As I pick up the pace of work again, coming into the midterms, I have to get some stories cleared off the desk in order to make room for some others, and that's what we're about today.
We'll be talking about saving more than 300,000 of this country's most important jobs, and paying for it in a way that is not only good policy, but is a real problem for Republicans who are yelling "no new taxes!" once again while pretending they care about actually paying for actual spending and actually want to cut actual unemployment.
We have a bit of work to do today, but we want to keep it somewhat short...so let's get going.
It's been a while since we had to have a real heart-to-heart, the Obama Administration and I, and last time it was because Rahm Emanuel had been a bit snippy toward those of us who are carrying the water for this Administration.
We need to have another one of those conversations today; this time the circumstances are a lot more positive-in fact, if the Administration follows my suggestions here, we have a real chance to put the Democrats on the road to victory, not just this November, but also in 2012.
What I'm proposing will create hundreds of thousands, if not millions of jobs, and it will stimulate millions more as we create a national source of discount electrical power that can be used by business and consumers alike.
Here's the best part: it's no "pie in the sky" promotion I'm offering here; we've already done the same thing before, it's been working out well for almost three quarters of a century...and even better than all that...my idea first pays for itself, and then...it actually makes the Federal Government a profit, forever after.
It wasn't but a couple of days ago that we had a conversation about The Fear and the emails that are used to spread it, and I figured with that out of the way we had dealt with the topic, and that we'd move on to new things.
Well, we would be moving on, Gentle Reader, if it wasn't for the fact that an email came in today that was so ugly, so disturbing, and so indicative of what we are about to see as the battle over the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) begins to heat up (ENDA being possibly the next "big contentious thing" that this Administration hopes to accomplish), that I had to interrupt my story schedule to bring it to your attention.
It seems like everywhere you look these days, someone's trying to spread...The Fear.
All around us...in every town...on every corner...a massive Army Of Fear is standing by, according to the Messengers, ready at a moment's notice to obey the dictates of some unappointed Czar or another.
Just ask Glenn Beck: concentration camps for the white people, jackbooted stormtroopers ready to snatch the guns from your cold dead fingers...Socialist Government-Controlled Healthcare That Threatens Your Not Socialist Medicare...it's all coming, my friends-and unless we organize, as a community, to return to the values of the Founding Fathers, The Government, meaning that awful Obama and Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid and George Soros and all the other Evil Community Organizers, will win.
There's no government, we're told, like no government.
You know who would find all of this fear of self-government just entirely bizarre?
The Founding Fathers.
In today's conversation we'll consider the fundamentals of American patriotism, we'll ask one of those Founding Fathers how he saw the role of Government-and we'll toss in a few words from Abraham Lincoln, just for good measure.
LANGUAGE WARNING: Today's story is uncharacteristically blunt, and from this moment forward we will be using lots of inappropriate language in making our points.
It is by now fairly well known that Rahm Emanuel, President Obama's White House Chief of Staff, had a bit of a blow-up with liberals who were ready to start running ads against "blue dog" Democrats who were working very hard to shut down the health care reform effort.
Now we're not gonna get in the middle of that argument today; instead, since we're finally getting a chance to talk, I figured me and Rahm could get a few other things out of the way that have been on everyone's mind for the past year or so.
Corporations are persons. Fox News is the most trusted news source. Democrats cannot hold Ted Kennedy's senate seat. Obama seems to be trying the Clinton triangular strategy. The list goes on.
I am finding it hard to keep my hopes up. Between the bad economy, the spineless Dems in Congress, the real threat of an energized Republican party , the wild card of right wing Teabagging populism, what's not to worry about?
I hope writing about it will help. I don't know if it will....
I can't fix Washington, I can't undo Massachusetts. What I can do is what I have been doing. Blogging here, training others in how to talk politics with the undecided and the hostile.
I can be the voice of reason among my friends and colleagues.
These are dark times, and not because they bode badly for the goals and objectives I hold dear. It is not about me really, it is about our community, our state , our nation.
However you feel about health care, surely you want your fellow citizens to have access to it. This has to get done, no matter how imperfectly IMHO, or we wait another generation.
I goggled Child Labor Laws. The first one (1916) only said that you could not transmit goods made in violation of child labor rules across state lines, it as declared unconstitutional , twice.
We strive to be, if anything, a participatory space around here, and I've had a question come to my inbox that is very much deserving of our attention.
To make a long story short, our questioner wants to know why, on the one hand, despite the passage of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA, also known as the "stimulus"), unemployment in the construction industry continues to increase, and, on the other hand, why there is such a giant disparity, on a state-by-state basis, in the cost of saving a job?
They're great questions, and, having done a bit of research, I think I have some cogent answers.
Left of College Station will be covering the protest and counter-protest at Texas A&M University during President Barack Obama's speech to the Points of Light Institute.
Stay tuned for a report on the day's events, photographs from around campus and the protests, and video interviews from both the protest and the counter-protests.
"They" said you were too young
for such an office,
Too green, lacking the seasoning
of age and experience.
The people said otherwise,
they saw Hope personified
Some of them said you were unworthy
because your skin was darker than theirs
Most people rejected this lie.
