E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSAssessing Rahm's tenure as chief of staff... His successes, his detractors... The bottom line: He helped run Washington, but didn't help change it... Meet Pete Rouse, Rahm's successor at least for the short term... Obama to announce the personnel move at 11:05 am ET... Assessing the electoral map as we begin October... Is Meg Whitman in BIG trouble?... Profiling SC-5.
From NBC's Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Ali Weinberg
*** Assessing Rahm: As Rahm Emanuel today departs the White House to run for Chicago mayor, it's time to assess his nearly two years as chief of staff. On the one hand, he played a key role in the Democrats racking up more legislative achievements than Washington has seen since the Great Society or the New Deal. His half-a-loaf-is-better-than-no-loaf approach produced big results, even if those results weren't widely embraced by a public during a time of 10% unemployment. Rahm -- perhaps more than many pundits or chatterers in the blogosphere -- knows that politics is the art of the possible, that you take what you can get, and that enacting change is hard. Really hard. This, in fact, has been a hallmark of Rahm's career. As head of the DCCC, he pursued the "art of the possible" when finding candidates to win in tough districts. (Ironically, many of those candidates who won in '06 are the first ones who are going to lose in 2010 after having helped Rahm and Rahm's boss enact their long list of legislative achievements.)
*** His detractors: On the other hand, the larger-than-life Emanuel didn't always rub folks the right way. His style as chief of staff was not just an organizational dynamo, but also a micro-manager in every good and bad way that label is applied. He often wore too many hats (chatting with reporters, poring over polling data, dabbling in political races). He alienated liberals (like when he called them "f-ing retarded" for planning to air attack ads against conservative Dems who weren't backing the health reform). And he -- deliberatively or not -- let it be known that he disagreed with the president on major issues, like Obama going big on health care.
*** The bottom line on Rahm: History will likely judge Rahm's tenure as a successful one when it comes to helping "run" Washington. And if the president is re-elected in 2012, his two-year run will look even better. Perhaps someone with as hot of a personality as Rahm has only has a two-year political life expectancy as a staffer; you don't aspire to be mayor of Chicago one day if you enjoy simply being a No. 2 The president brought Rahm in because he needed someone who was familiar with Washington -- he didn't want to make the mistake Jimmy Carter, George H.W. Bush, or Bill Clinton made when they came in determined to do things their way to the point of naive stubbornness. Like Reagan and Bush 43, Team Obama was determined to figure out a balance of working IN Washington and trying to change. Thanks to Rahm, they got the working "in" Washington right. But the president's political problems stem from the other half of the challenge: failing to change it.
*** Meet Pete Rouse: Let's make one thing clear, though: What's taking place at the White House isn't a shakeup; it's just turnover. It's Plouffe replacing Axelrod. It's Goolsbee replacing Romer. It's likely Donilon replacing Jones at NSA (by the end of the year). And the man who will replace Rahm -- at least temporarily -- is senior White House adviser Pete Rouse, who served as Obama's chief of staff when he was in the Senate and who was Tom Daschle's chief of staff before that. Here's the New York Times: "The decision to tap Mr. Rouse reflects a desire by the president to maintain his small circle of close advisers for now rather than bringing in an outsider or elder statesman to present a new face." And the AP says he "shuns the spotlight but has quietly built up an enormous wealth of trust and relationships in Washington. Those close to him say that he provides what Obama needs -- a sharp and strategic mind, a sense of continuity, a knack for troubleshooting and an ability to keep people focused on their tasks." In essence, he's the anti-Rahm. President Obama will announce the personnel change at 11:05 am ET.
*** October surprise? We're now a month away from Election Day. And here's what we know as we begin the month of October: Republicans are still poised for substantial House and Senate pick-ups; Democrats, though, look to be in a better position in the California and Washington state Senate contests; but they're weaker in Wisconsin, where Russ Feingold is having trouble against Ron Johnson; Richard Blumenthal in Connecticut has about the same lead as Boxer does in California (but he's on the decline, while she has been on the rise).
*** Is Whitman in big trouble? A month out before an election, it is never a good thing for a candidate to declare he/she would be willing to take a lie detector test. It also isn't a good thing when it's revealed that the candidate's husband knew about a letter of possible problems with a housekeeper's Social Security number. Here's the L.A. Times: "Meg Whitman launched a forceful effort Thursday to regain control of her campaign for governor, pledging to take a lie detector test if necessary to prove that she and her husband were unaware they had employed an illegal immigrant housekeeper for nine years until the woman confessed her status in 2009... But Whitman's lengthy defense was undercut ... as the housekeeper's attorney, Gloria Allred, produced a copy of a government letter sent six years before Nicandra Diaz Santillan was fired alerting the couple to potential problems. On the bottom of the letter was a note in what Allred said was Whitman's husband's handwriting: 'Nicky, please check this. Thanks.'"
*** Couldn't be worse timing: This is all coming at a horrible time for Whitman. In fact, tomorrow is the Brown-Whitman Univision debate, where this entire story will play a BIG role and where plenty of California Latinos will be watching. This is already a three-day story. Will we still be talking about this on Monday? If so, that's a problem for the Whitman campaign. One other thing worth noting: This story has been driven by TV more than print.
*** 75 House races to watch: SC-5: The Democratic nominee is 14-term incumbent Rep. John Spratt, who was first elected in 1982. His GOP opponent is state Sen. Mick Mulvaney. McCain won 53% of the vote in this district in '08, while Bush got 57% in '04. As of June 30, Spratt had $1.2 million in the bank, versus Mulvaney's nearly $475,000. Spratt voted for the stimulus, health care, and cap-and-trade. Both Cook and Rothenberg rate the race as Toss Up.
Countdown to Election Day 2010: 32 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:
Jumping the Gun:
Yesterday the First Thoughts headline was, "The GOP Weak 2012 Front Runner". The headline mentioned all the players: Romney, Palin, Huckabee, Barbour, and Pence. What was fascinating was that we are still a month away from the 2010 elections and the pundits are getting ready for 2012. Maybe Thursday was a slow news day with candidates returning to their respective districts to campaign. Maybe the pundits think the 2012 election won't matter so much. I don't know.
The results of this off-year election will likely be a mixed bag. There will be some very close races with some surprises and a few Tea Party conservatives will win. I expect the Senate to continue to have a majority of Democrats. Harry Reid will likely keep his Nevada seat, but I doubt he will continue to be the majority leader. The House will be a toss-up. It may be so close that the leadership may not be determined until after some districts recount their ballots. It all depends on how well the Democrats are able to GOTV.
The two relevant points have to do with the leadership and the candidates. The neo-conservative leaders have control of the GOP and quite frankly their thinking is much further right than the majority of the American voters. If the neo-cons manage to keep control (and I think they will), the GOP will likely become a regional party. The GOP has not learned that you can not alienate the Hispanic community, the gay community, the unemployed, small business owners, veterans, oppose health care, oppose public education, ignore the poor, and expect to win. Eventually all these groups will figure it out!
With regard to the candidates: First Thoughts is right. All the GOP candidates are weak. Candidates should be able to answer questions like, "how do you plan to govern?" "Besides lowering taxes and cutting spending, what are you for?" Republicans need a star, a rock-star, but alas, there are no stars in the Republican Party. That is the Achilles heel for conservatives; they cling to the same old people, saying the same old thing.
President Obama will gladly debate any candidate the GOP selects…and he will win. Plus the Tea Party leadership has alienated large segments of the population. So the question becomes, "Why would Latinos, gays, the unemployed, small business owners, veterans and the poor vote for Republicans?"
Great thoughts, Ron.
What gets me is pundits have been predicting and talking about 2012 since January 21, 2009. I don't recall which influential republican outsider said it but he indicated that the GOP has rallied around the Tea Party candidates for now but after the election, there will be a huge battle between the far right factions and the moderates. That battle should be interesting to watch. I'll save my prediction for your annual prediction post.
Morning Ron!
When I look at the GEENOPEE 'superstars' of today all I can think of is what a 'Motley Crew'!
It really is a shame that the moderates like Charlie Crists, Chuck Hagels and such have been squeezed out by the lunatic fringe...
BTW: Speaking of moderate Republican's - Heard last night that Colin Powell is being floated as a possible replacement for Robert Gates! Now that would be a awesome decision!
Let's make sure we GET OUT THE VOTE! Keep in mind that contrary to all of the pontificating going on around here @ FR about the Republican 'blood bath' coming in November EACH & EVERY VOTE COUNTS!
The 'fat lady' has not sung yet...
Ron:
Good morning, nice way to end the week.
The Washington Post has put up the report on the Stimulus Bill this morning. It basically says that President Obama is on target with about 70% of the original 787 Billion Spent. By the end of September both leading economists and the CBO agree that this bill has saved about 3.5 Million Jobs
Other Excerpts from the report include;
242 Billion in Tax Breaks that have lowered the taxes on 95% of all Americans.
77 Billion to Public Works projects that created additional jobs with another 127 Billion committed
232 Billion to States – These were funds that every republican voted against or claimed they would not take. Let us not forget:
Crapo (R-ID) called the stimulus bill an "Avalanche of Special Funding". So what does he do? He shows up Wednesday at a ribbon cutting ceremony for the Health West Clinic (which provides health care for people with special needs) with money from the stimulus bill. Did he mentioned that the $600,000 plus came from the stimulus bill. No, he took the credit for the funding.
Blunt (R-MO) In July of 2009 attends ribbon cutting ceremony for Neosla National Fish Hatchery 1.1 Million in federal stimulus. Ozone Disinfectant Systems, 16 Million in stimulus funds and in Feb of 2010 announces $940,000 for Homeless Assistance, again made possible by the stimulus bill.
One of my favorite, Governor Daniels of IN who said "only a blind zealot" would say that the stimulus bill did any good. Not only did he take the money he also asked for extensions of some of the programs. He took over 434 million dollars even though he was one of the staunchest opponents of the bill. This is the same governor that claims fiscal responsibility for his state by declaring a $400 million dollar surplus. He forgot to mention the 2 Billion dollars that the stimulus bill gave his state. Instead he takes all the credit. He also took the education funds but instead of using the money to pay for teachers and improving education he puts the money into the states rainy day fund, causing the lost of thousands of jobs. Guess who he blames for the job lost????
