E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe New York Times: “Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. and the top Republican in the Senate, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, traded barbs on Thursday about whether terrorism suspects captured on American soil should be prosecuted in regular civilian court or sent to Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, to face trial before a military commission.”
This was a rough story to read if you’re the White House. “It was supposed to be the White House’s latest make-nice session with corporate America — a visit by Chief of Staff William M. Daley to a meeting with hundreds of manufacturing executives in town to press lawmakers for looser regulations,” the Washington Post says. “But the outreach soon turned into a rare public dressing down of the president’s policies with his highest-ranking aide.”
Per NBC’s Libby Leist, Vice President Biden yesterday emerged from an afternoon of deficit talks on the Hill in positive spirits -- even heaping high praise on Republican negotiators Eric Cantor and Jon Kyl. Biden said the group has hit "the whole waterfront" in the federal budget and everyone is committed to an agreement that saves $4 trillion over a decade or so. He told reporters that the "tough stuff" is still left to go -- such as big ticket items like changes in Medicare. "There are differences that are going to have to be bridged and wont occur until the end," he said.
Biden “described in general some of the tentative horse-trading involved, saying that the two sides have started cutting smaller deals that are contingent on reaching a larger deal on tougher items, like revenue,” Roll Call writes. Things like, “Now we’re getting down to the real hard stuff,” he said. “I’ll trade you my bicycle for your golf clubs.”
Leave a Comment:
If you guys screw with Medicare, don't expect to get my support in 2012. End of story.
Do away with Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security and I don't think they will have to worry about votes. I think it will lead to another civil war in this country with the teabaggers first to be eliminated.
Mom:
I don't think that's far fetched.
With all the crazy TParty crap, there's a real question about the states rights/federalism situation in this country. Look at SB 1070 in AZ. They wanted to set up their own immigration law. Rick Perry brought up TX seceding from the union. Where have we heard this before?
We had a war once to settle this issue. I hope it doesn't come to that point again. But it could.
Pretty bold statement there biweeler. I don't think they wanted to set up their own law, they want the Federal Government to enforce the law.
3W&M:
Their law conflicted with federal law. Thus the lawsuit, which so far has gone badly for AZ. The part in conflict with federal law is enjoined until the appeals are final.
Had DOJ not sued AZ, we would have/could have 50 different versions of immigration law. It would be an impossible mess. Imagine if we had 50 different versions of air traffic control, because AZ or other states didn't like the way fed gov handles it. How many of us would want to fly?
Maybe AZ will prevail, but I doubt it. They went over the Constitutional line. Fed gov is enforcing the immigration law; it's a canard that they're not.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/57108.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/25/AR2010072501790.html
Just saying that the fed gov does not enforce immigration law does not make it so. No matter how many times you repeat it.
Oh, and by the way, who killed immigration reform that last time it was proposed?
Republicans, that's who.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2007/06/29/us-usa-immigration-idUSN2742643820070629
So, unless the GOP has an immigration reform bill they like, we're going to be stuck with the status quo. No matter WHO is in the White House.
It's always amusing to hit them over the head with the truth. That way they don't know what hit them because they haven't seen it in a very long time.
Chris:
Yeah, they don't live in the reality based world...and they're proud of it. Unfortunately, facts don't bother them, so no minds are ever changed.
Bill
The bold statement part was towards your war comment. Second, I believe AZ passed the law because the Feds refuse to according to AZ. Now you have Alabama, pretty much passed the same bill as AZ right? I don't hear the DOJ filing a law suit, do you?
I read that article and it was pretty much a split down the middle and it was a bill introduced by Bush. But I believe the Democrats are just has fault since the Democrats controlled the Senate during that vote, am I wrong? I guess you didn't know that little bit of truth there did you Chris? ouch..
So biweeler, I think you can blame both sides on that issue.
3w2&M:
No need for a second suit on the same language. Any legislation modeling the AZ language will suffer and/or benefit from what is going to be a SCOTUS ruling in the AZ law. If AZ fails, they all fail.
