In my life and country...
Well, I lost some steam on my blog writing and took a month long break, but am now ready to pick things back up again. There are lots to write about in both politics and life . The fun house of GOP Presidential politics should provide endless starting points for steams of thought. And of course, my endless wait for the GOP jobs plan continues - where are the jobs John Boehner that you promised last fall? Life has been busy too with one child now in college, the other a pre-teen, and everyone else meeting the challenges of aging and health.
More to come....
Friday, November 4, 2011
Thursday, September 29, 2011
Nero fiddles while Rome burns
There are reports that a draft of the House's Labor/Health and Human Services appropriations bill contains deep cuts to heating assistance for the poor, requires the repeal of a major provision of the health care law that will help provide assistance for disabled people, halts implementation of the entire law until the Supreme Court determines the constitutionality of its individual insurance mandate, and slashes funding for Planned Parenthood and public broadcasting.
Needless to say, the Democrats in both the House and the Senate say the bill is DOA. Of course, it needs only a majority vote to pass in the House where the GOP holds a majority. On the other hand, in the Senate the Democrats hold a majority. And as you know, a bill must pass both chambers of Congress and be signed by the President to become a law. This draft bill will never become law, but if it does pass out of the House and doesn't pass the Senate, the federal Labor/Health and Human Services department will not have any funding leading to a partial government shutdown.
I'm thinking back to last November when the GOP was swept into power in the House on the promise to create jobs. Tell me how this action creates even 1 job. Tell me how the time they are spending on this draft bill, that will never become law, moves the country forward in any way, or does anyting at all to create the envronment where jobs will be created. The GOP is good at trying to force the government to shut down, at job creation, not so much.
To those of you who vote, realize that if you chose to put the GOP in control of other parts of the government, as they have demonstrated since last November, the GOP will waste their time on social issues that punnish middle class and poor, sick citizens rather than focus on public polciy to move our country forward for the good of the whole society. Look no further than the last 12 months and see what has happened in the House and in numerous State legislatures to see where the GOP wants to take our coutry.
Needless to say, the Democrats in both the House and the Senate say the bill is DOA. Of course, it needs only a majority vote to pass in the House where the GOP holds a majority. On the other hand, in the Senate the Democrats hold a majority. And as you know, a bill must pass both chambers of Congress and be signed by the President to become a law. This draft bill will never become law, but if it does pass out of the House and doesn't pass the Senate, the federal Labor/Health and Human Services department will not have any funding leading to a partial government shutdown.
I'm thinking back to last November when the GOP was swept into power in the House on the promise to create jobs. Tell me how this action creates even 1 job. Tell me how the time they are spending on this draft bill, that will never become law, moves the country forward in any way, or does anyting at all to create the envronment where jobs will be created. The GOP is good at trying to force the government to shut down, at job creation, not so much.
To those of you who vote, realize that if you chose to put the GOP in control of other parts of the government, as they have demonstrated since last November, the GOP will waste their time on social issues that punnish middle class and poor, sick citizens rather than focus on public polciy to move our country forward for the good of the whole society. Look no further than the last 12 months and see what has happened in the House and in numerous State legislatures to see where the GOP wants to take our coutry.
Wednesday, September 28, 2011
A step ahead of Grover
With my post from last night, I'm a step ahead of Grover Norquist.
Is it too late to retitle that previous post to read Warren, Doug, Joe, and Grover?
Is it too late to retitle that previous post to read Warren, Doug, Joe, and Grover?
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Warren, Doug, and Joe
You may have heard that President Obama has proposed the Buffet Rule. This would be anew tax law that would require millionaires and billionaires to pay an effective tax rate at least equal to middle income wage earners. It is called Buffet Rule because billionaire investor Warren Buffet noted that he pays a lower effective tax rate than his secretary. He believes tax rates on the richest people in the US should be higher. I also believe they should be higher. Total tax revenue as a percentage of GDP is at a 50 year low while at the same time the country is fighting two unfunded wars and suffering massive layoffs of workers because of the deepest recession since the Great Depression.
Yesterday at an event with President Obama, A former Google executive, Doug Edwards, asked President Obama to raise his taxes. This was his way of saying taxes on the richest in our society should be raised. In response to Warren Buffet and now Doug Edwards, I have heard numerous people, including Joe Scarborough today on Morning Joe, suggest these two should just write a check out to the IRS and mail it in. Obviously Joe and like minded people are missing the point, but I’ll play along for fun. Let’s go!
Two unfunded wars in the Middle East and you believe it’s in our national interest to be there, how about you write out a check to the Department of Defense. They could use a little to offset the $10 billion being spent a month. And you know, since you are so supportive of the conflicts, put your money where you mouth is. While your at it sign up for military service yourself, or at least ask that the draft be reinstituted.
Feel like the oil companies should keep their subsidies because bolstering US oil production is so important, well you should just send Exxon a check to show your commitment.
If your number one national concern is the deficit, then skip your tax refund. When you fill out your tax return for 2011, just use zero exemptions and take no deductions. Flat out skip the 1040 Schedule A and the effort to itemize your deductions. Just put zeros in all the deduction boxes. This is the most patriotic way to show how serious you are on a personal level about deficit reduction.
None of this really makes sense does it? One nation under God, indivisible…. We are one nation, and we rise and fall together. We have to get some macro things right in our country over both the short-term and long-term. The country does need to be on more solid financial footing for the good of our whole society. We can not get there simply through spending cuts alone. Remember, tax revenue as a percentage of GDP is at a 50 year low. We are not just experiencing a spending thing; we are also experiencing a revenue thing. This is what both Warren Buffet and Doug Edwards understand, but can’t solve alone by sending their checks to the IRS.
Friday, September 9, 2011
Death Panels, Social Security, Rick Perry, and the GOP
In my country…
…I watched the Republican Presidential candidate debate on Wednesday night. The most excitement of the 2 hours came when Rick Perry doubled down on his recent comments about the Social Security system in the US. In days prior to the debate Perry referred to Social Security as a Ponzi scheme. During the debate, he could have tempered his remarks about the US retirement system that has been in place since 1935, or choose to ratchet up his rhetoric instead. In referring to Social Security Perry said “ It is a Ponzi scheme to tell our kids that are 25 or 30 years old today, you're paying into a program that's going to be there. Anybody that's for the status quo with Social Security today is involved with a monstrous lie to our kids, and it's not right.”
Perry’s comments have to be called out as the lie they are. Perry is lying about Social Security. He is fabricating things that hold no basis in fact. He is deliberately misleading and confusing you. The reason I, and everybody else who knows the truth, must smash this down and expose it as a lie, is because if he, the GOP, and Fox News is permitted to get this going in their echo chamber, a section of the public will start to believe it’s actually true. Just look at the “death panels” that were said to be part of the Affordable Care Act that was signed in into law in 2010. There are no death panels, but in absence of aggressive pushback against a lie, if it is allowed to be repeated enough, people start to believe it’s true.
Social Security as a Ponzi scheme? Certainly not! Put most simply, here’s why. If you do better with a picture than with a written article, then check out this Venn diagram to see what characteristics Social Security and a Ponzi scheme do, and do not, share.
Click on the image to enlarge.
…I watched the Republican Presidential candidate debate on Wednesday night. The most excitement of the 2 hours came when Rick Perry doubled down on his recent comments about the Social Security system in the US. In days prior to the debate Perry referred to Social Security as a Ponzi scheme. During the debate, he could have tempered his remarks about the US retirement system that has been in place since 1935, or choose to ratchet up his rhetoric instead. In referring to Social Security Perry said “ It is a Ponzi scheme to tell our kids that are 25 or 30 years old today, you're paying into a program that's going to be there. Anybody that's for the status quo with Social Security today is involved with a monstrous lie to our kids, and it's not right.”
