Be INFORMED

Thursday, January 21, 2010

Those Messed Up Democrats!!

Why is it that Democrats always tend to turn stupid once they get into political office? President Obama is no exception to this rule, as he seems to have forgotten what he was placed into office for.

www.commondreams.org
Published on Thursday, January 21, 2010 by CommonDreams.org
Massachusetts and the Populist Imperative
by Robert Weissman

It takes a special skill for a Democrat to lose a federal election in Massachusetts.
But whatever the failings of the candidacy and campaign of Martha Coakley, the Democratic senate candidate in Massachusetts, the Democrats' loss of the Massachusetts Senate seat held for almost half a century by Edward Kennedy, following the party's November loss of the New Jersey gubernatorial race, suggests the need to focus more on the broader context, and less on individual shortcomings.
The Democratic Party has squandered the enormous opportunity bequeathed to it by the election of 2008.
The party gained overwhelming control of both the legislature and executive in 2008. Yet party leaders somehow failed to recognize the political moment.
We live in populist times.
Wall Street has crashed the economy. According to the official figures -- which under-report unemployment -- one in six people in the country are out of work or unable to find full-time work.
People know who's to blame for the country's deep recession, and they want them held accountable.
And they want to see aggressive policies to put people back to work.
But we've seen neither populist politics nor policies from the Democrats.
Although President Obama on occasion has had harsh words for Wall Street, in general the administration has sought to blunt the public's anger against the banksters.
It supported and has continued the Bush administration's bailout plan, a kind of unconditional love for Wall Street. Sure, you could make the case the banks had to be saved in order to rescue the economy; but there is no defense for bailing out the richest of the rich with no strings attached.
The administration has put forward a financial regulatory plan with some very useful components. But it has refused to embrace the bold populist policies we need -- breaking up the banks, taxing financial speculation -- to rein in Wall Street. It has also failed to defend the good positions it has advocated with sufficient vigor and high-level involvement.
The gentle treatment of Wall Street from the outset of the administration has framed subsequent political developments.
To its credit, the administration pushed through a desperately needed economic stimulus plan. But in significant part because the size of the stimulus plan was similar to the amount spent on the Wall Street bailout, and because the administration had embraced both, the stimulus and bailout -- though totally distinct -- became entangled in people's minds.
Next came health care. The Democratic Congressional leadership developed a complicated and obtuse health care plan. There was the occasional bluster about how the insurance industry was seeking to undermine the plan, but in fact the insurance and pharmaceutical industries embraced the idea, and will profit enormously from it. Rather than identifying and campaigning against the corporate obstacles to providing affordable access to care for all, the White House cut deals with them.
Meanwhile, while the stimulus and Federal Reserve interventions prevented the recession from turning to depression, the unemployment and foreclosure situations grew dire. No post-stimulus jobs initiatives appeared until the end of 2009. And the Congress and White House failed to do anything consequential to keep people in their homes.
Along the way, populism did find a partial outlet: in the confused and contradictory tea party movement.
Going forward, who grabs the populist reins will significantly determine the 2010 election results.
The populist issue of the day is Wall Street's exorbitant bonus payments. Wall Street remains in business only because it has benefited, and continues to benefit, from trillions of dollars in public supports. The billions that Wall Street is now preparing to pay itself in bonuses come, in a very real sense, out of the pockets of We, The People.
Neither we nor our elected officials need to stand by and watch this happen. We can take our money back by imposing a windfall bonus tax, as Representative Dennis Kucinich has proposed.
You can click here to sign a Public Citizen petition supporting a tax on Wall Street's bonuses.
One clear lesson from the last year is that the people cannot count on political leaders to read the tea leaves and go populist -- even if it is in elected officials' narrow self interest. They have to demand it.

Robert Weissman is the president of Public Citizen.

© Copyrighted 1997-2009
www.commondreams.org

Saturday, October 31, 2009

Barack Obama's Pledges, And How He's Doing...

