tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8003264782896229572024-03-06T01:00:35.087-08:00Political NewsJohnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09408839338139169839noreply@blogger.comBlogger3003125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-800326478289622957.post-33879745900134670022011-08-18T22:17:00.000-07:002011-08-18T22:20:47.798-07:00Will Republicans block Obama's jobs plan?<h2>President Obama is preparing to unveil a new plan to fight unemployment and boost the economy, and he's daring Republicans to simply slam the door</h2> <div class="articleImage"> <a href="http://theweek.com/article/slideshow/218391/will-republicans-block-obamas-jobs-plan"><img src="http://4.images.theweek.com/img/dir_0064/32476_article_main.jpg?48" alt=""We could do even more if Congress is willing to get in the game," President Obama has said during his tour of the Midwest." /></a> </div> "We could do even more if Congress is willing to get in the game," President Obama has said during his tour of the Midwest. <span class="photoCredit">Photo: Joe Raedle/Getty Images
<br />
<br /></span><p>President Obama, promising to <a href="http://theweek.com/article/index/218380/will-obamas-jobs-speech-matter">unveil specific proposals</a> in September to combat the unemployment crisis, all but <a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-obama-bus-tour-20110817,0,5073945.story">dared the GOP to block his plan in Congress</a>. Republicans have signaled that they are <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/ap-source-obama-to-give-major-speech-in-early-sept-to-unveil-ideas-for-jobs-growth/2011/08/17/gIQA1wDqKJ_story.html">unlikely to support</a> new spending on infrastructure, unemployment benefits, or a payroll tax break — setting up yet another showdown with the White House. Since jobs are America's top concern, will the GOP really take Obama up on his dare? And if so, who stands to win the spin war?</p> <p><strong>Obama should relish this fight:</strong> Obama's a little late with his "specific plan" to create jobs, <a href="http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists_ezorn/2011/08/obama-slogan-should-channel-larry-the-cable-guy.html">says Eric Zorn in the <em>Chicago Tribune</em></a>. "But assuming it's ambitious and contains a significant proposal for job-creation," he should channel Larry the Cable Guy by relentlessly challenging the GOP House to "Get it done." When they don't — and they won't — "he'll be able to remind voters next summer and fall who had ideas and who had ideologies."
<br /><a href="http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists_ezorn/2011/08/obama-slogan-should-channel-larry-the-cable-guy.html">"Obama slogan should channel Larry the Cable Guy"</a></p> <p><strong>Republicans needn't fear Obama:</strong> Running against a do-nothing Congress might have worked for Harry Truman, but this isn't 1948, and Obama isn't "give 'em hell" Harry, <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/08/16/professor-barry-channels-give-em-hell-harry/">says Chris Stirewalt in <em>Fox News</em></a>. "The professorial Obama's shift to confrontation" might shore up his dispirited base, but it will look "somewhat forced" to everyone else. So when Obama submits whatever un-passable plan he comes up with, Republicans can rest easy swatting it down.
<br /><a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/08/16/professor-barry-channels-give-em-hell-harry/">"Professor Barry channels Give 'Em Hell Harry"</a></p> <p><strong>Obama needs less talk, more hardball:</strong> Running against Congress may or may not help Obama, but it certainly won't help the unemployed, <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/how-would-republicans-fight-for-jobs/2011/08/12/gIQACKD9IJ_blog.html">says Ezra Klein in <em>The Washington Post</em></a>. "Voters want more than stunts," and if Obama is truly determined to get job-creating proposals through Congress, he has to act as "intransigent and obsessive" as the GOP is about spending cuts. All the browbeating in the world won't work if Obama isn't "willing to strap on some pads and play by the new rules."
<br /><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/how-would-republicans-fight-for-jobs/2011/08/12/gIQACKD9IJ_blog.html">"How would Republicans fight for jobs?"</a></p><p><a href="http://theweek.com/article/index/218391/will-republicans-block-obamas-jobs-plan">Original here</a>
<br /></p>
<br />
<br />Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09408839338139169839noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-800326478289622957.post-40364873026791393902011-07-11T02:11:00.000-07:002011-07-11T02:14:23.461-07:00The Marijuana Tipping Point Is Already Here<span class="db-wrapper db-clear db-compact"><span><span class="db-container"><span class="db-body db-compact"></span></span></span></span> <div class="Entry_Body"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Arial,sans-serif; line-height: 21px; background-color: rgb(239, 239, 239); margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><div style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><table class="image left" border="0" width="300"><tbody><tr><td><a href="http://www.tokeofthetown.com/2011/07/08/news-2.jpeg"><img alt="news-2.jpeg" src="http://www.tokeofthetown.com/assets_c/2011/07/news-2-thumb-300x360.jpeg" height="360" width="300" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="credit">Graphic: <a href="http://www.newsreview.com/sacramento/marijuanas-tipping-point/content?oid=992503">NewsReview.com</a></td></tr></tbody></table></span><div style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); line-height: 22px; background-color: rgb(239, 239, 239);"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; font-family: inherit;"><b style="font-weight: bold;"><i style="font-style: italic;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: 21px;"></span>By Jack Rikess</i></b></span></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); line-height: 22px; background-color: rgb(239, 239, 239);"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); line-height: 22px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); line-height: 22px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); line-height: 22px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); line-height: 22px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); line-height: 22px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); line-height: 22px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); line-height: 22px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); line-height: 22px;"><div style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><i style="font-style: italic;">Toke of the Town</i></div></span></span></span></span></span><div style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); line-height: 22px;">Northern California Correspondent</span></div></span></span></span></span></div></span><div><br /></div><div>The writer and social critic, Malcolm Gladwell, defines the 'Tipping Point' as the moment of critical mass, the threshold, the boiling point; the point at which the buildup of minor changes or incidents reaches a level that triggers a more significant change or makes someone do something they had formerly resisted.</div><div><br /></div><div>Another way of saying it would be that point in time and space when everything changes and there's no turning back.</div><div><br /></div><div>Every day there are more encouraging headlines appearing in newspapers and on the Web from California to Maine supporting medical marijuana legislation suggesting the tide is turning.</div><div><br /></div><div>Even when the cynics call medical marijuana a joke and claim the real goal of this smokescreen movement is legalization of pot, there are medi-jane supporters with valid and logical arguments to counter-balance any archaic rhetoric with which the anti-pot forces continue to misinform.</div> <a name="more"></a> <div><div>New Jersey passed one of the most restrictive medical marijuana rights and benefits program on the books so far. The state with a very conservative governor will soon have medical marijuana. Why? Because the people wanted it.</div><div><br /></div><div> It does seem like Time is marching on, but when is it gonna get there?</div><div><br /></div><div>We're zeroing in on something but when is the Tipping Point going to kick in fully regarding medical marijuana?</div><div> </div><div>What possible signs do we need to see before we believe that it works?!</div><div><br /></div><div>Here are some small recent events that may prove someday to have influenced the way we think, tipping the scales our way towards a bigger picture... </div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><table class="image right" border="0" width="400"><tbody><tr><td><a href="http://www.tokeofthetown.com/2011/07/08/5456819.jpeg"><img alt="5456819.jpeg" src="http://www.tokeofthetown.com/assets_c/2011/07/5456819-thumb-400x225.jpeg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="credit">Photo: <a href="http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=3594273">KSL.com</a></td></tr><tr><td class="caption">Utah Atty. Gen. Mark Shurtleff opposed medical marijuana -- then he got cancer.</td></tr></tbody></table></span><div><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;"></span>1) Okay, this guy never ever got high and he's for Medical Marijuana!</b></div><div><i><a href="http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/06/12/utah-attorney-general-shurtleff-approves-of-medical-marijuana-after-battling-cancer/" style="text-decoration: underline;">June 12th: How much straighter do they have to come? </a></i></div><div><br /></div><div>Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff approves of medical marijuana after battling cancer.</div><div><br /></div><div>Shurtleff said he would support the legalization of medical marijuana after experiencing months of intensive cancer treatment.</div><div><br /></div><div>Shurtleff said never used marijuana himself, but had talked to other patients who had traveled out-of-state to receive marijuana treatment.</div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></div><div><br /></div><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><table class="image left" border="0" width="300"><tbody><tr><td><a href="http://www.tokeofthetown.com/2011/07/08/Alyssa-Campanella-Miss-California-Crowned-2011-Miss-USA.jpeg"><img alt="Alyssa-Campanella-Miss-California-Crowned-2011-Miss-USA.jpeg" src="http://www.tokeofthetown.com/assets_c/2011/07/Alyssa-Campanella-Miss-California-Crowned-2011-Miss-USA-thumb-300x400.jpeg" height="400" width="300" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="credit">Photo: <a href="http://99post.com/633/alyssa-campanella-miss-california-crowned-2011-miss-usa.html">99Post</a></td></tr><tr><td class="caption">Miss USA Alyssa Campanella: "Medical marijuana is very important to help those who need it medically"</td></tr></tbody></table></span><div><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;"></span>2) Not innocent enough. Okay, as they say, from the mouth of babes...</b></div><div><i><a href="http://www.marijuanalawyerblog.com/2011/06/miss-america-favors-medical-marijuana-in-california.html" style="text-decoration: underline;">June 26: Miss USA and medical marijuana</a></i></div><div><br /></div><div>During the question-and-answer part of the competition, Miss California Alyssa Campanella was asked about her perspective on the medicinal cannabis.</div><div><br /></div><div>"Well, I understand why that question would be asked, especially with today's economy, but I also understand that medical marijuana is very important to help those who need it medically," Alyssa said.</div><div><br /></div><div>"I'm not sure if it should be legalized, if it would really affect, with the drug war," she said. "I mean, it's abused today, unfortunately, so that's the only reason why I would kind of be a little bit against it, but medically it's OK."</div><div><br /></div><div>She got Miss USA.</div><div><br /></div><div>When's the last time you had the crown on the line and you spoke the truth?</div><div><br /></div><div>I actually can understand why someone could dismiss a beauty queen and a cancer patient as being not scientific enough. They're just regular people.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><table class="image right" border="0" width="125"><tbody><tr><td><a href="http://www.tokeofthetown.com/2011/07/08/miraclegro.jpg"><img alt="miraclegro.jpg" src="http://www.tokeofthetown.com/assets_c/2011/07/miraclegro-thumb-125x224.jpg" height="224" width="125" /></a></td></tr></tbody></table></span><div><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;"></span>3) What about Big Business. They have scientists? They have economists? They understand the world...? Don't they?</b></div><div><i><a href="http://www.tokeofthetown.com/2011/06/miracle_gro_makes_a_play_for_the_medical_marijuana.php" style="text-decoration: underline;">June 13: Good Weeds, Bad Weeds - High Hopes at Miracle-Gro In Medical Marijuana Field</a></i></div><div><br /></div><div>Scott's Miracle-Gro Company has long sold weed killer. Now, it's hoping to help people grow killer weed.</div><div><br /></div><div>In an unlikely move for the head of a major company, Scott's Chief Executive Jim Hagedorn said he is exploring targeting medical marijuana as well as other niches to help boost sales at his lawn and garden company.</div><div><br /></div><div>"I want to target the pot market," Mr. Hagedorn said in an interview.</div><div><br /></div><div>"There's no good reason we haven't."</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><table class="image left" border="0" width="219"><tbody><tr><td><a href="http://www.tokeofthetown.com/2011/07/08/barney%20paul1.jpg"><img alt="barney paul1.jpg" src="http://www.tokeofthetown.com/assets_c/2011/07/barney%20paul1-thumb-219x118.jpg" height="118" width="219" /></a></td></tr></tbody></table></span><div><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;"></span>4) We've heard from the People, Big Business, and now from across the aisle comes...