Perry’s comments have to be called out as the lie they are. Perry is lying about Social Security. He is fabricating things that hold no basis in fact. He is deliberately misleading and confusing you. The reason I, and everybody else who knows the truth, must smash this down and expose it as a lie, is because if he, the GOP, and Fox News is permitted to get this going in their echo chamber, a section of the public will start to believe it’s actually true. Just look at the “death panels” that were said to be part of the Affordable Care Act that was signed in into law in 2010. There are no death panels, but in absence of aggressive pushback against a lie, if it is allowed to be repeated enough, people start to believe it’s true.
Social Security as a Ponzi scheme? Certainly not! Put most simply, here’s why. If you do better with a picture than with a written article, then check out this Venn diagram to see what characteristics Social Security and a Ponzi scheme do, and do not, share.
Click on the image to enlarge.
Monday, August 29, 2011
As if on queue - Eric Cantor please.
In my country...
When is a jobs plan, not a jobs plan? Just listen to the House Majority Leader, Eric Cantor. Calling his proposed bill a jobs bill is like calling vanillia ice cream chocolate. Just becasue you put that name on it doesn't mean that's what it is.
As I had stated in my immediate previous post, the answer to jobs is not more tax and regulation cuts. If this was the answer then why didn't it work between 2000 and 2008. Over that eight year period, we had large tax cuts and industry people in charge of federal government departments that suggested and wrote regulations. If tax and regulation cuts are the answer why didn't they work in the Bush years?
When is a jobs plan, not a jobs plan? Just listen to the House Majority Leader, Eric Cantor. Calling his proposed bill a jobs bill is like calling vanillia ice cream chocolate. Just becasue you put that name on it doesn't mean that's what it is.
As I had stated in my immediate previous post, the answer to jobs is not more tax and regulation cuts. If this was the answer then why didn't it work between 2000 and 2008. Over that eight year period, we had large tax cuts and industry people in charge of federal government departments that suggested and wrote regulations. If tax and regulation cuts are the answer why didn't they work in the Bush years?
And now jobs.
America businesses need to create more jobs. That is plain and simple. In the always present equation of supply and demand, we have tried to do things on the supply side of the equation. We have tried tax cuts and deregulation to stimulate business hiring. We have allowed accelerated depreciation tax rules to get businesses to buy more things now in hopes of stimulating more demand next. The chosen direction of our governament, Congress and the Executive alike, is to focus on the supply side and also on deficit reduction. These have not worked to create more jobs. Who else remembers back to the summer of 2010 and the lead up to the November elections? The mantra of the challengers was jobs, jobs, jobs. No actions have been initiated by any elected politician to actually do something to create the environment for new jobs to be created. Instead, the actions have simply lowered the tax revenue our government can then use to institute policies that could have an effect on demand, or at the very least provide needed services until demand comes back on its own. It is time the governament really does something to stimulate demand by focusing on where demand actually come from - the people. When people are in a position to buy goods and services, the companies that create them will hire people to build and provide them. It is time to focus on the demand side of the equation instaed of the supply side.
Call you elected representative today and tell them you want real action to create jobs, not more of the failed policy of tax cuts and deregulation.
Call you elected representative today and tell them you want real action to create jobs, not more of the failed policy of tax cuts and deregulation.
Saturday, August 27, 2011
Obligations when taking tax dollars
In my country (and state)...
...In Florida, Governor Rick Scott signed a law requiring state citizens to submit to drug testing before they can receive any cash aid from the state. Now, an Ohio Republican state senator has drafted a bill that would require unemployed workers to pass a drug screening before they could receive unemployment insurance from the state. If he thinks this is a good idea, then I wonder if he would hold all elected state politicians to the same requirement? Now, that I’m thinking about it, not only does Ohio State tax dollars pay his salary, they also greatly subsidize his health insurance premiums. I think he, and other elected state politicians should submit to health screening and if his body mass index is too high (follow the link to see the size of this guy's double chin), or his cholesterol is off the charts, or he smokes, he pays 100% of his health insurance premiums. Why should state tax dollars be wasted on his health care if he can't be bothered to keep himself in general good health. Seem fair doesn't it? No, double standard here.
...In Florida, Governor Rick Scott signed a law requiring state citizens to submit to drug testing before they can receive any cash aid from the state. Now, an Ohio Republican state senator has drafted a bill that would require unemployed workers to pass a drug screening before they could receive unemployment insurance from the state. If he thinks this is a good idea, then I wonder if he would hold all elected state politicians to the same requirement? Now, that I’m thinking about it, not only does Ohio State tax dollars pay his salary, they also greatly subsidize his health insurance premiums. I think he, and other elected state politicians should submit to health screening and if his body mass index is too high (follow the link to see the size of this guy's double chin), or his cholesterol is off the charts, or he smokes, he pays 100% of his health insurance premiums. Why should state tax dollars be wasted on his health care if he can't be bothered to keep himself in general good health. Seem fair doesn't it? No, double standard here.
By the way, what Florida has seen so far is that 2% of people applying for state aid tested positive for drugs. The typical population tests positive about 7% of the time. The amount of money Florida is paying for drug screening surpasses the amount they saved by denying aid.
I do not support this idea for Ohio's unemployed.
I do not support this idea for Ohio's unemployed.
They’re all the same, right?
In my country...
...For those of you that believe it doesn’t matter which political party controls the Executive Branch of government because both parties are the same, I’m here to tell you that it does matter in ways big, and small. For the big ways, all you have to do is look at what is happening to public employees in states like Ohio, Wisconsin, and New Jersey that are now under GOP Governors. For the small ways look no further than a recent ruling from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Here, you see how a federal agency works when it is under the control of a President who is from the Democratic Party rather than the GOP. Informing workers of their labor rights is a far from extreme as you can get, but just makes good sense. This would never happen if the GOP controlled the White House. It's time for Americans to wake up and realize the Democrats are on the side of middle-class working Americans while the GOP is on the side of Corporations, millionaires and billionaires.
...For those of you that believe it doesn’t matter which political party controls the Executive Branch of government because both parties are the same, I’m here to tell you that it does matter in ways big, and small. For the big ways, all you have to do is look at what is happening to public employees in states like Ohio, Wisconsin, and New Jersey that are now under GOP Governors. For the small ways look no further than a recent ruling from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Here, you see how a federal agency works when it is under the control of a President who is from the Democratic Party rather than the GOP. Informing workers of their labor rights is a far from extreme as you can get, but just makes good sense. This would never happen if the GOP controlled the White House. It's time for Americans to wake up and realize the Democrats are on the side of middle-class working Americans while the GOP is on the side of Corporations, millionaires and billionaires.
Thursday, August 25, 2011
I love Digby!
In my country...
...Where is her thinking wrong? This is a beautiful post that lays out exactly what is wrong with the thinking of the political right. The good old days can be talked about as being so perfect, but only while wearing rose colored glasses. Fully 1/3 of seniors lived in poverty before Medicare - this has gone down the memory hole with some many other things. Is this what we as a country want to go back to?
Medicare is needed and must be kept as an important program in our country. Does it have financial issues? Yes, it does. The answer to these issues do not lay in how to reduce the coverage of the Medicare program, but rather in the health care delivery system it seeks to insure against. We first need a single payer system like Canada, and then move to total national health care like the UK. This will be the only way to adequately attempt to control the cost of healthcare.
...Where is her thinking wrong? This is a beautiful post that lays out exactly what is wrong with the thinking of the political right. The good old days can be talked about as being so perfect, but only while wearing rose colored glasses. Fully 1/3 of seniors lived in poverty before Medicare - this has gone down the memory hole with some many other things. Is this what we as a country want to go back to?
Medicare is needed and must be kept as an important program in our country. Does it have financial issues? Yes, it does. The answer to these issues do not lay in how to reduce the coverage of the Medicare program, but rather in the health care delivery system it seeks to insure against. We first need a single payer system like Canada, and then move to total national health care like the UK. This will be the only way to adequately attempt to control the cost of healthcare.