...and this story comes to you by way of http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-10-28-obama-promises_N.htm#table. As you can see, I'm still having a small problem with Blogger posting the links to the story. What is one to do?

Tracking delivery on campaign promises

President Obama made hundreds of pledges to get elected. USA TODAY's Richard Wolf reviews some:

Taxes

Promise: Offer tax cuts of $500 for individuals with income up to $75,000 and $1,000 for couples with income up to $150,000. Obama said 95% of working families would benefit.
Quote: "This is a tax cut, paid for in part by closing corporate loopholes and shutting down tax havens, that will offset the payroll tax that working Americans are already paying." - Janesville, Wis., Feb. 13, 2008
Status: Obama settled for $400 and $800 as part of the $787 billion stimulus package passed by Congress in February. The non-partisan Tax Policy Center estimated that 91% of families with children would get tax cuts averaging $538. Overall, 75% of taxpayers would get reductions averaging $385. Obama's proposals to close loopholes and target tax havens are pending in Congress.

Jobs
Promise: Offer $3,000 tax credits in 2009 and 2010 to existing businesses for each full-time employee hired.
Quote: "I will give American businesses a $3,000 tax credit for every job they create right here in the United States of America." - Canton, Ohio, Oct. 27, 2008
Status: Obama dropped the idea during stimulus negotiations because of concerns in Congress that businesses could cook their books. As unemployment worsens, however, the White House is reconsidering it.

Home ownership
Promise: Create a $10 billion Foreclosure Prevention Fund to help people stay in their homes. Give a tax credit to middle-class homeowners to cover 10% of their mortgage interest every year
Quote: "This fund will help homeowners sell a home that is beyond their means, or modify their loan to avoid foreclosure or bankruptcy." - North Las Vegas, Nev., May 27, 2008
Status: Obama created a larger, $75 billion program in February, a month after taking office. It includes a one-time, $8,000 refundable tax credit for new homebuyers that expires in November.


Type in the link at the begining of this post for even more stats on Obama's financial regulation promises,healthcare, and stem cell research along with a host of other campaign promises which Obama made.

Saturday, September 19, 2009

Is Osama bin Laden Right?