One Republican stops subpoena power to the BP Commission denying them the tools needed to do their job. What are the republicans hiding?
Coburn stops the aid bill to Haiti
Whitman lies to America about hiring an illegal immigrant
O'Donnell lies again about her education, she has almost as many lies that Sarah Palin had in colleges she quit. Pattern???
What have the republicans done for America in the last 20 months???
Stop every job bill proposed by President Obama
Vote against Unemployment Extensions
Vote against 9/11 First Responders
Vote against Financial Disclosure
Vote against HCR
Vote against Financial Reform
He!!, they voted against virtually everything that would help undo the mess the last administration put us in.
This is why I will not vote republican in November.
Good morning Ron Indiana; it's always a good morning when I read your thoughts.
The House will be a toss-up. It may be so close that the leadership may not be determined until after some districts recount their ballots. It all depends on how well the Democrats are able to GOTV.
Thanks, Ron this is a very rational post from you as usual. I'm doing the GOTV.
"Why would Latinos, gays, the unemployed, small business owners, veterans and the poor vote for Republicans?"
I don't think many will only because of the most recent outrageous stances and rhertoir coming from the GOP/TP
Good post, Ron, but I differ on one point---the Republicans do have rock stars but I'm not sure they have stars that can lead. Sarah Palin could fill an arena with loyal supporters--look what she did in 2008 and look also at her book tour last year. That doesn't translate into leadership ability and ability to govern. What I think we will see in the midterm elections (as if we shouldn't already know this) is that an energized base can turn out and influence elections, especially if the other side stays home. It doesn't mean that the folks in the middle who each side are fighting over will show up either. They will probably show up in 2012 and we'll see if the Republicans have pushed themselves too far to the right to appeal to the middle.
The Republican Party is at its lowest approval rates since the Nixon era. Yet, the pundits give them so many props, you'd think their leaders were as popular as a Mainer in February with a surplus of firewood.
Good morning folks:
Here's a Friday poem, followed by a get-out-of-jail free card:
Save Me From Myself
If stupid were illegal, and dumb were against the law,
believe Sean Hannity, get five years in jail, and twenty for Rush Limbaugh.
Ffifteen if you believed Bill Clinton, George Bush would get you life.
Ten years for believing a husband, even more for believing a wife.
Now, I'd be stupid if I let you make the rules, so for that I'd go to jail.
Better I should make the rules that you will pass or fail.
But even that plan has a drawback, which is obvious to see.
All of you would be in jail and only I'd be free.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I borrow the words of Saint Ronald of Reagan, "Government isn't the solution, it's the problem." This being the Republican mantra, I am moved to ask the question: Why are so many Republicans spending millions upon millions of dollars to become part of the problem?
Consider Mitch McConnell (R- Pig trough). A look at his biography clearly shows he loves government. He can't get away from it. He's been there virtually all of his adult - dare I say "working" - life. Lots and lots of deficits during this guy's tenure - just like
John Boehner (R - Numbers, I don't do numbers). Boehner very recently noted that he has been in the House of Reps for 20 years. (Don't read the rest, John, I'm going to put some numbers in here.) During those 20 years, the Republicans have controlled the House for 12 years. That's 60% of his time at the trough. Even in the Republican math book, 60% is a majority. Now, in those 20 years, six of them were in the complete and total control of Republicans. Golly, the numbers (this is very confusing for John) clearly show a budget deficit in each and every one of those years.
St. Ron must be spinning in his grave. Not only are Boehner and McConnell part of the problem, they're outright liars. Thank heaven for good Christian humanitarians like Coburn, ethical models like Ensign, and deep thinkers like DeMint.
We thought it was interesting to note the favorability ratings of the candidate who most see as the presumptive front runner and how those compare to past Republican re-run nominees. Of course, the vast majority of our efforts are on the elections in front of us and the news of the day. But when we notice an interesting nugget on the 2012 field (not just mostly meaningless horse-race polling at this point), then we think that's good to point out to help you all stay informed. Republicans, who are likely running in 2012, have made trip after trip already in Iowa and New Hampshire. It's not just because they like deep-fried snickers and town halls with independent-minded voters.
And, remember, it was October 2006 when Barack Obama reversed himself on Meet the Press with Tim Russert and said he was interested in running for president. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15304689/
Domenico: Point well taken. No offense intended. Just playing in the mud pit.
Deep fried Snickers? Really?
I've tried l'iquid' Snickers (hot chocolate with a shot of Frangelico (sp?) liquor...
Guess I need to get out more! lol
Thanks for the clarification, Domenico and also thanks for all you & your colleagues do here to make FR the best political spot on the web. Even though we sometimes complain, we do appreciate all of your hard work here.
Even though the election is 2 years away and things will change many times, it is interesting to see where the Republicans line up. I wonder whether you see any Republicans trying to duplicate President Obama's Iowa strategy.
Steeler, I think they'd be fools not to. I have a sneaking suspicion that a lot of cues from Obama's campaign playbook will be imitated by GOP candidates come the next election cycle.
US Navy
I'm with you 100%....there's no way I could ever vote for Republican ever again!!!
They are really showing their true colors and people still want to put them back in office. If people would just really listen to what they have to say, then they would realize it's the same old sh!t that they have been preaching for years!
Isn't that the thing, though? Substance and facts don't really seem to matter to the electorate - it's the appearance of the truth, presented by the loudest voice, that sways opinion.
Domenico, it's nice to see you on here again Defending yall's assessment's of political happenings.
Now, Defend This:(Ironically, many of those candidates who won in '06 are the first ones who are going to lose in 2010 after having helped Rahm and Rahm's boss enact their long list of legislative achievements.)
This is the commentary You, Chucky T. Ali & Mark, putout for all the crazies crawling thru the Internet tubes to Read. How can yall make such a Remark, unless yall are on the inside Knowing the Results before voteing is conducted.
Maybe yall wanna make a correction to this Statement, doncha think?
I don't think anyone of us know whats gonna happen. What we do know is that the Print Media has pushed this Prediction for sometime Now.
You Betcha!
Mainstream Media. Where are you???
I know. Talking about Rahm's departure...Frontrunners for 2012...Republicans taking back the Congress...
This is not news. This is drivel. What should be breaking news today is:
No one should still be listening to the Republicans scream about how the Stimulus has not worked when they have been caught "begging" for Stimulus funds to finance jobs programs in their own districts.
Hypocrites!
Domenico. Always good to see one of our hosts pay a visit. We really do appreciate the predictions even when we cannot resist discussing and wondering who, where or why now.
Domenico, thanks for the nuggets you send our way. Although the never-ending horse race is wearying, forewarned is forearmed.
If we can see what nightmare candidate is headed our way, we can begin to work sooner to fend it off.
Sheila, MD;
Thanks for the post, it reinforces what I said above. The CBO, CBPP and most economists (both republican and democrats) are now saying the Stimulus Bill signed by our President did work. In fact they acknowledge that his stimulus saved about 3.5 Million Jobs, pretty much on target as President Obama said he would do.
It is amazing that he party of hypocrits who opposed this bill and/or said they would not take the money, did just the opposite. They did take the money and in some cases asked the government for more stimulus money for other projects.
Then they take the checks and go to ribbon cutting ceremonies and ground breaking ceremonies displaying the checks that they got from President Obama as if they should be rewarded for a job well done. You are right. This is hypocrisy at its best. Vote no on the bill, take the money anyway and then claim the credit for it.
This is the republican mentality today. Some where over history they have lost all the moral and ethical standards that they once stood for. Today it is all about Greed and who has the power.
E.D.,
In response to Steeler; I think they would be fools not to. (follow Obama's strategy)
Their specialty is fools, or fooling fools!
Hey Mr. Montanaro I've been out all morning and I hope I haven't missed the opportunity to ask how the youngest branch ( and adopted child of us all) of the Montanaro Family is doing. Got a first birthday coming up soon don't we? Put an extra candle on the cake for me please and pass on best wishes from the Old Redneck
Did the Stimulus work???
http://economyincrisis.org/content/did-stimulus-create-jobs
As predicted by the WSJ about two weeks ago, the majority Dem's in Congress are skipping town without having dealt with the massive tax increases on virtually all taxpayers due on January 1, 2011. Yeah, yeah, they say they will deal with it after the November election. Are they telling the American people they think we are so stupid that we will believe their obvious lie??
Here's what's going to happen after the election: The Dem's in the House will pass a bill that continues only the Bush middle class tax cuts knowing that the Republican's in the Senate will block it. Then the Dem's will let it die and blame the Republican's for increasing taxes on everyone. Then the Dem's will have a new pot of money, not to reduce the deficit, but, to increase their own pork-barrel spending programs.
There is a reason why Dem's are known for "tax and spend" policies. It's what Democrats do.
Anyone who votes for a Dem in November gets what they deserve.
So why did the Republicans put in an expiration date for the tax cuts? They held all three postions of legislative power when the cuts were made and could have made them permanent at the time. So you have to ask yourself, why did they put in a predetermined expiration date? And is it a coincidence that they expire shortly after the mid-term elections?
Whadda ya think Joe?
Morning, Joe. Did you happen to notice the front page of the Politics section today?
There is a headline "Obama:Now is not the time to quit".
Right next to that headline is a picture of a laughing Rahm.
Priceless, just priceless.
Frank H.
Good point. They did the 10 years because the Bill was passed under reconciliation (remember how the republicans complained about the dems using they same tool) and they did not have the votes to do otherwise. If they could have done more years I would suspect they would have, so they went with the most years they could get at the time. One could make the argument that this was by design, the 10 years, but I do not think the republicans think that far out. If they did, then this is even more repugnant.
No matter which way, it has put President Obama in a pickle. He is going to get flack no matter which way he goes. What we do know though is that Tax Cuts for the richest 2% do nothing for the other 98% except redistribute more wealth to them. That comes from CBO and CBPP.
Also, the latest reports show that the economic divide has grown again to another record. Those that have, now have more and the rest of us????
Looks like Joe's afraid his taxes are going up. And although he admits the Republicans will be the reason taxes will go up he wants everyone to blame the Democrats, good luck on that one Joe, best go by that sixth pair of Gucci shoes before your taxes go up, pathetic.