</b></div><div><i><a href="http://www.tokeofthetown.com/2011/06/legislation_to_end_us_marijuana_prohibition_coming.php" style="text-decoration: underline;">June 22: Ron Paul, Barney Frank to jointly offer bill to end war on weed</a></i></div><div><br /></div><div>Congressmen Ron Paul, Barney Frank and others will introduce legislature Thursday that aims to end a major part of the war on drugs -- namely the battle against marijuana.</div><div><br /></div><div>Reps. Paul (R-Texas) and Frank (D-Mass.), though technically on opposite sides of the aisle, have often spoken out against the war on drugs and will propose a bill "tomorrow ending the federal war on marijuana and letting states legalize, regulate, tax, and control marijuana without federal interference," according to a statement from the Marijuana Policy Project via Reason.</div><div><br /></div><div>The bill would allow the individual states to decide how they want to deal with pot. </div><div><br /></div><div>The legislation, co-sponsored by Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.), Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colo.), and Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Oakland), is the first of its kind to be proposed in Congress that would end the 73-year-old federal marijuana prohibition that began with the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937.</div><div><br /></div><div>.......</div><div><br /></div><div>These four events that just transpired in the last month couldn't be more current, more 'now.' What is it going to take in order for that cosmic plate to tilt to our side? And stay that way!</div><div><br /></div><div>Entrepreneurs and forward thinkers are testing the waters of the medical marijuana Industry with venture capitalists abroad throwing dollars into edible research think-tanks and other esoteric ganja-related enterprises. </div><div><br /></div><div>Politicians and law enforcement from all walks and talks of life are coming forward, decrying that the time is now to lose the campaigns that have never worked and to embrace a new way of thinking. To challenge the uncommon wisdom and to end the wars on law abiding citizens who because they ingest a specific weed, they could have their lives ruin because we, as a nation and a society refuse to change. </div><div><br /></div><div>Sixteen states support medical marijuana. Every poll taken shows public support for medical marijuana. GW Pharma (Weed) and Novartis (Ritalin, Excedrin) have become partners in Sativex (medical marijuana spray) licensing pact overseas and now, in America.</div><div><br /></div><div>"My professional view of cannabis as a substance is that it appears to be a remarkably safe substance in comparison to most medicines prescribed today," said Dr. Geoffrey Guy, chairman of GW Pharmaceuticals. "The more I learn about this plant the more fascinated I become. It has through its various constituents multiple effects of therapeutic interest, many of which are now being validated by the enormous growth in basic cannabinoid research."</div><div><br /></div><div>What is it about marijuana that makes us afraid to go forward and embrace a new safer tomorrow? Pharmaceutical giants are moving forward with patents and marketing. You would think that the data from research geeks would be refutable, they're the same people who give us our aspirin, for gosh sakes. </div><div><br /></div><div>The data's coming in like a Haboob through Phoenix. Unstoppable. Marijuana has applications that can help certain people. That's it. It can't be changed.</div><div><br /></div><div>Marijuana does some good. It's proven. </div><div><br /></div><div>You can't go backwards with that. Only thing you can do is not open your eyes to what's in front of them.</div><div><br /></div><div>Why aren't we coming together as a nation over this issue when people with perspectives as different as those of Miss USA to the Mormon Attorney General of Utah support medical marijuana?</div><div><br /></div><div>When law enforcement officials and Ex-President Jimmy Carter come forward to say the War on Drugs not only doesn't work, it's unwinnable. A waste of money. </div><div><br /></div><div>Speaking of money, when Wall Street, Main Street and Home Depot all say the time is right to build the future fields of dreams of medical marijuana that only Weed-Gro can protect. What more do we need to hear?</div><div><br /></div><div>Do we need Nancy Reagan in her Chanel housecoat to come forward to say she was wrong? Would that be the final straw? Would that be our national Tipping Point? To have someone other than ourselves say it is okay for us to have this weed? Mommy, please say its okay because in 1937, someone said it was bad. </div><div><br /></div><div>Right now President Obama has alienated the Ganja Nation with his reversal on leaving the medical marijuana community alone. More and more his obtrusive agenda is forcing the hand of medical marijuana to take a stand, one way or another in various localities. Howard Zinn said you can't be neutral on a moving train.</div><div><br /></div><div>Opinion is sliding to the side where the weed grows green and high. Mendocino County is aggressively constructing a platform that is workable for growers and law enforcement alike. Not perfect, but a start. </div><div><br /></div><div>Growers are paying taxes in exchange for their right to grow medical marijuana. They pay just like anyone else.</div><div><br /></div><div>The Tipping Point is already here. Embrace it. </div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></div></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:Arial, sans-serif;color:#000000;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 22px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:arial, helvetica, hirakakupro-w3, osaka, 'ms pgothic', sans-serif;color:#333333;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: normal;"><br /></span></span></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Arial,sans-serif; line-height: 22px; background-color: rgb(239, 239, 239); margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; display: inline;"><table class="image right" style="margin: 6px 0px 6px 6px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; border-collapse: separate; float: right;" border="0" width="250"><tbody style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><tr style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><td style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: normal; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.tokeofthetown.com/2010/11/16/jack.jpeg" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(55, 116, 46); text-decoration: none;"><img alt="jack.jpeg" src="http://www.tokeofthetown.com/assets_c/2010/11/jack-thumb-250x274.jpeg" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 1px 1px 2px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; border-style: solid; border-color: rgb(221, 221, 221) rgb(186, 186, 186) rgb(76, 76, 76) rgb(213, 213, 213);" height="274" width="250" /></a></td></tr><tr style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><td class="credit" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: bold; font-style: italic; font-size: 10px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-align: right; height: 13px; color: rgb(175, 175, 175); line-height: 12px;">Photo: <a href="http://www.jackrikess.com/" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 10px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(55, 116, 46); text-decoration: none;">Jack Rikess</a></td></tr><tr style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><td class="caption" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: normal; font-style: italic; font-size: 11px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-align: left; color: rgb(175, 175, 175); line-height: 13px;">Toke of the Town correspondent Jack Rikess blogs from the Haight in San Francisco.</td></tr></tbody></table></span></span><div style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); line-height: 22px;"><i style="font-style: italic;"><br /></i></div><div style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); line-height: 22px;"><i style="font-style: italic;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: normal; font-size: 13px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"></span>Jack Rikess, a former stand-up comic, writes a regular column most directly found at <a href="http://www.jackrikess.com/" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(55, 116, 46); text-decoration: none;">jackrikess.com</a>.</i></div><div style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); line-height: 22px;"><i style="font-style: italic;"><br /></i></div><div style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); line-height: 22px;"><i style="font-style: italic;">Jack delivers real-time coverage follo</i><span style="display: block;" id="formatbar_Buttons"><span class="" style="display: block;" id="formatbar_CreateLink" title="Link" onmouseover="ButtonHoverOn(this);" onmouseout="ButtonHoverOff(this);" onmouseup="" onmousedown="CheckFormatting(event);FormatbarButton('richeditorframe', this, 8);ButtonMouseDown(this);"><img src="img/blank.gif" alt="Link" class="gl_link" border="0" /></span></span><i style="font-style: italic;">wing the cannabis community, focusing on politics and culture.</i></div><div style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); line-height: 22px;"><i style="font-style: italic;"><br /></i></div><div style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); line-height: 22px;"><i style="font-style: italic;">His beat includes San Francisco, the Bay Area and Mendocino-Humboldt counties.</i></div><div style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); line-height: 22px;"><i style="font-style: italic;"><br /></i></div><div style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; outline-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); line-height: 22px;"><i style="font-style: italic;">He has been quoted by the national media and is known for his unique view with thoughtful, insightful perspective.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.tokeofthetown.com/2011/07/the_marijuana_tipping_point_is_already_here.php">Original here</a><br /></i></div></div></div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09408839338139169839noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-800326478289622957.post-87932794244483806682011-07-11T00:13:00.000-07:002011-07-11T00:15:08.784-07:00Attorneys For Schaeffer Cox Want Murder Conspiracy Charges Thrown Out<div class="meta_module"> <img src="http://talkingpointsmemo.com/assets_c/2011/04/schaffer-cox-jail-talk-attorney-cropped-proto-custom_2.jpg" /> <br /><div class="caption">Schaeffer Cox<br /><br /><div class="entry_text"> <p>Attorneys for Schaeffer Cox have asked a court to throw out murder conspiracy charges against their client, who is accused of plotting to kill a federal judge, because of the way the grand jury was conducted. </p> <p>Cox, a self-proclaimed sovereign citizen and leader of the Alaska Peacemakers Militia, was arrested in March, along with Coleman Barney, Lonnie and Karen Vernon, and Michael O. Anderson, for allegedly stockpiling weapons as part of a plot to kill two Alaska State Troopers, an IRS employee, and the federal judge. </p> <p>In two motions filed last week, Cox's attorneys argued that the grand jury process was mishandled and treated like "high school," and therefore the murder conspiracy charges should be thrown out.</p> <p>In one motion, Cox's attorney Robert John argued that the grand jury was not properly instructed on the burden of proof necessary for indictments. In the other motion, the <a href="http://newsminer.com/bookmark/14610420-Schaeffer-Cox%E2%80%99s-lawyers-want-several-charges-thrown-out-in-241-militia-plot"><em>Fairbanks Daily News-Miner</em></a> reports: </p> <blockquote>In one of the filings in the Cox case, attorney Robert John quotes a prosecutor in the grand jury transcript who appears to pick a foreperson out of the grand jury for arriving late, saying "that's what you get for showing up late. It's just like high school." <p>The procedure violates the criminal rule that a grand jury itself or a judge should pick the foreperson, John says in the filing.</p></blockquote> <p>"Schaeffer Cox has the constitutional right to be indicted by a grand jury, not by a high-school teacher and the class he teaches," the motion says.</p> <p>Prosecutors on Wednesday also filed a motion to block the release of Coleman Barney. Barney's attorneys have been pushing for his release on bail because, as they argue, he "has a history of contributing to the community, not destroying it." Superior Court Judge David C. Stewart <a href="http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/06/state_trial_of_ak_sovereign_citizens_may_be_delaye.php">reduced</a> Barney's bail from $2 million to $100,000 in June, though Barney's attorneys must still convince a federal judge of the same. </p> <p>But in the motion filed this week, prosecutors provided additional evidence against Barney in protest of his release. They also detailed the weapons allegedly found in his trailer -- including body armor, hand cuffs, a gas mask, a number of grenades, and "assorted" guns and ammunition. </p> <p>Stephen Skrocki wrote in the motion: </p> <blockquote>The Coleman Barney, father of five, business owner and member of the community referenced in the defense pleadings and in letters of support is not the same Coleman Barney who elected to arrive to an illegal arms sale wearing body armor and carrying two loaded pistols. It is not the Coleman Barney who, during this arms sale held and examined with his own hands what he thought were live hand grenades, and a pistol silencer combination. It was not the same Coleman Barney who sought to purchase tactical weapons which only exist to kill either violently, secretly, or furtively.<blockquote> <p>"Despite the order of the state court," Skrocki wrote, "which may have not been in command of these facts due to the volume of discovery, Coleman Barney's motion for bail<br />must be denied. The risk to the community, the danger to the community and the risk of flight or absconding are simply too great."