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/09/19
Published on Saturday, September 19, 2009 by The Independent/UK
Everyone Seems to Be Agreeing with Bin Laden These Days
Only Obama, it seems, fails to get the message that we’re losing Afghanistan
by Robert Fisk
Obama and Osama are at last participating in the same narrative. For the US president's critics - indeed, for many critics of the West's military occupation of Afghanistan - are beginning to speak in the same language as Obama's (and their) greatest enemy.
There is a growing suspicion in America that Obama has been socked into the heart of the Afghan darkness by ex-Bushie Robert Gates - once more the Secretary of Defence - and by journalist-adored General David Petraeus whose military "surges" appear to be as successful as the Battle of the Bulge in stemming the insurgent tide in Afghanistan as well as in Iraq.
No wonder Osama bin Laden decided to address "the American people" this week. "You are waging a hopeless and losing war," he said in his 9/11 eighth anniversary audiotape. "The time has come to liberate yourselves from fear and the ideological terrorism of neoconservatives and the Israeli lobby." There was no more talk of Obama as a "house Negro" although it was his "weakness", bin Laden contended, that prevented him from closing down the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. In any event, Muslim fighters wold wear down the US-led coalition in Afghanistan "like we exhausted the Soviet Union for 10 years until it collapsed". Funny, that. It's exactly what bin Laden told me personally in Afghanistan - four years before 9/11 and the start of America's 2001 adventure south of the Amu Darya river.
Almost on cue this week came those in North America who agree with Obama - albeit they would never associate themselves with the Evil One, let alone dare question Israel's cheerleading for the Iraqi war. "I do not believe we can build a democratic state in Afghanistan," announces Dianne Feinstein, the California Democrat who chairs the senate intelligence committee. "I believe it will remain a tribal entity." And Nancy Pelosi, the House Speaker, does not believe "there is a great deal of support for sending more troops to Afghanistan".
Colin Kenny, chair of Canada's senate committee on national security and defence, said this week that "what we hoped to accomplish in Afghanistan has proved to be impossible. We are hurtling towards a Vietnam ending".
Close your eyes and pretend those last words came from the al-Qa'ida cave. Not difficult to believe, is it? Only Obama, it seems, fails to get the message. Afghanistan remains for him the "war of necessity". Send yet more troops, his generals plead. And we are supposed to follow the logic of this nonsense. The Taliban lost in 2001. Then they started winning again. Then we had to preserve Afghan democracy. Then our soldiers had to protect - and die - for a second round of democratic elections. Then they protected - and died - for fraudulent elections. Afghanistan is not Vietnam, Obama assures us. And then the good old German army calls up an air strike - and zaps yet more Afghan civilians.
It is instructive to turn at this moment to the Canadian army, which has in Afghanistan fewer troops than the Brits but who have suffered just as ferociously; their 130th soldier was killed near Kandahar this week. Every three months, the Canadian authorities publish a scorecard on their military "progress" in Afghanistan - a document that is infinitely more honest and detailed than anything put out by the Pentagon or the Ministry of Defence - which proves beyond peradventure (as Enoch Powell would have said) that this is Mission Impossible or, as Toronto's National Post put it in an admirable headline three days' ago, "Operation Sleepwalk". The latest report, revealed this week, proves that Kandahar province is becoming more violent, less stable and less secure - and attacks across the country more frequent - than at any time since the fall of the Taliban in 2001. There was an "exceptionally high" frequency of attacks this spring compared with 2008.
There was a 108 per cent increase in roadside bombs. Afghans are reporting that they are less satisfied with education and employment levels, primarily because of poor or non-existent security. Canada is now concentrating only on the security of Kandahar city, abandoning any real attempt to control the province.
Canada's army will be leaving Afghanistan in 2011, but so far only five of the 50 schools in its school-building project have been completed. Just 28 more are "under construction". But of Kandahar province's existing 364 schools, 180 have been forced to close. Of progress in "democratic governance" in Kandahar, the Canadian report states that the capacity of the Afghan government is "chronically weak and undermined by widespread corruption". Of "reconciliation" - whatever that means these days - "the onset of the summer fighting season and the concentration of politicians and activists for the August elections discouraged expectations of noteworthy initiatives...".
Even the primary aim of polio eradication - Ottawa's most favoured civilian project in Afghanistan - has defeated the Canadian International Development Agency, although this admission is cloaked in truly Blair-like (or Brown-like) mendacity. As the Toronto Star revealed in a serious bit of investigative journalism this week, the aim to "eradicate" polio with the help of UN and World Health Organisation money has been quietly changed to the "prevention of transmission" of polio. Instead of measuring the number of children "immunised" against polio, the target was altered to refer only to the number of children "vaccinated". But of course, children have to be vaccinated several times before they are actually immune.
And what do America's Republican hawks - the subject of bin Laden's latest sermon - now say about the Afghan catastrophe? "More troops will not guarantee success in Afghanistan," failed Republican contender and ex-Vietnam vet John McCain told us this week. "But a failure to send them will be a guarantee of failure." How Osama must have chuckled as this preposterous announcement echoed around al-Qa'ida's dark cave.
2009 Independent News and Media.
Robert Fisk is Middle East correspondent for The Independent newspaper. He is the author of many books on the region, including The Great War for Civilisation: The Conquest of the Middle East.

