Thoughts?

Example: Supposedly Tea Baggers are suddenly all upset about the deficit. This is a little hard to take seriously. Democrats turned yearly deficits into yearly surpluses in the 1990s. Then Republicans go in power and reversed this with massive tax cuts for the rich and a massive, unfunded benefit package (Medicare D) in an election year.

Where was concern for deficits then?

Republicans led us into a war based on false pretenses and refused to pay for it by raising taxes or cutting other spending. Instead, they celebrated with yet another massive tax cut for the rich.

Where was concern for deficits then?

And yet now we are to believe that these same folks--who couldn't be bothered to make a peep while Dick Cheney was assuring us the "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter"--are concerned about deficits.

It's a little hard to take seriously. Surely there must be some other motivation here.

What is it?

Hard to say. Hard to say.

http://wnymedia.net/paladino/

Then never made a rational argument against it that was the least bit compelling. They also lied a lot (government death panels, premiums being raised, etc.)

The same is now happening with financial reform. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell told a big fat lie last week about the Dem's reform bill. "We cannot allow endless taxpayer funded bailouts for big Wall Street banks. That's why we must not pass the financial reform bill that's about to hit the floor. The fact is this bill wouldn't solve the problems that led to the financial crisis. It would make them worse."
McConnell said the bill in question, authored by Senate Banking Committee chairman Chris Dodd, would "not only allow for taxpayer funded bailouts for Wall Street banks. It institutionalizes them."

Even conservatives in right-wing publications agreed that this bill does not increase the likelihood of future bailouts by taxpayers. In fact, "it makes them impossible." http://www.americanbanker.com/issues/17 … 657-1.html

So why are the Republicans lying about this?

Same reasons they lied about health care reform. The truth is that they oppose regulations on the financial industry because they get lots of money from the industry and because they can't see past their ideology. But they can't say that. And they can't make a reasoned argument against this bill.

So they lie.

OKLAHOMA CITY – Frustrated by recent political setbacks, tea party leaders and some conservative members of the Oklahoma Legislature say they would like to create a new volunteer militia to help defend against what they believe are improper federal infringements on state sovereignty. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100412/ap_ … ty_militia

Okay, this is pretty silly and won't come to anything. But still, I just don't understand all this rhetoric about "federal takeovers."

Here's what happened: In 2008 Democrats won a 75-seat majority in the House, a 19-seat majority in the Senate, and won the Presidency by the greatest margin in over 20 years. Obama and many Democrats ran on health care reform.

So they got into office and they passed health care reform.

Isn't this just a case of people not accepting defeat in the American system of elections? Isn't this just a case of people who don't really accept the idea of democracy?

From their perspective the census is obviously a Communist-Socialist conspiracy. So they've been braying about not cooperating with the census, encouraging their gullible followers to not return their census forms.

Ironically, this works against their own interests, since if they aren't counted, they stand to lose representation in government. Here's a right-wing columnist explaining this: http://www.redstate.com/rep_patrick_mch … onal-duty/

But wait! It gets better.

So, if the right-wing crazies are undercounted in the census, and thereby underrepresented in Congress?
They only have themselves to blame.

1) Republican-passed Medicare Part D legislation gives subsidizes of about $1,300 per retiree per year to businesses that provide prescription drugs to their retirees and permits companies to deduct the value of credit....The new health care law, however, pays for itself by eliminating waste in the system and it closes this particular double dipping provision. Companies would still receive the tax-free subsidy, but they’ll no longer be able to deduct it. And they’re angry.

Get that? They still get a taxpayer hand-out, whether they are raking in profits or not. It's just that now they can't take a tax deduction on their government payments. And they are all upset.

Republicans voted against this, unanimously.

2) The banking industry has been cut out as middlemen for student loans. Since the government guarantees loans, the banks were taking no risk--just lining their pockets with billions of dollars.

The new law will eliminate fees paid to private banks to act as intermediaries in providing loans to college students and use much of the nearly $68 billion in savings over 11 years to expand Pell grants and make it easier for students to repay outstanding loans after graduating.

Diverting tax dollars from the banking industry and investing them in educational opportunities for low-income students--Republicans voted against this, unanimously.

Democratic Congressional leaders struck a tentative agreement on Thursday that breathes new life into President Obama’s proposed overhaul of federal student loan programs. The deal would bundle the bill into an expedited budget package along with the Democratic health care legislation, which would allow for both measures to be passed by the Senate on a simple majority vote.

....The bill would end government payments to private, commercial student lenders, leaving the government to lend directly to students. It would also redirect billions of dollars to expand the Pell grant program for low-income students, and to pay for other education initiatives.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/12/us/po … loans.html

This will stop the nutty, craven practice of paying banks billions of our tax dollars to make federally guaranteed loans that the federal government can make directly for a whole lot less.