"They" said you were too left, too right,
too Carter, too Chicago,
too quick to discuss,
too slow to decide
and yes, totally unworthy of the Nobel Prize
"They" said....
And what does it say about them
That strangers would look upon so small a body of work
and of their own volition leap to reward it?
What does it say about their work, their choices,
About their deeds, their honors
(Medals of Freedom given to torturers and thieves)
That sage old men
Who had honored Jane Adaams, James Carter,
Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King
Would prematurely insist on rewarding this one,
This Obama?
Do they see Hope personified?
Are they projecting their dreams
Of collaboration and dialogue?
Daring to believe that the past
Need not be the future?
Betting that what is given in anticipation
more than achievement
Will, in time be presciently given?
So we are now finding out the answers to some of our questions about which members of Congress actually represent We, the People...and which ones represent, Them, the Corporate Masters.
We have seen a Democratic Senator propose a policy that would put people in jail for not buying health insurance and a Democratic President who has taken numerous public beatings from those on the left side of the fence for his inability to ram something through a group of people...and yes, folks, the entendre was intentional.
But most of all, we've been asking ourselves: "why would Democratic Members of Congress who will eventually want us to vote for them vote against something that nearly all voting Democrats are inclined to vote for?"
Today's conversation attempts to answer that question by looking at exactly how money and influence flow through a key politician, Montana's Senator Max Baucus-and in doing so, we examine some ugly political realities that have to be resolved before we can hope to convince certain Members of Congress to vote for what their constituents actually want when it really counts.
He has since, apologized. Sadly, this comment was probably the most cogent response the Republicans had for Obama's speech this night. Their "reponse" from some random doctor from Louisiana , the fake "alternative" papers they were waving around were, by comparison hollow shams. In other words, the claim that Obama is lying is at least an honest if baseless critique.
By the way, this from Political Wire comments section:
Reaction to Obama's Speech...Joe "You Lie" Wilson seems to have sent the base over the edge. His opponent Ron (?) Miller's campaign fund got $16,000 richer in the last two hours....
So it's the day of the big speech, Mr. President, and we got trouble with a capital "T" right here in Health Care City.
What are you gonna do? Do we follow the traditional Democratic Party legislative process of passing...something...at any cost, assuming the entire time that the Left and the Netroots will "go along with the program", or is there a risk that the calculus doesn't work as well today as it did in 1994 and 1996?
Well, lucky for you, I'm a fake consultant, and I know a few things about your "target market", so before you answer that question...we need to talk.
Well, the text is now out and here is the heart of the President's message:
Work hard, stay in school, listen to the adults in your life who wish to help you. No matter how hard it is, no matter how tough your situation, you are responsible for your education, for your fate.
That's it.
Yet, it is the case that school districts have been cowed into defensive posturing and arrangements over these sentiments.
The following is a list of how various school districts are handling the speech. Districts are listed alphabetically:
* Allen ISD: Speech will not be shown to grades kindergarten through third grade but will be used as part of the social studies/government curriculum for grades 4 through 12.
* Arlington ISD: Making the speech available for students and parents on its Web site. The speech will also be available for classroom use as deemed appropriate to the district's curriculum.
* Carrollton-Farmers Branch ISD: District will record the speech, and teachers can choose to use it at a later time.
* Dallas ISD: Speech will be live on its cable channel. Principals will decide if they want to air it live.
* Denton ISD: Speech will be available on its Web site for anyone to view, but will not be broadcast to students.
* Duncanville ISD: Social studies teachers will have the option of broadcasting the speech to their students.
* Fort Worth ISD: Speech available live at all of its high schools, but students will not be required to watch it. Students who choose not to view will have alternative activities.
* Frisco ISD: District will record the speech, and teachers can choose to use it at a later time.
* HEB ISD: Speech will be recorded as a podcast. It will be available to social students teachers who want to use it in class and to everyone on the district's Web site.
* Highland Park ISD: Any teacher can choose to broadcast it.
* Keller ISD: Speech will be available live. Teachers can show it if they want to.
* Lancaster ISD: District will record the speech, and teachers can choose to use it at a later time.
* Mansfield ISD: Speech will be recorded, and teachers can use it at a later time.
* Plano ISD: Speech will be available on its Web site for anyone to view, but will not be broadcast to students.
* Richardson ISD: The speech will be available on Wednesday, the day after, and optional for grades kindergarten through 12. Parents will need to give permission for students in grades kindergarten through 8. No discussions or lessons will be offered afterward.
But, of course this is part of something larger. More below the fold.....
(The successful tactics used in this meeting seem well worth noting. - promoted by boadicea)
We've all been hearing the "Town Hall Meeting" stories the past few days, and the images presented have been of gatherings where you might see some current or former official "death panel" for the benefit of the crowd, where the few people who shout the loudest bully the rest into silence, and where threats of physical intimidation are part of the debate.
I attended one of these meetings, and based on what I saw I'm here to tell you that it is possible to hold an event that features none of the images previously described.
Instead, what I say was an event where people asked their questions, the Congressman answered-and from time to time the angry members of the audience got their shout on, too...but not in a way that was able to ever take control of the venue.