</p> <p>Full coverage of Cox et al <a href="http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/alaska_peacemakers_militia/">here</a>.<br /></p><p><a href="http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/07/attorneys_for_schaeffer_cox_want_murder_conspiracy.php">Original here</a><br /></p> </blockquote></blockquote></div><br /></div> </div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09408839338139169839noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-800326478289622957.post-49673709792895031612011-07-11T00:11:00.000-07:002011-07-11T00:13:37.741-07:00Wisconsin Flyer Calls For Conservatives To Vote For Fake Candidate In Dem Primary<span class="db-wrapper db-clear db-medium"><span><span class="db-container"><span class="db-body db-medium"></span></span></span></span> <div class="meta_module"> <img src="http://talkingpointsmemo.com/assets_c/2011/05/wi-recall-new-cropped-proto-custom_2.jpg" /><br /><br /><p>Wisconsin Democrats face the next hurdle in the state Senate recalls on Wednesday, with primaries being held in the races to go up against six Republican incumbents -- and they'll have to beat the fake Democrats before they can take on the real Republicans.</p> <p>Soon after the recall elections were triggered, <a href="http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/06/wis-gop-senate-leader-theres-nothing-cynical-about-running-fake-candidates.php">Republicans declared a strategy to plant fake candidates in the Democratic primaries</a> -- which they have called "protest candidates" -- in order to delay the general elections from July to August, while the GOP incumbents run unopposed. Also, it turns out the whole scheme <a href="http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/06/wis-gops-fake-democrats-to-cost-taxpayers-more-than-400k.php">will cost local governments throughout the state over $400,000.</a></p> <p>Now, <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/gop-allies-hatching-sleazy-dirty-tricks-in-wisconsin-recall-wars/2011/03/03/gIQASL1f3H_blog.html">Greg Sargent</a> has obtained a flyer being distributed by a group called "Patriot Advisers," 18th District race against GOP incumbent Randy Hopper -- encouraging conservatives to go vote in the open <i>Democratic</i> primary, for Republican plant John Buckstaff against real Dem Jessica King.</p> <p>On the one hand, it's possible to look at this as a dirty trick. On the other hand, how could the Dems ever hope to take on the real Republicans if they can't drub the fake Dems first?</p> <p>The flyer refers to the fake Dem candidate John Buckstaff as "Pro-Wisconsin," and declared: "He'll roll up his sleeves and work with Governor Walker to eliminate special privileges for government unions."</p> <p>As for the official Dem candidate Jessica King, she is called "Pro-Union Extremist," with the added description: "King is taking tens of thousands of dollars from pro-union groups. She will put their agenda first -- even if it bankrupts Wisconsin."</p> To be clear, the Dems <a href="http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/06/wis-dems-wont-run-fake-gop-candidates----will-run-extra-dems-instead.php">specifically rejected entreaties by labor</a> to respond in kind and run fake Republicans, in order to prevent this kind of shenanigans.<br /><br /><a href="http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/07/wisconsin-flyer-calls-for-conservatives-to-vote-for-fake-candidate-in-dem-primary.php">Original here</a><br /> </div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09408839338139169839noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-800326478289622957.post-83745157143964676172011-07-11T00:06:00.000-07:002011-07-11T00:11:31.012-07:00U.S. Is Deferring Millions in Pakistani Military Aid<div class="articleSpanImage"><img style="width: 340px; height: 198px;" src="http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2011/07/10/world/10intel/10intel-articleLarge.jpg" alt="" border="0" /> <div class="credit">Kuni Takahashi for The New York Times</div> <p class="caption">Pakistani soldiers trained last year at Pubbi Hills, 75 miles southeast of the capital, Islamabad. </p> </div> <h6 class="byline">By <a rel="author" href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/eric_schmitt/index.html?inline=nyt-per" title="More Articles by Eric Schmitt" class="meta-per">ERIC SCHMITT</a> and <a rel="author" href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/p/jane_perlez/index.html?inline=nyt-per" title="More Articles by Jane Perlez" class="meta-per">JANE PERLEZ</a></h6> <h6 class="dateline">WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is suspending and, in some cases, canceling hundreds of millions of dollars of aid to the Pakistani military, in a move to chasten <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/pakistan/index.html?inline=nyt-geo" title="More news and information about Pakistan." class="meta-loc">Pakistan</a> for expelling American military trainers and to press its army to fight militants more effectively. </h6><br /><p> Coupled with <a title="Times article" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/08/world/asia/08mullen.html">a statement</a> from the top American military officer last week linking Pakistan’s <a title="Times article" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/05/world/asia/05pakistan.html">military spy agency to the recent murder</a> of a Pakistani journalist, the halting or withdrawal of military equipment and other aid to Pakistan illustrates the depth of the debate inside the Obama administration over how to change the behavior of one of its key counterterrorism partners. </p><p> Altogether, about $800 million in military aid and equipment, or over one-third of the more than $2 billion in annual American security assistance to Pakistan, could be affected, three senior United States officials said. </p><p> This aid includes about $300 million to reimburse Pakistan for some of the costs of deploying more than 100,000 soldiers along the Afghan border to combat terrorism, as well as hundreds of millions of dollars in training assistance and military hardware, according to half a dozen Congressional, Pentagon and other administration officials who were granted anonymity to discuss the politically delicate matter. </p><p> Some of the curtailed aid is equipment that the United States wants to send but Pakistan now refuses to accept, like rifles, ammunition, body armor and bomb-disposal gear that were withdrawn or held up after Pakistan ordered more than 100 Army Special Forces trainers to leave the country in recent weeks. </p><p> Some is equipment, such as radios, night-vision goggles and helicopter spare parts, which cannot be set up, certified or used for training because Pakistan has denied visas to the American personnel needed to operate the equipment, two senior Pentagon officials said. </p><p> And some is assistance like the reimbursements for troop costs, which is being reviewed in light of questions about Pakistan’s commitment to carry out counterterrorism operations. For example, the United States recently provided Pakistan with information about suspected bomb-making factories, only to have the insurgents vanish before Pakistani security forces arrived a few days later. </p><p> “When it comes to our military aid,” Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton told a Senate committee last month “we are not prepared to continue providing that at the pace we were providing it unless and until we see certain steps taken.” </p><p> American officials say they would probably resume equipment deliveries and aid if relations improve and Pakistan pursues terrorists more aggressively. The cutoffs do not affect any immediate deliveries of military sales to Pakistan, like F-16 fighter jets, or nonmilitary aid, the officials said. </p><p> Pakistan’s precise military budget is not known, and while the American aid cutoff would probably have a small impact on the overall military budget, it would most directly affect the counterinsurgency campaign. The Pakistani Army spends nearly one-quarter of the nation’s annual expenditures, according to K. Alan Kronstadt of the Congressional Research Service. </p><p> While some senior administration officials have concluded that Pakistan will never be the kind of partner the administration hoped for when President Obama entered office, others emphasize that the United States cannot risk a full break in relations or a complete cutoff of aid akin to what happened in the 1990s, when Pakistan was caught developing nuclear weapons. </p><p> But many of the recent aid curtailments are clearly intended to force the Pakistani military to make a difficult choice between backing the country that finances much of its operations and equipment, or continuing to provide secret support for the Taliban and other militants fighting American soldiers in Afghanistan. </p><p> “We have to continue to emphasize with the Pakistanis that in the end it’s in their interest to be able to go after these targets as well,” Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta told reporters on Friday en route to Afghanistan. </p><p> Some American officials say Pakistan has only itself to blame, citing the Pakistani military’s decision to distance itself from American assistance in response to <a title="Times article" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/03/world/asia/03pakistan.html">the humiliation suffered from the American commando raid</a> in Abbottabad, Pakistan, that killed Osama bin Laden, as well as rising anger from midlevel Pakistani officers and the Pakistani public that senior military leaders, including Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, the powerful army chief of staff, are too accommodating to the Americans. </p><p> Pakistan shut down the American program to help train Pakistani paramilitary troops fighting the Taliban and Al Qaeda in the lawless border regions near Afghanistan, prompting the Americans to take with them equipment Pakistani troops used. The Central Intelligence Agency has been relying more heavily on flying armed drones from Afghanistan since Pakistan threatened to close down a base the C.I.A. was using inside the country. </p><p> But in private briefings to senior Congressional staff members last month, Pentagon officials made clear that they were taking a tougher line toward Pakistan and reassessing whether it could still be an effective partner in fighting terrorists. </p><p> “They wanted to tell us, ‘Guys, we’re delivering the message that this is not business as usual and we’ve got this under control,’ ” one senior Senate aide said. </p><p> Comments last week by Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, also reflected a potentially more confrontational approach to Pakistan. Admiral Mullen, who is retiring in two months, became the first American official to publicly accuse Pakistan of ordering the kidnapping, torture and death of the journalist, Saleem Shahzad, whose mutilated body was found in early June. </p><p> Besides the growing tensions, the slowdown in aid can also be attributed to tightening military budgets as lawmakers seek deeper cuts in Pentagon spending to help address the mounting government debt. </p><p> There is growing opposition on Capitol Hill to sending security assistance to Pakistan. Last week, the Republican-controlled House approved a Pentagon budget bill that limits the Defense Department from spending more than 25 percent of its projected $1.1 billion budget for training and equipping Pakistani troops next year, unless the secretaries of defense and state submit a report to Congress showing how the money will be spent to combat insurgencies. </p><p> The Pakistani military is the most important institution in the country. But it has been under intense domestic and international pressure because of the humiliation of the Bin Laden raid, <a title="Times article" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/23/world/asia/23pakistan.html">an attack</a> on Pakistan’s main navy base in Karachi weeks later, and continuing fallout from the arrest and subsequent release of a C.I.A. security contractor, Raymond A. Davis, <a title="Times article" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/22/world/asia/22pakistan.html">who shot and killed</a> two Pakistanis in January in what he said was a robbery. </p><p> The United States has long debated how hard it can push Pakistan to attack militant strongholds in the tribal area. Washington, however, depends on Pakistan as a major supply route into Afghanistan. American officials also want to monitor as closely as they can Pakistan’s burgeoning nuclear weapons arsenal. </p><p> The decision to hold back much of the American military aid has not been made public by the Pakistani military or the civilian government. But it is well known at the top levels of the military, and a senior Pakistani official described it as an effort by the Americans to gain “leverage.” </p><p> A former Pakistani diplomat, Maleeha Lodhi, who served twice as ambassador to the United States, said the Pentagon action was short-sighted, and was likely to produce greater distance between the two countries. </p><p> “It will be repeating a historic blunder and hurting itself in the bargain by using a blunt instrument of policy at a time when it needs Pakistan’s help to defeat Al Qaeda and make an honorable retreat from Afghanistan,” Ms. Lodhi said of the United States. </p><p> Washington imposed sanctions on Pakistan in the 1990s, and in the process lost influence with the Pakistani military, Ms. Lodhi said. Similarly, the Obama administration would find itself out in the cold with the Pakistani Army if it held up funds, she said. </p><p> Within the Pakistani Army, the hold on American assistance would be viewed as “an unfriendly act and total disregard of the sacrifices made by the army,” said Brig. Javed Hussain, a retired special forces officer. </p><p> </p><div class="authorIdentification"> <p>Eric Schmitt reported from Washington, and Jane Perlez from Islamabad, Pakistan. David E. Sanger contributed reporting from Washington, and Ismail Khan from Peshawar, Pakistan.