Nice.

And here I had thought that Sarah Palin was the most ridiculous person on the McCain/Palin ticket...

Interesting. A government of the people and by the people? Although if that's the case why was Obamacare passed? It clearly is not supported by the majority of Americans....

CNN:
"As you may know, the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate are trying to pass final legislation that would make major changes in the country's health care system. Based on what you have read or heard about that legislation, do you generally favor it or generally oppose it?"

            Favor     Oppose     Unsure           
            %     %     %           
      3/19-21/10
           39             59                2           

Fox:
"Based on what you know about the health care reform legislation being considered right now, do you favor or oppose the plan?"

            Favor     Oppose     Unsure           
            %     %     %           
      3/16-17/10
            35             55                10

NBC:
"Do you generally approve or disapprove of the job Barack Obama is doing in handling the issue of health care reform?"  Half sample (Form A), MoE  ±  4.4

            Approve     Disapprove     Unsure                 
            %     %     %                 
     

3/11, 13-14/10
                41      57                          2    

PEW:
"Thinking about some issues: Do you approve or disapprove of the way Barack Obama is handling health care policy?"

            Approve     Disapprove     Unsure           
            %     %     %           
     

3/10-14/10
             39             52                        9    

The polling list goes on and on. And ultimately the US is not a democracy, but regardless, why does the president feel the need to lie in his speeches? I know I know, it probably wasn't him. The teleprompter told the lie  .

I will be fair though. Pelosi did a hell of a job bribing people to vote for Obamacare. So nice job Pelosi, I'll make sure I hire you when I'm looking to run for office.

Now the Republicans are lying through their teeth about what the nuclear option is. Republicans are knowingly misusing the term to describe the Democrats considering using the reconciliation process to pass health care reform.

The reconciliation process is entirely within existing Senate rules.

--And here's the kicker--

The reconciliation process has been used 22 times since 1980, and 16 of those times it was used by the Republicans. Using the reconciliation process for large medical bills is routine.

Ever heard of COBRA: That's the health insurance program that lets people get temporary insurance after they are laid off of work. It stands for Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act. It was passed in the spring of 1986, when Republicans held the majority in the Senate.

Lots of sources on this. Here's one: http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2 … cceptable/

Full credit:
1. Forming insurance exchanges
2. Reforming Medicare Advantage
3. Value-based payment for Medicare
4. Creating an independent Medicare advisory board
5. Fighting Medicare fraud
6. Investing in IT
Partial credit:
7. Prevention programs
8. A tax on high-value insurance plans
9. Malpractice reform

According to this article in the far-left wing Socialist Wall Street Journal: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 … TopOpinion

And he left one out:

10. Price transparency (making public the precise charges for items and services charged by hospitals)

What does that really mean, when you look at real numbers? I submit that it means they shouldn't be taken seriously when they whine about the deficit.

Many people think that balancing the budget is an easy task just requiring political will, something that would not affect them personally. Many members of Congress often give the impression that all we have to do is eliminate earmarks and pork barrel spending and that would be enough.

Is that true?

Recently the ranking Republican in the House Budget Committee, Paul Ryan, was honest enough to actually put forward a budget that would be balanced without raising any taxes. According to the CBO, under the Ryan plan federal debt as a share of the gross domestic product (GDP) would rise from 61% this year to 100% in the year 2045 before falling to zero in 2080.

2080. That's a long time to wait. And what policy changes would have to be enacted? Ryan was honest and courageous enough to admit that the only way to eliminate the deficit without tax hikes was to cut Social Security and Medicare. Severely. In fact, by 2021 Medicare would have to be eliminated completely, replaced with vouchers that would steadily lose ground to annual costs (they would be indexed for only half the historical rate of price inflation in health care). Social Security would be privatized.

Workers would see their health benefits sharply reduced because Ryan would abolish the tax exclusion for health insurance.

Now, you may actually support some or all of these policy changes. But the reality is that the American public overwhelmingly likes and supports Social Security and Medicare. Any politician who dares even begin to speak seriously about cutting them is cut off at the knees. Bush tried very hard in 2005 to invest his re-election momentum into privatizing Social Security. He got nowhere. Clinton annihilated the GOP when they tried to cut Mediare in 1995, which in part was responsible for Speaker Gingrich's forced retirement.

Today the GOP is running from Ryan's budget as if it were the new Bubonic Plague. Yet they continue to call for a balance budget and no new taxes.

Which is why they should not be taken seriously.

