E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Breaking down the Lew appointment to head OMB… Cloture vote (and maybe also final passage) of financial reform will take place tomorrow… Pelosi takes a shot at Gibbs for stating that the House is in play… In Alabama’s GOP gubernatorial run-off, Bentley defeated the establishment favorite Byrne, and that gives Democrats the potential to put this race into play… Also in Alabama, Rick “Gather Your Armies” Barber lost his congressional run-off… Manchin’s temporary appointment to fill Byrd’s Senate seat to come on Friday… New polls in Florida and also in Pennsylvania, where Obama’s approval is upside down… And: “What’s the matter with Colorado?” part 2.
From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro and Ali Weinberg
*** Skip to my Lew: The news of Jack Lew replacing Peter Orzsag as OMB director gives the Obama administration a good elevator pitch regarding the deficit. The White House can say, as President Obama did yesterday, that they’re bringing in the last budget director who left the country in surplus. That’s the upside. The downside, however, are Lew’s ties to Citigroup; he wasn't just a banker, he was CFO of Citi’s hedgefund -- an entity that will be finding more scrutiny under the new Wall Street reform rules. But make no mistake: Obama turning to the deficit is perhaps his best way to win back independent voters. And regardless of what happens in November, the conversation about the deficit will dominate the first six months of next year. Lew largely buys them some good will with Senate Dem deficit hawks. How will the Republican deficit hawks respond?
*** Will final passage on financial reform come tomorrow? Speaking of those new Wall Street rules… Per NBC’s Ken Strickland, the Senate’s cloture vote on the final financial reform legislation will take place tomorrow, and Democrats appear to have the 60 votes to clear a GOP filibuster. If Republicans play nice, Strick advises, the vote on passage could happen immediately following the cloture vote. But if the GOP plays hardball, vote for passage could be as late as Saturday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said.
*** Pelosi vs. Gibbs: Who knew that White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs stating the obvious -- that there are enough seats in play for the GOP to take back the House -- would turn into a four-day story? But that is what is has become with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi telling her members how furious she is with Gibbs. "How could [Gibbs] know what is going on in our districts?" Pelosi told her members Tuesday, per Politico. "Some may weigh his words more than others. We have made our disagreement known to the White House." Here is where Pelosi and her allies are coming from: Some folks -- though definitely not your authors here at First Read -- are just waking up to the news that the House is in play after Gibbs’ statement, and that is spooking Dem donors. On the other hand, Pelosi blasting Gibbs only extends this story another day.
*** Yesterday’s run-off results in Alabama: Yet another establishment candidate went down to defeat. In Alabama’s GOP gubernatorial run-off yesterday, Bradley Byrne -- who was endorsed by the state’s top Republicans, including outgoing Gov. Bob Riley (R) and Sen. Jeff Sessions (R) -- lost to state Rep. Robert Bentley, 56%-44%. Bentley will take on Ron Sparks (D) in the fall election, and Democrats now have a shot in this race. It’s a case where the primary created an opportunity for Democrats. Look, is Bentley still the favorite? Yes. But Byrne would have walked into office. Now SOME in the Alabama business community will at least listen to what Sparks has to say. Also in Alabama last night, establishment fav Martha Roby defeated Tea Party fav Rick “Gather Your Armies” Barber in the congressional run-off for the right to challenge Dem Rep. Bobby Bright in the fall. And in the Alabama Democratic run-off for Artur Davis’ House seat, Terri Sewell defeated Sheila Smoot, making her the odds-on favorite to become the state’s first African-American congresswoman.
*** Manchin appointment to come Friday: West Virginia Gov. Manchin (D) will call the legislature into special session on Thursday to consider legislation to set up a special election for Robert Byrd’s Senate seat, NBC’s Kelly O’Donnell reported yesterday. Manchin is expected to make his appointment to temporarily fill the seat by Friday afternoon. Politico’s Toeplitz adds that Manchin’s proposed legislation “includes a special primary in August or September and a November general election. Manchin said last week that because the state attorney general, secretary of state and other legal officials have differing interpretations on when and how to conduct a special election for the Senate seat, it was necessary to call the legislature together to revise and clarify the law.”
*** State poll wrap: There are some new polls out in Florida and Pennsylvania. In the race for Florida Senate, Reuters/Ipsos shows Charlie Crist (I) at 35%, Marco Rubio (R) at 28%, and Kendrick Meek (D) at 17%; in a three-way featuring Jeff Greene as the Dem nominee, it’s Crist at 34% and Rubio at 29%. In the race for Florida governor, Reuters/Ipsos also finds Rick Scott (R) at 34% and Alex Sink (D) at 31%, while Sink is at 31% and Bill McCollum (R) is at 30% in a hypothetical Sink-McCollum match-up. And in Pennsylvania, a Quinnipiac poll of state voters has Joe Sestak (D) and Pat Toomey (R) deadlocked in the Senate race at 43% each.
*** Obama’s approval is upside down in Pennsylvania: Yet the biggest news in that Quinnipiac poll is President Obama’s standing. His approval rating in Pennsylvania is upside down, at 46% approve/49% disapprove. Folks, this isn’t in a true battleground like Ohio, Virginia, or even Colorado. It’s in a state Democrats pretty much need to hold on to in presidential elections, and a state Republicans have NOT carried in a presidential contest since the landslides '80s. We know some like to call Pennsylvania a battleground, but it's really not. It's a CLOSE state but not a swing state.
*** What’s the matter with Colorado? Part 2: Likely GOP Colorado gubernatorial nominee Scott McInnis is in damage control. The Denver Post writes, “A new example of possible plagiarism by Scott McInnis surfaced Tuesday as the Republican gubernatorial candidate faced calls to repay $300,000 he received for plagiarized essays on water that he submitted as ‘original works.’ A Denver Post review of McInnis' floor speeches and columns published during his congressional career found striking similarities between a 1995 speech and 1994 column by McInnis and a previously published Op-Ed in The Washington Post.” More: “McInnis has declined interview requests from The Denver Post since the paper first reported that the ‘Musings on Water’ articles he submitted to the Hasan Family Foundation as ‘original works’ included passages that were similar to or copied directly from a 1984 essay by now-Colorado Supreme Court Justice Gregory Hobbs.” These allegations for McInnis are potentially crippling to his campaign. He was trying to define himself as an outsider and desperately trying to lose his Washington ties. Now he's getting defined in a negative light, just as voters in the state are beginning to tune in. Meanwhile, McInnis' likely Dem foe, Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper, has a day job he can always be focused on. http://bit.ly/anIlsC
Countdown to GA primary: 6 days
Countdown to OK primary: 13 days
Countdown to KS and MO primaries: 20 days
Countdown to CO and CT primaries: 27 days
Countdown to Election Day 2010: 111 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:
Republican Logic:
Republicans are willing to extend the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy (which costs millions) and refuse to extend unemployment benefits for the poor. Both impact the national debt, but it’s OK to give a break to the rich, but not to the unemployed. Now where is the logic in that?
Rand Paul says to the Tea Party, “I owe it all to you.” Then he out-does himself by saying, “The poor in America are enormously better off than the poor in the rest of the world.” How compassionate is that? Poor is poor and hunger is hunger. Every religion in the world believes in helping the poor and hungry…but not Rand Paul. He opposes both Social Security and Medicare. How is it that Christian conservatives can support this guy?
Sixty-two percent of the American people (and 43% of Republicans) believe we should provide unemployment insurance. Yet Senator Kyl of Arizona believes unemployment insurance is a necessary evil. I wish Senator Kyle would tell us what is evil about it…and don’t give the national debt excuse.
David Vitter supports creating a law suit over President Obama’s birth certificate. The only reason I can think of for bringing this up is because he does not want to talk about his adulterous affair from a few years back. I wonder if the people of Louisiana will remember and will pick a new Republican candidate? Stranger things have happened, even in Louisiana.
Michele Bachmann made the following comment last week in Denver: “Obama is turning America into a nation of slaves”. I won’t even try to make sense out of her pretzel logic.
Last, but not least, Newt Gingrich, age 67, said, “I’ve never been this serious about running for President.” Great! Newt, go for it! Beat Romney and Palin. Then face President Obama. Newt; look in the mirror. You are another old guy whose time has come and gone. There is no logic here, just wishful thinking.
In fact, I can’t find logic in any of the above examples.
I agree with you, Ron--can't find the logic in these examples but sadly, they do not fall on deaf ears. The Republican leadership does not call them out and the base continues to elect them. Meanwhile the Democrats sit back and do nothing but endless in-fighting and waste the opportunity of a generation to reverse the losses of the Bush years. It is so discouraging.
"Republicans are willing to extend the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy (which costs millions) and refuse to extend unemployment benefits for the poor. Both impact the national debt, but it’s OK to give a break to the rich, but not to the unemployed. Now where is the logic in that?"
Ron- It seems I need to change my fixation on "ME" first, to "WE" first. The "WE" being, of course, all the good Republicans that espouse "COUNTRY" first to rhe rest of us all the tme.
As to looking for logic in all yor observations, forget it. There is no logic other than "...this will break him...".
Good Morning Everyone.
Ron Indiana
Great post!!!!