I actually think it was a mistake for the Dems to hold off dealing with extending the cuts until after the November elections. If I were Speaker or Senate MAjority leader, I would've divided the thing in half. First, vote on extending the tax cuts for just the middle class. If it passes, Dems can go out and say, look what we did before the elections. If it fails, Dems can say look what the Republicans did to you! I don't get the waiting strategy here.
Joe: Pics or it didn't happen.
Looks like the Democrats, and their irrational supporters, are just not responsible for anything. When they ran for election, the Democrats had all the answers. Obama knew how to end the wars, fix the economy, and provide social justice to the middle class. Since winning Obama has increased the troop numbers in one war and claimed we pulled our troops out of another war. I guess the 50,000 troops in Iraq count for "ending the war" from Obama's point of view. For the economy, Obama has spent more and more money, borrowed money, not to stimulate the economy, but it turns out he used it to increase the size of government. No economy was stimulated, no job growth occurred, well except for the government. Instead, a bloated government got even larger with every trillion dollars Obama has spent, all the while the private sector jobs languish. On the social justice front, unemployment continues to rise and poverty increases as Obama and the Democrats borrow billions of more dollars for even more government give-aways.
Now if the Bush tax cuts are left to expire, of course it's not the Democrats fault. They're just innocent bystanders. They can't do anything about it. What can anyone expect the Democrats to do? They only have massive majorities in both Houses of Congress and they have one of the most, if the the most, liberal president ever who will sign any spending bill sent his way. Obviously the Democrats are in a powerless situation. Once again, Obama and the Democrats got elected because they claimed they could run the government, they could manage the situation. Instead they stand off to side, pointing fingers at others. And their supports continue to buy this nonsense. Good thing their supporters are getting to be fewer and fewer, because the rest of the country is waking up to what frauds, fakes, and phonies Obama and the Democrats are. Who are the Democrats going to blame when they thrown out of power in this years elections? It's already started with Obama, Kerry, and Biden blaming their very own base voters. It could never be Obama', Kerry, or Biden's fault. It could never be the Democrats fault.
The Democratic leadership is just so far in denial.
"best go by that sixth pair of Gucci shoes before your taxes go up"
Screw the shoes, we're talking about a new Maserati Quattroporte Sport GT S or not.
LOL!!!
Awww, comeon now JoAnna, Iraq has been off the FrontPage for sometime now. We've moved onto taking out Real Terrorist in Pakistan "Just Like Candidate Obama said he would". I'm glad he & Petraeus are on the same page here, as with the recent incursion into Pakistans sovernty.
They Both Understand America's Honor is at Stake, albeit 9 years too late. But hey, who's counting!
Speaking of Leadership, where's the Republican Leadership, now that Senator Jim Dement Coup has worked to Silence McConnel?
Rick. Let's talk leadership. Is is leadership to not provide the American taxpayer with the knowledge of what their tax rates will be starting on 01/01/2011? Or is it leadership to skip town without a vote on that issue and let the American taxpayers twist in the wind?
The House Republicans along with 39 House Democrats thought it would be good idea to stay in town and provide Americans with that answer. It would have been a tough debate and a tough vote for many of them, one that may or may not have been popular with voters back home, but that's why they were sent there, correct? You know, to have the tough debates and have the tough votes. Now if they would have done that, that kind of sounds like leadership.
Instead the Democrats look not so much like leaders, but more like cowards.
Here's Your answer JoAnna. Take the FACT, that the GOP put these into Effect to Go Away in 10 years, & Add or Subtract from there.
Really pretty simple stuff, unless you can't Read: Reconciliation!
Again I ask, where's the Relublican leadership now, after Demint's Coup upon McConnel.
Heck if I was getting Paid to sit on My A$$ & do Nothing but say NO to the Eon's, i'd wanna stay in town myself. like the Republicans have done for lemme see now, 2 years on the Taxpayyers $. There Home is LaLaLand, the Capital of the State of Denial!
Can you Ever answer a question without Asking a Question? I've seen the answer already, but thought i'd askya again, just in case your able to think for yourself without a Telepromter(Talking Points).
Rick, save your temper tantrum for someone that cares. If Obama and the Democrats do not want to deal with things happening in the present, then lets get someone in office that does. The Democrats are nothing but power hungry cowards that don't want to deal with the problems facing all Americans TODAY. If the Democrats can't formulate a tax policy for going forward based on the current conditions of the economy, lets get someone in office that will.
Joanna's got a point, Rick. That tie-breaker Pelosi cast was none-too-becoming for the Democrats.
JoAnnaSmith1
The Democrats are nothing but power hungry cowards that don't want to deal with the problems facing all Americans TODAY
And you honestly think Republicans are any different and hold no responsibility for nothing being done?
Its obvious you graduated with honors from the Republican School of Spin. I bet you even were valedictorian.
Good point Frank, and I agree, that is exactly how the Republicans behaved when they were in the majority. Because of the awful performance of the Democrats, the Republicans will now get another chance. They had better use that opportunity wisely, else they'll be thrown out yet again.
Like the Republicans needed anything else to give them a better chance at success in November. Talk about being diconnected from the people they represent, that would be the Democrats and Pelosi.
Passing tax cuts by reconciliation, letting them expire after 10 years, and letting a Democratic president deal with the resulting deficit, and letting the new pres. deal with "raising" taxes, is the only example I can think of "long term" planning that has worked as they intended by the repubs.
The democrats did not set the 10 year expiration date for the tax cuts, the republicans did.
Unemployment keeps going up because the republicans veto every bill that has to do with creating jobs, Big Business continues to send their new jobs overseas (and yes, the republicans filibustered a bill that would stop that and Pay Americans first).
President Obama did not create the two unfunded wars costing us trillions of dollars that was borrowed from China, the republicans did this and President Obama is trying to clean up the mess.
According to the report on WP today, President Obama's stimulus bill did work. It saved about 3.5 Million Jobs and for the last 8 months, we have been adding private sector jobs. True in 2009 we lost about 3 Million Jobs but economists also put that on the previous administrations ledger. President Obama inherited a 700,000 per month decrease in employment from the republicans and he was not in office long enough to impact that number although it did start to decline in the summer and continue through the fall. Sine Jan 2010, for 8 consecutive months President Obama has added private sector jobs.
Who are the fakes, frauds, phonies and hypocrites?? What would you call a party that campaigns on Tax Cuts for Small Business but votes no for the bill, wants to reduce the deficit but proposes one that is 1 Trillion Dollars more than our current President's, a party that wants more disclosure but filibusters the bill, a party that says they are for all Americans then turn around and deny unemployment Extensions, medical care for the first responders, health care reform and financial reform. I suggest that those despicable names posted best described the republicans and proven by their deeds.
Can we all not agree that the people we elect, more often'n not, are only after one thing and one thing only - staying in the place of power and prestige they've become accustomed to?
Part of the strategy is pitting the lot of us against each other.
JoAnnaSmith1
Good point Frank, and I agree, that is exactly how the Republicans behaved when they were in the majority. Because of the awful performance of the Democrats, the Republicans will now get another chance. They had better use that opportunity wisely, else they'll be thrown out yet again.
Well since unemployment has held seady, albeit higher than we would like, there is slow but continual growth, the tax cuts have not produced jobs as of yet------ why not give Democrats another chance.
Navy,
How do you save jobs? How does the Government know what jobs they saved? It's a made up statistic.
The Stimulus spend was more than the two wars put together. I'm starting to think you're Ed Shultz......But hey, if additional 10 Trillion in Debt that was done by Obama doesn't bother you than don't blame others..............blame everybody. I don't expect you to read it, it might hurt to much...
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/72404
"In just the last four months (May through August), according to the CBO, the Obama administration has run cumulative deficits of $464 billion, more than the $458 billion deficit the Bush administration ran through the entirety of fiscal 2008"
The Democrats aren't going away. They still have Barack "The Veto-er" Obama in the big chair. The Republicans will have a slight majority in the House, and possibly the Senate. The Republicans will have to do what the Democrats didn't, actually get along with the minority party in passing legislation.
What the Democrats won't have is an iron-head like Pelosi buying votes and doing what ever she pleases to get ultra-left-wing pro-union legislation passed, mostly by one vote margins. That gravy train has left the station.
I'll agree with Exodite Dragon - people we elect, more often'n not, are only after one thing and one thing only - staying in the place of power
Staying in power and avoiding the hard questions, reminds me of a movie I watched in college called Mindwalk. I caught it again a couple months ago on cable.
The moview was made back in the early 90's and the whole movie was a wide ranging dialogue about politics, the environment, social justice... between a conservative Democratic senator, a poet and a scientist. It was interesting to note that the problems they talked about like global warming, real health care reform, energy reform etc are still issues that have not been addressed.
When the other two asked the senator why the senate didn't take action on real issues, he said something like - well you have to be pragmatic about things take the little victories. If you take a stand corporate lobbyists will give millions to your opponent and you will lose. Instead you keep your head down and try not to rock the boat.
Sorry but I digress.
Well guess what Navy, the Democrats are just going to have to deal with it! Instead Pelosi skips town and hides out in her multi-million dollar mansion in California. Let the taxpayers eat cake, right Navy?
Well I'm certain this is such good news for the people that are unemployed and under-employed, the ones that have been out of work for so long their unemployment checks have stopped coming, the ones trying to keep the bank from foreclosing on their homes, the ones that serve mac&cheese to their kids five times a week.
Btw Navy, did the WP (who is the WP?) mention how many jobs the Bush Tax Cuts saved?
It is about what was accomplished---In 20 months the Obama Admin has gotten plenty done...in the face of total obstruction and manufactored BS from the republican fractured machine.. and much to the chagrin of the Media..goaty Todd included!....Most of which Rahm had a hand in!
Rahm is a guy who does work hard; however, he didn't work hard enough for the "public option".
A Job to Clean Up
One might think talking to a mailbox as strange and even funny. When Rachel Maddow exposed a shadowy group running misleading campaign ads accusing Rep Peter DeFazio a Democrat in OR of being in lock step with Speaker Nancy Pelosi, I thought it was godsend. Art Robinson is a Tea bagger and climate change denier and refuses to reveal his funding sources of ads against Democratic Rep Peter DeFazio . I'm still trying to get into the psyche of a TB candidate and their supporters. Their stances are so extreme as well as an insult to intelligence.