</p><p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/10/world/asia/10intel.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all">Original here</a><br /></p> </div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09408839338139169839noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-800326478289622957.post-41597551813519548702011-07-10T04:10:00.000-07:002011-07-10T04:12:17.547-07:00CITY HUNTER<div><br /></div><div><div id="channel_masthead" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 16px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; position: relative; width: 460px; height: 335px; line-height: 20px; "><div class="buttons" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 16px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; position: absolute; top: 0px; left: 0px; width: 460px; height: 335px; "><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 16px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; position: relative; width: 460px; height: 335px; -webkit-transition-property: opacity; -webkit-transition-duration: 0.5s; -webkit-transition-timing-function: initial; -webkit-transition-delay: initial; opacity: 1; "><div class="play" id="43080" id="42882" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 16px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; display: block; position: absolute; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden; top: 110px; left: 173px; width: 114px; height: 114px; background-image: url(http://a1.viki.com/images/channel_mastheads/play_sprite.png); background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: initial; background-position: 0px -114px; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; "></div></div></div><div class="footer" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 16px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; position: absolute; bottom: 5px; width: 460px; height: 20px; text-align: center; "><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 20px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 4px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 4px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-family: Arial; vertical-align: baseline; display: inline-block; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: rgba(102, 102, 102, 0.699219); color: white; text-shadow: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.746094) 1px 1px 2px; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; "><span class="poster" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 4px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 4px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; ">Poster</span> <span class="trailer" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 4px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 4px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; ">Trailer</span> <span class="episode selected" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 4px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 4px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-transform: uppercase; ">EPISODE 1</span></p></div></div><div id="information" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 12px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 16px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 20px; "><h3 style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 5px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: bold; font-style: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-family: Verdana; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 20px; text-transform: uppercase; color: rgb(102, 102, 102); ">SHOW INFORMATION</h3><ul style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-family: Verdana; vertical-align: baseline; list-style-type: square; list-style-position: inside; list-style-image: none; "><li style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(102, 102, 102); "><span style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); ">Title : 시티헌터 (<span class="romanized_title" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); "><span style="margin-top: 2px; margin-right: 2px; margin-bottom: 2px; margin-left: 2px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 2px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 2px; border-top-width: 1px; border-right-width: 1px; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-left-width: 1px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: bold; font-style: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(230, 3, 94); border-top-style: solid; border-right-style: solid; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: solid; border-top-color: rgb(179, 179, 179); border-right-color: rgb(179, 179, 179); border-bottom-color: rgb(179, 179, 179); border-left-color: rgb(179, 179, 179); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 221); ">R</span>Siti Heonteo</span>)</span></li><li style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(102, 102, 102); "><span style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); ">English Title : City Hunter</span></li><li style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(102, 102, 102); "><span style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); ">Country : Korea</span></li><li style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(102, 102, 102); "><span style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); ">Episodes : 20</span></li><li style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(102, 102, 102); "><span style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); ">Broadcast Network : SBS</span></li></ul></div><div id="description" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 31px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 1px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-family: Verdana; vertical-align: baseline; border-top-style: dotted; border-top-color: rgb(191, 191, 191); line-height: 20px; "><div class="title" style="margin-top: 5px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 5px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; display: block; "><h3 style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 5px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: bold; font-style: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-family: Verdana; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 20px; text-transform: uppercase; color: rgb(102, 102, 102); display: inline; ">SERIES DESCRIPTION</h3></div>City Hunter is based on world-famous Japanese Manga by Tsukasa Hojo. Lee Yoon-Sung (Lee Min-Ho) works at the Blue House's National Communication Network Team and received his Ph.D at M.I.T.Kim Na-Na (Park Min-Young) is a bodyguard at the South Korean President's residence, the Blue House . Na-Na lost her parents by car accident since then she made a living by doing part time jobs. She became a bodyguard at the Blue House and she falls in love with Lee Yoon-Sung.</div></div><div id="description" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 31px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 1px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-family: Verdana; vertical-align: baseline; border-top-style: dotted; border-top-color: rgb(191, 191, 191); line-height: 20px; "><a href="http://www.viki.com/channels/1820-city-hunter">Original here</a></div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09408839338139169839noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-800326478289622957.post-19529683073799070942011-07-08T00:59:00.000-07:002011-07-08T01:05:30.219-07:00Bill Clinton: Debt is Republicans' legacy<div> <div class="slideshow"> <img src="http://images.politico.com/global/news/110706_bill_clinton_ap_328.jpg" alt="Bill Clinton speaks at an event. | AP Photo" title="Bill Clinton speaks at an event. | AP Photo" height="328" width="605" /> <div class="slideshow-components"> <div class="caption close-this" id="caption_3955">Bill Clinton blames Republicans for doubling the debt after he left office. <span class="close-button" title="close this caption"></span></div> </div> </div> </div> <div class="byline"> By <a href="http://www.politico.com/reporters/DarrenSamuelsohn.html" rel="nofollow">DARREN SAMUELSOHN</a><br /></div> <div class="story-wrapper"> <div class="story-text resize"> <p>Bill Clinton bashed Republicans as hypocrites on Wednesday, saying their policies created the huge budget deficits that the GOP is now using to demand economically harmful spending cuts.</p><p>"Why aren’t we talking more about the economy and less about this?" Clinton said during a speech to liberal youth activists in Washington. "Partly because the Republicans who control the House and have a lot of pull in the Senate have now decided, having quadrupled the debt in 12 years before I took office and doubled it after I left, that it's all of a sudden the biggest problem in the world."</p><p id="continue">Speaking at Campus Progress’s seventh annual conference, Clinton blamed GOP leaders for creating the deficit through tax cuts and military spending. He also warned President Barack Obama and congressional leaders to avoid lumping immediate spending cuts into any debt limit deal because the economy still hasn't fully recovered.</p> <p>"In the current budget debate, there's all this discussion about how much will come from spending cuts, how much will come from tax increases, and almost nobody is talking about one of the central points, that everyone who's analyzed the situation makes, including the bipartisan Simpson-Bowles commission, which said you shouldn't do any of this until the economy is clearly recovering," Clinton said.</p> <p>"Because if you do things that dampen economic growth, and the U.K. is finding this out now, they adopted this big austerity budget, and there's a good chance that economic activity will go down so much that tax revenues will be reduced even more than spending is cut, and their deficit will increase," he added.</p> <p>Clinton last month <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-06-30/bill-clinton-says-don-t-fix-deficit-amid-busted-u-s-economy.html" target="_blank">told</a> Bloomberg Television’s Al Hunt that it was “crazy” for Obama and Congress to consider spending cuts now. He urged them to wait two years before venturing into the types of reductions envisioned by the Simpson-Bowles commission.</p> <p>Obama is scheduled to meet Thursday at the White House with House and Senate leaders from both parties as they search for an agreement before an Aug. 2 deadline to raise the nation’s borrowing limit from its current cap of $14.3 trillion.</p><div style="overflow: hidden; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: transparent; text-align: left; text-decoration: none; border: medium none;">Original here<br /><br /></div></div></div><div style="overflow: hidden; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: transparent; text-align: left; text-decoration: none; border: medium none;"><br /><br /></div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09408839338139169839noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-800326478289622957.post-14850431155381068912010-02-11T20:48:00.000-08:002010-02-11T20:50:12.575-08:00Did Glenn Beck set up Texas gubernatorial candidate Debra Medina?<p><img src="http://image3.examiner.com/images/blog/EXID37620/images/7b335bdb-7c86-4507-a6a0-f62b8bd5c8e9.jpg" alt="" align="left" height="205" width="312" />Explosive information hit the radio airwaves today as it was revealed that Texas gubernatorial candidate Debra Medina appeared to confirm in an interview that she is a so-called '9/11 truther.' <a href="http://www.therightscoop.com/debra-medina-is-a-911-truther/" target="_blank">The interview was conducted by Glenn Beck on the radio.</a></p><p><span style="text-align: left; width: 510px;">Debra Medina, right, at a debate with Gov. Rick Perry and Kay Bailey Hutchison (AP Photo/Pool,LM Otero).</span> <!-- SiteCatalyst code version: H.4. Copyright 1997-2006 Omniture, Inc. More info available at http://www.omniture.com --> <script language="JavaScript" src="http://image.examiner.com/scripts/StaticOmniture/s_code.js" type="text/javascript"></script><img src="http://stats.examiner.com/b/ss/examinercom/1/H.4-pdv-2/s71646655995760?[AQB]&ndh=1&t=12/1/2010%206%3A54%3A7%205%20-180&vmt=448DD6E2&ns=examinercom&pageName=Examiner%20Article&g=http%3A//www.examiner.com/x-37620-Conservative-Examiner%7Ey2010m2d11-Did-Glenn-Beck-set-up-Texas-gubernatorial-candidate-Debra-Medina&r=http%3A//digg.com/politics&cc=USD&ch=Politics&server=1004&events=event4&h1=Politics&c4=EXENTRY%3A1000616&v4=EXENTRY%3A1000616&c5=Did%20Glenn%20Beck%20set%20up%20Texas%20gubernatorial%20candidate%20Debra%20Medina%3F&v5=National&c6=Anthony%20G.%20Martin&v6=National&c7=EXID%3A37620%20Conservative%20Examiner&c8=EXID%3A37620&c9=11&c10=National&c11=National&c12=Report&c13=y2010m2d11-Did-Glenn-Beck-set-up-Texas-gubernatorial-candidate-Debra-Medina&s=1280x1024&c=32&j=1.3&v=Y&k=Y&bw=1280&bh=802&p=Shockwave%20Flash%3BMozilla%20Default%20Plug-in%3BRealPlayer%28tm%29%20G2%20LiveConnect-Enabled%20Plug-In%20%2832-bit%29%20%3BRealPlayer%20Version%20Plugin%3BMicrosoft%20Office%202003%3BAdobe%20Acrobat%3BJava%28TM%29%20Platform%20SE%206%20U6%3BMicrosoft%AE%20DRM%3BWindows%20Media%20Player%20Plug-in%20Dynamic%20Link%20Library%3B&[AQE]" name="s_i_examinercom" alt="" border="0" height="1" width="1" /></p><p>Immediately the Internet was burning up with quick responses both from Medina supporters and from those who jumped to the conclusion that the candidate had 'outed' herself as part of a movement which believes that the U.S. government had a hand in bringing about the terrorist attack on 9/11.</p><p><a href="http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/196/36197/?utm_source=co2hog&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+GlennBeckArticles+%28Glenn+Beck+Articles%29" target="_blank">The transcripts of the interview seem to indicate that those who believe Medina is a 'truther' have been vindicated</a>. However, the audio of the interview, as provided at the link in the first paragraph, seems to portray a slightly different angle. </p><p>Beck no doubt believes that Medina admitted to being a truther, as indicated by his follow-up questions and the comments he made on the air after the Medina interview.