Plus I read somewhere that from 1951 to 1963 that the marginal was 90 to 92% which made the economy 3.7% and when the marginal is 35% which made the economy 1.7% for each year.
Plus I noticed yesterday that someone posted the different laws that President Obama has signed and someone commented who was Ledbetter. Goes to show that all the Republicans want is just to be in the White House. First they need to learn what laws are in effect before they start putting down the President.
If I'm wrong feel free to correct me.
Here is the problem, Ron: government spending, which should generate about sixty cents for each dollar spent,is actually taking a dollar five out of the economy for every dollar spent-due entirely to the high cost of borrowing, both in terms of interest due and reducing the amount of capital available.
Tax cuts generate THREE dollars for every dollar cut. Who says so? Try Christina Romer-yes, THAT Christina Romer.
Cutting taxes is more stimulative than increased spending, and borrowing. Why, exactly, do you think businesses have moved so many jobs off-shore? You don't think that our nation having the highest corporate tax rate in the world has anything to do with it?
Of course you don't-you also believe that Obama's stimulous bill stimulated something other than the deficit. There is no reaching some people.
As to unemployment benefits-yes, they are a drag on the economy when they are handed out for almost two years. Moreover,they are a drag on the states.
There ARE states with plenty of jobs available; in other times, families would have relocated to these states. Where? North Dakota now has underemployment, and 10,000 jobs begging to be filled. If your choice is no job in your current location, versus moving to a new state, the decision is an easy one. When, however, the government keeps your cash flow static, there is no incentive to relocate; nor, I might add, is there an incentive to innovate which might help the economy in the future.
I am thinking of a local moving company that was founded in the eighties by a couple of teachers who could not find new jobs after they had been riffed. They bought a truck and went into the moving business. They now have a large fleet of trucks and are a regional moving company-employing hundreds.
Obama does not understand any of this, as he has no concept of anything that is not written in a text book. He is a classic ivory tower intellectual, with no concept of the law of unintended consequences.
He has been a disaster for this country, and will continue to be so until well after he is out of office.
Ron:
It just amazes me (well perhaps not) with the mood of the public right now not being happy with anyone in Washington how the Republicans are blowing this opportunity to make major political gains by allowing the wack jobs like Bachmann, Vitter, Palin, the far right fringe of the tea party, Fox Noise, Rush Limbaugh, Rand Paul and others speak for them, and to control the destiny of their party.
There are plenty of predictions going around about the November elections being a major take-over by the Republicans and similar predictions as to Obama's chances in 2012, but let me tell you. The people, even though frustrated with Obama and Congress, will in the end reject these far right nut jobs and thereby will cause major damage to what may have been a boon for the Republicans in November and the 2012 elections.
CA:
It amazes me also. In fact I'm giving it some thought about what is really going on. Your explanations are excellent, and I'm wondering what are the underlying currents that are happening, but haven't been identified. There's got to be some reasons why people would vote for this Republican insanity.
Ron said:
Rand Paul says to the Tea Party, “I owe it all to you.” Then he out-does himself by saying, “The poor in America are enormously better off than the poor in the rest of the world.” How compassionate is that? Poor is poor and hunger is hunger. Every religion in the world believes in helping the poor and hungry…but not Rand Paul. He opposes both Social Security and Medicare. How is it that Christian conservatives can support this guy?
______________________
Ron.... The Bible also says if a man does not work he will not eat. Now this DOES NOT mean that we shouldnt help those that are needy. What this does mean is that it is a PERSONAL responsibility to help those who cant help themselves. Thats why Christians tithe and give to the church so the church can help the helpless. See what many have lost sight of is that the way this country was designed by the Founders was that the Government wasnt supposed to be in the game of social welfare. That was supposed to be left for the Church to deal with. But over the course of time Progressives have shifted that responsibility to the government so that people feel as if they NEED the government instead of needing God.
Why would Christians vote for Paul? Well lets look back to the Bible.... The Bible says "...I will not be a burden to you, because what I want is not your possesions but you. After all, CHILDREN SHOULD NOT HAVE TO SAVE UP FOR THEIR PARENTS, BUT PARENTS FOR THEIR CHILDREN" (2 Corinthians 12:14)
Now what does that mean? That means that it is not anyone's responsibility to plan for my retirement but my own. Its not yours its not my childrens and it is especially not the Governments. I agree 100% with Rand Paul and Sherry Angle. Abolish Social Security and let me keep that money and invest it the way I see fit. If I fall flat on my face because of bad choices that is my fault and problem.
And I know someone is going to say that some dont have the knowledge or ability to save on their own and they "need" SS....well those people can seek out help to LEARN how to save.... you know the whole give a man a fish he eats for a day teach a man how to fish he eats for a lifetime thing?
And you do realize that the "poor" here in America are "richer" than about 80% of the world right? Its about time we remember that we are the richest country in the world. Or at least we were before Obama decided we needed to be "taken down a peg".
Simple explanation, Ron:
suppose you had a business. You install a management team, and for a while, things seem to be going pretty well. After a few years, you start to notice that expenditures are going way, way up, with little to show for it. You replace some of the managers, and things begin to get even worse. Thus, you replace the entire management team.
Rather than getting better, things get even worse than they were. You cannot get a coherent answer from any of the managers as to why; their response is that they need to do more of the same things that have made your balance sheet even worse than it was before you installed them. They continually blame the people they replaced for their bad results-finally, they refuse to even prepare a budget for your review.
What do you think you'd do? Keep them on, with 'hope' that things would 'change'? Or do you think you would get some people from the old team,with different ideas on how to turn the company around, and strict instructions to cut expenditures?
I don't know about you, but the electorate is sick and tired of 'hoping' things will 'change'.
They are going to install their own change.
Larry Minot, N.D.
Preacher Man, you are crazy!
Great post. The twisted logic is beyond belief and how people can vote for the likes of these folks is also beyond comprehension. If I could have a wish, it would be for Kyl, Rand Paul, Bachman, Hatch to find themselves unemployed with no access to their bank accounts for a long time--I imagine they would not think of themselves as lazy, stray animals, hobos and drug addicts. I see them not as conservatives but as selfish fools whose ideological purity is dangerous.
The 43% of republicans who support extending unemployment benefits are the good republicans who are compassionate and get it. Unfortunately, the GOP legislators cater to the 60% of republicans who describe themselves as "conservatives"--those are most likely the evangelicals, and definitely the Tea Party.
Jody: Good Morning my Iowa friend. Great to see you on the Vine.
I think you are sending us some very hot weather...and it isn't even August yet. I bet we will have a lot to write about during Congresses August vacation. Last year is was about Town Halls.
You got it, Ron, we're sending you a scorcher. Did you get that rain we sent--over an inch in about 25 minutes Monday night, no storm sirens though. It is 80 already with 70% humidity. I dread going out the mow the backyard--am waiting for the most shade back there in about an hour.
"Cutting taxes is more stimulative than increased spending, and borrowing."
Are you prepared to back that up? I'm prepared to back up my disagreement with that statement. http://www.voxeu.org/index.php?q=node/4227 "
"Why, exactly, do you think businesses have moved so many jobs off-shore? You don't think that our nation having the highest corporate tax rate in the world has anything to do with it?"
No, we have the highest corporate INCOME TAX rate. If you look here http://www.doingbusiness.org/documents/Paying_Taxes_2008.pdf you'll find that many countries have higher total corporate taxes, including Australia, China, Germany, Japan, and the Phillipines.
"Of course you don't-you also believe that Obama's stimulous bill stimulated something other than the deficit. There is no reaching some people."
And you're one of them. You continually parrot the talking point that stimulus doesn't work, ignoring all evidence to the contrary including the academic work of Economists.
"There ARE states with plenty of jobs available; in other times, families would have relocated to these states. Where? North Dakota now has underemployment, and 10,000 jobs begging to be filled. If your choice is no job in your current location, versus moving to a new state, the decision is an easy one. When, however, the government keeps your cash flow static, there is no incentive to relocate; nor, I might add, is there an incentive to innovate which might help the economy in the future."
Larry in Minot stated yesterday that the unemployment rate there is 6.5%. Not full employment by any means. Yet you sit there and command those who are at risk of losing everything to load up like the Joabs and hit the Mother Road for some place where the streets are paved with gold. Nice.
"Obama does not understand any of this, as he has no concept of anything that is not written in a text book. He is a classic ivory tower intellectual, with no concept of the law of unintended consequences."
And you have no appreciation of expertise, data, or any of the things that fill textbooks. Your opinions are empty, with no backing.
"He has been a disaster for this country, and will continue to be so until well after he is out of office."
Once again you pronounce his ability to prevent a disaster that started well before he entered the Oval Office for the first time. If only he had those super powers that you so proclaim.
"The Bible also says if a man does not work he will not eat. Now this DOES NOT mean that we shouldnt help those that are needy. What this does mean is that it is a PERSONAL responsibility to help those who cant help themselves."
Your bible absolves you of responsibility to work toward a fair and just society? Mine doesn't. You are free to believe as you see fit, but I believe Christ would be furious with me for using him as a cop out to limit my responsibility to those less fortunate.