In the republican /TB spirit of the times such as their sharp irritation and resentment of government is to be aroused, then funding from unknown entities should rouse their anger this time; for real. Rachel exposed a right-wing front group "Concerned Taxpayers for America."
In actuality, there aren't really any" Concerned Taxpayers for America. Their website does not come up in a Google search. As Rachel said "We don't get to know who's behind this stuff."It's called money laundering."
The GOPTB cannot take over Congress; there is no ceiling on what you can spend.
"We don't get to know who's behind this stuff."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/#39449958
Rachel did a great job in her research as usual to discover this splendidly done sauté. Now, if only TBs would do their homework; they'd marinate more so in anger of this deceit. That would be soothing. .That's why it's important to not let the GOP/TP party take control you'll never know what outside forces are wagering against the best interest of middleclass Americans.
.
They may be billionaires such as the ubiquitous Koch Brothers; but they get one vote only. They may have more money but their money doesn't equal the amount of US.
PS: Fox is on the Rocks
This only solidifies why more people are turning off Fox's tabloid sensationalism. It's difficult to fathom why anyone would watch unless it is to keep abreast of the lie(s) of the day as I occasionally do. This week's New York Times Magazine contains a long profile of weepy incendiary Glenn Beck. Author Mark Leibovich spoke with the television host and author about his alcoholism, his pessimism, his fears of violence (both regarding his personal safety and the country's survival), whether or not he has an apocalypse bunker (no), and his intellectual journey from middling Floridian radio host to the Glenn Beck of today
Beck's tendency to cross-promote non-Fox ventures on air that has been "a sore spot at Fox News, particularly for its president, Roger Ailes, who has complained about Beck's hawking his non-Fox ventures too much on his Fox show," according to Leibovich.
http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2010/09/fox-on-the-rocks-glenn-beck-despised-by-network-president-other-employees.html
Bev;
Rachael was on point again. lets see what happens with the current house cleaning that is going on in the White House. I am wondering if our President is feed up with some of the dead wood that he has in his administration. We all know that most of these people do not get fired, they are made an offer to leave (resign) before being fired. They then move on and become somebody elses problem. Just an observation.
I hate to see Rahm go. He did more to run the country than Obama.
– Thu Sep 30, 5:09 pm ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Already battered by a wave of product recalls, Johnson & Johnson acknowledged on Thursday it had misled consumers and U.S. regulators as it quietly removed its Motrin painkiller from the market.
The FDA was told of the Motrin recall in April of 2009, but was not alerted to its breadth or how it would be conducted until three months later, an agency official said. It then called on McNeil to conduct a formal recall.
"There were contractors going out, telling people to act like regular customers and (to) not really tell the truth about what they were doing in the stores," said FDA Deputy Commissioner Joshua Sharfstein.
The U.S. attorney's office in Philadelphia is already probing J&J over this April's recall of more than 40 potentially contaminated children's medicines such as Children's Tylenol and Benadryl.
An email released by the committee shows a worker for one contractor knew the buyback could be viewed negatively.
Pulling specific faulty lots "will take time and may draw suspicion to what we are doing," an employee for Inmar Inc. told McNeil managers. "Some stores will not care, others will ask specifically what we are doing
_____________________________________________________
Look at where thirty years of the constant litany of deregulation and letting the market police itself has got us. Our unregulated financial markets almost succeeded in making paupers of all but the privileged few. We have seen the deaths of our fellow citizens in mining disasters and on oil rigs. We have seen them pretty much trash the Gulf and its environment. Now we even see that one of our oldest and most trusted brands is willing to put even our children at risk so that the corporate bottom line stays healthy.
You know I'm an independent old cuss like most folks I know that purely hates the idea that we need regulations to force somebody to do the right thing. Some of my good friends have even alluded to fact that at times I might even get a tad bit ornery about it. But the simple fact of the matter is that as you can see we have now arrived at a place where some folks given the choice between doing the right thing and owning up to a mistake or covering it up and lying about it to keep the bottom line healthy are going to choose the bottom line every time. Even if they are putting children and sick folks at risk.
Individually we can't fight this kind of thing. Most folks just don't have the expertise and wherewithal to even make a dent in it. That is why we have Government. You know that part of the Preamble that says "to promote the general welfare". So why do we not set out this task for ourselves as citizens of our great country? Instead of setting beside the road and saying that because occasionally it runs a little rough and lack of brakes puts us in the ditch why don't we jump it back up on the road and use the things that it does do right to get it moving forward in the sure and certain knowledge that amongst all of us there is enough will to make the minor repairs to keep it moving so we can all ride up the hill to that fine and shining place that fulfils everybodies hopes and dreams.
Pearls of wisdom, I.R. Great post.
Republicans have demonized Government and Government regulation plus some "starving the beast" thrown in since Reagan promised a shining city on the hill if we just cut taxes, deregulated and got evil government out of our lives. Look at what has happened to this country since then. The purpose of Government is to protect the public from the greed and corruption of the private. Unions give a voice to miners, oil rig workers, etc. The nonunion mines rack up thousands of violations every year and those violations cost the lives of workers. Union mines have few accidents and few violations. This is true in every industry. I read there are 62 oil rig inspectors nationwide--62 and we wonder why Deep Water Horizon blew up, why operators there filled out inspection forms. Toyota is another great example of a company that KNEW it had big problems but failed to report them and did their best to downplay the dangers.
A great book on coal is "Reckoning at Eagle Creek", well worth the time.
Things like deregulation always sound good in theory but they just don't work out in practice. You would think we would learn this lesson by now. Thanks for sharing this story, IR.
Steeler, re: the Texas power utilities.
IR, just think the shape we'd be in if we didn't have the Food and Drug Administration to regulate the medications we take every day. We trustingly take our over-the-counter pain meds and our blood pressure meds and our anti-seizure meds and our memory loss meds and our chemotherapy...what if there were no government agency to regulate their purity and efficacy?
What if there were no FDA to regulate clinical trials that, under intense scrutiny, bring life-saving miracle drugs to the market?
To those of you who insist that severely limited or no government is the answer - look in your or your parents' medicine cabinet and then tell me that you would dismantle the FDA in the name of "freedom."
I.R.,
Another great post, and somewhat related to the issue you brought yesterday (how 1 senator can block/stop anything).
Why can't we get a subpoena to figure out what went wrong with the BP oil rig disaster? ...Jim DeMint is blocking it!! Why?... My best guess is money , it's always money with these guys!
Thanks for the kind words yesterday, John
Broken Senate, Part 2.
Repairing the edges cannot improve it. The best thing that could happen for America is that the Senate throw out every single "tradition" rule they have and start over. This time allow the majority to rule as was intended by the Constitution regardless of which party is in power. The Senate is a joke while America burns. Legislation goes there to die while people suffer and America's future hangs in the balance.
Yesterday, Senator LeMieux used his "objection" to block a 20 week extension of unemployment benefits. He wants to review how they plan to pay for it. Did Senator LeMieux worry about paying for the Iraq War? Did he worry about paying for the Medicare Rx Plan? Did he worry about paying for Homeland Security? Afghanistan? How about extending the Bush tax cuts for the 2% richest people--does he worry about paying for that? Did he worry about paying for all the Bush tax cuts? No, but he worries about paying unemployment to people who lost their jobs because of all those unpaid, unsustainable decisions the GOP made from 2001-2007. Why would anyone vote republican?
Yesterday, the Senate majority democrats accepted a compromise on Presidential nominees being held up by GOPers, some for nearly a year. The democrats agreed that President Obama would not make any Senate recess appointments in exchange for approval of half in a timely fashion (?). In exchange, McConnell would not use an obscure rule that would send the nominees back to the White House and require the whole process to start again. Disgusting. We pay these yahoos their salaries, we pay some of their benefits, we provide their pensions, we pay the bills for their offices, their staffs, their heat and air conditioning and the water bill.
Yesterday, the Senate actually voted and passed unanimously a piece of legislation. Television must now set the transmission volume for commercials at the same level as their regular programming. I say it is about time and applaud their action. But it took them nearly 60 years to do it. As Lawrence O'Donnell pointed out, consumers have complained about this since the 1950's, since television was invented.
Apparently legislation really does go to the Senate to die; occasionally they resurrect something to make us forget all the important things that sit on shelves gathering dust while America burns. America is angry, yes it is. It is time to redirect our anger and not focus on which party to blame--instead focus on a broken Senate, a Senate that has a one-person King maker rule, a 60 vote cloture vote for everything. The broken Senate is the real cause of our problems and it is the reason little gets done in Washington.
Americans are angry, angrier than we have been in a long time. Perhaps it is time to refocus our anger from blaming one or the other party and place it squarely on the broken and dysfunctional Senate where good ideas for our future go to die.
Bev, IR, Jody:
Great posts! Gotta run.
Don't get me wrong, Jody--I'm glad that those annoying commercials won't be blasting at me (I hope they didn't exempt political ads!) but surely there were more important issues that could have taken the time and efforts of 100 Senators to resolve.
Regarding the judicial appointments as well as other DOJ appointments, I had a friend go through this many years ago. The problems with the lengthy delays is that the person still has to earn a living while he or she waits. My friend was in private practice in a 2 person law firm and had difficulty managing things when his referrals dropped off because people thought he wouldn't be around to handle matters. This is the human element they forget in their obstructionism. And I would blame the Democrats for doing the same thing.
Jody,
Right on. I find it totally hypocritical and repugnant where one (just one) individual can bring the whole process to a halt. Then they use this to claim that nothing was done and it is President Obama's fault.
These people are literally playing with the lives of people. And some of them are going to die because of their political crap. I wish America would wake up to what is really at stake here. It is not just idelogy but the very essence of this country.
If people want a nation where Big Business replaces our government and all the regulations and social programs go out the window and the Big Businessess dictate our every day being and the top 2% control that, then vote republican. The 2% will wear one uniform, live in nice houses, send their kids to school, have medical care etc. and the other 98% will wear pin stripes and say yes sir, no sir and take what little we are GIVEN by our masters.
This is where we are heading, make no mustake about it.
Jody everything you stated is true, the Senate is a corrupt Corporate owned entity that is completely dysfunctional, everybody knows it, nobody likes it, and there is not one damn thing anyone can do to change it. The Senate knows they are untouchable, because they are, there is no legal way to make them change, voting them out won't work because to become a Senator you are expected to protect the status quo. Nothing short of a revolution can fix the problem, and since the good Senators know that isn't going to happen they will continue to disregard the wishes and needs of the nation and operate like a bunch of Greek Gods who only concern themselves with the groups that offer up the most treasure.