Monday, August 22, 2011
Perry and Kerry - they rhyme but are completely different
First there was John Kerry, the Democrat's 2004 Presidential candidate, a bunch of false things were said about him by others (Swiftboat Veterarns for Truth) in a successful plan to discredit him. Here none of what was said by others was truthful.
Now, we have Rick Perry, who 9 months ago wrote a book laying out exactly what he believes (Fed Up). This is a book written by Perry defining his beliefs in his own words. Here all of what Perry said you are now told not to believe.
This is the GOP up-is-down world.
Now, we have Rick Perry, who 9 months ago wrote a book laying out exactly what he believes (Fed Up). This is a book written by Perry defining his beliefs in his own words. Here all of what Perry said you are now told not to believe.
This is the GOP up-is-down world.
Monday, August 15, 2011
Fighter or Lover?
In my country...
When a unilateral decision to continue to push for compromise and bipartisanship causes your base to view you as weak, and the independents to view you as ineffective, it is time to give it up and be a fighter, not a lover. It is time for Obama to move from his current position, left to where the majority of the American voters are.
Saturday, August 13, 2011
Our loss of Freedom and Liberty?
In my country…
I am starting to hear, once again, the GOP (especially its Presidential candidates) talk about restoring freedom and liberty – usually in the context of “taking back our country”. I’d like to know the freedoms and liberties they think were lost in the last 2 years and 8 months since Barrack Obama became President. Perhaps, it’s the Affordable Care Act, or the law to regulate the reckless practices of Wall Street and the banks. Beyond these two laws that have been sorely needed – 55 million Americans without health insurance and the financial meltdown, I’m not sure what their talking about, do you? If so, help me out by telling me the freedoms and liberties you have lost over the last two years.
I also hear them talk a lot about changing the direction we are headed to restore jobs. They say we need lower taxes and less regulation. Well as best as I can remember, we have had massive tax cuts, and less regulation since 2000 and we have not seen more jobs created. At what point, do they believe that lower taxes will actually result in job creation? From the beginning to the end of President George W. Bush’s 8 years in office taxes were reduced by a huge amount, but it didn’t result in a huge increase in jobs. Surely he, and his administration, worked to reduce the amount of regulation, but again it didn’t seem to have an effect on job creation. So why does the GOP believe that this is the answer to creating more jobs. It wasn’t the spark for our economy from 2000 to 2008, and it won’t be the spark for 2012 and beyond. On the other hand, it will allow the rich to get richer while the poor gets poorer. This is not the direction I want our country to head in beyond 2012.
Friday, August 12, 2011
Saving this from the memory hole
In my country...
I don't like to just post other material very much, but want to save this from the memory hole it is already trying to be pushed down into. Whether or not you believe it was in fact a trigger, remember that these folks did say these things when they try to say the didn't.
From Talking Points Memo
After Triggering Downgrade, Debt Default Skeptics Try To Run From Their Records — But They Can’t
Standard & Poors has a specific justification for downgrading the U.S. bond rating, and it's deadly for Republicans. It wasn't just that Congress showed itself to be reckless and dysfunctional, or that the GOP shows no sign of ever ending their anti-tax jihad. It's that for a period of weeks, some lawmakers (read: Republicans) were quite literally shrugging off the risks of blowing past the August 2 deadline, running out of borrowing authority, and missing payment obligations.
"[P]eople in the political arena were even talking about a potential default," said Joydeep Mukherji, senior directior at S&P. "That a country even has such voices, albeit a minority, is something notable," he added. "This kind of rhetoric is not common amongst AAA sovereigns."
This is unambiguous, and leaves little room for obfuscation. S&P's original, lengthy statement explaining the downgrade cited political dysfunction in Congress quite broadly, but did not mention this specific element of the debate. For weeks, high-profile conservative lawmakers practically welcomed the notion of exhausting the country's borrowing authority, or even technically defaulting. Others brazenly dismissed the risks of doing so. And for a period of days, in an earlier stage of the debate, Republican leaders said technical default would be an acceptable consequence, if it meant the GOP walked away with massive entitlement cuts in the end.
Of course, that doesn't mean the GOP won't try to sweep the mess they've made down the memory hole. Here's Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA), who sponsored legislation that would've forced the Treasury to prioritize interest payments on U.S. debt in the event of a lapse in borrowing authority. "No one said that would be acceptable," he said of a default. "What we said was in the event of a deadlock it was imperative that bondholders retain their confidence that loans made to the United States be repaid on schedule."
That may be true for McClintock. Others were much more relaxed about the consequences of ignoring the August 2 deadline.
House Budget Committee chairman Paul Ryan said if "a bondholder misses a payment for a day or two or three or four," it's preferable so long as "you're putting the government in a materially better position to be able to pay their bonds later on." (Video below)
Ryan and others, including Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA), were echoing hedge-fund manager Stanley Druckenmiller, who was quoted in a widely cited Wall Street Journal article. Here's Toomey: "The most high-profile advocate for this was Stanley Druckenmiller ... one of the world's most successful hedge-fund managers, extraordinarily wealthy from his knowledge of the markets, a big money manager now, and a big holder of Treasury securities -- and he has said that he would actually accept even a delay in interest payments on the Treasuries that he holds. And he would prefer that if it meant that the Congress would right this ship."
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) warned against default, but for a time was willing to go past August 2.
"The markets are not fooled by some date imposed to say that that is the trigger for the collapse," he said at a Virginia jobs forum in May. "I think the markets are looking to see that there is real reform."
Others, on the conservative wing of the GOP claimed loudly that President Obama and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner were being dishonest about the consequences of blowing past August 2, and refused to vote to raise the debt limit unless Democrats agreed to truly radical conditions.
When Speaker John Boehner acknowledged that missing the August 2 deadline would put the country in "an awful lot of jeopardy, Rep. Louie Gohmert reacted by saying, "[t]he problem with the Speaker, and him saying that, is he believes the President. And I would encourage the Speaker not to believe the President anymore when the President says things like that."
This was a fairly common view among conservative Republicans, particularly in the House.
A number of other them tried to defuse the political time bomb they'd set under themselves by demanding that the White House prioritize not just creditors, but entitlement beneficiaries and the military as well, which would have left no money for just about any government services.
This extended beyond the halls of Congress, too. Taking their cues from the right, GOP Presidential candidates stood opposed to raising the debt limit. In response to a question from TPM, former Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty said he wasn't sure a temporary U.S. default would have calamitous consequences. "Maybe not. We don't know," he said.
Nebraska GOP Senate candidate Jon Bruning, who, if he wins, will be faced with a debt limit vote in early 2013 said, "[Default] may be something that has to happen to make the fundamental changes that are necessary in the American governmental system. We have to shrink it. And, if the Democratic Party that controls the White House and the Senate doesn't understand it, default may be necessary."
It's worth noting as well that a protracted lapse in borrowing authority would have massive economic consequences even if the Treasury department prioritized U.S. debt, which would reduce incoming revenue, and likely lead to a debt default anyhow. So the notion that the U.S. could meet all of its obligations to bondholders indefinitely doesn't hold water either.
Republicans will try to sidestep Mukherji's claim that they were welcoming, or at least toying with the idea of, in his words, "potential default." But they most certainly were.
Saving this from the memory hole
I do not like to just post other material very much, but want to save this from the memory hole it is already trying to be pushed down into. Whether or not you believe it was in fact a trigger, remember that these folks did say these things when they try to say the didn't.
From Talking Points Memo
After Triggering Downgrade, Debt Default Skeptics Try To Run From Their Records — But They Can’t
Standard & Poors has a specific justification for downgrading the U.S. bond rating, and it's deadly for Republicans. It wasn't just that Congress showed itself to be reckless and dysfunctional, or that the GOP shows no sign of ever ending their anti-tax jihad. It's that for a period of weeks, some lawmakers (read: Republicans) were quite literally shrugging off the risks of blowing past the August 2 deadline, running out of borrowing authority, and missing payment obligations.