Bold language on a potential war? I'm not the first to mention that someone might resort to "2nd Amendment remedies." The difference is that I hope it doesn't happen. Sharon Angle and others advocate it.
Yeah, there Dem resistance to Bush's reform. But the consensus is that without his own party's support, the Bush legislation was doomed. He didn't get that support, and it was indeed, doomed.
Is there ample blame for both parties? Of course. But if Bush had been able to marshall the GOP, it would have been a done deal...they had enough dem votes to clear the Senate.
Sharon Angle is an idiot.
I don't know if AZ is bring it to the SC. I haven't heard of that, it's not in the news where I'm at.
3W&M:
I think it's still at the 9th Circuit. But there's no doubt that the loser will eventually appeal to the SC. That should resolve the issue, but it's still 2-3 years down the road.
Not sure how the SC will rule. There's a clear conservative majority resulting in a lot of 5-4 decisions. But this is a somewhat unique issue that may create unforeseeable results.
Off subject but this article suggests the perfect ticket for the Democrats in 2012, if the Obama-Biden thing doesn't work out:
Weiner-Holder 2012, or 'Tweet and Litigate with us!'
Stop right there.
No need for cheap Weiner jokes. Scandal over....deal with it. Now let's talk about spending cuts and tax increases.
Why take away the one issue that they have?
Tough to prosecute people in civilian courts when the "confessions" may have been coerced via water boarding and other techniques. Guessing that evidence would never be admitted.
How is it allowed in military courts?
the problem is that they aren't really military courts that fall under the ucmj. basically the bush administration made up a bunch of rules and created a court to try people.
Groucho,
You were in the military and you don't know?
"the problem is that they aren't really military courts that fall under the ucmj."
What does that mean? That doesn't make any sense at all.
essentially these military courts are tribunals and don't fall within constitutional bounds. Because of that they don't have t have the same rules as other courtsk. Which is why people can be exonerated by this court and still be held indefinitely. this is partly why bush and cheney can't travel abroad. they might be arrested.
I understand that Chris, but you understand what the UCMJ applies to right? I think you were confused on what with military tribunals.
I just shake my head when i read the stupidity on here. I hear liberals crying on on about Medicare, when they are the party that is wanting to destroy it. They want to do nothing and let it go broke. I know liberals always think that money grows on trees. Do they not see whats happening in Greece!!! The whole world is going to be in trouble because of irresponsible Liberal and Socialist policies. Wake up people!!!
while i am not a liberal, i will say the policies of clinton and the new deal which really is the issue you have as a conservative have worked. the problem has been needless tax cuts that have balooned our defecit along with rampant de-regulation that has allowed the things in the financial markets that still hold a grip over us all. i wish if you would espouse conservative views please do so in a cogent manner.
Realhope:
If it's that bad, I suggest you stop wasting your time reading and commenting here.
Stop shaking your head and start burying it in the sand.
Money grows on trees? I didn't know that. Thanks for the insight.
If you think this is a liberal/socialist country like Greece, then you are seriously misinformed. This country may well fail in the next 2-5 years, but if it does, it will be because over the corporate takeover of governing driven by the GOP/TParty.
I'm sure you believe health care has now been socialized. WRONG. I wish you were right, because rather than a socialized system like Medicare or the VA, the Health Care Reform Act was a HUGE giveaway to insurance companies.
So find a site that doesn't make you shake your head. But if you want to get out of the echo chamber that is constantly screaming "Marxist," "socialist," and "communist," then stick around. You could learn something here.
You have a very warped and misinformed view. I believe you work hard, you save money and you support yourself. You are not owed anything from the government except national security. I am lower middle class but I make enough money to get by. I dont belevie my health care cost should go up because the government wants me to pay for irresponsible or lazy people. Same with my taxes. Unfortunately The lazy and irresponsible or starting to out number the rest. Thats what keeps the Democrats in office. You can tax the rich all you want , even untill they are broke too. The Democrats will go through that so fast and then what? Wake up!!!
what you just said is the exact reason why biweeler thinks this country may fail, because that view is so tragically naive that you actualy vote outside your own self interest. the fact is most people who don't have health care aren't lazy at all they simply can't afford it. unfortanetly there isn't enough spae here to have this whole conversation. please keep listening and reading here though because someone here will eventually open your eyes to the world around you.