Steeler Fan,
If you add up all the time allocated (hours) by Senate rules for debate for all the current openings (Judges, US Marshals, US Attorneys, Ambassadors, Agency Officials and WH Officials) and divide that by the average number of hours the Senate is in session you will find it would take 10 years to clear all the nominations.
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/09/30/merkley-obstruction/
Dennis--that assumes that the Republicans are actually interested in holding hearings where they examine the background of the appointees rather than holding up appointments to stick it to President Obama. I'm not willing to make that assumption. And I know that it has been done by both parties---doesn't make it right for either party to do and seems petty to me. And they wonder why people don't respect Congress.
Thanks for adding good points to my post. Dennis, that is a discouraging thought but I know it is true. Steeler Fan. I was glad they passed that volume legislation but had the same thought you did--with all the problems we face, the Senate could agree on volume control.
Jody, Jody, Jody. What am I going to do with you? The good senator did not have to worry about paying for the Iraq invasion. It was off-budget. I'm pretty sure that means it was free.
In fact, this weekend my wife and I are going to work on our brand new "off-budget". I think we will probably put rent, groceries, utilities, and insurance on it. I tell ya, paying for what I call "nuisance expenses" can get pretty costly. If this works, look for my new book: "Off-budget, Off-kilter, Off-our Rocker".
Jody, US Navy Ret. ,David Walker,Steeler Fan ,Dennis,and w bush,
I'm looking forward for parts 3,4,5....great posts one and all, this is my pet peave, please stay with this topic!
David Walker, your book should sell, seems 50% of the country believes in this stuff!!
w bush ,love your posts too, just not the name, haha!! John
David Walker:
LOL! Your OFF-Budget analysis was funny.
I think Rush had the best description of Rahm, "like a ferral rat protecting it's young".
Rob-459463
I think Rush had the best description of Rahm, "like a ferral rat protecting it's young".
The subtext to that statement is grab your gold and guns and head for the hills from Rush's chamber fear.
Emanuel is one of those snotty-nosed soiled punks who has the mistaken impression that he's tough because he can scream and cuss a lot. I hope someday he mouths off to the wrong person and they beat him like a yard dog. Betcha he becomes a lot more personable after that.
And hopefully this latest Democrat dirty trick being pulled in CA by Moonbeam and the media whore Gloria Allred will backfire and blow up in their faces. Once again, libs take the word and the side of a non-American over an American. Keep it up, libbies...your time is coming.
When is Rush moving to Costa Rica? He promised he would if health care reform passed. Rush calling someone else a name--the hot air Limbaugh blows everyday could fuel our energy needs for a decade.
Ah, Rahm Emanuel, he of the "bedroom eyes." I'm going to miss that guy.
People! Laugh once in a while. You really can't be this bitter, can you?
You'd be surprised, Rob.
Tomorrow is you people's big left-wing rally in D.C. Among many socialist, illegal alien amnesty groups, gay organizations etc...will be the Communist PartyUSA. The CPUSA. Do you all think it's ok to march and demonstrate with an organization that has a history of supporting genocide, ethnic cleansing, forced starvation and oppression? The CPUSA is the equivalent of the American Nazi Party. The union I am in are ok with this.
No word yet on whether or not Rage Against The Machine will be providing the music. I'll be the guy standing off to the side with the "FRY MUMIA" sign.
CU Farley
Tomorrow is you people's big left-wing rally in D.C. Among many socialist, illegal alien amnesty groups, gay organizations etc...will be the Communist PartyUSA. The CPUSA. Do you all think it's ok to march and demonstrate with an organization that has a history of supporting genocide, ethnic cleansing, forced starvation and oppression? The CPUSA is the equivalent of the American Nazi Party. The union I am in are ok with this.
OMG your in a union. i bet you really get things going at the local meetings. faley i though only bleeding heart pinko liberals belong to unions. Are you a closet liberal ???
CU Farley, Think of it this way, they may be just as embarrassed to be seen standing next to you :-)
Seriously, I know what its like to go out to protest and think "I'm not with YOU" about the more colorful characters around me. But, you have to believe that you know why YOU are out there protesting, and, after all, God meant for you to live your life out loud. Go, express yourself, have a great time.
to vote
Tis done. We have become a nation. - Benjamin Rush, on the ratification of the Constitution, 1788
Our Founders were not perfect and we as a Nation have over time, corrected the wrongs from that day and time. Yet what a difference between our Congress back then and our Congress today. There isn't a whole lot of pride in our Nation's capital any longer in terms of what our country was founded on and how we should conduct ourselves. All seems to have been forgotten over time. What a shame. Today's GOP do nothing. Absolutely nothing. It's disgraceful and shameful. And they believe they are representing us? They're not. They're representing themselves and their rich benefactors only. Makes you want to weep. Can't we do better? Of course we can. By getting these SOBs out of our government. They don't belong there. They're just collecting taxpayer money. We are doing our future generations a huge disservice by keeping these republicans in Congress. It's almost like they think of themselves as royalty. We just can't have that. They have all they need, yet have no problem with everyone else suffering while they get rich and fat. Where's our democracy? We had people fight and die for it. Shame on all of us.
___________
A little history since the end of the Revolutionary War for those interested:
December 23, 1783 - Following a triumphant journey from New York to Annapolis, George Washington, victorious commander in chief of the American Revolutionary Army, appears before Congress and voluntarily resigns his commission, an event unprecedented in history.
January 14, 1784 - The Treaty of Paris is ratified by Congress. The Revolutionary War officially ends.
May 8, 1785 - Congress passes the Land Ordinance of 1785 which divides the northwest territories into townships, each set at 6 square miles, subdivided into 36 lots of 640 acres each, with each lot selling for no less than $640.
February 21, 1787 - Amid calls for a stronger central government, due in part to Shays' Rebellion, Congress endorses a resolution calling for a constitutional convention to be held in Philadelphia, beginning in May.
May 25, 1787 - With 29 delegates from nine states present, the constitutional convention begins in the state house (Independence Hall) in Philadelphia. A total of 73 delegates have been chosen by the states (excluding Rhode Island) although only 55 will actually attend. There are 21 veterans of the Revolutionary War and 8 signers of the Declaration of Independence. The delegates are farmers, merchants, lawyers and bankers, with an average age of 42, and include the brilliant 36 year old James Madison, the central figure at the convention, and 81 year old Ben Franklin. Thomas Jefferson, serving abroad as ambassador to France, does not attend. The delegates first vote is to keep the proceedings absolutely secret. George Washington is then nominated as president of the constitutional convention.
June 19, 1787 - Rather than revise the Articles of Confederation, delegates at the constitutional convention vote to create an entirely new form of national government separated into three branches - the legislative, executive and judicial - thus dispersing power with checks and balances, and competing factions, as a measure of protection against tyranny by a controlling majority.
July 13, 1787 - Congress enacts the Northwest Ordinance which establishes formal procedures for transforming territories into states. It provides for the eventual establishment of three to five states in the area north of the Ohio River, to be considered equal with the original 13. The Ordinance includes a Bill of Rights that guarantees freedom of religion, the right to trial by jury, public education and a ban on slavery in the Northwest.
July 16, 1787 - At the constitutional convention, Roger Sherman proposes a compromise which allows for representation in the House of Representatives based on each state's population and equal representation for all of the states in the Senate. The numerous black slaves in the South are to be counted at only three fifths of their total number. A rough draft of the constitution is then drawn up.
August 6-10, 1787 - Items in the draft constitution are debated including the length of terms for the president and legislators, the power of Congress to regulate commerce, and a proposed 20 year ban on any Congressional action concerning slavery.
September 17, 1787 - Thirty nine delegates vote to approve and then sign the final draft of the new Constitution.
September 19, 1787 - For the first time the proposed Constitution is made public as printed copies of the text are distributed. A storm of controversy soon arises as most people had only expected a revision of the Articles of Confederation, not a new central government with similarities to the British system they had just overthrown.
October 27, 1787 - The Federalists, who advocate a strong central government and approval of the new Constitution, begin publishing essays in favor of ratification. Written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay, the total number of articles will eventually reach 85 and be compiled and published as the Federalist Papers.
December 7, 1787 - Delaware is the first of the nine states needed to ratify the Constitution. To be followed by: Pennsylvania (Dec. 12) New Jersey (Dec. 18) Georgia (Jan. 2, 1788) Connecticut (Jan. 9) Massachusetts (Feb. 7) Maryland (April 28) South Carolina (May 23) and New Hampshire (June 21).
February 6, 1788 - Anti-Federalists in Massachusetts, led by Sam Adams and John Hancock, favor a more decentralized system of government and give their support to ratification of the Constitution only after a compromise is reached that amendments will be included which guarantee civil liberties.
February 27, 1788 - In Massachusetts, following an incident in which free blacks were kidnapped and transported to the island of Martinique, the Massachusetts legislature declares the slavery trade illegal and provides for monetary damages to victims of kidnappings.
March 24, 1788 - In Rhode Island, the Constitution is rejected by a popular referendum. The state, fearful of consolidated federal power, had refused to send a delegation to the constitutional convention in Philadelphia and had subsequently rejected a state convention to consider ratification.
June 2, 1788 - In Virginia, anti-Federalist forces, led by Patrick Henry and George Mason, oppose ratification of the Constitution. They are joined by Richard Henry Lee who calls for a bill of rights and a lower house set up on a more democratic basis.
June 25, 1788 - In Virginia, the Federalists, led by James Madison, finally prevail as ratification of the Constitution (with a proposed bill of rights and 20 other changes) is endorsed by a close vote of 89 to 75.
July 2, 1788 - A formal announcement is made by the president of Congress that the Constitution of the United States is now in effect, having been ratified by the required nine states.
July 26, 1788 - The state of New York votes 30 to 27 to endorse ratification while also recommending a bill of rights be included.
September 13, 1788 - New York City is chosen by Congress to be the temporary seat of the new U.S. government.
October-December - Commodity prices stabilize, spurring economic recovery and a gradual return to pre-war levels of prosperity.