"[P]eople in the political arena were even talking about a potential default," said Joydeep Mukherji, senior directior at S&P. "That a country even has such voices, albeit a minority, is something notable," he added. "This kind of rhetoric is not common amongst AAA sovereigns."
This is unambiguous, and leaves little room for obfuscation. S&P's original, lengthy statement explaining the downgrade cited political dysfunction in Congress quite broadly, but did not mention this specific element of the debate. For weeks, high-profile conservative lawmakers practically welcomed the notion of exhausting the country's borrowing authority, or even technically defaulting. Others brazenly dismissed the risks of doing so. And for a period of days, in an earlier stage of the debate, Republican leaders said technical default would be an acceptable consequence, if it meant the GOP walked away with massive entitlement cuts in the end.
Of course, that doesn't mean the GOP won't try to sweep the mess they've made down the memory hole. Here's Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA), who sponsored legislation that would've forced the Treasury to prioritize interest payments on U.S. debt in the event of a lapse in borrowing authority. "No one said that would be acceptable," he said of a default. "What we said was in the event of a deadlock it was imperative that bondholders retain their confidence that loans made to the United States be repaid on schedule."
That may be true for McClintock. Others were much more relaxed about the consequences of ignoring the August 2 deadline.
House Budget Committee chairman Paul Ryan said if "a bondholder misses a payment for a day or two or three or four," it's preferable so long as "you're putting the government in a materially better position to be able to pay their bonds later on." (Video below)
Ryan and others, including Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA), were echoing hedge-fund manager Stanley Druckenmiller, who was quoted in a widely cited Wall Street Journal article. Here's Toomey: "The most high-profile advocate for this was Stanley Druckenmiller ... one of the world's most successful hedge-fund managers, extraordinarily wealthy from his knowledge of the markets, a big money manager now, and a big holder of Treasury securities -- and he has said that he would actually accept even a delay in interest payments on the Treasuries that he holds. And he would prefer that if it meant that the Congress would right this ship."
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) warned against default, but for a time was willing to go past August 2.
"The markets are not fooled by some date imposed to say that that is the trigger for the collapse," he said at a Virginia jobs forum in May. "I think the markets are looking to see that there is real reform."
When Speaker John Boehner acknowledged that missing the August 2 deadline would put the country in "an awful lot of jeopardy, Rep. Louie Gohmert reacted by saying, "[t]he problem with the Speaker, and him saying that, is he believes the President. And I would encourage the Speaker not to believe the President anymore when the President says things like that."
This was a fairly common view among conservative Republicans, particularly in the House.
A number of other them tried to defuse the political time bomb they'd set under themselves by demanding that the White House prioritize not just creditors, but entitlement beneficiaries and the military as well, which would have left no money for just about any government services.
This extended beyond the halls of Congress, too. Taking their cues from the right, GOP Presidential candidates stood opposed to raising the debt limit. In response to a question from TPM, former Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty said he wasn't sure a temporary U.S. default would have calamitous consequences. "Maybe not. We don't know," he said.
Nebraska GOP Senate candidate Jon Bruning, who, if he wins, will be faced with a debt limit vote in early 2013 said, "[Default] may be something that has to happen to make the fundamental changes that are necessary in the American governmental system. We have to shrink it. And, if the Democratic Party that controls the White House and the Senate doesn't understand it, default may be necessary."
It's worth noting as well that a protracted lapse in borrowing authority would have massive economic consequences even if the Treasury department prioritized U.S. debt, which would reduce incoming revenue, and likely lead to a debt default anyhow. So the notion that the U.S. could meet all of its obligations to bondholders indefinitely doesn't hold water either.
Republicans will try to sidestep Mukherji's claim that they were welcoming, or at least toying with the idea of, in his words, "potential default." But they most certainly were.
From Talking Points Memo
After Triggering Downgrade, Debt Default Skeptics Try To Run From Their Records — But They Can’t
Standard & Poors has a specific justification for downgrading the U.S. bond rating, and it's deadly for Republicans. It wasn't just that Congress showed itself to be reckless and dysfunctional, or that the GOP shows no sign of ever ending their anti-tax jihad. It's that for a period of weeks, some lawmakers (read: Republicans) were quite literally shrugging off the risks of blowing past the August 2 deadline, running out of borrowing authority, and missing payment obligations.
"[P]eople in the political arena were even talking about a potential default," said Joydeep Mukherji, senior directior at S&P. "That a country even has such voices, albeit a minority, is something notable," he added. "This kind of rhetoric is not common amongst AAA sovereigns."
This is unambiguous, and leaves little room for obfuscation. S&P's original, lengthy statement explaining the downgrade cited political dysfunction in Congress quite broadly, but did not mention this specific element of the debate. For weeks, high-profile conservative lawmakers practically welcomed the notion of exhausting the country's borrowing authority, or even technically defaulting. Others brazenly dismissed the risks of doing so. And for a period of days, in an earlier stage of the debate, Republican leaders said technical default would be an acceptable consequence, if it meant the GOP walked away with massive entitlement cuts in the end.
Of course, that doesn't mean the GOP won't try to sweep the mess they've made down the memory hole. Here's Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA), who sponsored legislation that would've forced the Treasury to prioritize interest payments on U.S. debt in the event of a lapse in borrowing authority. "No one said that would be acceptable," he said of a default. "What we said was in the event of a deadlock it was imperative that bondholders retain their confidence that loans made to the United States be repaid on schedule."
That may be true for McClintock. Others were much more relaxed about the consequences of ignoring the August 2 deadline.
House Budget Committee chairman Paul Ryan said if "a bondholder misses a payment for a day or two or three or four," it's preferable so long as "you're putting the government in a materially better position to be able to pay their bonds later on." (Video below)
Ryan and others, including Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA), were echoing hedge-fund manager Stanley Druckenmiller, who was quoted in a widely cited Wall Street Journal article. Here's Toomey: "The most high-profile advocate for this was Stanley Druckenmiller ... one of the world's most successful hedge-fund managers, extraordinarily wealthy from his knowledge of the markets, a big money manager now, and a big holder of Treasury securities -- and he has said that he would actually accept even a delay in interest payments on the Treasuries that he holds. And he would prefer that if it meant that the Congress would right this ship."
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) warned against default, but for a time was willing to go past August 2.
"The markets are not fooled by some date imposed to say that that is the trigger for the collapse," he said at a Virginia jobs forum in May. "I think the markets are looking to see that there is real reform."
Others, on the conservative wing of the GOP claimed loudly that President Obama and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner were being dishonest about the consequences of blowing past August 2, and refused to vote to raise the debt limit unless Democrats agreed to truly radical conditions.
When Speaker John Boehner acknowledged that missing the August 2 deadline would put the country in "an awful lot of jeopardy, Rep. Louie Gohmert reacted by saying, "[t]he problem with the Speaker, and him saying that, is he believes the President. And I would encourage the Speaker not to believe the President anymore when the President says things like that."
This was a fairly common view among conservative Republicans, particularly in the House.
A number of other them tried to defuse the political time bomb they'd set under themselves by demanding that the White House prioritize not just creditors, but entitlement beneficiaries and the military as well, which would have left no money for just about any government services.
This extended beyond the halls of Congress, too. Taking their cues from the right, GOP Presidential candidates stood opposed to raising the debt limit. In response to a question from TPM, former Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty said he wasn't sure a temporary U.S. default would have calamitous consequences. "Maybe not. We don't know," he said.
Nebraska GOP Senate candidate Jon Bruning, who, if he wins, will be faced with a debt limit vote in early 2013 said, "[Default] may be something that has to happen to make the fundamental changes that are necessary in the American governmental system. We have to shrink it. And, if the Democratic Party that controls the White House and the Senate doesn't understand it, default may be necessary."