--I cribbed/amended/etc. this post from the following column by conservative economist Bruce Bartlett: http://www.forbes.com/2010/02/11/cut-sp … tlett.html

Lately it's been used to an unprecidented extent, as the loser party has decided that stopping the majority party from governing is just fine with them, the country be damned.

Here's what the very, very, centrist/milquetoast USA Today opines:

http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2010/02/ … t-gop.html

I agree.

Why is that, do you suppose? Due to unusual levels of incompetence? Or something else?

Here's some interesting data that suggests "something else" is the answer. And the answer is the economy.

Source: http://www.themonkeycage.org/2010/02/wh … e_gov.html

People trust government when times are good. They don’t trust it when times are bad.

Fri 25, Dec 2009
   
Fighting for the Family of Man
Written by Peter Chamberlin   
Friday, 25 December 2009 15:54

by Peter Chamberlin

The American people are slowly waking-up to what we are.  We are a Nation that has surrendered our right to determine our own destiny for the promise of a job, a nice home, or healthcare that we can afford.  We think that we are still the same people who volunteered to fight a war against an obvious evil because it was the right thing to do, but that is no longer who we are.

The long series of wars that we have made possible, because we continued to think that it was right, have changed us.  Our support for endless war has opened the door for a few individuals to reap astronomical profits from our Army’s actions.   Our government is the hands of men who profit enormously by manufacturing and exporting war, not the tools of war, but actual war itself.  Serving a government that creates wars, then uses our children for cannon fodder in them is a travesty beyond measure.

Patriotism and dedicated service to a mission to start wars all over the world does no service to the Nation; it undermines the American homeland.  Bravery and heroism in service to a cause, whose ultimate objective is the destruction of the American Republic, is more than foolishness, it is dishonor to those who have served in the past and a dark stain on the ideals they fought for.

The men who pull the strings and make the life and death decisions in America have a hunger that extends far beyond our shores.  It was not enough that they owned everything in this country, they had to bleed the country dry in a methodical plan to use their American assets as seed money to take over the world.  They would buy controlling interest in every corporation and every country in the world.  Whatever they couldn’t buy they planned to take by force.

It was not enough that we were slowly destroying the world in order to maintain our extravagant lifestyles; they had to go and accelerate the process.  What have we empowered our leaders to do in the name of “preserving our way of life”? 

To save the American way, we have spread the cancer of war onto every shore, driving it deeply into every heart.  We have forced the entire world to engage in our war upon individual freedom, for limiting freedom of action in the rest of the nations is the only way to avoid limits on our own behavior.  American foreign policy is a pathological assault upon the rest of the human race.  Anyone with an unsuppressed conscience, a true love of his or her country, or an ounce of human decency has to be disturbed to the point of exploding over what is being done by American hands.

Most of our leaders freely admit that we are in this global war to preserve our “way of life,” having dropped the ruse about this being a war of “self-defense,” long ago.  Even though it is approaching absurdity to continue claiming victim status in this war of aggression, the appeal that we are fighting to preserve the “American dream” still fires-up the ignorant masses, who all long to become millionaires themselves.  For sheep such as this, there is no cure; no appeal to reason (no matter how eloquent or profound) can dissuade them from supporting this fight for world conquest.  Such people have long ago laid their consciences to rest, for them there is no hope.

The power of the conscience is our greatest weapon in this ideological war.  The key that can save America (and the world) from itself is the collective guilt that we all share, which alone has the power to motivate us to take the necessary actions to put an end to the assault.  American leaders view the world as a prize to be won, or better, to be taken by force.  To this end, they have hatched a monstrous plan, so pervasively evil that it is beyond comprehension to the average sheep’s puny little mind.

Everything in the plan centers around the willingness of a certain type of individual to murder his own countrymen for money and power.  Without the active aid of this key personality type; the plan will not work.

Wherever the Empire oozes forth, spreading its putrid decadence, there are always countless men without consciences, waiting to become part of the great desolation. When confronted by this evil, so many men think that they will somehow fare better by serving this beast than by opposing it. The monsters know this, and know how to recognize which men and women can be swayed with bribery or threats and which ones will not submit to the yoke for any reason. Their work is organized like a symphony, hitting the high notes here, slamming the low notes over there. The point is, they know how to play us like we were merely instruments. Our task in the resistance must be to recognize this and learn to recognize the sheep's mind within ourselves. Once we learn to recognize it within, we can apply that knowledge to the people we meet, or hope to influence, learning to recognize which one is open to reason and which one is a closed mind. Their intent to control the world is based on their ability to control and manipulate minds. We must develop similar capabilities, if we are to be effective. Changing human nature is the name of the game. We must teach the sheep to think like wolves.

Resistance is the only answer.

    peterchamberlin@naharnet.com

http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/news/1 … f-man.html