In response to your 10:22 post no joe all blow, we all know what you would do, you'd cut your income (i.e. taxes) because you've already stated you get 3 dollars back for every dollar of income cut. BTW: I'd be vary interested to hear how for every dollar cut you get three dollars back. I'm guessing that when the government cuts your taxes 1 dollar your going to sent the government a check for 3 dollars and not call it a tax, I guess you'll call it a donation. Is that how it works no joe all blow?
Ron:
I don't have the answer. I'm stumped. The only thing I can say is I'm not so sure people are voting for something as much as they think they are voting against something. We find ourselves in a very negative political period where positions people take tend to be identified by that to which they are opposed rather by that which they are for or support. And the more radical a person is (whether left or right) the more they seem to be against things rather than for things. Why, I suppose it is easier to be against something than to be for something. Being for something requires responsibility and accountability, and I'm not so sure that many people right now wish to be held responsible or accountable. They are not for others intervening into their lives (as government) but they are also not so sure they want to be responsible and accountable for their lives and those things that impact those lives as well.
The human mind is a complex thing, and only the human species (that I know of) takes so much time and spends so much effort arguing politics. Sometimes the look I get from Dog makes me as a human being and therefore supposedly the smarter of the two feel pretty darn silly and stupid.
Larry Minot- As you have made your point with purely biblical terms I will do the same. Politics aside. I dislike the fact that Tea Partiers like you apparently claim to have the only true understanding of the Bible. For every verse you quote espousing your interpretation that the Bible mirrors your political beliefs, there are other verses that I think you should also recognize and adhere to.
You say it is the Tea Party belief that only individuals should help the homeless and the unemployed not the government. As I don't know you, I will not make any decision on whether you do or not. I'm sure you do, but I would bet a vast majority of the Tea Partiers who spout "If a man doesn't work he doesn't eat" do not help give to the needy or homeless. Its either their greed or indifference that gets in the way of giving. Then to console their heart they say well its in the bible that people who don't work shouldn't eat.
I'm not an elder in the church as you are so I'll paraphrase, I think it is in Matthew, Jesus describing his judgement.
Jesus - When I was hungry you didn't feed me. When I was sick you didn't treat me or visit me. When I was naked you didn't clothe me.
Tea Partier - Lord when did I see you hungry or sick or naked.
Jesus - When you didn't do these things for the least of my children you didn't do it for me. Get away from me you wicked evil doer.
Tea Partier - Weeps and gnashes their teeth.
On another point, the church I grew up with also asked us to pray for our country and our leaders. The Tea Party movement I see is hateful of everything that is not like them. They glady hope for the destruction of my country.
I remembered the hateful images of racist posters of Obama as a witch doctor, Obama with a joker smile, Obama as Hitler during the health care debate.
From First Timothy Chapter 2
1I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; 2For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. 3For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour.
I know that disagreement is at the heart of politics, but politics aside purely biblical; What would Jesus do when Tea Partiers disrespect and wish ill of the President? What would Jesus do when Tea Partiers disrespect and call people names who can't find jobs through no fault of their own?
oK.... jOHN....THERE IS WHERE THE MISUNDERSTANDING LIES..... nEver once did I state that we shouldnt try to make the world a better place. What I actually said was that it is not the government's job to do it for me with my tax dollars. That is my CHOICE whether or not to help someone and WHO I decide to help.
If God is telling me to help Focus on the Family then that is my business not the governments. Again it comes down to if the gov't would get out of the way and let people do what they will things would be much better off. But instead the govt decides they need to take a portion of my money and give it out to whom THEY feel is deserving. Last time I checked the Bible said give unto Caeser what is his and give unto God what is His.
Yellowdog....
Ill say the same thing to you that I said to John..... (read the post I sent to him).... now on to your quote from Matthew. Again when did I say we shouldnt help anyone? I didnt Sir. What I said is that it is MY responsibility as a Christian to give my time treasures and talents to help those who need help.
Now please tell me anywhere wher I said we shouldnt help those that are out of a job?
As far as praying for my elected leaders. I do. I pray that President Obama looks to God for wisdom and not the unions. I pray that he brings this country back to Him. I also pray that all this political bickering ends and all our elected leaders turn toward God for their wisdom and ask for His guidance during the decision making process.
Now that being said the Bible DOES NOT say that I have to agree and go along with everything that the elected leaders say and do. Especially when those elected leaders are passing laws that are in direct opposition to the Bible.
You lost me at "republican logic." ;)
"oK.... jOHN....THERE IS WHERE THE MISUNDERSTANDING LIES..... nEver once did I state that we shouldnt try to make the world a better place. What I actually said was that it is not the government's job to do it for me with my tax dollars."
No misunderstanding, that was my point. In the eyes of many Conservatives making the world a better place stops where we've done enough to salve our conscience, and anything further is waste. Larry, I don't know you. You could give very generously to worthy charities who concentrate on those who are most in need. Most of us are unchurched, however, and we aren't overly generous when we do http://www.fraseramerica.org/commerce.web/product_files/US-Generosity-Index-2009.pdf . 26.6% of taxpayers give a total 1.60% of their income to charity. Further the wealthy, those who can best afford it give a lower percentage of their income than those of more modest means. When they do it's far more likely that they'll give to establish an endowed chair at a university, buy a hospital wing or other things that, while worthy don't do much for those who need it most.
In other words if those who need help have to rely on the generosity of individuals they're likely to be waiting a long, long time. Therefore for most people the concept of individual responsibility for helping others isn't taking on that responsibility, it's avoiding responsibility.
Larry - I read your post. If I mistakenly lumped you in with the vast majority of Tea Partiers who I believe are bigoted and racist, I apologize. Interesting to see your response to John about Choice. Do you really want to start a topic about Choice on a liberal blog.
I'm glad to hear you pray for our leaders, and I agree that you should follow no person, party or group blindly. You shouldn't agree with everything they say or do either. That is why I think it is important for those on the right wing to call out, the vast majority of Tea Partiers who I believe are bigoted and racist.
Your last verse on taxes was posed to Jesus by the Pharisees to see if they could trip him up about not paying taxes. He said whose picture is on this coin, pointing to Ceasar. "Give unto Ceasar that which is Ceasar and give unto God that which is his."
The Tea Party believes that although taxes are the lowest in a generation that they are taxed enough already. The verse you used leads me to believe that in even the most basic tenant of their belief Jesus would say to the Tea Party, "Pay your taxes".
Ron
Let's talk about your 'logic'
The Republicans want to extend the unemployment benefits. They want the funds to come from the Stimulus money, the Democrats want to add it to the deficit. So who is actually delaying this?
By the way, unemployment has already been extended to almost 2 years, how long do you think it should continue?
I think 2 years is long enough.
As far as the tax breaks to the rich you refer to, who actually pays the bulk of the Federal income taxes in this country? 57% of Americans don't pay any according to several sources. So should we continue to give tax breaks to those who don't pay any?
Let's start there first
Repubs keep talking about That Stimulus Money, However, it is actually already allocated towards projects in the works, and is drawing interest which is Part of how it is going to continue to fund those projects. The Repubs are trying to do their best to make sure that the Stimulus does not work, for their own political points. It is time to toss those self serving, Locked-in-goosestepping- Repubs out the door and NEVER let them return to Governing until they can actually show they are on the side of the People instead of on the side of who has the most money!!
And Larry, your rants are the very reason that there IS a separation between Church and State, too many Churchies just point to the parts of the Bible that THEY think supports them, without bothering to read or understand the entire context with regards to how it works in the modern world, which is very difficult since parts of the Bible were passed down VERBALLY over 4k years ago, and mostly talk about what happened 2K years ago. Modern Christianity, as an organized religion, is only a tool to try to have a Government over the top of the Government, and the Founding Fathers were very correct to build that wall in place to keep our Democracy a Secular one, and NOT beholden to ANY Church. Take your scriptures elsewhere, the words of people that have used Christ as a tool for power need not be heard here!
B. Honest, I'll make the point that in fact there are always 2 churches--the church that argues on behalf of the powerful and the church that argues on behalf of the least powerful. The church that supported divine right kings for hundreds of years and the church of Mother Theresa. Prosperity Theology and ministering to the homeless. "Give me mine" vs "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses." The two are in constant tension, ebbing and increasing over time. We all say "as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord", but differ on the meaning of that phrase. I know where I stand.
B Honest - "too many just point to the parts of the Bible that THEY think supports them" I agree.
In a political setting (such as crafting legislation) religion really shouldn't play much of a role.
I hear a lot of similar stuff that Larrry espouses from some of my incorrect "right" wing relatives. Thanksgiving dinner was never fun when they showed up.
John B - Didn't see your post until my latest one posted. Powerful. I voted!
Dirty Little Secrets:
On a lighter note this morning…
I can’t stop giggling that Bristol Palin & Levi Johnston have reunited and are in engaged – and the Wild Alaskan Dingbat was totally oblivious to the situation! lol
Another shining example of the Family Values Queen not having a clue what’s going on with her own children! lol
Why is it her children are SO afraid to talk to her?
I’m actually happy that they’ve reconciled… maybe they can get away from the lipstick wearing pit bull and bring some sense of normalcy into their lives and that of their son!
Watching Grama Grizzly blow a GASKET will be amusing if nothing else!