Scott:
Well done. Thanks.
"I just shake my head when i read the stupidity on here."
You mean like what you just posted here? Medicare is funded with a 1.45% payroll tax on both the employer and employee. Has anyone even ran the number to see if Medicare would be solvent if this tax was raised to, say an even 2%. I would be willing to have more taken from my check to have a robust Medicare system when I retire. It is not like the insurance industry isn't taking enough from me now and I would just as soon cut them off when I reach 65.
You know Al, you're correct, now what about the people using Medicare that don't pay into it? Do you see the problem with that?
3WolvesandaMoon
Who doesn't pay into Medicare? Everybody who gets a paycheck is docked. It's not like the federal taxes which many people are refunded.
The huge debt and the economic meltdown are a result of the sub prime mortgage meltdown and the dems attempt at social engineering that caused the scandal. When will you people see that? Banks all over the world held derivatives that went to nothing after Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac went down the tubes. And the sub prime scandal is not the fault of George W. Bush or Barack Obama. But the government has to eliminate deficit spending and bring down the debt or Medicare and SSI will both come to an abrupt end. Whether you like it or not they will have to be changed. And the biggest problem with Medicare and SSI is that there will soon be many more drawing out of them than paying in. Small increases in the deductions for those two are similar to a fart in a whirlwind.
they have looked into raising that rate and it would help. also raising the ceiling on deductions above 104k in income. there are solutions we just have to put rhetoric and ideology aside and have real conversations. The mortgage scandal has a lot of things in it like the repeal of glass stiegel by clinton. In aditio to that it is a culture of corruption within big business. and there are many economists who would tell you that some debt is a good thing.
Rick:
I don't think any discussion of the sub prime melt down is complete without considering Goldman Sachs' role.
http://articles.nydailynews.com/2010-04-16/news/27061951_1_subprime-mortgages-john-paulson-mortgage-meltdown
While I lay the bulk of the blame on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for making sub prime lending so profitable I think anyone would have to admit the greed of the lending institutions and their investors is the cause of the meltdown.
Rick-312779
Fannie Mae and Freddie followed the sub prime trend, they did not lead it.
Do you not remember the outrageus housing prices of 2005-2006?
The housing bubble was fueled by Wall Street speculating in the mortgage market. I understand some were even betting the market would fail. It was a seriously screwed up situation, one that conservatives are now trying to pin on poor people buying houses they couldn't afford. That is just spin.
http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews/article/618173/david_brooks_gets_it_wrong_again;_blames_fannie_mae_for_big_banks'_mortgage_crisis/
biweeler, You are correct about Goldman Sachs. But Barack Obama's campaign took an awful lot of money from them.
I'm sorry Amy but you are just wrong. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac enabled it by purchasing the MBSs and CDSs that made it all possible. I think together they held around 5 trillion in those funds when the government took them over. And the Billion that Goldman Sachs tried to pawn off was just a drop in the bucket.
And the housing budget was fueled by the government putting pressure on the lending institutions to finance risky loans. But then it took on a life of its own when the banks and share holders assumed that the government would guarantee the loans.
Lisa:
The whole political system is awash in money, and it is fully corrupted by that money as a result. The Citizen's United decision has actually made the buying and selling of politicians the law of the land.
Goldman Sachs pulled off the biggest financial crime of all time. They will continue to buy politicians for peanuts, and they will continue to suck as much money as they can from our homes, our pensions, and from our system of government.
And they are clearly not alone in this endeavor...
Additional reading: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-people-vs-goldman-sachs-20110511
Rick-312779
You have been infected by right-wing spin.
We can settle this by reviewing the findings of the bipartisan Senate committee on the financial crisis.