</p><p><a href="http://dailypaul.com/node/124931" target="_blank">Medina herself, however, maintains she admitted no such thing</a>. </p><p>To be fair, listening to the audio of the interview seems to confirm Medina's contention. The interview was fast-paced with Beck often interrupting and appearing to overlook the fact that the candidate clearly stated she is not a 9/11 truther, although she admits that the movement has raised some good questions that need to be answered.</p><p>And when Medina seemed to indicate that she would not purge her campaign of truthers, if she found any, Beck immediately jumped to the conclusion that Medina 'is a truther.' At that point, the interview was over as Beck essentially wrote off Medina as a viable candidate.</p><p>Nothing in the interview indicates that Beck deliberately set-up Medina. His flaw was the sloppiness with which which he conducted the interview and the knee-jerk reaction of branding Medina as a truther. </p><p>Beck's question was a fair one. Citizens need to know if their candidates are truthers and why. </p><p>However, stating that some truthers have good questions that need to be answered is not tantamount to admitting being part of the movement. Stating that there is no truther litmus test for campaign workers is no indication that a candidate believes that the U.S. government perpetrated the 9/11 attack.</p><p>No doubt Medina could have answered Beck's questions more effectively. And Beck could have been much more professional in the manner in which he went about conducting this interview.</p><p><a href="http://www.examiner.com/x-37620-Conservative-Examiner%7Ey2010m2d11-Did-Glenn-Beck-set-up-Texas-gubernatorial-candidate-Debra-Medina">Original here</a><br /></p>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09408839338139169839noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-800326478289622957.post-55592309743714823552010-02-11T20:46:00.000-08:002010-02-11T20:48:09.846-08:00Obama ‘Agnostic’ on Deficit Cuts, Won’t Prejudge Tax Increases<p>By Rich Miller</p> <p class="indent"> Feb. 11 (Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama said he is “agnostic” about raising taxes on households making less than $250,000 as part of a broad effort to rein in the budget deficit.</p> <p class="indent"> Obama, in a Feb. 9 Oval Office interview, said that a presidential commission on the budget needs to consider all options for reducing the deficit, including tax increases and cuts in spending on entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare.</p> <p class="indent"> “The whole point of it is to make sure that all ideas are on the table,” the president said in the interview with Bloomberg BusinessWeek, which will appear on newsstands Friday. “So what I want to do is to be completely agnostic, in terms of solutions.”</p> <p class="indent"> Obama repeatedly vowed during the 2008 presidential election campaign that he would not raise taxes on individuals making less than $200,000 and households earning less than $250,000 a year. When senior White House economic adviser Lawrence H. Summers and Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner suggested in August that the administration might be open to going back on that pledge, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs quickly reiterated the president’s promise.</p> <p class="indent"> In the interview, Obama said that putting preconditions on the agenda of a bipartisan advisory commission, which he said he would soon establish, would just undermine its purpose.</p> <p class="indent"> “What I can’t do is to set the thing up where a whole bunch of things are off the table,” Obama said. “Some would say we can’t look at entitlements. There are going to be some that say we can’t look at taxes, and pretty soon, you just can’t solve the problem.”</p><br /><p class="center"> Politically Risky</p><br /><p class="indent"> Many economists, including conservatives such as former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, argue that tax increases will be necessary as part of a broad package to control the deficit, which the White House projects will hit a record $1.6 trillion in the fiscal year ending on Sept. 30.</p> <p class="indent"> Obama said the U.S. was faced with a “structural deficit” that was in place before the recession began and that was only made worse by the deepest drop in the economy since the 1930s.</p><br /><p class="center"> Revenue ‘Mismatch’</p><br /><p class="indent"> “Our real problem is not the spike in spending last year, or the lost, even the lost revenues last year, as significant as those are,” he said. “The real problem has to do with the fact that there is a just a mismatch between the amount of money coming in and the amount of money going out. And that is going to require some big, tough choices that, so far, the political system has been unable to deal with.”</p> <p class="indent"> The administration hopes the bipartisan commission will make it easier to produce a comprehensive plan to reduce the budget gap to a sustainable level, often described as 3 percent of the overall economy, by 2015.</p> <p class="indent"> The White House decided to set up the group on its own after the Senate blocked a measure to establish a congressional panel whose recommendations would have been guaranteed a vote by lawmakers. Opponents, including a majority of Senate Republicans, complained that the plan would result in tax increases and that Congress wouldn’t have a chance to amend the panel’s recommendations. Under a presidentially appointed commission, Congress could ignore any panel recommendations.</p><br /><p class="center"> Republican Skepticism</p><br /><p class="indent"> House Republican leader John Boehner has expressed skepticism about the Obama commission and has sought assurances from the White House that its makeup would be bipartisan and not predisposed to tax increases. The Ohio Republican said he is still considering whether to appoint members from his party to the panel after a Feb. 9 meeting with the president.</p> <p class="indent"> The Obama administration’s budget already takes that route with its proposed $970 billion tax increase over the next decade on Americans earning more than $200,000 a year, largely by not extending former President George W. Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthy beyond 2010.</p> <p class="indent"> Even with those revenues -- and a proposed three-year freeze on some discretionary spending by the government -- the administration still projects a deficit of $752 billion in 2015, equivalent to 3.9 percent of gross domestic product.</p> <p class="indent"> That’s above the 3 percent mark that White House budget director Peter Orszag has said is necessary to stop the rise in government debt as a proportion of the economy.</p><br /><p class="center"> Budget Gap</p><br /><p class="indent"> Analysts say that middle-class taxes will need to be increased because the government can’t raise enough money from the wealthy alone to close the budget gap. “It’s just not possible to get the revenue you need only from this group,” said Joel Slemrod, director of the Office of Tax Policy Research at the University of Michigan.</p> <p class="indent"> Going back on his campaign pledge would be fraught with risks for Obama. Former President George H.W. Bush paid a steep political price when he abandoned his 1988 campaign promise not to raise taxes, losing out in his bid for a second term to Bill Clinton.</p>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09408839338139169839noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-800326478289622957.post-69908663426528152802010-02-11T20:43:00.000-08:002010-02-11T20:45:52.295-08:00The Daily Show Mocks GOP Hypocrisy over Obama and Hawaii<p>On Tuesday’s The Daily Show, John Oliver followed Republicans to the RNC winter meeting in Hawaii, where they continued to talk about fiscal responsibility while enjoying an expensive Hawaiian getaway. The point was that when Obama goes to Hawaii, to the GOP he is an elitist, but the RNC sees no irony in their own behavior.</p> <p>Here is the video:</p> <table style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 11px; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; color: rgb(51, 51, 51); background-color: rgb(245, 245, 245);" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" height="353" width="360"> <tbody> <tr style="background-color: rgb(229, 229, 229);" valign="middle"> <td style="padding: 2px 1px 0px 5px;"><a target="_blank" style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold;" href="http://www.thedailyshow.com/">The Daily Show With Jon Stewart</a></td> <td style="padding: 2px 5px 0px; text-align: right; font-weight: bold;">Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 14px;" valign="middle"> <td style="padding: 2px 1px 0px 5px;" colspan="2"><a target="_blank" style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold;" href="http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-february-9-2010/rnc-meeting-in-hawaii">RNC Meeting in Hawaii</a></td> </tr> <tr style="height: 14px; background-color: rgb(53, 53, 53);" valign="middle"> <td colspan="2" style="padding: 2px 5px 0px; overflow: hidden; width: 360px; text-align: right;"><a target="_blank" style="color: rgb(150, 222, 255); text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold;" href="http://www.thedailyshow.com/">www.thedailyshow.com</a></td> </tr> <tr valign="middle"> <td style="padding: 0px;" colspan="2"><embed style="display: block;" src="http://media.mtvnservices.com/mgid:cms:item:comedycentral.com:264229" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="window" allowfullscreen="true" flashvars="autoPlay=false" allowscriptaccess="always" allownetworking="all" bgcolor="#000000" height="301" width="360"></embed></td> </tr> <tr style="height: 18px;" valign="middle"> <td style="padding: 0px;" colspan="2"> <table style="margin: 0px; text-align: center;" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" height="100%" width="100%"> <tbody><tr valign="middle"> <td style="padding: 3px; width: 33%;"><a target="_blank" style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10px; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; color: rgb(51, 51, 51); text-decoration: none;" href="http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes">Daily Show<br />Full Episodes</a></td> <td style="padding: 3px; width: 33%;"><a target="_blank" style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10px; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; color: rgb(51, 51, 51); text-decoration: none;" href="http://www.indecisionforever.com/">Political Humor</a></td> <td style="padding: 3px; width: 33%;"><a target="_blank" style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10px; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; color: rgb(51, 51, 51); text-decoration: none;" href="http://www.thedailyshow.com/videos/tag/health">Health Care Crisis</a></td> </tr> </tbody></table> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p>Oliver talked to several Republicans who utter the same talking point that Democrats are out of touch with average Americans, while they lounged around in Hawaii. One meeting attendee claimed that Democrats can’t connect with people because, “They’re more well to do. They had the money to go to Harvard and that kind of thing.”</p><p>Later in the segment, Oliver said, “It was basic common sense. In the middle of the recession don’t waste money on programs that we don’t need, can’t afford, or simply look ridiculous,” all the while the video showed him lounging at the resort.”</p> <p>As usual, the comedic Daily Show was the only program to point out the sheer absurdity of the Republican Party trying to score political points, by talking about Democrats being out of touch with the common man, and fiscal responsibility, from Hawaii where they decided to hold their winter meeting in the middle of a recession.</p> <p>The worst part about it is that the members of the RNC seemed completely clueless. They talk about Democrats being elitist, but fail to realize that even in good times, average Americans can’t afford a getaway to Hawaii. If Republicans are serious about fiscal responsibility, they could set an example for the rest of America, but holding their winter meeting in Pittsburgh or Cleveland instead of Hawaii.</p><p><a href="http://www.politicususa.com/Daily-Show-RNC">Original here</a><br /></p>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09408839338139169839noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-800326478289622957.post-72061083005203734822010-02-10T21:00:00.000-08:002010-02-10T21:05:53.149-08:00The Worst Political Ad Ever? This Fiorina Offering Has Got To Be Up There<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiSYVX_xXEjQWxvkp_BC_VedGr30UvRU0puDAk-VyJIokQkglbWLDWSArHL63ngeb4aOD2J11Qvv5FrLva8bX9Px_6ZbH65ngKMdauVn9Pq_c9TImzck-08mT5UnlQZ8WHAOhxa1rcnsgs/s1600-h/000.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer; width: 200px; height: 200px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiSYVX_xXEjQWxvkp_BC_VedGr30UvRU0puDAk-VyJIokQkglbWLDWSArHL63ngeb4aOD2J11Qvv5FrLva8bX9Px_6ZbH65ngKMdauVn9Pq_c9TImzck-08mT5UnlQZ8WHAOhxa1rcnsgs/s400/000.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5436847477685242482" border="0" /></a><br /><p>I have never done LSD -- at least I don't think so -- but I suspect its effect on me would not be much different than how I felt after I watched <em><strong>Carly Fiorina's</strong></em> "demon sheep" attack ad on rival <em><strong>Tom Campbell</strong></em>. </p> <p>Fiorina, the ex-CEO of Hewlett-Packard, had been the supposed frontrunner for the Republican Senate nomination in California to take on three-term Democrat <em><strong>Barbara Boxer</strong></em>. Campbell, a former congressman who was finance director for Gov. <em><strong>Arnold Schwarzenegger</strong></em> -- maybe not the thing one should put on a resume, given the state's economic woes -- entered the Senate race just last month after his bid for the GOP gubernatorial nomination was going nowhere. Campbell has run statewide before -- he got trounced in the 2000 Senate race by <em><strong>Dianne Feinstein</strong></em> (D) and lost the Republican primary for the other seat in '92 -- and so people pretty much know who he is. But I never pictured him as the devil. Or, to be more specific, as a demonic wolf in sheep's clothing.