It's worth noting as well that a protracted lapse in borrowing authority would have massive economic consequences even if the Treasury department prioritized U.S. debt, which would reduce incoming revenue, and likely lead to a debt default anyhow. So the notion that the U.S. could meet all of its obligations to bondholders indefinitely doesn't hold water either.
Republicans will try to sidestep Mukherji's claim that they were welcoming, or at least toying with the idea of, in his words, "potential default." But they most certainly were.
Today, not tomorrow!
In my life...
For a work colleague and a friend, a pain in the stomach turned into a trip to the hospital that revealed an obstructed bowel that then required an operation that discovered a tumor that turned out to be cancerous. Over 4 years ago my friend went through multiple courses of chemotherapy and two stem cell transplants before he finally beat his disease into remission. He has now relapsed and my heart is heavy.
The email and subsequent phone calls over the past two weeks have been hard on my emotions. I can’t even begin to fathom what my friend and his family is feeling – surely something beyond devastation. Life is delicate indeed. No matter how much we feel we are in control, and have any situation in hand, our world can be turned on its head in an instant. He told me he gave himself 24 hours to feel sorry, and that now he is just pissed and determined. Knowing that he beat cancer before, I believe he will beat it again.
When things like this can happen to any of us, and in an instant change our lives forever, we realize that we must live in the present. And by this I mean that time and emotions spent in anger, envy, jealousy, or the host of other negative states of mind, is that much less time spent on what is really important. Hug your family, call your mom and dad, smile at someone, hold the door, forgive someone who hurt you. Live today as if there is no tomorrow.
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
A crisis of confidence, a lack of leadership.
In my country...
This is the current meme going round the Serious People of the village. Barak Obama’s lack of leadership is leading to a crisis of confidence in our country. I don’t buy it. The fact of the matter is, we now have open warfare in the US Congress. The GOP has been very forthright about it’s No. 1 goal – making President Obama a 1 term president. This truly is the GOP’s number 1 goal – more so than working to move our country out of the deepest recession that it was in when he took office. To make laws to move our country forward, we have to have some level of agreement between the House and the Senate which are controlled by different political parties. The GOP has shown it is not going to do anything, anything at all, to give the President what could be seen as a “win”. The game of “no” the GOP is playing is beyond anything we have seen in politics in the modern history. The GOP wants lower taxes on businesses and individuals, but when the President proposes moves to allow small businesses to purchase and depreciate equipment on more favorable tax terms, the GOP says no way. When the President proposes changes to Medicare and Social Security (which I disagree with) in a $4 trillion “grand bargain”, the GOP says no. The truth is the GOP’s strategy, its political strategy, is to have the country stay mired in the aftermath of recession through the 2012 elections. They have no plan to create jobs, get our country back to work, increase tax revenues (even through increased economic activity). Remember, the GOP’s stated number one goal is to do anything, and everything, possible to ensure President Obama is not reelected – even if that means stopping things that would move our country forward.
Tuesday, August 9, 2011
A Pulitzer Prize winning writer agrees with me!
In my country...
Check out Eugene Robinson's column today in the Washington Post. He pretty much agrees with my take yesterday that the GOP's brinkmanship with the debt ceiling and threatening to cause default is the cause of the market free fall.
Sometimes I get it right!
Check out Eugene Robinson's column today in the Washington Post. He pretty much agrees with my take yesterday that the GOP's brinkmanship with the debt ceiling and threatening to cause default is the cause of the market free fall.
Sometimes I get it right!
Monday, August 8, 2011
Thanks GOP and Tea Party
As a direct result of the actions of the GOP and Tea Party in the recent debt ceiling fight, the DOW has lost over 10% of its value over the last two days.
Thanks Tea Party!
Thanks Tea Party!
Monday, August 1, 2011
A mosaic of opinions
In my country...
This is a cool feature in the NYT that was open for a few days (it’s now closed to comments). You can see where most of the nearly 17,000 opinions landed – a balanced approach of reducing spending and raising more tax revenue. If you follow the link, you can hover over 1 of the squares to see the specific comments a person left.
This is a cool feature in the NYT that was open for a few days (it’s now closed to comments). You can see where most of the nearly 17,000 opinions landed – a balanced approach of reducing spending and raising more tax revenue. If you follow the link, you can hover over 1 of the squares to see the specific comments a person left.
Here are a sample of the comments from each of the 4 corners starting in the top left then moving clockwise.
Friday, July 29, 2011
The responsibility of a President
In my country...
This evening the House passed a bill to raise the debt ceiling voting 218 to 210. No Democratic Representatives voted "yes". 22 Republicans voted "no". One of the "no" votes was Michelle Bachmann. As you may be aware, Michelle Bachmann is a GOP candidate for President. She said she voted "no" because she is not in favor of any attempt to raise in the debt ceiling. When the House and the Senate finally do get a bill passed, it will not have a "yes" vote from Michelle Bachmann. She wants the US to default rather then meet it current debt obligation.
Now, just think if she were to be the President. A bill becomes a law only by passing both houses of Congress and being signed by the President. I suppose that as President she would veto a debt ceiling bill if it were put on her desk. Being just one voice in 435 as she is in the House is one thing, but as President, being able to turn back legislation through the veto, she would have great power - even if it were used foolishly to drive the US economy into the ditch.
Isn't that scary!
This evening the House passed a bill to raise the debt ceiling voting 218 to 210. No Democratic Representatives voted "yes". 22 Republicans voted "no". One of the "no" votes was Michelle Bachmann. As you may be aware, Michelle Bachmann is a GOP candidate for President. She said she voted "no" because she is not in favor of any attempt to raise in the debt ceiling. When the House and the Senate finally do get a bill passed, it will not have a "yes" vote from Michelle Bachmann. She wants the US to default rather then meet it current debt obligation.
Now, just think if she were to be the President. A bill becomes a law only by passing both houses of Congress and being signed by the President. I suppose that as President she would veto a debt ceiling bill if it were put on her desk. Being just one voice in 435 as she is in the House is one thing, but as President, being able to turn back legislation through the veto, she would have great power - even if it were used foolishly to drive the US economy into the ditch.
Isn't that scary!
How did I miss these
In my life...
Wikipedia tells me that Truck Nuts have been around since 1998. How is it that this is the first I have heard of them?
Wikipedia tells me that Truck Nuts have been around since 1998. How is it that this is the first I have heard of them?
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
Holy crap! Has it really come to this?
As our country struggles to fully come out of the biggest recession since the Great Depression, companies and the stock market are doing pretty well, but for middle class Americans, the deep loss in jobs has not recovered yet. When I read this article in the NYT today, I just had to shake me head. Why would anyone think this was a smart move for a business, or our country? Why would any sane person accept this kind of treatment of our fellow citizens?
Saturday, July 23, 2011
Wish I could write like this
In my country...
Hullabaloo is a blog written by Heather Parton under the pseudonym Digby. Her ability to understand what's going on and post her thoughts so clearly as to why it is right or wrong, is what I aspire to in my writing. Very rarely do I read something she has written and don't agree with it 100%. A recent blog post about the current "negotiations" over the debt limit was so spot on that I post the link here. It is really hard for me to understand why all middle-class, middle income Americans don't see the current events like this and feel the same way too.
Hullabaloo is a blog written by Heather Parton under the pseudonym Digby. Her ability to understand what's going on and post her thoughts so clearly as to why it is right or wrong, is what I aspire to in my writing. Very rarely do I read something she has written and don't agree with it 100%. A recent blog post about the current "negotiations" over the debt limit was so spot on that I post the link here. It is really hard for me to understand why all middle-class, middle income Americans don't see the current events like this and feel the same way too.
Friday, July 22, 2011
The weakest Speaker Ever?
In my country...