December 23, 1788 - Maryland proposes giving a 10 square-mile area along the Potomac River for the establishment of a federal town to be the new seat of the U.S. government.
April 30, 1789 - On the balcony of New York's Federal Hall, George Washington, at age 57, is sworn in as the first President of the United States. He then enters the Senate chamber to deliver his inaugural address.
July 4, 1789 - Congress passes its first tax, an 8.5 percent protective tax on 30 different items, with items arriving on American ships charged at a lower rate than foreign ships.
July 14, 1789 - In France, the French Revolution begins with the fall of the Bastille in Paris, an event witnessed by the American ambassador, Thomas Jefferson.
July 20, 1789 - Congress passes the Tonnage Act of 1789 levying a 50 cents per ton tax on foreign ships entering American ports, 30 cents per ton on American built but foreign owned ships, and 6 cents per ton on American ships.
September 25, 1789 - Congress submits 12 proposed constitutional amendments to the states for ratification. The first ten will be ratified and added to the Constitution in 1791 as the Bill of Rights.
September 29, 1789 - The U.S. Army is established by Congress. Totaling 1000 men, it consists of one regiment of eight infantry companies and one battalion of four artillery companies.
March 1, 1790 - A Census Act is passed by Congress. The first census, finished on Aug. 1, indicates a total population of nearly 4 million persons in the U.S. and western territories. African Americans make up 19 percent of the population, with 90 percent living in the South. Native Americans were not counted, although there were likely over 80 tribes with 150,000 persons. For white Americans, the average age is under 16. Most white families are large, with an average of eight children born. The white population will double every 22 years.
The largest American city is Philadelphia, with 42,000 persons, followed by New York (33,000) Boston (18,000) Charleston (16,000) and Baltimore (13,000). The majority of Americans are involved in agricultural pursuits, with little industrial activity occurring at this time.
July 10, 1790 - The House of Representatives votes to locate the national capital on a 10 square-mile site along the Potomac, with President George Washington choosing the exact location.
____________
If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace. - Thomas Paine
____________
{I can't remember where I got this list above, but it was something like "USA History Timeline". I can't find it at the moment. But I just want to be clear - this is not my list.}
Where ever you found the list, it is a great historical reminder. Thanks for posting it, Pat. We need a reminder of our history as well as remembering that compromise leads to sound Government.
For anyone who likes history and wonders why the country is politically divided, read "Thirteen American Arguments" by Howard Fineman. We have always been divided, what we see today is not new.
Thank you Jody. I know we have always been divided, but this set of Republicans won't lift a finger to help anyone. And it enrages me. They truly act like royalty. Let 'em eat cake, or whatever it was that she was supposed to have said. That's how they act.
I actually have Howard's book; I think I'm due to read it in November. (lol-don't ask).
Well since Pakistan has closed off the main artery for getting supplies to the military, does this mean we can stop sending them money?
Oh by the way....a guy that I work with is so excited this morning because he just found out that he still has one more year on his dad's insurance and he's also married. He's so Republican and he said that he loves President Obama. So I told him that he should be very lucky and not to slam President Obama because he is doing everything he can to help the middle class.
If people would just sit down and read what they can just to see what President Obama has done so far for the middle class, even if they don't want to listen to him. At least READ want his has done, maybe everyone will understand things a little bit better.
I want everyone to have a great weekend!!!!!
Thanks for sharing some good news. If there is one, there are more out there.
When President Obama was in Des Moines Wednesday, he spoke to a backyard gathering of of 70 invited neighbors both republican and democrat to discuss the economy and answer questions. Afterwards, one woman who voted for McCain in 2008, said "I don't know that you can put the blame on anybody. The economy is what it is. I think he's (Obama) been a good leader. I think he is doing the best job that he can."
A 93-year old said, "I was really impressed with how easily he (Obama) answered questions. When he talked about the depression, I knew what he was talking about."
Thanks Jody!!!
Yes, it's always nice to here good news!
This is related to Obamacare? hmmmmmmmmmm...............so you work with a guy that's married and is still on his Dad's insurance? Is that even possible? Does you're employer give you insurance? Some many questions to that statement.
"a guy that I work with is so excited this morning because he just found out that he still has one more year on his dad's insurance and he's also married."
I like the backyard meetings when they pin Obama with a question that he can't answer or change the subject. Thoses stories are on tape. At least you're in the 42% that thinks he's doing a good job.
Good news
Menendez: We'll keep the Senate
By: Shira Toeplitz
September 30, 2010 05:27 PM ED
With about one month to go until the midterm elections, Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chairman Robert Menendez predicted Thursday that his party will hold the Senate after Election Day.
Bad news
For Democrats, Senate Still a Possible Nightmare
By Stuart Rothenberg, Roll Call Contributing Writer Stuart Rothenberg, Roll Call Contributing Writer – Wed Sep 29, 11:01 pm ET
Delaware's Republican primary may well have lulled Democrats into a sense of complacency about their ability to hold the Senate after November's elections. They would be wise to wake up if they want to avoid a nasty surprise on election night.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/cq/20100930/pl_cq_politics/politics000003743985;_ylt=AqSwKB4M8E7cy4K1BaBp94H4R9AF;_ylu=X3oDMTJxa2Q2cGFwBGFzc2V0A2NxLzIwMTAwOTMwL3BvbGl0aWNzMDAwMDAzNzQzOTg1BHBvcwM3BHNlYwN5bl9wYWdpbmF0ZV9zdW1tYXJ5X2xpc3QEc2xrA2ZvcmRlbW9jcmF0cw
Good news
Robert Shrum
Democrats will hold the House and Senate
For Democrats, it's Rove time: rally the base and save Congress
posted on September 30, 2010, at 5:55 PM
http://theweek.com/bullpen/column/207701/democrats-will-hold-the-house-and-senate
bad news
September 30, 2010
The Middle Has Swung Against Dems
By David Broder
WASHINGTON -- Sometimes the most important clues are hiding in plain view. That was the case in late June, when the Gallup Organization reported that the share of voters who describe themselves as conservative had increased from 37 percent to 42 percent in the past two years.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/09/30/the_middle_has_swung_against_dems.html
It's all very clear, isn't it?...
dangerfield
Your daily polls must be as much fun for you to post as your coloring in theThe Tea Party Really Big Coloring Book for Kids; if you color?
Enjoy
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/09/30/tea-party-coloring-book-reportedly-prompts-death-threats/
Troll...
Some of what you posted is from June, it is October. If I have learned one thing following politics for many years, no poll, no pundit can determine what a voter will do on election day. Their intentions to throw the bum out seem to dissipate when they mark their ballot--they often decide to keep the one they know.
Jody, Iowa
Some of what you posted is from June, it is October...
Talking to me?
Everything is from today...
I wonder if they'll let me in the polling station dressed like a luchador.
It may be from today but it is referencing some numbers from June. Either way, that doesn't matter. What people do Nov 2 does.
Super Crazy would be an excellent choice, considering...
Again Jody if anything from the AUTHORS of the four articles dated Sept 30th and Oct 1st and listed on today's realclearpolitics.com referenced any material you feel superannuated, I apologize for them.
Thanks for the lively discussion on the incredibly disparate views espoused in the pieces.
Dangerfield, you're a hoot, and maybe a heretic to boot, for posting something less than 100% in support of the Democrats here on First Read. I read all those articles at RCP this morning, and was struck by exactly your point, there's enough difference of opinion out there to make each and every one of us lose our minds. It's no wonder that American's are confused, which, if any of these, can/should you believe? I'll go with those that predict the loss of the House, and retention of the Senate, that seems to be the most likely outcome at this point in time.
From political handicapper and Democrat Charlie Cook, in an article up today in National Journal.com:
"In my view, the structure and direction of this election hasn't changed. A natural tightening is occurring. Republicans are still headed toward retaking the House and making substantial gains in the Senate, possibly enough to become the majority."
This is Charlie Cook, people...not Frank Luntz.
Don't shoot the messenger...that directive would, of course, also apply to dangerfield, who brings a much-needed dose of reality to the other-worldly environment here at First Read.
Embrace diversity.
First, Cheers to Matthew, Houston for his astuteness yesterday at noticing the impressive multi-state political connections of a certain individual who posts here a lot (you know, the one who throws tantrums and starts name-calling at the slightest jibe). It seems odd that someone whose writing shows so little support for the Democratic party's philosophy and an obsessive animosity toward the president is so well-connected in the Democratic Party. I guess it's that "Big Tent" thing. Either that or we've been punked by a troll, an alternative that Matthew pointed out.
Second, I enjoyed the "dramatic" peformance on Maddow's show last night of John Boehner handing out tobacco lobby checks to his fellow Republicans on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives. Theater at its finest! Just think what thrilling performances we'll get for the next two years from the real John Boehner if the Repubs win the House next year.
Third, didn't Mitt Romney have problems similar to those of Meg Whitman? It seems that Republicans find illegal immigrants as useful at keeping their mansions clean as they do for political demagoguery.
I saw that. What was more enlightening was Boehner's lack of speaking talent; wonder how many people nodded off listening to the droning tone. Boehner claims he wants to restore integrity to the House just as George W. Bush promised to restore integrity to the White House.
Why is it when I draw a mental picture of Boehner promising integrity to America, the picture I see is a pedophile promising a child some candy?
Interesting take on Rahm above. He's an interesting man. Smart. Strong. Independent. Handsome. (Well, I always thought so). But some of the things he said really did help anybody.
But please remember, it was he who had to get legislation passed. And in today's climate, it was probably the most difficult job in DC. But he was up for it.
Be well Rahm. Politics is ugly. But you remained in the game despite it.
Re Meg Whitman: She doesn't seem to understand her own problem. She doesn't need to take a lie detector test about whether or not she knew her employee was not legally supposed to be working in the US. She doesn't seem to understand that her harsh rhetoric about immigration (no amnesty, hold employers accountable) has not been supported by her own actions. She didn't call INS to report the agency, she didn't call INS to report the employee. In fact, the employee was a valued and trusted one. Ms. Whitman doesn't come off well in the account of this because it reinforces her image as a distant and unconcerned employer (didn't know much about someone so intimate with her life for nine years), and as a hypocrite: what does she really think about immigration? As governor will she crack down on people like herself or her employee, or will she let the situation carry on? Will she support a path to citizenship for all the people in this country who are "illegal?" Will she villify undocumented workers (as many on the right do) as lazy, untrustworthy, not here to work but to take advantage of the US?
kate-1855079 You hit the nail right on the head. Excellent post.