Should make for an interesting Thanksgiving dinner… no?
Yeah. . . I'm awaiting the Sarah spin on this one! Should be entertaining, to say the least.
These folks have managed to extend their 15 minutes of fame way past the expiration time. If an innocent child weren't involved it would be too funny. I do hope for the sake of their son that these 2 find some kind of life together.
I saw that on Today. Holy cow or more appropriate, Holy Mama Grizzly!
I did have to laugh when I heard the announcer say that because they "believe in abstinence - they will be living in separate households until the wedding".
Seriously?!?! I'm looking at a beautful picture of the two of them and their son....and they aren't going to share a household yet because they believe in abstinence. Is it just me?
In all seriousness - I do wish the new family a peaceful and happy future. The child deserves some stability!
I too couldn’t stop giggling when Levi stepped forward and admitted he lied about the Palin family. It came as no surprise to anyone with a brain that he was lying and doing it for money. But the left loves to hate so why would they question the propaganda that Levi and MSNBC tell them as long as it fits their style. What is even funnier is even though the libs discovered their hatred was based on lies, their still going to keep on hating. So the only question remaining is will the left be hating on Levi the once liberal love child for lying and making you all look shallow and stupid or is no longer feeding the Palin hate machine.
You mean it was an immaculate conception, Paul? Wow, excuse me for concluding they're a bunch of lying hypocrites.
I wish Bristol and Levi the best and hope they're at peace knowing they've behaved as young people have behaved since time immemorial. Shame on Mom for using them as political props.
Well, in a slight bit of other bad news for Lew, the Obama administration and the Democrats just crossed the $1 trillion mark in deficit spending for the current fiscal year, with 3 months left to go on the fiscal year. Deficit projections for next year are a little murky because the Democratic led Congress refuses to pass a budget, but the deficit numbers look about the same next year as they do this year.
So what exactly is Lew supposed to do, tell Obama and the Democrats to stop spending? Print more money? Raise taxes? Lew is doomed before he even starts.
JoAnna:
Are you being paid by the number of posts or the number of words? Certainly not by the number of ideas!
By the number of times I get responses from you Ron.
You know it Ron! *yawn*
Judging from her response to you - I rest my case! ;0)
But it is 7.6% below last year. An oversight or a convenient omission on your part?
JoAnnaSmith sez:
The bad news for you, JoAnnaSmith is that most of the debt is attributable to the Bush tax cuts, the revenue shortfalls from the Bush recession and the Bush wars. Only about 10% is due to the stimulus that has created 3 million new jobs.
And 300% larger then any deficit of Bush's. But I'm sure that was just a convenient omission on your part.
And 300% larger then any deficit of Bush's. But I'm sure that was just a convenient omission on your part.
Thats because the largest portion of Bushs deficits did not show up untill 2009. You know, when Obama began including the two wars in his budget that Bush so conveniently left off the books. But we won't let minor facts get in the way. Spin it any way you want that makes you feel as if everything is Obamas fault. That would certainly be easier than admitting Bushor the Republicans did anything to add to the deficit
JoAnna, Bush kept two separate sets of books just so everyone would think he wasn't doing so much deficit spending. The wars, emergency disaster responses like Hurricanes Katrina and Rita--all those dollars were never included in the projected budget. Pres Obama insists that every expense is shown, and that includes allocating estimated dollars for emergency response.
NO NEED to copy and reprint, the new FR site allows direct response.
Jody,
When you're paid by the word... she has to copy & reprint... lol
Just wait for the deficit growth when Obamacare kicks in.
Looks like Barry’s 2009 Porkulus bill is finally kicking in. The front page today’s WSJ has an article about the Fed seeing slower economic growth in the second half of 2010. The article says the Fed sees growth in the economy continuing, but, at a slower pace than they had been forecasting. The article also says that puts the Fed in line with many private economic forecasts that have already cut their estimates of second-half growth. The only good news is that they see inflation staying at moderate levels which, for now, means a return to the 1970’s Jimmy Carter years of “stagflation” is not an immediate concern.
Hurry up and get your election day shopping done, there are only 111 more days until November 2 (including three more monthly jobs reports). You don’t want to miss out on all those FANTASTIC going out of business sales at stores that sell Hope and Change, Change We Can Believe In, and Yes, We Can/Yes, We Did memorabilia!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Commerce Department just reported that retail sales were down in June, for the second month in a row. As anyone that follows this stuff knows, consumer spending makes up about 70% of U.S. economic activity.
This is TERRIBLE news for the economy.
I guess thats what you get when you have childish pols like Botox Pelosi third in the line of succession to the Presidency:
From Politico:
Pelosi also accused the White House of playing favorites with the Senate, where President Barack Obama served. She said that the White House gives help to Senate candidates while making damaging comments about House Democrats' chances in November.
Pelosi and her allies in the House have privately griped that the White House hasn’t given her enough credit for pushing the president’s agenda through the House – and risking her majority and her job in doing so.
You mention what WSJ said. However, there hasn't been much discussion on this board about Erskine Bowles' comments that the spending has to stop or we will be bankrupt.
Joe, Albany from yesterday. I DO KNOW the difference between budget surplus, budget deficit and the national debt.
Jody, I'm very proud of you.
Looks like Botox Pelosi is going to fly her broom down Pennsylvania Ave and take Barry out to the woodshed for a spanking:
Just posted on Politico:
President Barack Obama will hear House Democrats' frustrations in person Wednesday evening at a White House meeting, according to senior aides on Capitol Hill.
Word is the WH kitchen will be serving a special Shrew Stew, including eye of Newt. LOL!!!
N.R.A. expands agenda into health, courts, campaign finance, credit cards ...
Lobby group flexes its muscles and strikes fear into politicians' hearts
WASHINGTON — Fresh off a string of victories in the courts and Congress, the National Rifle Association is flexing political muscle outside its normal domain, with both Democrats and Republicans courting its favor and avoiding its wrath on issues that sometimes seem to have little to do with guns.
The N.R.A., long a powerful lobby on gun rights issues, has in recent months also weighed in on such varied issues as health care, campaign finance, credit card regulations and Supreme Court nominees.
So all of a sudden I’m supposed to be just shaking in my old brogans because the “Black Panthers” Boogeyman has been drug out of retirement and put back on life support.
Just so nobody mistakes where I’m coming from here I’ll kind of remind you’ll that I’m an old rural fellow that has had a firearm of some sort close at hand all my life. As such I pretty well keep myself up to speed on firearms issues. I have also never felt the need despite numerous attempts on their part to join the NRA. If I feel the need to spend time around a bunch of fools waving firearms around without a good purpose I’ll throw a big party out on the back forty and let them have at it making sure that I have a couple of ambulances and EMT’s on hand for when they shoot themselves in the foot or other more precious parts of their anatomy.
Contrary to opinion of the gun waving crowd I have seen no evidence that the present administration has 2nd amendment rights even on their radar screen. So I guess the NRA lacking the legitimate purpose that they were formed for has decided to branch out and tell everybody how to run the country. What’s next we going to stand old Charlton’s ghost up in front of Congress and have it make that cold dead hands speech? That ought to work out well.
Frankly it is just my personal belief that if we can prevail upon our legislators to keep enough money in our municipalities to keep some police on the streets the “Black Panther “thing will work itself out to everybody’s satisfaction. Running things to old Heston’s ghost’s satisfaction doesn’t show me a whole lot of promise for anything in most of We the People’s best interests.
Hi, I.R. Good to know the NRA hasn't gotten you yet. Amazing that people think only republicans own guns. My uncles, my stepdad owned guns, one uncle collected hunting rifles and they all are democrats who felt the NRA was a useless group collecting annual fees they would rather spend on hunting licenses or a good meal.
I heard the NRA is now demanding that those on the terrorist watch list should be allowed to buy guns. Now, that makes good sense--allow terrorists to just go buy whatever they want before shooting up the town because terrorists have 2nd amendment rights, too.
What started out as a gun club where hunters and sports shooters could "bond", has turned into an NRA consisting of a manipulative bunch of thugs going around scaring people into thinking they need assault weapons to protect their 2nd amendment rights from the evil government which, any moment now, will descend in mass to fight a war with them.
All 3 of those New Black Panthers aren't nearly as scarey as the dozens like Michelle Bachman, Steve King, Sharon Angle, Rand Paul, Vivian Foxx, to name a few.
Like watching two children fussing over a toy while playing in the sandbox. The Republicans don't have to tear down the Democrats, they do a great job of it all by themselves.
Can't you Democrats all just get along?
Sure they can all get along. Just as soon as they lose congress like all you wishful thinkers are predicting. Then, when they all sing "NO' in unison to EVERYTHNIG the Repubs try to do (paybacks, you know?), I want to hear the reaction from folks like you. And remember- no bringing up the 'past administration'.
drive-by:
You don't seriously expect JoAnnaSmith and the other rabid rightwingnuts to abide by the rules they try to impose on others, do you? They whined about how Clinton was responsible for all of Bush's disasters for 8 years and didn't stop until Obama was sworn in. Hypocrisy is a core principle of modern "conservatism."