In their report, "Wall Street and the Financial Crisis: Anatomy of a Financial Collapse," the committee describes the following players as having had a central role in the collapse : Washington Mutual, an aggressive mortgage lender that collapsed in 2008; the Office of Thrift Supervision, a regulator; the credit ratings agencies Standard & Poor's and Moody's Investors Service; and the investment banks Goldman Sachs and Deutsche Bank.
Freddie Mac and Frannie were followers, they were not leaders in sub prime mortgage lending. Republican as well as Democratic Preesidents have always pushed home ownership as a goal for lower income people, to build wealth and grow communities. But it was not the push to help poorer people to buy homes that fueled the bubble. It just was not. Don't you remember the McMansions the middle class were buying and building? The advertisments urging people to refinance and use the funds to go on vacation? I remember all that, why don't you?
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/14/business/14crisis.html?_r=1
i agree with both of the last two but without putting the mortgages with the high risk bankers (glass steigel) and the corporate corruption of the ratings companies
There's a number of things that bother me about the Washington Post story. The Clean Air Act and Clean Water Acts are the laws of the land. The EPA is charges with the task of writing regulations to carry out and enforce these acts. There is an Administrative Procedure Act set up to challenge what an person believes to be an improper or unlawful regulation. In other words, the courthouse is open to any corporation. Instead rather than comply with the law or challenge the aggrieving regulations, the businesses just want to belly ache. Last time I checked the free market system doesn't prevent businesses from doing stupid, corrupt or greedy things that are in their perceived self-interest. That's why we have laws to regulate them the same way we have laws to prevent speeding and running red lights. Do you really trust your neighbor that much? The same should apply to any business.
Wm.-375815
I can't say I can find anything wrong with protecting the environment and going "green". But if it is going to cost an extra $60,000 to build a 1500 sq.ft. house I would be willing to bet a lot of you would give it a lot of thought before committing to a project like that. If eveybody went green we would be a heck of a lot better off so I think the government should pass regulations requiring everyone to do so.
That is exactly what the government is demanding that industry do and I know from working in the industry that it is very expensive. To top it off, most technology is trading one type of pollution fro another. And to further rub salt in the wound, customers don't want to pay the added costs. I'm not saying that we should not follow EPA requirements for allowable emissions but I am saying don't be griping about what it costs you.
Rick:
Not to be difficult, but it really doesn't matter to me at this point if we add to the price of a new home.
1. Construction was always undervalued because of cheap immigrant labor. We should be paying a living wage to construction workers...citizens and legal immigrants only.
2. Sometimes higher cost for a better environment is a worthwhile investment. Not sure if this is one of those situations, but I'd be willing to consider it. I'd also pay more for a home built with solar, wind, or other energy options.
3. Frankly, nobody can buy a new home anyway, so what's the difference? So many homes are in foreclosure, abandoned, or under water that new housing is totally crazy anyway. I don't know why any builder would be putting up spec houses in this market.
In any event, I'm not griping about what it costs me.
3Wolves- regarding current Medicare beneficiaries not paying more into it? The generation that paid Medicare taxes during their working lives and paid income taxes at higher rates, in some cases astronomically higher rates, during the 1950's, 1960's, 1970's, 1980's and 1990's? You mean the generation that won WW II, faced down the Soviets in the Cold War, sent a man to the moon and built the current infrastructure we have that is now crumbling because THIS generation won't get off their cheap asses and maintain it? As far as I'm concerned, current Medicare recipients are paid their fair share.
Voting Right wing has cut your own throat and will continue to do so.
If you really want to help go to change.org and sign my petition to give share holders a vote on campaign contributions. Stop the politico's from robbing our corporations and their share holders blind .
The right wing politico's have declared war on you poor cowards and you best learn how to defend your selves instead of fighting among your selves. One corporation gets more welfare than all the poor people put together.The right wing is buying your mind with campaign contributions and poisoning your voters with misinformation , propaganda, and outright lies.Blue Dog democrats are hand and glove with the right wing corporatist s.