Terrific comment, kate. Whitman's position against hiring illegals is the polar opposite of her own actions. She obviously did not take the housekeeper's attorney seriously when she said she could provide proof that Whitman and her husband knew and has been caught in a bold face lie in front of a camera no less.
Kate,
You have nailed it. Great post.
We are seeing day in and day out how the republicans say one thing and do the other. They have no moral or ethical compass to guide them anymore. They now practice hypocrisy and deceit as their everyday model. How many times have we seen the republicans campaign on fiscal responsibility, Tax Cuts for small business, helping the middle class, improving education etc. Then they, in mass, do just the opposite, vote no on bills they campaign for, hoping the American people will not notice. This is just lying to get votes.
This fraud and hypocrisy is not limited just to the republicans, we have several democrats that are just as bad. It just seems that this mentality is much more prevalent on the right. As proof you just have to look at the last 20 months at their individual records. The deeds of the republican party are no where near their lip service rhetoric. More often than not, they are polar opposites.
thanks for the comments -- it's true that if one hasn't spent a lifetime planning to be part of politics, one might not be quite so "careful".....but if one is a principled person, that should come through. In the latest rounds of non-career politicians running for office, it seems that they are all unprincipled!
Excellent post Kate!
Meg Whitman is a poster child for the hyprocrisy exhibited by those who hold non-constructive views about illegal immigration.
She cannot be Governor of California. She needs to get a clue!
Happy Friday!
Glad the Emmanuel family gets to be reunited in Chicago . . . I'll bet that President Obama sometimes wishes he could go "home" . . . and yes I know that there are many Americans who would be glad to help him pack!
lol
Off the watch the President's speech from last night . . . I hear it was a classic . . . here's the link for those who care:
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/295745-2
As always, I'm still FIRED UP and READY TO GO! :o)
Should the Democrats retain the Senate despite losing seats there, I really really really hope Reid gets ousted as Majority Leader. I would much like to see my senior senator from NY Chuck Schumer, get the post since it was his efforts that got the Dems to control the Senate, while it was Reid's actions that will cost us seats there. I also believe the same thing should happen in the House should the Dems maintain a majority despite losing a lot of seats...replace Pelosi with someone with a less divisive reputation.
At this point the best thing that could happen for the Dems is to lose the majority in the House and Senate, the Republicans have no ideas, no plans and no hope of fixing the economy, let them hang themselves, which they surely would. Even with the majorities the Dems currently have the Republicans in the Senate can block anything and blame the Dems, so I say take that stick out of their hands, let them have the majority and stand on their merits (har har), believe me the top Republicans don't want to have a big majority because they know they can't "fix" any of the problems they are currently blaming Dems for.
wbush. I generally agree with your comments but not this. Pres Obama and democrats have accomplished a great deal considering the GOP Senate blockade, it is time we recognize how much has really been done. Turning the House and Senate would accomplish exactly what? Two years wasted to prove what we already know, the GOP is incapable of governing, that the GOP has short-sighted baby-step vision to solve the massive problems we face in the future that require giant steps forward.
Jody make no mistake I will be casting my vote for Democrat candidates offered me come November not because they are Democrats but because they offer what I believe is best for my country, that being said if you believe the talking heads the Republicans are going to pick-up some seats, if that happens how on Earth can the Dems accomplish anything? And if the Dems retain a majority Republicans will continue to lay blame on the majority party, although I think it safe to say you and I can see that as a disingenuous argument on the Republicans part a whole lot of people won't put forth the effort required to come to that same conclusion, at any rate like a lot of Dem supporters I am tired and frustrated, people are angry but they are focusing that anger in the wrong place all the while refusing to acknowledge that Obama and the Dems are on the right path, it truly troubles me to think that people would even consider putting the Republicans back in power when there is no logical reason for it, I suppose my earlier post is a rather feeble attempt on my part to make sense out of a situation I find most puzzling. Have a good weekend.
Just what has the GOP blocked? The Democrats have massive majorities in both houses of Congress, and they've used to them to pass nearly every major piece of liberal legislation they wanted to pass, save for Cap and Trade.
But passing legislation are not accomplishments. What has this legislation the Democrats passed accomplished for Americans? 9.6% and rising unemployment, a feeble 1.6% GDP, massive deficits, growing government, shrinking private sector, and failed bailout on top of failed bailout, and a very unpopular ObamaCare program. These are the results of the "accomplishments" of the Democrats.
JoAnnaSmith1 asks the question "Just what has the GOP blocked?"
I have neither the stamina nor time to even attempt to answer your question Joanna, but I can answer this question quite rapidly, "Just what hasn't the GOP tried to block?" And the answer is "NOTHING".
JoAnnaSmith:
Come on. You're not that ignorant. You know very well that "massive majorities" don't matter as long as one single lunatic like Jim Demint can block just about any legilstation the "massive majority" tries to pass.
As has been repeatedly explained to you, JoAnna, the deficits are mostly due to Bush, even Republican economists acknowledge that the stimulus succeeded, and everything in "Obamacare" is popular except for the mandatory insurance requirement dreamed up by the Republicans that was put into the health insurance reform law because there was no way to get a public option past the Republicans and conservative Democrats. And of course, you forgot the recovery of the stock market, which should please anyone with a retirement account except those with terminal Obama Derangement Syndrome.
But I guess you won't be able to understand any of that since you can't even understand the simple arithmetic that prevents Democratic majority from getting legislation passed with being severely watered down.
Houston - Happy Friday to you!
First, no President, and no party gets everything they want. Not in a democracy. The last time that happened was, . . . . . never! It's not an over statement to say that Obama and the Democrats have gotten most of what they wanted.
And no, sorry Houston, the stimulus did not succeed. If it did, why are people like Geithner looking for more of it?
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE68T5ZZ20100930?feedType=RSS&feedName=politicsNews&rpc=22&sp=true
And why does unemployment continue to rise? And why does the GDP continue to get revised downward? Why does housing continue to fail, and why are bankruptcies continuing at record levels? None of these are elements of a healthy economy. And after rebounding in 2009, the stock market has been range bound since. That's because of uncertainty in the market Houston. The market doesn't know what the government is going to do from a tax point of view or from a regulation point of view, so it spins it's wheels waiting for the answers.
You continue to be entrenched in the "Blame Bush" camp Houston. Take a look around you, many of your fellow campers have pulled up stakes and headed elsewhere. Even they understand. Maybe they can explain it to you.
It's their job w bush. It's part of being in a Democracy. I'm sorry the Republicans didn't want to play ball with you Liberals, but what you proposed was really out of the main-stream of what America was looking for. Need proof? See many Democrats campaigning on all their legislative successes for the last two years lately? Maybe few. More close to none. People are not happy with the Democrats and what they have done w bush. Not at all.
JoAnnaSmith1:
It's hard to tell whether you are being deliberately obtuse or whether you are making an attempt at humor.
It is ludicrous to assert that the Democrats have gotten most of what they wanted. There are more than 400 bills that have been bottled up in a Senate, in which a minority of Republicans - you do understand what "minority" means, right? - have stopped virtually all legislation. WE have even seen this insane donkey - DeMint - from South Carolina single-handedly bring the senate to a halt. How about the good Dr. Coburn stopping approved aid from going to Haiti?
Guantanamo remains open thanks to the fear mongering of Repubs. "Sheeeeeit, doncha know they're gonna put hardened criminals in your local neighborhood prison."
In a sop and with an extended hand, Obama and Holder - for the good of the country - have not prosecuted Darth Cheney and his evil minions for clearly illegal acts. I'm not a Dem, but I'd sure like to see Cheney in prison. I'd like to think the U.S. still occupies the moral high ground. Cheney sure as hell stomped all over that - arrogant draft-dodging SOB. I mean that in the nicest way.
The stimulus did succeed, but thanks to the outflow of capital to build foreign factories that employ cheap labor, unemployment continues to rise in the U.S. Consumption is down because employment is down AND most Americans simply don't need to consume any more, and what they do consume in many cases is from outside the U.S. There is also a case to be made that the unemployed do not understand that we are entering a new era in which PAID employment will necessarily drop. You certainly don't get it.
Each and every one of your questions has an answer based on empirical data. Housing is down because demand is down. The answer is no more sophisticated than that. Bankruptcies are up because people took on debt they could not repay AND because credit holders changed rules unilaterally in the middle of the game.
The market does not know and NEVER has known what is going to happen. Oh yes, Big Money tries desperately to rig the game, but the future is and always has been uncertain. You spout nonsense.
It is said two things in life are certain - death and taxes. No decent businessman is going to wait for death. That is a very bad time to start a business. As far as taxes, that is a pure BS argument. My guess is you have no idea how to fill out a Schedule C or you wouldn't come to fora such as these making such inane statements. Hey, if you pay more taxes, that means you're making more money.
Your understanding of Economics would be laughable if it weren't for the fact that this condition runs rampant in the right wing.
You have someone that disagrees with you. His name is Barack Obama. Appears he believes he's gotten most of what he set out to do:
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/209395?RS_show_page=0
JoAnnaSmith:
I only blame Bush for the blunders and incompetence for which he was clealry responsible. But JoAnnaSmith and other victims of Obama Derangement Syndrome want to blame President Obama for the mess Bush made.
And Obama clearly has made significant progress cleaning up Bush's mess. At least if you believe expert economists, some of whom are even Republicans like Mark Zandi. So whom should we believe? Those who clearly are suffering from ODS like JoAnnSmith, or the impartial experts?
Presently there are over 300 bills sitting in the Senate that the Repubs have blocked with their Senate Rule 22 quasi-filibuster, nearly all of them things that the Repubs themselves in prior years have worked to pass. Almost all of them directly impact the middle class and job creation, however, the Repubs have blocked them so as to disallow Pres. Obama any 'victories' when it is actually the American People that have been disallowed these victories. Almost everything that the Repubs and TPers have been complaining about with the HCR, such as the mandate to buy insurance from the Corps, were put into it by the REPUBS because the Dems wanted them on board for a bi-partisan vote...the Repubs voted NO on it anyways.