Sorry, Houston, I'm afraid there's enough hypocrisy to go around for all polticians and parties, not just one side.
dirt-303814
Specifics, please. Sure Democrats can be hypocritical. Most people other than saints can fall into it from time to time. But you need to give an example on the Democratic side that is equivalent to the pervasive, breathtaking, and mind boggling degree of hypocrisy of spending the 8 Bush years blaming Clinton for Bush's screw-ups, and then immediately blaming Obama for them before he was even sworn in, while at the same time whining about anyone blaming Bush for the damaged he caused to the country, some of which will take decades to repair, if it ever can be.
So again, what are your examples?
We are playing by the rules you all set, by example, the last 8 years. I can't help now that your on the receiving end you don't like it. It sucks looking in a mirror doens't it. I will treat your president EXACTLY as you treated mine and in the manner in which you all taught me.
Good news or not, still worth posting this report - I heard Dylan Rattigan AND Ed Schultz yelled and screamed about President Obama. Is there anyone out there whose NOT yelling and screaming? What do they think, the president is sitting in a corner twiddling his thumbs? I know Ed is trying to sell a book and now we have Rattigan. Everybody wants to be Limbaugh. It's sickening. Where's the thoughtful analysis? Where's the dignity? Where's the less emotion, more balanced approaches? Where's the maturity?
The men in this country are truly becoming idiots. Especially the ones in the media. I can't stomach them. I bet you ANYTHING these same people voted for GWB and Cheney. They're stupid.
Amen, Pat--what else would they have the President do, especially when his own party does not back him up? (my theme for the day, I guess).
Morning Pat!
Not sure about Ratigan... but I was listening to Shultz on my way home last night and his tirade against Harry Reid was nothing more than despicable!
As for Tweety... blood pressure is much better since I tuned him out weeks ago!
Everyone wants to be a Beckerhead these days... *shakes head*
MESSNBC's Mr. Ed Show is one of my favorites. There's nothing more Hillaryously funny than an angry liberal on a rant, and you can count on Mr. Ed to deliver on most shows. He reminds me of a far left wing Archie Bunker.
I just love the concept of a "saved job" and I have to give Obama an A+ for creativity on that one (unlike his dismal "creativity" on "new jobs").
A "saved job" can't be objectively seen or proven because it is entirely the creation of the variable assumptions used in computing it. For example, is it just a coincidence that the number they are now touting as an actual reality is the same number as the projected when they were pushing the Porkulus bill?
Want 10 million "saved jobs"? Just change your assumption about how many jobs would have been lost without the Porkulus so that....... abracadabra:
The answer is now 10 million "jobs saved"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Pat, I totally agree with your assessment of Ratigan and Schultz... They both seem to feel that a loud, angry voice equates intelligence. It doesn't...
They want it all and they want it now. Seems like nothing is ever enough... HCR for Schultz and Financial Reform for Ratigan.
Those who have to shout their message, normally have very little to say.
Even John McCain's economic adviser in the 2008 campaign says the stimulus created jobs. But who should we believe? Expert economists like him or the ignorant far-out rightwingnuts ranting on this message board? It's so hard to decide sometimes.
Hi Feisty, Lyn and Steeler Fan: These radio and tv gigs are getting ridiculous. The only one doing any real work is the President. He has to live with this economy 24/7. Yet these so-called grown up men feel the need to continue to behave like Limbaugh and Beck. It's sickening. Truly sickening.
Big mouthed morons. And now the President is not supposed to be friendly to corporations? What's that all about? He's pushing through financial regulations for crying out loud.
The corporations you know - HIRE PEOPLE. Don't Schultz and Rattigan accept a paycheck from A CORPORATION? Disengenuous hollering. And it's everywhere. All for ratings and a buck.
Feisty, my love...
I thought Ed was in rare form last night.
That's exactly the sort of insightful analysis that Ed always strives to bring to his forum.
Bill Press was good too...you know, when he agreed with Harry Reid that President Obama is too timid?
And DCCC Chairman Chris Van Hollen...blindsided by Ed's exuberance, and looking like he'd rather be anywhere else?
I loved it, Feisty...moments like that are why I don't give up on MSNBC.
Feisty, Harry Reid makes a comment, one comment, about President Obama and Schultz has to make it into one big huge scream fest about President Obama. That's tv for ya.
Pat--I'm trying to be positive here and have decided that even if the Democrats don't accomplish all that I had hoped they would when President Obama was elected, at least we stopped the debacles of the Bush years and prevented whatever McCain would have done and haven't had to live with the worry of a Vice President Palin. Our standing in the world is improved and we aren't having another Depression.
What's truly sickening Pat is this is nothing more a game to them!
It's not about the GOOD of America... it's ONLY about the freakin ratings!
And the people who don't comprehend that are dangerously STUPID!
Steeler Fan, you should continue to be positive. Don't get dragged down to the level of so many in this country. Read books, take walks, listen to music. Don't turn on the tv or radio and listen to these "grown up adults". Many of these pundits are going on emotion only for ratings. They're not worth your time.
President Obama is an excellent president. The pundits? They're just looking for ratings. Nothing more. Nothing less. Get the population all up in an uproar. No solutions. No working together. Just divide. Quote something Senator Reid said and then holler and of course - take a poll.
The rest of us will enjoy the summer while everyone else continues with their insanity. (smile)
Good observation. I have been saying for some time there are a lot of Ruch and Glenn wannabees on all the networks. At MSNBC we have the ones mentioned by you and do not forget Joe Schmo in the morning and his motley crew.
You can tell the people who are losing the argument by how loud they yell and how many times they interrupt the other speaker. Calm intelligent discourse has gone by the way side. Who yells the loudest and most often is the one who gets the limelight, so to speak. Look at all the junk posts on this site alone from the usually right wing people that offer no ideas, just background noise. Ask them for proof and you get none. Ask them what they would do and you get talking points. And if by chance one does offer some proof it is usual wrong or not on point.
This week we have heard a lot about the Republicans wanting to lower the debt (deficit) and their plan is to stop unemployment benefits for over a million people who were hard working and paid into he system for years and they want to keep the tax cuts for the rich. This increases the debt on the backs of the middle class for the benefit to those few that do not need tax relief to begin with. Looks like we will get Financial Reform in some flavor but the repugs are going to try and delay this knowing that it is a lost cause just because they can, no other reason needed other than to keep on doing everything they can to try and make our President fail. Gibbs did not say anything that we did not already know. Maybe he is trying to get the dems to rally for the elections. If we do not get out and vote to stop the party of no ideas, no morals, no ethics, supporters of Big Business, the rich of the rich, Wall Street etc., we wll pay the price. ANd believe me, it is going to be a whopper.
I've noticed that as well, USN. Week by week they get more shrill as it becomes clear that the Tea Parties have unleashed a force that could prevent their victory in November. The GOP has cut a deal with the devil, mainstreaming craziness that they once had the sense to ignore as their strategy of pandering to the base paints them into a smaller and smaller corner.
Cheers, Pat! I stopped watching Ratigan weeks ago, and the minute Matthews or Ed go off on some nonsense, the channel changes not because they have a difference of opinion but because they become ugly and unrealistic about it.
Last night Ed was in a snit because Harry Reid made a comment that Pres Obama could be more forceful with republicans. What was ignored by every pundit having a fit is that Reid was asked a question regarding whether he had any criticism of Pres Obama or was there something he thought could have been done better. Reid responded that a "few" times he wished the President had been more forceful with republicans. I'm not defending Reid because he should simply have said "not really" but the pundits went crazy. It was hardly a mean-spirited comment by Reid but when taken out of context, it became fodder for hours.
You can find dignity and research and no yelling on Rachael Maddow show. The only show worth watching.
I suspect that Schultz voted for Bush the first time, but not the second time. I question his ranting now and then, but never his heart. It's firmly in the right place, even though we may not always agree with him. And I happen to like Dylan Ratigan, too. You have to have loud voices to keep this administration from drifting too far to to the right. I'm one of the people who has, from time to time, questioned the drift -- and I don't think irrationally -- and I, for one, really appreciate what these guys are trying to do. Someone needs to do it.
But hey, how about the irony that the American League streak of All-Star Game wins would end on the day of George Steinbrenner's death?
And where the heck IS Brett Favre gonna play this year, Pat?
Elise, SF,
I have been watching Rachael on MSNBC from day one. I used to also listen to her radio show as well. Anybody know when Larry O will be on so we can have another journalist.
I was out of town and away from the news. It was great. Has FR covered the ridiculous attack by the NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE on the Tea Party activists?
What is their problem? We have a colored president, we've had TWO colored Supreme Court justices (although I know to many of you Clarence Thomas isn't really black). There are MANY colored congressmen and one colored shreiking, racist shrew disguised as a congresswoman (Maxine Waters).
How desperate are these idiots to stay relevant when, in fact, they have not been relevant for years. The civil rights battles were all won years ago and they basically are a propaganda arm of the Democrat Party who is apparently directed to make sure that black people keep voting Dem.
Other than trying to help poor, downtrodden LeBron James from being treated like a slave, they don't seem to have any reason for being. Jeez. Good thing they don't have tax-exempt status as a non-partisan organization.