Now we know just how weak a Speaker of the House John Boehner is as he walks away from negotiating table with President Obama and pushes the work to the Senate. It is obvious that Speaker Boehner is unable to lead the GOP House Cacus. You know the old saying, "lead, follow, or get out of the way". Speaker Boehner was unable to lead, and so by pushing work on a debt ceiling extension (which must, and will, happen) to the Senate, he has chosen to just get out of the way.
Now we know just how weak a Speaker of the House John Boehner is as he walks away from negotiating table with President Obama and pushes the work to the Senate. It is obvious that Speaker Boehner is unable to lead the GOP House Cacus. You know the old saying, "lead, follow, or get out of the way". Speaker Boehner was unable to lead, and so by pushing work on a debt ceiling extension (which must, and will, happen) to the Senate, he has chosen to just get out of the way.
Thursday, July 21, 2011
At the Elvis Rock
In my life...
This week, I posted on Facebook a picture of myself at the Elvis rock. This rock was named by my friend, Tim Fay, many years ago during our annual fall golf trip. The first thing to know is that Tim was actually an elementary and high school friend of my older brother Joe. But, Tim was my friend too. Joe, Tim, and their friend Chris went on an initial golf trip to Hueston Woods about 25 years ago. They came home with some good stories including one about having to walk and carry their bags over a bazillion holes in 100 degree heat with no water. They described it as the Bataan Death March. I'm not sure it was that brutal, but parts of the story may be true. Of course, golf is best with a foursome and so in the following year, I was asked to go too. This was the first of two decades-plus of golf trips with Tim, Joe, and Chris, as a core, and as many as 12 other guys too. We played at courses inKentucky and Indiana Lake Cumberland
This week, I posted on Facebook a picture of myself at the Elvis rock. This rock was named by my friend, Tim Fay, many years ago during our annual fall golf trip. The first thing to know is that Tim was actually an elementary and high school friend of my older brother Joe. But, Tim was my friend too. Joe, Tim, and their friend Chris went on an initial golf trip to Hueston Woods about 25 years ago. They came home with some good stories including one about having to walk and carry their bags over a bazillion holes in 100 degree heat with no water. They described it as the Bataan Death March. I'm not sure it was that brutal, but parts of the story may be true. Of course, golf is best with a foursome and so in the following year, I was asked to go too. This was the first of two decades-plus of golf trips with Tim, Joe, and Chris, as a core, and as many as 12 other guys too. We played at courses in
A rock that looks like Elvis’ profile is not memorable in itself. What makes it special to me is that on April 20th, 2008, Tim lost a years-long fight against cancer. Up to this time, I have had people in my life pass away, but Tim’s passing affected me quite deeply. I guess this is because he‘s the first friend I had who has died. I guess it is also because he was so young, just 56 years old.
I think about Tim pretty often. When at Mass and asked to add my own intentions in silence, I always ask that Tim be at peace in heaven. Whenever, I hear news of Elder High School
Tim is no longer here to play golf or coach, but his Elvis rock lives on. If you look at the size of the rock on my Facebook page, you will see that it will be around hundreds, and perhaps thousands, of years from now. I miss his humor, laughter, and friendship. When playing golf this week at Woodson Bend Resort, I made it a point to stop at the rock and think about Tim for a few minutes. On one of the holes, I hit my 3 iron once particularly well, and I hope he saw it and knew that, as good as it was, it couldn’t match the way he smacked his 3 iron which was amazing when he connected with it.
Mid Summer thoughts...
In my life…
I just returned from a short family vacation to Woodson Bend Resort on Lake Cumberland in Kentucky. While it was only 4 days away, it was time enough to swim, read a book, watch some movies, play some board games, and play 36 holes of golf. There were some things that stand out for me on this trip. The first is that there was nothing that HAD to be done. I watched my daughters enjoy time with each other. This was good because Ellie will be leaving for college at Ohio Wesleyan in less than a month. Rebecca got to drive a golf cart which is always fun to do, especially if you don’t drive a car. Jackie got some quiet time to read, relax, and swim. Oh, and she still managed to get in an hour long workout each day. I got to visit the Elvis Rock on hole #15, more about that later.
If any agreement in the current debt ceiling fight does not contain new tax revenue now, then the Democrats and Obama will have lost. Our country will have lost. And my faith that at least one of the two major political parties have the middle class’s back will be lost. Let’s see what happens.
I just returned from a short family vacation to Woodson Bend Resort on Lake Cumberland in Kentucky. While it was only 4 days away, it was time enough to swim, read a book, watch some movies, play some board games, and play 36 holes of golf. There were some things that stand out for me on this trip. The first is that there was nothing that HAD to be done. I watched my daughters enjoy time with each other. This was good because Ellie will be leaving for college at Ohio Wesleyan in less than a month. Rebecca got to drive a golf cart which is always fun to do, especially if you don’t drive a car. Jackie got some quiet time to read, relax, and swim. Oh, and she still managed to get in an hour long workout each day. I got to visit the Elvis Rock on hole #15, more about that later.
In my country…
The next several days are going to show me a lot about President Obama and the Democratic Leadership in Congress. The fact that they have even allowed to GOP to play the “Debt Ceiling Card” this far is depressing. All you need to consider is that the debt ceiling was raised 17 times under President Reagan – yes, that right, 17 times! Under President George W. Bush the debt ceiling was raised 7 times. Do you remember this kind of fight? No, because there wasn’t one. Do we need to look at and negotiate over the nation’s finances, yes, but should it be done at the brink of default, no. The most astonishing item to me over the last few days has been the House GOP’s idea of “cut, cap, and balance”. Now consider if the GOP really believed in this. Think back to the 2001 and 2004 Bush tax cuts. They could not have occurred, if the cuts in revenue (tax receipts) needed to be paired with spending cuts to ensure a balanced budget. Think about President Bush’s ability to go to war in Afghanistan and Iraq. Both of these operations cost hundreds of billions of dollars. What would have had to occur to avoid the cap on spending and also balance the budget? The answer is that either many other programs would have had to be cut, or taxes raised. A law to cap and balance is a bad idea.If any agreement in the current debt ceiling fight does not contain new tax revenue now, then the Democrats and Obama will have lost. Our country will have lost. And my faith that at least one of the two major political parties have the middle class’s back will be lost. Let’s see what happens.
Monday, July 11, 2011
Negotiating against oneself
It’s hard to negotiate any agreement when you are only negotiating against yourself. In the fight to raise the debt ceiling, something that was done 7 times under the previous President with no real fighting, the GOP will not compromise one single little bit. The Democratic leader s in Congress and President Obama should offer nothing more than a deal that raises the debt ceiling to the level needed to fund the current already agreed expenditures through the end of 2012. When the GOP refuses to agree to an amount needed to pay the bills already incurred, they will be seen as the cause of any problems that result when required payments are not made. It’s as if the GOP has eaten the restaurant meal, but when the bill comes they baulk at the cost.
The Democrats should keep this same attitude about ending the current tax cuts that went into effect in 2000 and 2001 and were extended (stupidly in my opinion) at the end of 2010. They should not agree to any plan that extends them again for Americans making over $250K a year. With taxes as a percent of GDP at their lowest point in 60 years, move revenue is needed, not less. This will set them up well for the next election in 2012 because the American people will see the GOP for what they really are – a political party that can not lead our country as a whole because they are cornered by a political base that prevents them from compromising on anything – even for the good of the country as a whole.
Sunday, July 10, 2011
Square this!
How do you square these two NewYork Time Online addition front page stories?
Let talk about a "grand bargain" to cut benefits and the social safety net in the wake of the worst economic down turn since the Gret Depression.
AND
Cutting benefits will hurt the economy, not help it.
Let talk about a "grand bargain" to cut benefits and the social safety net in the wake of the worst economic down turn since the Gret Depression.
AND
Cutting benefits will hurt the economy, not help it.
Exactly what I would have said.....