You are severely DEBUNKED JoAnnaS1 as you only spout drivel that you KNOW is not true, attack those who post the truth and continue to harp away at folks who PROVE you wrong, every time.
Had to pass this on. Hope the Tea Party reads and understands that what Mr. Scott of Hamilton, Montana is pointing out, is the "real enemy".
Time for Tea Party to face reality
by Bob Scott, Hamilton
There's lots of anger from the right wing these days, especially here in Montana. From Libertarians and Constitutionalists to Tea Party Republicans themselves, conservatives are mad. They're mad at establishment Republicans and Democrats; they're mad at the government; they're mad at politicians top to bottom. They want a revolution. Trouble is, they don't know which way to point their guns.
There is, of course, plenty to be angry about. With real unemployment rates pushing 20%, jobs permanently gone to other countries, massive oil spills, house prices collapsing, financial turmoil, and perpetual war bleeding us dry, who wouldn't be mad? To someone like me who has spent years trying to raise awareness of these problems, the right wing anger is, in a way, encouraging. What is disturbing and rather bizarre, however, are the targets of this anger. The scapegoats of right wing anger – environmentalists, immigrants, "regulations," and government itself – are easy targets, but going after them is the rough equivalent of going after your pond beaver after the fox has raided your chicken coop - not only pointless, but cruel.
The foxes that have raided our chicken coop are the most powerful corporations in the world – financial and industrial titans that dominate the economic life of our planet. For giants like Goldman-Sachs, Exxon-Mobil, British Petroleum, General Electric, Monsanto, and ADM, theft and plunder are easy, because they have made them legal through control of what should be our government. When their theft and plunder became open during the bailout in 2008 (remember TARP?), I thought everyone would catch on. After telling us for decades that there was no money for education, healthcare, or jobs, or anything else we might need, the government came up with $700 billion – in one week – to bail out the "too big to fail" bankrupt corporations. Most of the big corporations pay very little in taxes (General Electric – one of the primary beneficiaries of government war spending – not only paid zero taxes in 2009, but got a refund!). Of course, I thought people would catch on when establishment darling Enron went criminal, and then went bust taking pensions, savings, and most of the economy with them. Yes folks, the foxes have been in charge of the henhouse for quite some time now.
If the Tea Party were to actually get its way – environmentalists gone, government gutted, and laissez-faire restored – what tiny restraint that exists on corporate abuse and dominance would be removed, and the ironic result would be a tragic worsening of the all the problems we face. Foxes would then not only be in charge of the henhouse, they would own it. There would be nothing we could do about it – short of a genuine revolution, I suppose. We would be right back where the Massachusetts colonists were when they threw that tea in Boston harbor during the original Tea Party. Largely forgotten today is that the tea thrown into the harbor belonged to the East India Company, a colossal private company with a government sanctioned monopoly on trade.
The Tax Act of 1773, which the colonists were protesting, was actually a subsidy granted to the East India Company to save it from bankruptcy in an economic downturn which the company itself had caused. Sound familiar? The East India Company was Goldman-Sachs, General Electric, Exxon-Mobil, and Monsanto all rolled into one. It controlled the British government and made enormous profits from this control. The profits went to a tiny elite, a minuscule fraction of the British population, leaving the rest to struggle in poverty. This too should sound quite familiar.
So get back to your roots, Tea Partiers! Go after the corporations. Expose their dealings and make them accountable. Make them release their stranglehold on government. Work for justice and peace. We'll be right behind you. And hey, we just might make a difference. Otherwise, Tea Party believers are going to go down as gullible victims of another bout of propaganda induced delusional hysteria – not very bright victims either, and possibly a bit loony.
Thanks for sharing this, Steven. How true it is. People are angry but not at the real cause of our problems. Government is not the problem, corporate control of it is.
Good to see you Steven... hopefully as more of this is exposed the MORE people will start to wake the hell up!
Have a Great Weekend!
Houston!
First, Cheers to Matthew, Houston for his astuteness yesterday at noticing the impressive multi-state political connections of a certain individual who posts here a lot (you know, the one who throws tantrums and starts name-calling at the slightest jibe). It seems odd that someone whose writing shows so little support for the Democratic party's philosophy and an obsessive animosity toward the president is so well-connected in the Democratic Party. I guess it's that "Big Tent" thing. Either that or we've been punked by a troll, an alternative that Matthew pointed out.
Speaking of PUNKS and TROLLS...
You can't incite me with your trolls, and that's all they are. I'm sorry that you are so in love with me (jealous?) that you are irrationally compelled to post unsolicited attacks and stalk my posts like mary's little lamb...
Have something to say ON-TOPIC or risk being banned as a troll...you're just making yourself look even more petty and foolish with this personal vendetta.
This is not the "First Place" to work out your personal problems...
In other words, according to dangerfield, if some of us want to discuss issues that matter to us on a political web site that are not on topic--free speech to discuss other things will be subject to trolls.
Didn't you hear Jody... dangerfield is NOW the self appointed KING of First Read...
LMAO that it starts out with 'you can't incite me'... WTF
Jody, Iowa
In other words, according to dangerfield, if some of us want to discuss issues that matter to us
I'm right here, so who are you addressing?..
And exactly what issue was I addressing?
Another troll, another ad homenim...
What a waste of time responding to the off-topic personal BS...
Next up Feisty or Ron will talk over me to Jody GUARANTEED...they are like little children...
The handful of intelligent respectful (except when responding in "kind" to the trolls) posters here should have their own "March for a return to sanity"...and you know who you are
and who you're not...:)
I can make bubbles with my spit. :o
It's amusing that Dangerfield is complaining about off-topic posts when so many of his posts are off-topic links to polls that show "bad news" for Democrats that everyone already knows about, apparently just to get a rise out of people. And since he's unhappy that some people suspect he's just a troll for that sort of behavior, perhaps he should stop with the ad hominem attacks against half the people on this forum as being "liberal fringe" and tossing various other stupid insults at people who aren't in the "handful of intelligent posters" who don't express negative opinions on some of his "contributions" to the discussion.
Yeah, but, uh, Houston? Didn't you call him out with a lot of unrestrained hostility yesterday?
ED-
Score...
Spit bubbles put you right up there...:)
It's Friday.
Beyond that, as usual, I came late to the party this morning - one very annoying fact of my time schedule is that I arrive after people like Ron, Pat, Feisty, Mr. Navy, Bev, you, MB, Matt, Houston, Joanna and so on have already gotten into the thick of it. Most of the arguments and points have already been made - everything else typically gets reduced to details. Why multiply entities without necessity?
What else can I do but make cryptic in-jokes? Unless, of course, y'all want me to start responding entirely in haiku.
Exo:
But I thought that's what you were doing.
If the Republicans win with their record and Sarah Palin is a serious candidate for President, then the Fox propaganda machine has taken over our country in what is really a coup.
Rupert Murdock employs four leading Republican Presidential candidates and uses his entire news network to build his power base in American politics. He is one immigrant who should be deported for the good of the country.
It is time to stick a fork in Meg Whitman, she's done!
Like the Republicans needed anything else to give them a better chance at success in November. Talk about being diconnected from the people they represent, that would be the Democrats and Pelosi. JoannaSmith1
Well, I will agree that the Republicans do seem very connected and subserviant to the wishes of the people they represent. Unfortunately, the people they actually represent are not the same as and bear little resemblance to the people who vote in their districts and states.
Pretty much the entire lot's out of touch with the silent majority. If the Democrats, for example, are so connected with their constituency, why haven't we seen comprehensive and sensible immigration reform? Why did HCR ultimately lack a public option? What's stopping Obama from issuing an executive order repealing DADT?
Exo:
Evidently, they didn't go over what a "filibuster" is in your highschool civics class. The Democrats leadership tried for all those things but were blocked by the Republicans, aided and abetted by conservative Democrats like Ben Nelson. The Republicans who used to back the DREAM flip-flopped and now oppose it because Obama is for it. The minority part, consists of grownups who act like big babies. If the election goes their way, the big babies are going to really screw things up. But you can alway blame Obama if you want.
Rahm is the biggest scum to ever serve in the White House besides Obama. He has done a fine job in leading the most corrupt administration in this countries history. All we could hope for now is that his plane hits a mountain on the way to Chicago. I hope he burns in hell.
Another run of the mill phony flag wrapped lost soul who caught the train to Beckistan...
FAI...
1776, your assessment is spot on. Rahm's biggest service to the White House was providing cover for the most corrupt administration in the nation's history. Rahm makes the Watergate conspirators look like Sunday school children.
1776 freedom--Rahm worse than Chaney? Better rethink that one...Chaney's holdings and interests were lightyears ahead in corruption than anything you could stick on Rahm or this administration.
Otherwise everyone, I am enjoying the banter today (minus the name calling and hoping people burn in hell/plane hits a mountain). Then again, I guess that is what our "role models" in politics have taught us in how to handle an issue versus compromising to come to a solution.
Cheney is a Mr. Softee compared to Rahm.
So typical of Republicans...you see...lies have a way of catching up with you...Whitman KNEW that her domestic help was an illegal immigrant....
Bush opened the boarders allowing illegal immigration...in my State certain areas were flooded by illegal immigrants...Blount and Shelby county...with Jefferson running a close tie with Shelby county...
Many business owners used illegal immigrants to work construction jobs at ages that were illegal (that became an issue in Alabama because of deaths)...in the city of Hoover alone all one has to do is drive to Lorna Road...careful though...because illegals that want work have flooded the street between Patton Chapel Road and Lorna that you may just hit one accidentally...
Cheap labour and tax evesion was why they did it and continue to do it...in Blount county...they work at chicken processing plants....
They (Republicans) lied to those people taunting citizenship...many have improper identification and forged documents...
Those that sought to cash in on those promises by Republicans in order to garner support in the Hispanic communities, failed them yet again with empty promises that amounted to blatant lies, in so much that protests were staged on Washington...how soon do we forget Republicans...
Since the election of President Obama, Republicans have sought to make immigration an issue for this administration (something that they COULDN'T accomplish in 8 years)--Brewer decided to follow orders in a strategic move (sponsored by Rush and the rest of the cowardly Republicans) to enact a lame law that amounts to racial profiling....
Then comes Meg Whitman...the Tea Bagger that didn't cover her tracks too well...now...it's time to put up or shut up...I suggest that she gets SHUT down....
Have a great weekend everyone...