</p> <p>But that's who he is in the ad in question.</p> <p>Since Campbell switched races, he has found himself leading in the polls for the nomination. A <strong>Public Policy Institute of California</strong> survey has him with an 11-point lead over Fiorina, 27-16 percent; state Assemblyman <em><strong>Chuck DeVore</strong></em>, a conservative, trailed with eight percent. A <strong>Field</strong> poll had Campbell over Fiorina by five points.</p> <p>This is what apparently led to the Fiorina campaign running the demon sheep ad. In it, she lays the blame for California's financial situation on him, calling him a FCINO -- a Fiscal Conservative In Name Only.</p> <p>But it's more than a simple, ordinary attack ad. It seems to go way over the top, bizarrely so, as if, well, it was the result of some bad acid trip. I really urge you to watch it yourself (and please avoid operating heavy machinery as you do so): </p> <p><object width="462" height="281"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/KRY7wBuCcBY&hl=en_US&fs=1&"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/KRY7wBuCcBY&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="462" height="281"></embed></object></p> <p>I think when I first saw the ad I stared at the screen without blinking for the next five minutes, completely motionless. Maybe that's the kind of mistake someone makes when running for office for the first time? Who came up with this concept, anyway?</p> <p>(For the record, it was Republican media consultant <em><strong>Fred Davis</strong></em>, who also produced the McCain ad comparing Barack Obama with Paris Hilton in an attempt to turn Obama's celebrity status against him. How'd that one work out?)</p> <p>Apparently I'm not the only one who thinks this ad is, well, from another galaxy.</p> <p><em>Time</em> magazine blogger <a href="http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/02/03/carly-fiorina-releases-rare-psychadelic-attack-ad/">Michael Scherer</a> writes that the "best way" to view Fiorina's "awesomely bizarre new primary campaign ad -- which includes shots of an alien robot sheep, or something -- is by pressing play on your cassette tape of Pink Floyd's Dark Side of The Moon just as you click play on YouTube."</p> <p><em><strong>Jason Linkins</strong></em>, writing in the <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/05/luckily-for-carly-fiorina_n_451128.html">Huffington Post</a>, calls it "expensive and deranged, with fake sheep crawling around with lite-brite eyes in a field, and a terrible, malformed metaphor that actually insults the fiscal conservatives whom everyone wants to win over."</p> <p>Blogger <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-10448245-71.html">Chris Matyszczyk</a>, writing in CNET's "Technically Incorrect": "It may well be that Carly Fiorina will make for an excellent California senator. It may well be that her advisers are slapping her (and themselves) on the back because they have finally got her name out of the morass of apparently faceless politicos who are vying for the honor of failing to corral the psychedelic state. But it also may well be that they have propelled an image of Fiorina as something of nasty nutbag who shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the steering wheel of a Prius, never mind that of a state whose recall may have been total, but whose politics should be totaled."</p> <p>British blogger <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/02/05/fiorina_sheep/">Lester Haines</a>: "What the remarkable 'demon sheep' seen in the vid has to do with the price of fish is anyone's guess. Still, it's good to see that the Senate race in California is being conducted in the time-honoured US fashion, with fellow party members beating the crap out of each other before they've even faced up to their true political rivals."</p> <p>Chuck DeVore, who has suddenly become the forgotten candidate in all this, has set up a Web site, <a href="http://demonsheep.org/demonsheep/">demonsheep.org</a>, which proclaims it represents the "Society for the Eradication of Demon Sheep From Our Political Discourse." </p> <p>But who says we're right? She got everyone talking about her ad, so Fiorina must be on to something, no? That's the view of the <em>Christian Science Monitor's</em> Peter Grier, who <a href="http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/The-Vote/2010/0205/Method-to-the-madness-of-Carly-Fiorina-s-demon-sheep-campaign-ad">wonders</a> if there is a "method" to the ad's "madness":</p> <blockquote>In politics, it's not a good sign when your opponent is directing attention to your ads -- particularly if they attack him by name. But is the Fiorina camp being crazy like a, uh, fox?</blockquote> <blockquote>Maybe the ad is working. Fiorina has received loads of free media coverage that at least mentions her claim that Campbell is a false fiscal conservative. In a GOP primary, that's a tough charge. And polls show that Fiorina may be behind Campbell at this point, meaning that she needs to do something to shake up the race.</blockquote> <blockquote>For now, the Fiorina campaign is unrepentant.</blockquote> <blockquote>"Look, what I like about the ad is first, it's funny, but it's also factually correct," said Fiorina Thursday in response to the controversy.</blockquote> <blockquote>"Factually correct" and "demon sheep" may be two phrases you never thought you'd see connected. But Fiorina aides promised more such outrageous ads in comings weeks.</blockquote> I can't wait.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.npr.org/blogs/politicaljunkie/2010/02/the_worst_political_ad_ever.html">Original here</a>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09408839338139169839noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-800326478289622957.post-3276945056709255282009-12-19T23:51:00.000-08:002009-12-19T23:53:07.941-08:00What Changed? White House Now Supports Franken Rape Amendment<div class="meta_module"> <img src="http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/assets_c/2009/10/al-franken-reporters-cropped-proto-custom_2.jpg" /> <br /><div class="caption">Sen. Al Franken (D-MN)<br /><br /><div class="entry_text"> <p>Sen. Al Franken's (D-MN) "rape amendment," which guarantees that rape victims who work for defense contractors can pursue charges against their employers, has been championed by many but opposed by Obama's Department of Defense. The Pentagon initially called the measure unenforceable. But the provision, part of the defense appropriations bill, made it through conference committee and is now supported by the White House. </p> <p>So what changed? </p> <p>A senior administration official explains to TPM: The White House was concerned about the original language, which would have prohibited the DoD from using companies whose employment contracts contained an "arbitration clause," which would keep employees from taking the company to court for Title VII offenses, which include rape, sexual assault, harassment and false imprisonment. That language, the official said, may have forced the government to reneg on multi-billion-dollar contracts. Because of a clause in many of those contracts, the government would still have to pay the contractors, even though the work wouldn't be performed. </p> <p>Another concern: The Pentagon deals with a massive number of contracts and would never be able to make sure the arbitration clauses were stripped in all those contracts. </p> <p>So White House staff, after a week or so perusing contract and grant law, came up with a "clever construct," the official said. The contractors, in order to stay in the lucrative government contract business, don't have to remove the arbitration clauses. But they can't enforce them. </p> <p>If it works the way the administration tells us, this is good news for Jamie Leigh Jones, the woman who inspired Franken's amendment. While working for KBR in Iraq, Jones was allegedly drugged, gang-raped and locked in a storage container by her co-workers. She's been fighting, unsuccessfully, to bring her case to court because of the abritration clause in the contract she signed.</p> <p>It's good news for her even though the new restriction will not be retroactive per se, and even though it doesn't go into effect until 60 days after the President signs the appropriations bill. </p> <p>But it will affect any company, such as KBR, once it signs a new contract. (And the major contractors sign a lot of contracts.) Here's the real bite to the restriction: It will affect the entire company, and everyone who works for it. </p> <p>So the second KBR signs a new contract, Jones -- and anyone else with similar claims -- will be able to take her case to court. If KBR tries to enforce their arbitration clause, they could lose millions in future government contracts. </p> <p>Of course, there is a national security waiver. The secretary of defense can waive the restriction if, say, a contractor is the only one who can provide a certain service or product. But the secretary would have to explain, in detail, why no one else could fulfill the contract. And, according to the official, that explanation would be posted online, in public view. (The idea here being that another company who makes the same product could step forward.) </p> <p>And the amendment will only apply to companies with contracts worth $1 million or more -- but that will include most contractors. </p> <p>If the amendment works the way the White House says, it will do what Franken wanted: Give rape victims their day in court. </p> <p>The appropriations bill still needs to be approved by the Senate, where Republicans are threatening to filibuster in an attempt to stall health care legislation. But it is expected, eventually, to pass, and to be signed by the President.<br /></p><p><a href="http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/12/how-the-franken-amendment-will-work.php">Original here</a><br /></p> </div><br /></div> </div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09408839338139169839noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-800326478289622957.post-70318846871099416562009-12-19T23:50:00.000-08:002009-12-19T23:51:53.507-08:00Flashback: McCain Refused To Grant 30 Seconds Of Time During Iraq War Debate<p><img src="http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/mack.gif" alt="mack" title="mack" class="alignright size-full wp-image-74381" height="204" width="170" />Yesterday, Sen. Al Franken (D-MN), acting on the orders of the Senate leadership, refused to grant Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) “<a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2009/12/17/franken-lieberman-minute/">an additional moment</a>” to continue speaking on the Senate floor after his 10 minutes expired. Franken’s objection caused Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) to groan about how Franken’s move was unprofessional, unprecedented, and disrespectful:</p> <blockquote><p>McCAIN: <strong>I’ve been around here 20-some years. First time I’ve ever seen a member denied an extra minute or two to finish his remarks. … I just haven’t seen it before myself.</strong> And I don’t like it. And I think it harms the comity of the Senate not to allow one of our members at least a minute. I’m sure that time is urgent here, but I doubt that it would be that urgent.</p></blockquote> <p>Unfortunately, McCain’s memory is suffering. In fact, McCain has engaged in the very same behavior that he was criticizing Franken for yesterday.</p> <p>On October 10, 2002 — just ahead of the looming mid-term elections — the Senate rushed a debate on a war authorization giving President Bush the power to use force against Iraq. The resolution ultimately passed the Senate after midnight <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution">on an early Friday morning by a vote of 77-23</a>. </p> <p>During the course of the frenzied floor debate, then-Sen. Mark Dayton (D-MN) spoke in favor of <a href="http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=2&vote=00234">an amendment offered by Sen. Robert Byrd</a> (D-WV) that would have restricted Bush’s constitutional powers to wage war against Iraq. After a minute and a half, Dayton ran out of time, <a href="http://cns.miis.edu/cr/021014sd.htm">prompting this exchange</a>:</p> <blockquote><p>The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator’s time has expired. </p> <p>Mr. DAYTON. <strong>I ask for unanimous consent that I have 30 seconds more to finish my remarks. </strong></p> <p>Mr. McCAIN. <strong>I object.</strong></p></blockquote> <p>Byrd stepped in to grant Dayton time to finish his remarks. But just moments later, Byrd asked for more time to speak for himself. Again, McCain objected, prompting Byrd to chide him for doing so. “This shows the patience of a Senator,” Byrd said. “This clearly demonstrates that the train is coming down on us like a Mack truck, and we are <a href="http://cns.miis.edu/cr/021014sd.htm">not even going to consider a few extra minutes for this Senator</a>.” </p> <p>After being publicly shamed, McCain acquiesced to Byrd’s request. But moments later, McCain added this disclaimer: “I wish to say very briefly that I understand people have a desire to speak. We have a number of Senators who have not spoken on this issue. It is already looking as if we may be here well into this evening. From now on, <a href="http://cns.miis.edu/cr/021014sd.htm">I will be adhering strictly to the rules</a>.” In other words, he acted just like Franken did yesterday.