Don't forget, the sickest, most vile political TV ad in history was created by the NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE. You remember. The one where they used James Byrd's little daughter to attack Bush when he was running in 2000. Even Al "I Got Global Warming In MY Pants" Gore had to condemn it. I'm sure it's on youtube.
"..........We have a colored president..."
A what??
Is that like a 'spade' or something, CU?? Maybe a "jungle-bunny"?? What???
It is interesting that the NAACP is so adamant about passing a resolution against the Tea Party, but are no where to be found when something needs to be said about African-American single parent families, incarceration rates, low life expectancy, unemployment in the AA community, or black on black crime. These issues seem to not register with the NAACP.
I'm certain the NAACP will get to the new New Black Panther Party resolution today. Probably one that supports the NBPP. They'll give them some kind of an award.
Feisty, I know I used some big words in this post, I don't have time to explain them to you now, but I'll get back to you about them later today.
JoAnnaSmith
The New Black Panther Party consists of a few nut cases that are at the opposite extreme at which nut cases like you are with your race-baiting.
You're right Joanna. 75% of Black babies are born to a single mother. The leading cause of death for young, black males is MURDER...at the hands of other black males. Which reminds me: How's that War On Inner-City Poverty workin' out for ya, libs? Where's the exit strategy? Time for a new non-Democrat approach?
But I digress. Where is the NAACP regarding these problems? Could it be that it's easier to shine the light somewhere else than on your selves?
CU. F Guess you missed the Bush ads in 2000 which accused McCain of having a black child by someone other than his wife.
CU Farley
This is not the 40s we(blacks,african american) are not colored. i understand why you keep mention colored, NAACP was founded back in the day when you whites people could not call us Ni**ers any more so you called us colored. i take serious offense to how your putting this, so what i will say is this, farely, what are you, don'rt tell me your white because this is ovious, are you a irish mick, or polock. its nice to your fellow white brothern to mention colored so much.
Now the NAACP is still working to advance help black people. do you have a problem with this. what is your problem with the NAACP. YOU SHOW YOU IGORANCE
75% OF BLACK BABIES ARE NOT BORN TO SINGLE MOTHERS, The percentage is 50%. just for the record all my 4 kids were born in wedlock. my 5 brothers and sisters were born in wedllock, all my necies and nephews were all born in wedlock. the reason why the birth rate with unwed blacks is so high is because black are very consertive when it comes to abortion. we don't believe in abortion that is what white girl do to get rid of there unwanted babies. so your right the brith rate with unwed black is high but man at least we don't get rid of a life, we(black) value life. i wish i could say that about you people(whites)
Good for you and your family, Jeff. The NAACP should use you and your family as role models instead of the usual idiots they choose. Remember when they gave Tupac Shakur their "Image Award" right around the same time he was charged with rape and shooting a couple off-duty policemen? Lovely. By the way, I wouldn't say too loud on this site your anti-abortion stance. You may suffer a decline in popularity to rival Ratigan and Shultz or whoever the libs are viewing as a traitor this week.
Sorry, the 75% stat IS correct. Or maybe it's 72%. Look it up. It's mainly because of a destructive "baby-mama" culture and a culture of recklessness and irresponsibility that is common among many poor people of all races. Hence their being poor.
I believe the term "colored" is every bit outdated as the organization that uses the term in it's name. They are irrelevant and constantly clawing for a way to stay in the news. They are idiots. At least Julian "Republicans are America's Taliban" Bond isn't in charge of them anymore.
First of all CU Farley my family is typical of allot of black families, you look at the news and Liston to the media and you have judges the whole black race by this.
You did not answer my Question, what are you, A drunken Irish Mick, Dumb Pollock, Gennie Italian woop, or even worse are you a cheap Jew. come on what. its easy for whites to call blacks colored, or Ni**ers or coons. but what are you.
please any body but CU Farley don't take offence to this but this guy loves to call blacks colors i just want to know what he is. my family is typical of alot of black families. there is a mother, father (married) and children. we go and finish college. yes the baby Mama culture is very destructive but you attitude toward black is more destructive.
alot of you are saying the NAACP are racist and Idiots.
well lets compaire the NAACP to the KKK.
has the NAACP ever went of a night time Lynch party killing blacks because they as they would always say cause trouble, like trying to vote or sit at a lunch counter to eat a meal.
Has the NAACP put up signs like the tea partiers did yeaterday,, hell no. only idiots would do this. Not the NAACP. remember the non violence demonstrations of the 60. the NAACP took everything the klan has to offer and they turned the other cheek.
until the tea party stops this campaign of exclusion and race bating the only idiots are the tea baggers and YOU!!!
you should have not been sleeping in your history class because your non tolorance for people unlike you is making you look like a racist, I'm not calling you a racist because i don't know you all i see is what you have posted. on lunch i was watching CNN and the head of the Memphis tea party movement said that the movement must weed out these kind of racist from the movement. this has no place in the year 2010. let me tell you one more thing, the only way we can stop the black on black killing is to find a way to keep these kids in school and teach them a better way. 30 years ago when i was in High school the kinds of things happening now did not happen. but come on you don't care. i read you and if all the black killed each other you would not loose a nights sleep.
Hey CU Farley no answer, i want to know what you are, and don't tell me your white.
I would love a journalist to ask one of the Republicans who apparently dislike all classes of Americans except the rich this question: If you will not vote to extend unemployment benefits to families in desperate need unless spending is cut, why are you for further tax breaks for the rich, without those same cuts being made? It is claimed that Marie Antoinette, when French citizens were starving said "let them eat cake". She showed herself to be completely divorced from the realities of what families were facing in France at that time. This is the Republican leadership doing the same thing. As long as they and their rich friends prosper, the rest of America can "eat cake". All societies prosper when the middle class is doing well, and when people know that if they work hard, they can aspire to raise their own station. We as Americans need to heed that lesson, we ignore it at our own peril.
Exactly right. There is such a disconnect between the reality of the poor and middle class and the GOP perception of it.
Newday, Jody:
Right on. These questions do not get asked because there are so few real journalist like Rachael M. and a very few others asking the questions. The questions that are asked today are the ones (usual softballs) that are designed to get a response to further the agenda of the one asking the questions, example, look how Chuck T. questions people and then look at how Rachael does it.
Most even do not correct misinformation when they are slapped in the face with it. They just follow the script and move on. David Gregory on MTP admitted that they do not fact check anything. It is up to the people to determine fact from fiction. If so, then WTF are these morons doing for us. Where do we go to get the information we need to make intelligent choices?
I've read that Marie Antoinette never said that "let them eat cake" line. She may have gotten a bum rap on that. But King Georgie W. La Bushie did in effect say "Let them go to the emergency room" if they have no health insurance.
Houston: You are exactly right, there is no attribution for the quote, which is why I wrote it that way. I have never been able to substantiate that she actually said that. I think it is more a corollary to Marie Antoinette's inability to see anything but her own needs.
Houston!
Apparently the actual quote, when told that the peasants had no bread to eat, was "Well, then let them eat crusts." Which, for the context, bread crusts were trimmed from anyone's bread who could afford not to eat it, the crust was considered 'beneath them' to consume, and often left for the servants, poor or beggars.
Part of the problem around that time, along with widespread famine, was the fact that the wheat and rye from which the bread was made had molded in storage, a particular kind of smut, Ergot, which contains precursors similar to LSD, and so many of the rioters were thought to be hallucinating as well as hungry. They used the contaminated grains because there was nothing else left to eat!
Yay for me! I went in search of the quote"let them eat cake" directly to Lady Antonia Fraser, historian, and expert on the Royal Families of Europe. Here is the actual quote: " Qu'ils mangent de la brioche," said by Marie Therese, wife of Louis XIV. Literal translation is "let them eat a funny looking yellow bun". Well, sort of. So the quote kind of exists, and we can quit blaming poor Marie Antoinette for it.
FR:
Will somebody clue in the First Read reporters about Rick Scott's involvement in Medicare fraud? Or is that a subject that the corporate media has decided is taboo?
In Madame Speaker's fantasy world, Robert Gibbs' remarks are just too dissonant, the "clang" just too annoying. Don't shoot the messenger, Nancy.
Recent polling would suggest that the electorate is not nearly as impressed by the wondrous legislation bestowed on them by Pelosi and her caucus as she is...that's not Robert's fault, is it?
It would be priceless to observe the gavel being stripped from her reluctant hands as a result of November's coming referendum.
Gibby will be vindicated.
Gibbs is the Obama insider most likey to turn on Obama. Okay, well maybe Hillary too. Wait until we all see those tell all books.
Last week we learned that 4.5 million new workers qualified employers for the new employer payroll tax holiday from paying Social Security or Medicare. This new hire tax credit is supposed to be for new employees filling brand new positions newly created, not as replacement workers for those who recently quit, were fired or laid off.
Considering that only about 400,000 new private industry jobs have been created since February that means that over 90% of the newly hired employees are being claimed as new hires falsely by corrupt conservative businessmen. As always the corrupt conservative businessmen will abuse any tax credit in order to stuff more money into their pockets.
If the IRS investigates this obvious tax cheating by corrupt conservative businesses then watch the limpwristed conservative crybabies whine to protect their corrupt conservative business supporters. No wonder they spent decades eviscerating the IRS so it didn't have the manpower to audit the corrupt conservative tax evaders.