Thursday, September 10, 2009

Obama Scares The GOP

From http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/9/10/779677/-No-Wonder-the-GOP-have-gone-crazy...-This-is-a-formidable-enemy...(UPDATE)

No Wonder the GOP have gone crazy... This is a formidable enemy...(UPDATE)
by The Simple Canadian
Wed Sep 09, 2009
What have you guys done? The sun is shining through my window, I am looking at a beautiful Vancouver, British Columbia false creek waters and the boats slowly moving through, early in the morning (6am), I brush my teeth, and I say, let's check out the dailykos before heading to work... and voila, my anonymous diary that I posted last night is at the top of the rec list??? Merci tres beaucoup les gars!!!
This is really a formidable enemy (at least to them). Obama threatens to make the GOP irrelevant for many years to come. They are unable to match up with him intellectually, charismatically and politically. And unlike Kennedy, he seem to have a damn good Secret Service.
However, every time Obama speaks, Americans remember why they are a great Nation. He seems to move the entire world with him, with just one simple speech he could wipe out all the town hall demonstrations, all smear TV ads from the McCain campaign, everything, is just wiped out.
This, my friends, is for the ages. This, is what is going to pass the health care reforms:
To the GOP, this enemy, is different, and is very very scary. No wonder, they have gone crazy.
There is something that can make you better, but I can't afford it

Tuesday, August 18, 2009

Latest Polling From Rasmussen

As of Tuesday, August 17, 31% of our country strongly approves of the way that President Obama is working as our President. At the same time, 46% strongly dislike the way that Obama is handling things. We knew that the numbers would be going down in time, but this is lousy timing as Obama attempts to get his Healthcare plan going. The Prez needs all of the support that he can muster!
In other polling stats, 42% of voters now expect that their taxes will be going up during the Obama years, while only 6% of voters expect a tax cut. I do hope that those 6 percent aren't to shocked when their taxes do go up. Common sense will tell you that taxes will have to go up in order to finance our debt and the programs which will come into being under this administration. Remember this though, Bush was responsible for many of the cutbacks which will have to be re-instated once again by President Obama.
The final numbers on Obama's approval/disapproval? 49% of voters say that they overall approve of Obama's job performance, while 50% disapprove. Well hell! You can't please everybody, can you?
SOURCE:http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

Friday, June 19, 2009

Presidential Tracking Poll

According to Friday's Rasmussen polling, President Obama has the approval of 34% of Americans who strongly approve of the way that Obama is performing his duties as President. On the other side of the fence, 33% of Americans strongly disapprove of the way in which Obama is running his show.

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows that 34% of the nation's voters now Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Thirty-three percent (33%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of +1. Only once (two weeks ago) has his rating been lower (see trends).

Seventy percent (70%) of Americans say they will not be impacted by the closure of GM and Chrysler dealerships. Only 9% are Very Likely to feel the pain.

Tuesday, June 02, 2009

According to , President Obama has the approval of 33% of Americans so far as his job performance is concerned.24% of those survayed strongly dissapprove of the President performance at this point in time.

Thirty-one percent (31%) say the President’s economic stimulus package has helped the economy while 27% believe it has hurt. Fifty-two percent (52%) are now worried that the government will do too much while responding to the economic crunch.

Overall, 58% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President's performance so far. Forty-one percent (41%) disapprove. For more Presidential barometers, see Obama By the Numbers and recent demographic highlights.

How long will the honeymoon last? Obama will stay in good standing with Ameas long as the economy doesn't sink to much farther into a hole. If things work out according to plan, Obama will manage to stay in our good graces.

Wednesday, May 06, 2009

Obama's Approval Ratings

It would seem that President Obama's approval ratings are holding steady, but, I think that he is suffering among some of the Democrats. We all know that he is among Republicans.
37% of voters approve of his role as President so far as his performance goes. 30% do not like the way that he is running things. I am one of those.
77% of the liberal voters think that Obama is doing a wonderful job, while only 15% of the conservative group think so. In fact, as should be expected, 54% of the conservatives actually disapprove of Obama's performance. I am shocked!

Overall, 57% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President's performance so far while 43% disapprove. The President’s overall approval rating has stayed between 54% and 58% every day since April 1 and every day but one for the past two months.

You can view the polling results at rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
i'll certainly be glad when I get this link crap fixed!! This shit pisses me off! Have a great day everyone!