From DailyKos
The only crisis here is the one the Republicans are making
There is no fiscal crisis. Everyone should be clear on that.
The United States is not bankrupt. Social Security is not about to founder. Wall Street is not on a precipice, the IMF is not standing by demanding massive shifts in our government, and U.S. bonds are not trading 1:1 with Charmin. There is nothing wrong.
Nothing except that the Republican Party is prepared to slice the nation's throat to get its way.
Real crises do exist. There are moments in a nation's history where the government must take abrupt action, either military or fiscal, to prevent disaster. In the collapse of 2008, some might disagree with the exact nature of the action the Bush administration took in bailing out banks that had recklessly overextended themselves, but there's little doubt that there was a real problem and without action there was a chance that it could grow from disaster to catastrophe.
That's not the case this time. Not only does solving the issue at hand not require the launching of a single ship, it doesn't require the expenditure of a single dime. Raising the debt limit does not commit the United States to any debt it has not already incurred. Refusing to raise that limit is no more an act of fiscal prudence than refusing to pay the restaurant for a meal already eaten.
Not only is the money already spent, the Republicans are the ones who spent it. It's not Social Security that drove up the debt over the last decade. Social Security is responsible for 0% of the deficit. Make that 0.00%, to be exact. The deficit that the Republicans are railing against is driven by the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and by the cost of the recently extended Bush tax cuts. You know what'll happen if we cut Social Security? We'll get less Social Security, not less deficit.
It's funny that politicians on both sides of the aisle keep demanding that "everything be on the table," when what they really mean is that "everything not responsible for the problem be on the table." Not that it matters. The truth is that Republicans aren't interested in solving the problem. They're making the problem. They invented it from thin, hot air and they're entirely invested in seeing that the problem gets worse.
Don't think the Republicans would put the nation at risk on purpose? Consider this: the only thing they won't even think about, the only option so odious they'll walk out of the room rather than talk about it, is precisely the only thing that would actually help. If we allow the Bush tax cuts to expire as scheduled—all of the cuts—the deficit will dry up and the nation will return to sound fiscal standing in short order. If we don't allow those unsustainable rates to expire ... then we will. If we go down after making cuts in Social Security and health care, then we'll we'll only succeed in making a lot of people miserable to no purpose. Only returning taxes to viable levels will help.
If Republicans were actually concerned about the fiscal health of the nation, they would sign onto raising the debt ceiling without hesitation or condition. Because there's nothing wrong, and because raising the limit would cost nothing. Instead they've created a completely artificial problem as nothing more than an excuse to extend the damage they've already caused. It's really a wonderful little game they've created: drive the nation so far into debt that there's no choice but to raise the limit, then use raising the limit as an excuse to create more debt. No wonder they call it red ink.
The only crisis we're facing is that one of our nation's political parties has decided to hold its breath until the nation turns red. And the media, the public, and the opposing party are treating this massive tantrum with far more respect than it deserves.
The only crisis here is the one the Republicans are making
There is no fiscal crisis. Everyone should be clear on that.
The United States is not bankrupt. Social Security is not about to founder. Wall Street is not on a precipice, the IMF is not standing by demanding massive shifts in our government, and U.S. bonds are not trading 1:1 with Charmin. There is nothing wrong.
Nothing except that the Republican Party is prepared to slice the nation's throat to get its way.
Real crises do exist. There are moments in a nation's history where the government must take abrupt action, either military or fiscal, to prevent disaster. In the collapse of 2008, some might disagree with the exact nature of the action the Bush administration took in bailing out banks that had recklessly overextended themselves, but there's little doubt that there was a real problem and without action there was a chance that it could grow from disaster to catastrophe.
That's not the case this time. Not only does solving the issue at hand not require the launching of a single ship, it doesn't require the expenditure of a single dime. Raising the debt limit does not commit the United States to any debt it has not already incurred. Refusing to raise that limit is no more an act of fiscal prudence than refusing to pay the restaurant for a meal already eaten.
Not only is the money already spent, the Republicans are the ones who spent it. It's not Social Security that drove up the debt over the last decade. Social Security is responsible for 0% of the deficit. Make that 0.00%, to be exact. The deficit that the Republicans are railing against is driven by the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and by the cost of the recently extended Bush tax cuts. You know what'll happen if we cut Social Security? We'll get less Social Security, not less deficit.
It's funny that politicians on both sides of the aisle keep demanding that "everything be on the table," when what they really mean is that "everything not responsible for the problem be on the table." Not that it matters. The truth is that Republicans aren't interested in solving the problem. They're making the problem. They invented it from thin, hot air and they're entirely invested in seeing that the problem gets worse.
Don't think the Republicans would put the nation at risk on purpose? Consider this: the only thing they won't even think about, the only option so odious they'll walk out of the room rather than talk about it, is precisely the only thing that would actually help. If we allow the Bush tax cuts to expire as scheduled—all of the cuts—the deficit will dry up and the nation will return to sound fiscal standing in short order. If we don't allow those unsustainable rates to expire ... then we will. If we go down after making cuts in Social Security and health care, then we'll we'll only succeed in making a lot of people miserable to no purpose. Only returning taxes to viable levels will help.
If Republicans were actually concerned about the fiscal health of the nation, they would sign onto raising the debt ceiling without hesitation or condition. Because there's nothing wrong, and because raising the limit would cost nothing. Instead they've created a completely artificial problem as nothing more than an excuse to extend the damage they've already caused. It's really a wonderful little game they've created: drive the nation so far into debt that there's no choice but to raise the limit, then use raising the limit as an excuse to create more debt. No wonder they call it red ink.
The only crisis we're facing is that one of our nation's political parties has decided to hold its breath until the nation turns red. And the media, the public, and the opposing party are treating this massive tantrum with far more respect than it deserves.
Thursday, July 7, 2011
7 times is all she wrote
Imagine if the monkey business being led by the GOP (including the Tea Party branch of it) had to occur 7 times. Why the lucky number 7, well thats how many times the debt ceiling was raised during the presidential term of George W. Bush - nearly once every year he was in office. Now, consider all of the energy and time the White House and Congress are being forced to spend on this one topic, rather than focusing on things to move our country forward. Imagine if the Democrats had caused this 7 times in Bush's 8 year. If only the GOP had held themselves to this same standard.
Where are the actions to create the jobs Americans need, and the GOP promised in November, 2010. I think shielding the income of hedge fund managers is much higher on the GOP's priority list than jobs for middle class Americans, or affordable health care for seniors and the poor, or clean energy legislation, or any of a hundred things that could once again allow America to do exceptional things. The GOP is found of saying the Democrats are pushing class warfare, but when chaeffeurs and personal trainers pay higher taxe rates than Wall Street tycoons, I believe the GOP needs to get real - and you need to quit being fooled.
Wake up America. Remember this in 2012.
Where are the actions to create the jobs Americans need, and the GOP promised in November, 2010. I think shielding the income of hedge fund managers is much higher on the GOP's priority list than jobs for middle class Americans, or affordable health care for seniors and the poor, or clean energy legislation, or any of a hundred things that could once again allow America to do exceptional things. The GOP is found of saying the Democrats are pushing class warfare, but when chaeffeurs and personal trainers pay higher taxe rates than Wall Street tycoons, I believe the GOP needs to get real - and you need to quit being fooled.
Wake up America. Remember this in 2012.
Wednesday, July 6, 2011
About Schmidt
Yes, it is probably a surprise, but I am on the mailing list for GOP Rep Jean Schmidt. She sends out propaganda every so often and I like to keep informed on her spin of current events. I received the Pledge of Allegiance article shown below from her on July 3rd. Very patriotic of her to write about the Pledge of Allegiance to help celebrate our nation's birthday.