Just look at the ads by firms who help tax evaders avoid paying their fair share of taxes like Taxmasters and you'll see a bunch of America Hating corrupt conservative tax evaders bragging about how they only paid pennies on the dollar for what they owed on back taxes because they cheated and got caught. In my decades of doing tax work the corrupt repugnant ones were the vast majority of those who wanted to cheat on their taxes in order to avoid paying their fair share of taxes.
We need to pump up the IRS with more agents to make sure that the tax evaders get caught and we need to stop giving them such big breaks on how much they end up paying. No wonder we have such a huge budget deficit and massive Reagan Bush Bush National Debt when so many conservatives cheat on their taxes.
Rick “Gather Your Armies” Barber lost? Oh, dear where's the extortist, Smiling Sarah and her SarahPac?
Fiesty,
I can't wait until sightless Sarah reads about it in the tabloid. What will she twitt; come home? Will she be waiting with bated Breath?
JoAnnaSmith
You read my post incorrectly Yesterday. I didn't say FOX NOISE is trying to the make NBPP a fringe hate group. I said they are one.
The right over at FOX Nation wants to have NAACP's tax-exempt status, for its success in increasing the number of African Americans who vote for its success in increasing the number of African Americans who vote. Republicans at the FOX NATION a.k.a. the Republican Campaign Headquarters want the NAACP Tax Exempt like the scam they did to ACORN republicans are AFRAID of increasing numbers of people of color.
The NAACP was founded on February 12, 1909 by a diverse group composed of Du Bois, Ida B. Wells, Archibald Grimké, Henry Moscowitz, Mary White Ovington, Oswald Garrison Villard, William English Walling (the last son of a former slave-holding family),and Florence Kelley, a social reformer and friend of Du Bois
It's purpose/focus is "To ensure the political, educational, social, and economic equality of rights of all persons and to eliminate racial hatred and racial discrimination." Headquarters Baltimore, Maryland
Take a gander at these racist jpgs the Tea Potty totes around in the AmeriKKKa they want to take back. This is no longer closet racism. It is overtly audacious.
http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/robertson.jpg
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_l3atg3tf1rg/S7HoAHG9A4I/AAAAAAAABB8/o2Rl0s9UNXE/s1600/racist-obama.jpg
http://img.skitch.com/20090915-8wxh9dd7bjg9ihjqaq5yjkq6tk.jpg
http://www.discourse.net/archives/pix/unarmed.jpg
http://media.eyeblast.org/newsbusters/static/2010/04/Race-Obsessed%20Professor%20Helps%20Media%20%27Prove%27%20Tea%20Partiers%20Are%20Racist.jpg
http://political-freedom.webs.com/TEA-PRTY-African-lion-sign.jpg
http://images.huffingtonpost.com/2010-02-05-obama_undocumented_worker.jpg
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/images/obamas-paladino-email.jpg
http://seesdifferent.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/racist-obama-pin.jpg
http://canarypapers.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/tea-party1.jpg
Immigratiom
Arizona governer, the frozen looking mummy Jan Brewer, has lost her head. She claims to have found beheaded bodies in the Wild Wild West. Aye yai yai !! Pero...
County coroners can't back the mummy Governor Brewer's beheadings claim. FOX NOISE's swich mouth, Greta Van Susteren, interviewed the cold mummy governor who claimed that all the drugs, kidnappings, extortions, and beheadings is why their community doesn't feel safe.
The cold mummy sure needs a sharper eye cause gov Brewer sure can bring some dope. Gawd!! By the way, crime is down too in Arizona. In addition to that, this President has deported more people than Bush. Undoubtedly, it should be accented what a huge liar the cold mummy governor is.
http://www.arizonaguardian.com/azg/index.php?catid=937:campaigns-a-elections-fp&id=2201:county-coroners-cant-back-brewer-beheadings-claim&option=com_content&view=article
.
Fair enough. Then we agree. I apologize for the misread.
Bet that Mommy UnDearest Sinner Sarah Palin had something to do with getting her abstinence only sex denying daughter to wed and become a married woman. Yep looks like Sinister Sarah Palin wants to make a run for the 2012 presidential election. So funny because no matter how much money she wastes on hiring people to teach her about everything she just isn't intelligent enough to handle all of that new learning. We Democrats are hopeful she will run as we aren't scared of her at all, just disgusted that such an arrogant ignorant elitist celebrity diva would even be considered a viable presidential candidate. But then there's a sucker born every minute and they become repugnant ones.
Since Sarah Palin believes she good church-goin' folk, this verse came to mind about Bristol and Levi's reunion...
"As a dog returneth to his vomit, so a fool returneth to his folly." - Proverbs 26:11
I'm no fan of the Palins but Levi Johnston, IMHO, is a giant douche...maybe there's a reason they broke up in the first place?
Hey Loser Rick Barber where's your army of voters at? Did this deadbeat pool hall owner forget to gather his armies before going to the polls? You Betcha! It's too funny to see this tea bagging prancing pansy get his comeuppance by a Lamestream repugnant one. Hey tea baggers what was that about you have a message that you're going to take back your government? Nice to see another facist racist tea bagger taken down by friendly fire, just more collateral damage from fratricide. Yep Eight Ball in the Corner Pocket!
Did anyone see Morning Joe today? Dylan Radigan was on a tirade about something the President did or didn't do he lost me for a few seconds but then I heard him say "What are you going to do about this LITTLE MAN" I almost put my fist through the TV. The panel did not call him on this comment they sat there and let him rant on. David Shuster was suspended for remarks he made about Chelsea Clinton. Dylan should be fired for this disgusting, despicable attack on our President. I will be writing a letter to the President of MSNBC calling for Dylan Radigan to be fired at once.
Dottie, there was a time when you earned your own tv program. Literally earned it through hard work, perserverance, dignity, maturity, intelligence.
What on earth did these people do to earn their own program? All they are, are arrogant self-centered BS artists. Little Man?
Unreal.
Thankfully I missed that Dottie! It was bad enough listening to Ed Shultz last nite! :0(
What really pi$$es me off is MSNBC suspended David Shuster some time last spring and for all appearances is keeping him under 'lock & key' until his contract is up...
It's a shame because I thought he was one of the brightest in the MSNBC lineup! Now we get Chris Jansen...? Seriously?
Gosh...
It seems like only yesterday that many were singing the praises of Dylan Ratigan...and Chuck Todd...and Ed Schultz...
You First Readers are certainly a fickle lot, aren't you?
That's right. Unlike the sheep that follow Fox's commentators, when 'ours' say something goofy, we call 'em on it.
Plagairist Scott McInnis proves that repugnant ones aren't original thinkers, they're too stupid and lazy to be original thinkers. So funny seeing so many of these corrupt conservatives coming nout of the closet to shame the repugnant ones with their lying, cheating stealing scams to seize power any way they can. With so many repugnant ones self destructing it may not be such a slamdunk taking back control of Congress for them.
Looks like Colorado is going to have a Democratic governor and if Racist Tom Tancredo keeps mouthing off his racist rants for Ken Doll Buck then Ken Doll Buck is going to be a day late and a Buck short on winning this November.
In the most recent CBS poll the President's disapproval number of 54% is identical to that of the President when the unemployment rate was this high, and coincidentally at the same point in his first term as well. That would be Ronald Reagan, and as we know things went rather well for him afterward. That won't give any warm fuzzy feelings to politicians trying to keep their jobs this Fall, but it presents some thoughts of how things may reveal themselves over time.
Democrats in that era weren't riding the wave, but they certainly weren't as unpopular as Republicans in general at this time. Therefore I believe the Democrats will suffer losses at the high end of a normal midterm, but hang on to the House and Senate. The economy will continue to improve and as with all Presidents the political fortunes of President Obama will also. As the recovery grows people will remember that the Republicans are in the pockets of the Wall Street titans who destroyed the economy in the first place, and will see them becoming increasingly hysterical as the President gains in popularity. Reagan won in 1984 in a political landslide, taking 49 states and furthering what is now known as the "Reagan Revolution." It isn't at all unreasonable to see Mr. Obama seeing a similar reversal of fortune.
It's always interesting to watch the Left make comparisons between Obama's approval rating and Reagan's approval rating at the same point in their presidencies. It's interesting because of the hatred the Left has for Reagan, but yet they use him as some sort of shining example to explain Obama's low polls. The difference of course was Reagan was doing the right things to correct the economy, while Obama is doing the wrong things. Reagan was making sure the climate for businesses and growth were in place. Unlike Obama, Reagan was working with American businesses, not against them. By doing so, the economy in America improved, and the growth of the country seemed unbounded. Obama is the opposite of Reagan though. Reagan said government was the problem, Obama says it is the solution. It isn't, and rather then seeing a future or prosperity for the country, with Obama we only see more regulation, more taxation, and less growth.
Joanna,
Thanks for rattling out your nonsense again today. Everyone in my office laughs at your attempt at intelligent discourse. Keep it up eventually you may fool someone into thinking you know what the hell you are talking about.