There were helpful lessons that can be applied by others who want to have these meetings, and today's conversation examines what can be done to make them work for you, too.
(We must protect our vital (and refreshing) liquids from those who would deny us. - promoted by boadicea)
WASHINGTON (FNS) - In a startling development related to the recent disruptions of town hall meetings, FNS is now able to confirm that the Obama Administration, with the assistance of Unilever Group and Queen Beatrix, both of the Netherlands, PepsiCo, Skull And Bones, and the Bilderberg Group, is unleashing a secret plot to dispatch fleets of unmarked aircraft and helicopters to prevent teabag protesters from having access to teabags.
The goal of the plot: to disrupt protesters' plans to save America from the destruction of our health care system.
FNS reporters have been following a trail of information that includes airport noise abatement records, classified documents, and the testimony of insiders, some of whom are now willing to be publicly identified.
We'll begin our story by reporting on three events that occurred the evening of Friday, August 8th.
It seems the picture I used with the posting , depicting Obama as a Witch Doctor, has a life of its own. It has gone national with the unmasking of one of the persons who 'passed it around'. Turns out he is Dr. David McKalip, a prominent anti-reformist spokesman and adviser to Republican opponents of same. See the full account here Citing Email Flap, McKalip Says He'll Withdraw From Public Debate Over Health care.
In typical Republican style the good doctor has apologized publicly, but lamely maintains he is the victim of those bad ultra-liberals who are out to twist his intent and divert attention from the real issues.
So a Supreme Court justice that hardly anyone noticed has announced his retirement and all of a sudden the lips of The Experts are all a-flutter with the word "Empathy".
President Obama reports he wants his nominee to have it; and Republicans are convinced that the word is a secret code for something that eventually ends in the death of free speech, massive roundups of guns by the Secret United Nations World Police, and the Internment Of All The White People In Reeducation Camps Run By Americorps And ACORN And Gay People Who Want To Marry And Are Funded By George Soros.
It is suggested that Evil Activist Judges will trample the Constitution as they create Law out of whole cloth; and that only those who interpret the Constitution just as it was written can bring the proper attitude to the Court.
It sounds like somebody needs to come along and provide a couple of cogent thoughts about this whole empathy thing...and lucky for you, Gentle Reader, we have before us today specific examples of how the quality of empathy can express itself in Court Doctrine.
[ Norte Dame is asking President Obama to deliver its commencement address ] This is despite the fact that Obama has distinguished himself as the most militantly anti-life president in American history. In fact, his support of abortion extends to the point of infanticide [1], and I speak of his, at best, indifference to the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. In opposing the Illinois version of this legislation - thereby signaling his willingness to allow newborn babies to die in soiled store rooms - he showed his true colors. That is to say, it's not so much that the matter of when a baby gets human rights is above his pay grade; it's that he is morally degraded.
[snip]
But it isn't just on life issues that Obama is found wanting. He also supports special rights for homosexuals (euphemistically called "gay rights"). Additionally, he apparently was a member of Chicago's socialist New Party in the 1990s, an association he has never adequately disowned. This is relevant because socialism seems incongruent with Catholic teaching. As Pope Pius XI said plainly in 1931, "No one can be at the same time a sincere Catholic and a true Socialist." (In fact, the Church has long condemned socialism - here [2] and here [3], for instance).
Don't you love how they tie together being anti-abortion, anti-socialist, and being truly Catholic or Christian or whatever? This cutting is, of course, seeped in moral absolutism. Everything in politics, in life , is either 100% right or 100% wrong. This kind of absolutism has made Democrats cringe and allowed Republicans to fraudulently steal the Moral high ground for a very long time.
Until Obama. Is there anything Texas Progressives/Democrats can learn about attracting rural, "values voters" from the Obama victory? I am not sure, but I try to work out my thoughts in this posting. I invite your ideas as well.
So if you're like me, you have been wondering just exactly what all this "tea party" stuff is about. There's going to be some sort of protest, that we know; but beyond that the whole thing seems a little...vague.
Alternatively, it's possible that you were unaware that "tea party" has recently become a word reborn in conservative political circles.
Well, whether you knew it or not, April 15th was indeed a day of protest, with citizens gathering for what were reported to be a series of grassroots events across the nation that was intended to invoke the spirit of the Boston Tea Party.
In an effort to find out exactly what is motivating these folks, and to find out what they are trying to accomplish, I took my handy recorder and captured a conversation with a "tea bag" protester.
We will review that conversation, and we will follow it up with a few thoughts about how this group of voters might impact electoral politics going forward.
, "Starving the beast" is a fiscal-political strategy of some American conservatives[1][2][3] to use budget deficits via tax cuts to force future reductions in the size of government. The term "beast" refers to government and the programs it funds, particularly social programs such as welfare, Social Security, and Medicare.
This little gem of responsible policy making has its origins in the make-believe budgets of the Reagan years. David Stockman was Reagan's budget director and Richard Darman was a key advisor during the era of the first Reagan supply-side budget schemes. Check out their comments from 1986...