What struck me about her writing is that of the 433 words she wrote (not counting the underlined title), she devoted just 123 of them to talk about the meaning of the 22 words of the original Pledge, and then took 310 words to write about just the two words "under God"; these words which were added in 1954 as an after thought, and in reaction to the rise of communism. The reason the pledge is recited in schools and organization around our country is because of the meaning found in the original 22 words, not in the 2 words add in 1954. I think Rep Schmidt missed the big picture and a good thing to celebrate on the 4th of July as she went down a rabbit hole to make some person point about religion.
On September 8, 1892, 22 words that were destined to become part of the American fabric were published in The Youth’s Companion, a well-known magazine for boys and girls. Those 22 words, encapsulated as the Pledge to the Flag, would soon earn a well-deserved spot in the hearts of all Americans.
We recite the Pledge of Allegiance not just to honor the flag, but to reaffirm the principles upon which our nation was founded. As Justice Harlan wrote in 1907, “The flag is a symbol of the nation’s power,- the emblem of freedom in its truest, best sense.” It represents “government resting on the consent of the governed; liberty regulated by law; the protection of the weak against the strong . . .” In 1954, another reflection of our nation’s founding principles was added to the Pledge when legislation adding the words “under God” was enacted.
Over the years, some have objected to those two words, arguing that their inclusion in the pledge is contrary to the constitutional doctrine that government can’t interfere with religion. A few years ago a man in California complained that his daughter should not be exposed to hearing the words “under God” when they were recited by the kids in her classroom. Most recently, NBC began coverage of the U.S. Open Golf Tournament with a patriotic opening where the words “under God” were purposely omitted from a recitation of the Pledge performed by children. The courts have ultimately decided that the words “under God” are not unconstitutional and NBC, after being flooded by complaints about its omission, was forced to apologize.
It cannot be denied that our great country was founded on the principles of freedom, liberty and democracy by men and women whose faith in God sustained them through a war that saw them throw off the yoke of British oppression and provided them with the courage to found a nation dedicated to the rule of law and not the dictates of man. In signing the law adding “under God” to the pledge, President Eisenhower said, “In this way we are reaffirming the transcendence of religious faith in America's heritage and future; in this way we shall constantly strengthen those spiritual weapons which forever will be our country's most powerful resource in peace and war.”
As you celebrate the 235th anniversary of our independence, I urge you to reflect upon the principles our flag represents. Acknowledge the wisdom of our Founding Fathers who laid the foundation for the greatest nation the world has ever known. And, give thanks to the One who has blessed us so much.
What struck me about her writing is that of the 433 words she wrote (not counting the underlined title), she devoted just 123 of them to talk about the meaning of the 22 words of the original Pledge, and then took 310 words to write about just the two words "under God"; these words which were added in 1954 as an after thought, and in reaction to the rise of communism. The reason the pledge is recited in schools and organization around our country is because of the meaning found in the original 22 words, not in the 2 words add in 1954. I think Rep Schmidt missed the big picture and a good thing to celebrate on the 4th of July as she went down a rabbit hole to make some person point about religion.
THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
On September 8, 1892, 22 words that were destined to become part of the American fabric were published in The Youth’s Companion, a well-known magazine for boys and girls. Those 22 words, encapsulated as the Pledge to the Flag, would soon earn a well-deserved spot in the hearts of all Americans.
We recite the Pledge of Allegiance not just to honor the flag, but to reaffirm the principles upon which our nation was founded. As Justice Harlan wrote in 1907, “The flag is a symbol of the nation’s power,- the emblem of freedom in its truest, best sense.” It represents “government resting on the consent of the governed; liberty regulated by law; the protection of the weak against the strong . . .” In 1954, another reflection of our nation’s founding principles was added to the Pledge when legislation adding the words “under God” was enacted.
Over the years, some have objected to those two words, arguing that their inclusion in the pledge is contrary to the constitutional doctrine that government can’t interfere with religion. A few years ago a man in California complained that his daughter should not be exposed to hearing the words “under God” when they were recited by the kids in her classroom. Most recently, NBC began coverage of the U.S. Open Golf Tournament with a patriotic opening where the words “under God” were purposely omitted from a recitation of the Pledge performed by children. The courts have ultimately decided that the words “under God” are not unconstitutional and NBC, after being flooded by complaints about its omission, was forced to apologize.
It cannot be denied that our great country was founded on the principles of freedom, liberty and democracy by men and women whose faith in God sustained them through a war that saw them throw off the yoke of British oppression and provided them with the courage to found a nation dedicated to the rule of law and not the dictates of man. In signing the law adding “under God” to the pledge, President Eisenhower said, “In this way we are reaffirming the transcendence of religious faith in America's heritage and future; in this way we shall constantly strengthen those spiritual weapons which forever will be our country's most powerful resource in peace and war.”
As you celebrate the 235th anniversary of our independence, I urge you to reflect upon the principles our flag represents. Acknowledge the wisdom of our Founding Fathers who laid the foundation for the greatest nation the world has ever known. And, give thanks to the One who has blessed us so much.
Tuesday, July 5, 2011
You ask for that, and you get this.
Lower Federal taxes, lower State taxes, lower Local taxes, lower Real Estate taxes. Yeah, give us more of that and we can get more of this. Perfect news for a country that is already failing to adequately educate its citizens. Where will our greatness continue to come from? A race to the bottom, i'm afraid.
Friday, July 1, 2011
Cutting our way to what?
In the current fight over raising the debt ceiling, the Democrats seem to be willing to accept cuts to spending but want additional tax revenue as part of a deal, The GOP steadfastly says “no”. If there is a true concern about the federal deficit, then I can’t understand how the GOP can be taken seriously when they won’t consider the need for additional tax revenue. If a household can’t pay their bills, they cut expenses, but also pick up additional hours of work, or a part-time job to bring in more money. With taxes as a percentage of GDP at a 50 year low, the federal government also needs more revenue. The ability to fight 2 wars and provide a huge prescription drug benefit for seniors doesn’t come for free. The GOP never made a move to pay for the guns or the butter that occurred under their watch.
Now all the GOP wants are cuts, cuts, cuts. At the same time, the US US
The easiest and quickest way to a balanced budget is for a stalemate to occur in the budget wars. If that were to come about, tax rates would revert back to where they were in 2000 and within 10 years the annual budget deficit would be eliminated. The GOP is found of saying our country should be run like a business, but at present it doesn’t want to pay the bills they had a huge responsibility in accumulating. Good businesses need sufficient income and good cash flow to pay its bills and invest in the operations. A mantra of cut, cut, cut leads to neither.
Sunday, June 26, 2011
And he danced.
On Friday night, my niece threw a really nice party to celebrate her husband’s college graduation. It was a fun evening full of family, food, and music. For me the best part was the joining of family and music.
My Mom, Winnie, died in September 2009. My Dad, Ed, has continued on in his life. From my view he is doing pretty well. After 60 years of marriage, losing your spouse must put you in a very unfamiliar and lonely spot. Dad has fallen into what seems to be a seamless routine of the grocery, laundry, yard work, and golf. I think the fact that he plays golf twice a week at age 83 is important. The exercise is really good – he uses a pull cart instead of riding (probably more to do with the cheap German in him, than a strong desire for exercise), and he is out with his buddies socializing.
My family has done pretty well to look in on Dad either on the phone, or by stopping by to visit. Before my Mom died, Dad was likely to want to take a pass on invitations to go out. Now he is willing to accept most invitations – probably because of the loneliness he must feel after losing Winnie after 60 years of marriage.
My Dad was at the graduation party Friday and it was nice to see him. My sister-in-law Debbie asked him to dance – and he did. My Dad is a good dancer and I used to love watching him and my Mom dance together. They would float across the floor effortlessly. Watching him on the dance floor on Friday may have been the first time he has danced since my Mom died, but I don’t know. I do know it brought tears to my eyes thinking of my Mom, and made me happy to see him out there living life in a way that brought him enjoyment for many years. Thanks Debbie!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)