people at the very top pay a heavy burden of taxes while some at the bottom pay nothing. While our tax code leaves a lot of room for improvement it is still hard to have much sympathy for those in the top couple of percentage points or to rationalize value in cutting taxes for them. Take the Bush reduction in dividend taxes as one example and then when looking at any corporate annual report check the executives compensation, perks, benefits, Golden Parachutes, stock and stock options. Besides having a compensation package that can’t ever be justified or earned they also have thousands, tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands of shares of stock both owned and covered by gratuitously given stock options – making dividend tax cuts extremely beneficial for them, while meaning comparatively little to everyone else.
These executives and directors, the ‘good ole boys’ club, literally control their own compensation in running the company and by voting their shares of stock. They also control and strictly limit everyone else’s compensation and benefits in their companies. As explained elsewhere tax cuts to the very wealthy simply does not have significant benefit to the economy (the ‘trickle down’ theory is really a fraud as they just don’t spend in ways to benefit the overall economy), so why do politicians want to focus heavily on and rationalize tax cuts for these few? Because of the obvious benefits from campaign contributions, overt and covert support, including financing third party action groups (like ‘Swiftboat’ and ‘Tea Party’) and even in after office compensation with speaking engagements, investment opportunities, book deals, employment and so on – they literally become owned and controlled ‘puppets’ for these extremely wealthy, powerful and influential individuals. George W Bush even bragged before leaving office that he would quickly pass his father and Bill Clinton in wealth from these ‘kickbacks’ and you can bet Sarah Palin is drooling over them. If you ever want real political reform, you have to get money out of politics.
The real proof that it is a con to say there is an inequity is in recognizing that the gap between the very wealthy and everyone else just keeps expanding, that as their spendable income keeps growing everyone else’s’ keeps shrinking. I don’t begrudge anyone success, especially when it is really earned, but there is no need to ever shed a tear for these people.
Well said. I have a friend who is extremely wealthy, and independently so. He's 32 and he's worked maybe all of 3 years in his entire life. All of his income comes from stock liquidation and dividends. He draws down on average $50K per month so obviously lives pretty high on the hog. He is so worried about an increase in capital gains tax and dividends....it's laughable. He doesn't even understand that I am in a higher tax bracket than he is making $60K per year.
Michael,
For your edification, here's the richest cities and their mayors/political parties
San Jose, CA
Chuck Reed
D
Anchorage, AK
Dan Sullivan
R
San Francisco, CA
Gavin Newsom
D
Virginia Beach, VA
Will Sessoms
R
San Diego, CA
Jerry Sanders
R
Anaheim, CA
Curt Pringle
R
Raleigh, NC
Charles Meeker
D
Seattle, WA
Mike McGinn
D
Washington, DC
Adrian Fenty
D
Honolulu, HI
Mufi Hannemann
D
Its the "Whack a Mole" time of the year. Shoot one down and two pop up.
A political hack being appointed as a Supreme court justice, no real judicial performance to show her record. Oh yes and a Harvard law dean that believes are legal foundation should be more internationalist that American. Ah too be a Supreme court justice nominee. Our founding fathers must be rolling in thier graves saying what a mess you guys made out of our country we so galliantly fought for. GOD bless America.
God help your spelling. Your thinking is probably beyond his control, free choice and all.