Your biggest fan,
Dan
And yet you play the "horse race" game every day, talking about low polls, approval number, the generic ballot and all that. I bring it up because the comparison is strong. It's worth noting, however, that the Ronald Reagan you remember is in many ways a myth. http://hnn.us/articles/5605.html He talked about the power of cutting spending but in fact increased it. He talked about unleashing the economy by cutting taxes but raised them. Today's Reagan mythology has him standing strong on principle but he compromised on nearly everything. The Reagan that Conservatives idolized didn't exist, and Linsdsay Graham is correct to say that he'd have trouble being elected today.
John B. And Reagan didn't have FOX noise, Limbaugh or the cable pundits yapping away on such critical topics of "anger" and golf.
No John. Ronald Reagan was real. Very real.
Sure was. You just remember him as you mythologize him, not as he was. http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/the-real-ronald-reagan-clearing-the-myth-and-finding-the-truth/blog-252173/
JoAnna Smith,
Ronnie RayGun was an ACTOR who spoke the lines that were handed to him and was good at gladhanding. He was certifiably stricken with Alzheimers disease and his brain plain was Not There. Reagan was a puppet of the Defense corporations and big business in general and his record plainly shows that. His programs have made America slide closer and closer to third world status, just like I was told by a Repub Agent, years ago during the Regan Admin, that they were working on doing. They tried to recruit me into their cabal...the agent's name was Jack Abramoff..And I laughed my Azz off when I saw him busted, because he was doing all of the things he said that the Repubs had planned, back in the 80's. I knew that kharma would get him, am now just waiting for it to fall upon the rest of that set of jokers.
The plight of the unemployed is even more desperate with the GOP obstruction on extension of benefits. Even the polls show that 43% of mainstream repubs recognize the need. Apparently GOPer legislators are being held hostage by the Tea Party element within it along with their absolutely stupid logic that tax cuts are OK to add to the national debt but unemployment must be paid for. This is when you pray that God hits these twisted brains with a bolt of lightening to the "compassion" brain area.
It is hard to comprehend that fear of the Tea Party precludes helping Americans feed their families. There are 5 applicants for every 1 job yet GOPers claim the unemployed are simply lazy and won't try as long as they have money. Here's a suggestion to Pres Obama and the Senate--take away the paychecks of those who vote NO, put them on unemployment and see how quickly they change their minds. It is a falsehood to think that "living" on unemployment is fat cat city. I've been unemployed due to layoffs in my early working years--it paid the rent, the car payment (Ford Maverick), bought gas to look for a job, and food but that's pretty much all it did and the food part was strictly the necessities, no extra treats.
Rachel Maddow's interview last night with Richard Holbrooke was terrific. After last week's reports from Afghanistan and last night's interview, it is clear that We the People have a very filtered view of this war and that filter is seen in the form of battles and death tolls.
Ambassador Holbrooke was quite forthcoming in expressing the critical aspect of why we are there, why the Afghan/Pakistan region is so dangerous and critical. It was telling when he admitted that even though it was a known fact that the Afghan war had been neglected by the previous administration, in early 2009 during the new administration assessments--they were surprised to find that it was even worse than they thought. While the Cheney's and others accused Pres Obama of "dithering" (as if they hadn't dithered for at least 6 years), Holbrooke said that Obama's Afghan policy review was the most intense and thorough he had ever been involved in, everything was reviewed. Since 2009, the Afghans are give literacy training so they can actually read things like people's papers allowing them access to an area, etc. Prior to 2009, the marksmanship of trained Afghans was only 35%; after the Obama review, that is now 90-95%.
Watching Rachel's reports last week and the Holbrooke interview, again I was struck by how little useful information about the war we are provided via the TV media. We need more reports and discussions on prime time TV. There are hour long newscasts like Dateline, 48 Hours that could be spent providing informative reports on not just the fighting but on the Afghan people, their struggles, why this is so difficult, their history and on the many factions of terrorist groups to name a few. These shows could educate the public on what, why we remain there. That's what journalism should be--inform the public about Afghanistan and Pakistan instead of an hour's worth of mystery husband kills wife or did he.
Mr. Holbrooke praised the journalists reporting from the war zones but not much praise for Washington journalists because "they have their own narrative" when interviewing. Sounds almost exactly like the comments we bloggers made not too long ago--the media creates the storyline and drives it rather than providing a report on facts. Nice to know that Holbrooke has the same opinion of what passes for journalism today by some reporters as many of us here do. I will add, there are some excellent reporters who stick to the actual story like Michael Isikoff (sp) and Pete Williams to name a couple.
Now, Speaker Pelosi, Gibbs stated the obvioius--the House could be in play. Why not say it? For one thing if democratic voters think they might lose Congress, maybe they'll get out and vote.
No No jo no bo
You're wrong. Cutting taxes is not more stimulative than increased spending, and borrowing.
Nothing trickles because St. Reagan gave us "voodoo economics".
Cutting taxes for the rich only means they live privilged lives and the middle and poor working class don't. It doesn't help the economy because they put their money and jobs in offshore places to avoid taxes.
No Tax Cuts For The Rich. What's there to cut?
Federal revenues are fully consumed by just three programs: Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. The rest of the federal government, including fighting two wars, homeland security, education, art, culture, you name it, veterans -- the whole rest of the discretionary budget is being financed by China and other countries.
Also extended Unemployment would stimulate the economy too. Why? The money would allow those who are working to stay on the their jobs rather than joining the unemployed. the rich will those puts money in pocket
Thank Georgie Boy and Right Wing Obstrustionist. We'll all be Communist and speaking Chinese soon.
I congratulate the NAACP for calling the tea bagging racists out for what they truly are, racists! Nothing says Racist like Neo-Nazi White Supremacist Birchers and Birthers and the Teahadist Paliban is made up of all these wacko racist groups the repugnant ones have kept hidden in their closet of election horrors for so many decades. Since the vast vast majority of tea baggers are white and southern and from red states it's rather obvious that the tea bagging prancing pansies are a bunch of racists. Only racists would support arizona's racist profiling law and the tea baggers are all over supporting it because they're afraid that white poeple will lose the majority in their lifetimes.
Only on First Read:
An anti-semite rails against bigotry.
Oh, the irony...
Nothing like the smell of racism by Eric in the morning.
I'm so laughing that Tea Bagger Rick Barber didn't gather his armies, all he gathered was "F Troop" as in Fools.
I will comment on JoannaSmith's posts with the same level of intelligence as she relays in them:
JoannaSmith is a doody head!
I'll see your 'doody head', and raise ya' a "mean-spirrited, prickly, perpetually irritated, doody head".
PatHuntington,
Too funny. Just ignore her. She has yet to add substance to just about anything since I have been on this board. Her and most of the others like her are like those little annoying flies buzzzing around in the summer months. Up north we call them no-see-ems. Just ignore them. Most of her facts (?) are wrong or do not relate. Ask for proof of her statement and you will get none, etc. I will give her credit though, she has mastered the art of cut and paste.
That's funny.
Pat: I love this! Thanks to you and drive by for my chuckle of the day.
Actually I think she is a poor lost McCarthyite still looking for Commies and Reds under the carpets, behind the curtains, under her bed etc....Like Bush the Second looking for WMDs!!
JoAnnaSmith
And 300% larger then any deficit of Bush's. But I'm sure that was just a convenient omission on your part.
Just in case you did not go back up the line to see this, Thats because the largest portion of Bushs deficits did not show up untill 2009. You know, when Obama began including the two wars in his budget that Bush so conveniently left off the books. But we won't let minor facts get in the way. Spin it any way you want that makes you feel as if everything is Obamas fault. That would certainly be easier than admitting Bushor the Republicans did anything to add to the deficit
Frank, the federal deficit was about $5 trillion when Bush took office, and was approximately $9.5 trillion when Obama took office. During the Bush years, $4.5 trillion was added to the debt. No accounting tricks, no false numbers, nothing hidden. Congress earlier this year raised the debt ceiling to $14 trillion. The number will be exceeded just after the November elections when Congress again will have to raise the limit. Doing that math, that's $4.5 trillion more added to the debt in 22 months.
So by the end of 2010, Bush and Obama will haved added the same amount of debt, with Bush doing so in 8 years, Obama in less then two. The American voters abandoned Bush and the Republicans for being so loose with the countries money and the Democrats took over Congress and the White House. Now the Democrats have supersized the deficit and are doing the same thing much faster. And now you know why the Democrats are going to take a pounding in this falls elections.
So you see Frank by ignoring the point you made about the wars being off the books I have managed to make myself...err I mean you look silly.
Thanks Joanna, you really straightened that out.
Dan, you beat me to it! If I ignore the real math and go with MY math, then the other math doesn't count.
She knows a lot about tax evasion, probably, too, also and therefore; but not much about anything else:
Example,...If I am an evil corporation and I tell the IRS I earned $1,000,000 (million - for JS benefit); but I ACTUALLY earned $2,000,000. I have now paid taxes on the 1M I reported. By her math, she doesn't owe taxes on the 1M she DIDN'T report. So easy, a Republican can do it. But wait, they DO!
If W charges 4.5 Trillion on the Chinese Express card; but NEVER discloses it in a tangible meaningful way (Budget, Balance Sheet Liability) - do you think China will just look the other way? Yeah, right. My aunt was a tea cart once, too. You Betcha!