</p><p><a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2009/12/18/mccain-hypocrisy-franken/">Original here</a><br /></p>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09408839338139169839noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-800326478289622957.post-39884846287067072492009-12-19T23:47:00.000-08:002009-12-19T23:50:48.220-08:00Democrats gain 60th vote on health bill<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjb6kYuMbtKhxr8KnxcN-6NQJdH6BsReN3SxzL4kEm_Ypr4Msdu70d5qP76wM0mVk0Xgtla_4KBzy-08yTJcX6i8w1PAPCHLnTsdCfA0PsSZuPFty9zuz_9N8mu1hbs8A5_ks8szTKo0cQ/s1600-h/www.reuters.com.jpeg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 390px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjb6kYuMbtKhxr8KnxcN-6NQJdH6BsReN3SxzL4kEm_Ypr4Msdu70d5qP76wM0mVk0Xgtla_4KBzy-08yTJcX6i8w1PAPCHLnTsdCfA0PsSZuPFty9zuz_9N8mu1hbs8A5_ks8szTKo0cQ/s400/www.reuters.com.jpeg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5417222367164850354" border="0" /></a><span id="articleText"><span class="focusParagraph"> <p>WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Senate Democrats reached a compromise on Saturday with the last holdout senator that secured the 60 votes they need to pass a broad healthcare overhaul sought by President Barack Obama.</p></span> <p class="relatedTopics"> <a href="http://www.reuters.com/people/barack-obama">Barack Obama</a> | <a href="http://www.reuters.com/subjects/healthcare">Healthcare Reform</a></p><span id="midArticle_1"></span> <p>A marathon negotiating session on Friday clinched an agreement with Democrat Ben Nelson ensuring federal funds would not be used to pay for abortions and providing extra Medicaid funds for his home state of Nebraska.</p><span id="midArticle_2"></span> <p>Nelson, a strong abortion rights opponent, had been the elusive 60th vote for the sweeping revamp, Obama's top legislative priority and the subject of intense political brawling for months.</p><span id="midArticle_3"></span> <p>"Today is a major step forward for the American people," Obama said at the White House. "After a nearly century-long struggle we are on the cusp of making healthcare reform a reality in the United States of America."</p><span id="midArticle_4"></span> <p>Nelson's backing should secure victory for Democrats in the first of a series of crucial procedural votes scheduled to begin at 1 a.m. (0600 GMT) on Monday and possibly conclude with final Senate passage on Christmas Eve.</p><span id="midArticle_5"></span> <p>"It seems that way," Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid said when asked if Democrats had the 60 votes they need to muscle the bill through the Senate against unified Republican opposition.</p><span id="midArticle_6"></span> <p>If the Senate approves the bill, it must be melded with a version passed on November 7 by the House of Representatives and both chambers must approve it again before sending it to Obama for his signature.</p><span id="midArticle_7"></span> <p>Reid introduced a 383-page amendment on Saturday making changes aimed at securing the last votes, including the abortion compromise and the dropping of a government-run public insurance option to appease moderates like independent Joe Lieberman.</p><span id="midArticle_8"></span> <p>The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office gave the revised bill a rosy review, saying it would cost $871 billion over 10 years and cut the federal deficit by $132 billion in the same period -- meeting Obama's cost target and goal of deficit reduction.</p><span id="midArticle_9"></span> <p>Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, who has vowed to use every tool possible to delay the bill, forced the public reading of Reid's amendment. That took more than seven hours on Saturday.</p><span id="midArticle_10"></span> <p>Afterward, Reid filed a series of procedural motions to bring debate to a close and set up a string of closing votes to begin early Monday. The moves came during a rare Saturday session as a huge snowstorm slammed the U.S. capital, shutting down traffic.</p><span id="midArticle_11"></span> <p>'MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT'</p><span id="midArticle_12"></span> <p>"If they were proud of the bill they wouldn't be doing it this way," McConnell told reporters. "They wouldn't be jamming it through in the middle of the night on the last weekend before Christmas."</p><span id="midArticle_13"></span> <p>Obama has asked the Senate to finish by year's end to prevent the issue from spilling into the campaign for November 2010 congressional elections. Opinion polls show the bill losing public support, with majorities now opposed to it.</p><span id="midArticle_14"></span> <p>The Senate bill would extend coverage to 30 million uninsured Americans, provide subsidies to help them pay for the coverage and halt industry practices like refusing insurance to people with pre-existing medical conditions.</p><span id="midArticle_15"></span> <p>Reid's amendment incorporates a variety of changes, from dropping the government-run public insurance option to adding non-profit health plans offered by private insurers and administered by a federal agency.</p><span id="midArticle_0"></span> <p>Other revisions take aim at insurance industry margins and taxes, including a cap on profits. Still, insurers would see a delay to the bulk of new taxes and now they would be phased-in over time.</p><span id="midArticle_1"></span> <p>Health insurance plans for large groups would have to spend at least 85 cents of every dollar on medical costs under the revisions, potentially crimping their profits. The amendment dropped the bill's tax on elective cosmetic surgery and added a 10 percent tax on indoor tanning, a potential cause of cancer.</p><span id="midArticle_2"></span> <p>Also included is an increase in the bill's Medicare payroll tax from 0.5 percent to 0.9 percent on income over $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for couples.</p><span id="midArticle_3"></span> <p>But much of Reid's focus had been on winning Nelson's support. He and other abortion rights opponents feared the federal subsidies could be spent on plans covering abortion.</p><span id="midArticle_4"></span> <p>Nelson said the agreement would allow states to prohibit abortion coverage in the new insurance exchanges created under the bill and mandate that every state exchange include an insurance plan that does not cover abortion.</p><span id="midArticle_5"></span> <p>It would require payments for abortion coverage be made separately with private funds.</p><span id="midArticle_6"></span> <p>"The plan that we've put together here, that we have agreement on, in fact walls off that money in an effective manner," Nelson told reporters. "I would not have voted for this bill without these provisions."</p><span id="midArticle_7"></span> <p>He said he could drop his support if the abortion deal was altered in negotiations with the House of Representatives.</p><span id="midArticle_8"></span> <p>Reid defended the additional federal funds for Nebraska that will permanently pay for the bill's expansion of the Medicaid health program for the poor -- all other states have to start picking up the tab in 2017.</p><span id="midArticle_9"></span> <p>"That's what legislation is all about," Reid said. "It's compromise."</p><span id="midArticle_10"></span> <p>Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer, a strong supporter of abortion rights, told reporters she believed the compromise would adequately separate public and private funds for abortion coverage under the bill.</p><span id="midArticle_11"></span> <p>Advocates on both sides condemned the abortion deal.</p><span id="midArticle_12"></span> <p>Planned Parenthood called it "a sad day when women's health is traded away for one vote."</p><span id="midArticle_13"></span> <p>Douglas Johnson, the legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee said, said the compromise "solves none of the fundamental abortion-related problems with the Senate bill."</p><span id="midArticle_14"></span> <p>The House version of the healthcare bill includes stricter anti-abortion language. The Senate rejected an amendment incorporating the language last week.</p><span id="midArticle_15"></span> <p>(Additional reporting by Susan Heavey, editing by Eric Beech and <a href="http://blogs.reuters.com/search/journalist.php?edition=us&n=jackie.frank&">Jackie Frank</a>)</p><p><a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5B83ZG20091219">Original here</a><br /></p></span>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09408839338139169839noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-800326478289622957.post-88992465524322357102009-11-22T01:40:00.000-08:002009-11-22T01:41:59.106-08:00Obama Calls for More U.S. Exports to Asia<h3 class="byline">By <a href="http://hpb.online.wsj.com/search/search_center.html?KEYWORDS=JUDITH+BURNS&ARTICLESEARCHQUERY_PARSER=bylineAND">JUDITH BURNS</a> </h3><p>WASHINGTON--U.S. President Barack Obama, fresh from his first presidential trip to Asia, called for the U.S. to increase exports to that region, saying even small gains would help put many unemployed Americans back on the job.</p> <p>"As we emerge from the worst recession in generations, there is nothing more important than to do everything we can to get our economy moving again and put Americans back to work, and I will go anywhere to pursue that goal," Mr. Obama said in his weekly radio address to the nation.</p> <p>The president's remarks follow his four-nation tour of Japan, Singapore, China and South Korea, a trip he said was prompted largely by economic interests. Now back in the U.S., he promised to continue to focus on ways to combat U.S. unemployment.</p> <p>Mr. Obama warned the U.S. shouldn't return to relying on growth fueled by consumer borrowing, urging the nation to spend less, save more and get the record federal deficit under control. He also called for a greater emphasis on exports, saying a 5% increase in U.S. exports to Asia would result in hundreds of thousands of U.S. jobs.</p> <p>The president touted an upcoming White House forum on jobs and economic growth, where business executives and owners, labor unions, economists and financial experts will discuss ways to spur hiring and get the economy moving again.</p> <p>"It is important that we do not make any ill-considered decisions--even with the best of intentions--particularly at a time when our resources are so limited. But it is just as important that we are open to any demonstrably good idea to supplement the steps we've already taken to put America back to work. That's what I hope to achieve in this forum," Mr. Obama said.</p> <p>The Republican address, delivered by Sen. Mike Crapo (R., Idaho), focused on legislation unveiled this week by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.), to overhaul U.S. health care. Mr. Crapo encouraged voters to read the 2,074-page bill, suggesting that would be "a real eye-opener."</p> <p>Mr. Crapo said that if Mr. Reid's bill becomes law, it would drive up health-care costs, increase taxes and impose hundreds of billions of dollars of cuts on Medicare, the federal health program for older Americans. He also complained that it would establish "a massive governmental intrusion into management of our health-care economy" and that despite its cost and sweep, it would still leave millions of Americans without health insurance.</p> <p>"This is not true health-care reform, and it is not what the American people want," said Mr. Crapo.</p> <p> <strong>Write to</strong> Judith Burns at <a class="" href="mailto:judith.burns@dowjones.com">judith.burns@dowjones.com</a></p><p><a href="http://hpb.online.wsj.com/article/SB125881283784359109.html?mod=wsj_share_digg">Original here</a><br /></p>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09408839338139169839noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-800326478289622957.post-77155123078176222942009-11-22T01:33:00.000-08:002009-11-22T01:40:12.127-08:00Democrats hold line, but cracks show<span style="font-size:85%;">By <a href="http://www.politico.com/reporters/CarrieBudoffBrown.html">CARRIE BUDOFF BROWN</a><br /><br /></span><!--/group--> <dl class="story-image"><dt><img src="http://images.politico.com/global/news/091121_reid_shinkle_297.jpg" alt="Senate Majority Leader Reid during a new conference following the passage of a cloture vote on the Senate Health Care reform bill. | John Shinkle/Politico" width="274" height="206" /></dt><dd>Reid will face bruising negotiations with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi who is intent on keeping intact major provisions of her far more left-leaning bill. <cite> Photo: <a href="http://www.politico.com/reporters/JohnShinkle.html">John Shinkle</a></cite></dd></dl><br /><div class="story-text"> <p>Senate Democrats pushed ahead with President Barack Obama’s vision of <a target="_blank" href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29785.html">health reform</a> Saturday night – after a day that exposed significant divides in the party that could make it all but impossible to complete work on a plan by year’s end, or even sink the bill altogether. </p><p> </p><p> In a 60-39 vote on strictly partisan lines, the Senate sent the $848 billion health care bill to the floor for debate after the Thanksgiving break, but not before a clutch of moderates served notice that they couldn’t back the bill in its current form. </p><p> </p><p> One key provision – for a government-run insurance plan that would allow states to opt-out of coverage – effectively died in the Senate chamber Saturday, as the last two Democratic holdouts demanded changes to the bill. s</p><p> </p><p> “I am opposed to a new government administered public health care plan as a part of comprehensive health care reform, and I will not vote in favor of the proposal that has been introduced by Leader Reid as it is written,” said Sen. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.politico.com/livepulse/1109/Durbin_walks_back_comments_about_Lincolns_vote.html?showall">Blanche Lincoln</a> (D-Ark.), the last Democrat to commit to a vote for opening debate. Two hours earlier, Sen. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29778.html">Mary Landrieu</a> (D-La.) had said much the same thing. </p><p> </p><p> Their comments signal that weeks of negotiations remain on a bill Obama once hoped to have on his desk by Christmas – and even raised the prospect that splits in the party over the public option, <a target="_blank" href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29651.html">abortion</a> and other aspects of the bill could scuttle passage altogether. </p><p> </p><p> That timetable has always been worrisome to the White House because it would push the delicate final passage of the legislation into an election year, with Democrats skittish about voter backlash for a plan that draws decidedly mixed reviews in the polls.</p> <p>Senate Democrats, though, are pushing for roughly three weeks of floor debate in December that could complete work on a bill by Christmas. That would be followed by a “mini-conference” over the holidays between Democratic House and Senate leaders – who would hope to have a bill to present to their caucuses in time for a mid-January vote. </p><p> </p><p> “We’re going to have some long days, we’re going to have weekends,” Senate Health Committee Chairman Tom Harkin said. "We’re going to have three weeks. That means we’ll finish on the 23rd of December. And maybe, actually, a little before then – actually the weekend before then.” </p> <p>The Democratic celebration in the Senate was subdued. There were a few scattered "yays" and applause when the tally was announced. Senate Majority Leader <a target="_blank" href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29746.html">Harry Reid</a> (Nv.) accepted handshakes.</p> <p>Sen. John McCain (R-Az.) made light of the vote as it was going down. </p><p> </p><p> "What is going to happen? What is going to happen?" McCain said, rubbing his hands together in mock anticipation from his seat on the Senate floor. "Oh, this is so tense." </p><p> </p><p> His comments could be heard in the gallery. Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), sitting next to him, smiled and buried her head in her hands. </p><p> </p><p> "We can see the finish line, but we're not there yet," Reid told reporters after the vote. </p><p> </p><p> "The road ahead is a long stretch. But we can see the the finish line...we have the momentum...we're going to keep this process moving, I have no doubt," said Reid, who conceded that "We know not all 60 senators in my caucus agree on every aspect of this bill.” </p><p> </p><p> Asked about the moderates’ opposition to a public option, Reid reiterated his support for a strong public option and said Schumer and Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.) were working with Landrieu on a compromise that everyone in the caucus could accept.</p><div class="story-text"> <p>Schumer spokesman Brian Fallon, though, said that while the New York senator is open to compromise, "no such talks have yet taken place, and there is not any compromise at hand beyond what Leader Reid has already inserted into the bill."</p><p> </p><p> There's still at least a chance that Democrats won't be able to bridge the divides inside their own party on the public option, abortion, how to pay for reform and other issues that could prevent a final deal from coming together.</p> <p>“Absolutely not," said Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio, one of the more liberal members of the Democratic Caucus, when asked if he was open to further discussion of the public option. “We’ve compromised four times now.” </p><p> </p><p> “Four members of the Senate aren’t going to tell the other 55 what to do on these issues,” he said. </p><p> </p><p> Other progressives signaled a willingness to deal. </p><p> </p><p> “We expected it all along that we continue to negotiate on the public option," said Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.). </p><p> </p><p> Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) echoed Stabenow. </p><p> </p><p> "I, for one, am willing to work with folks," he said. "We need to make sure we can pass this bill, and if takes flexibility on either side, nobody should have their mind closed to that flexibility." </p><p> </p><p> Even if Reid can assuage the moderates in his caucus by pulling his bill to the right without losing liberal support, he’ll face bruising negotiations with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who is intent on keeping intact major provisions of her far more left-leaning bill. Pelosi’s version of the public option, for instance, is far more open-ended than Reid’s. </p><p> </p><p> And then there are the Republicans, who vowed Saturday to try to block health reform from ever leaving the Senate. </p><p> </p><p> Democrats are expecting multiple Republican amendments on hot-button issues such as medical malpractice, immigration and abortion. The challenge for Reid is finding a way to shield his members from taking politically difficult votes and to prevent the passage of a GOP amendment that could sink the entire deal. </p><p> </p><p> Reid has promised a “free-wheeling, wide-open amendment process,” said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who added that Republicans are likely to attempt to filibuster each amendment, meaning Reid would have hold together his 60 votes time and again. </p><p> </p><p> "The battle has just begun," McConnell added. "The American people are asking us to stop this bill, and we are going to do anything and everything we can to prevent this measure from becoming law." </p><p> </p><p> Still, Reid declared victory for the bill and predicted that he could get a version of health reform passed and sent for Obama’s signature. The 8 p.m. vote was a significant milestone in a health care reform debate that has stretched over decades. </p><p> </p><p> Reid’s bill would cover 94 percent of all Americans by creating a public health insurance option, increasing subsidies for those who can’t afford insurance and requiring individuals to own insurance. Reid would pay for this by raising taxes on insurers who offer so-called Cadillac tax plans, bumping up Medicare taxes for the wealthy and creating a “Botox tax” on cosmetic surgery. </p><p> </p><p> Aside from the public option, there are other big differences with the House bill, including how to pay for reform. The House counts on a tax on couples earning more than $1 million a year to pay for it – an idea that has zero support in the Senate. </p><p> </p><p> But as it has for months, the public option remained the greatest obstacle to passing a bill. </p><p> </p><p> Two of those who voted yes on Saturday – Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) and Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) -- have already said they’d join a filibuster of the current bill and both have raised objections to the public option. </p><p> </p><p> The vote Saturday was likely to resurrect interest in the idea of using a “trigger” that would kick in a public plan if states lack enough affordable health care options. That plan has the support of a Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe (R), one of the few GOP senators who might cross party lines to back the bill, though she voted against cloture on Saturday. </p><p> </p><p> Some Democrats – including Obama – have signaled a preference for the trigger to bridge deep divides in the party, Landrieu, too, spoke in favor of the trigger.</p><p>“Our caucus knows this is a real serious issue for us from the beginning,” said Landrieu, who has been in discussions with other centrists. “A third are for the public option, a third are adamantly against and a third are in the middle. I am adamantly against but would consider a principled compromise because I understand this is one of the issues we have to find a solution for or it could blow up the whole effort.” Landrieu also was unapologetic in describing how she sought more help for her state in the health reform negotiations – even saying reports that she got $100 million more in Medicaid dollars for Louisiana were false. It was really $300 million, she said. </p><p> </p><p> “I’m proud to have asked for it. I’m proud to have fought for it, and I will continue to. That is not the reason I’m moving to the debate,” Landrieu said.</p> <p>Lincoln instead spoke of de-coupling the public option from a federal government role – apparently a reference to a plan being crafted by Carper for a national health insurance plan that would be run by a not-for-profit firm, not by the government. </p><p> </p><p> Lincoln, who is facing a tough reelection fight in 2010, also put fellow Democrats on notice about the political stakes in her race -- saying she’s already faced some $3.3 million in ads trying to sway her vote on the bill, from the left and the right.</p> <p>And she laid down a laundry list of concerns, most of which also are shared by her fellow centrists: that the bill must protect seniors on Medicare, make insurance more affordable for small businesses, enhances competition with private insurers, and must not increase the deficit – and do it all without a public option. </p><p> </p><p> For a day at least, Reid could breathe a sigh of relief, having passed a major test of his leadership by holding together 58 Democrats and 2 independents on a vote to open for debate a bill that doesn’t pass muster with many of them. </p><p> </p><p> In sometimes heated floor remarks, Republicans called the $848 billion bill a budget-busting, tax-raising monstrosity that would hurts seniors, small business and families. </p><p> </p><p> McCain said Reid was guilty of budget gimmickry by cutting Medicare and raising taxes in the first year of the bill, 2010, but not starting many of the services until 2014. “I don’t think Americans really understand the scam that’s going on here,” McCain said. “I think Bernie Madoff went to jail for this kind of behavior.” </p><p> </p><p> And both sides sparred over the nature of Saturday’s vote – with Democrats saying it’s merely a chance for debate to begin and Republicans saying it’s a back-door endorsement of the $848 billion plan.</p> <p>The missing vote was Ohio Republican George Voinovich, an opponent of the bill who announced that he would skip the vote for a thirtieth anniversary celebration of his election as Cleveland mayor. </p><p> </p><p> "The Democrat plan would make life harder for the vast majority of Americans. It raises their taxes, it raises their health care premiums, it cuts their Medicare and drives millions off the private insurance they currently have,” McConnell said. </p><p> </p><p> Democrats accused them of scare-mongering and said the bill is a sensible and long-overdue fix to a badly broken health care system. </p><p> </p><p> “The key elements of this health care reform bill, I repeat: reduces short-and-long term debt, expands coverage, promotes choice and competition, reforms the insurance market, improves quality of care,” Reid said. </p><p> </p><p> Ted Kennedy's widow, Vicki, phoned Reid in the Senate cloakroom immediately after the vote.</p><p> </p><p> She was emotional, as was he, Reid said. </p><p> </p><p> "I will remember the call always, always," the majority leader told reporters. "We both said Ted would be happy."<br /></p><p><a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29795.html">Original here</a><br /></p> </div> </div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09408839338139169839noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-800326478289622957.post-24451877879413826272009-11-22T01:28:00.000-08:002009-11-22T01:33:17.469-08:00Missouri Billboard Calls for Revolution: War Against America<h3 class="byline"><span style="font-size:85%;">by <a href="http://vyan.dailykos.com/">Vyan</a></span></h3><br /><div class="intro"><p>Via <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2009/11/20/missouri-gop-billboard/">Thinkprogress</a>.</p> <p style="text-align: center;"><img style="width: 362px; height: 232px;" src="http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c323/korbjaeger/Vyan/billboard2.jpg" /></p> <blockquote> <p>Fired Up! Missouri points out that the Lafayette County Republican Central Committee is highlighting a new billboard in the state with steps for a "citizens guide to revolution of a corrupt government": It calls for citizens to "starve the beast" and "vote out incumbents" -- and if that doesn't work, "PREPARE FOR WAR." </p> </blockquote> <p>Look, I'm all for reasonable and rational criticism of our government as the representatives of the people - but at a certain point you have to pull over the crazy train before it goes completely off the tracks.</p> <p>Also read the <a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/11/20/806458/-New-Missouri-Billboard:-Prepare-For-War.">Other Diary</a> on this.</p> </div><!-- polls come after this --> <ul class="catcom"><li><a href="http://vyan.dailykos.com/">Vyan's diary</a> :: :: </li><li><br /></li></ul> <p>This we have coming in addition to the <a href="http://features.csmonitor.com/politics/2009/11/16/biblical-anti-obama-slogan-use-of-psalm-1098-funny-or-sinister/">Psalm 109:8 Shirts on Cafe Press</a> we have stuff like this appearing....</p> <p style="text-align: center;"><img src="http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c323/korbjaeger/Vyan/Obamabillboard.jpg" /></p> <p>Nevermind the fact that there is no Gun Legislation on the horizon, that the House Health Care Bill practically reverses <em>Roe V Wade</em> and Obama has done literally nothing about DOMA or DADT - still they fear the exact opposite.</p> <p style="text-align: center;"><img style="width: 399px; height: 299px;" src="http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c323/korbjaeger/Vyan/Billboard.jpg" /></p> <p>And via <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/20/racist-obama-billboards-c_n_365514.html">Huffpo</a> in Colorado we now have this which is accusing Obama of being a Jihadist in support of the Ft. Hood Shootings!</p> <p>More on this see "<a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/11/20/806449/-President-or-Jihad">President of Jihad</a>" Diary.</p> <p style="text-align: center;"><img style="width: 399px; height: 290px;" src="http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c323/korbjaeger/Vyan/slide_3742_53002_large.jpg" /></p> <p>As I've <a href="http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/6/28/153612/297">written before</a> the hole in the deficit was blasted George W. Bush with his Wars of Choice and the Great Recession of 2008.</p> <blockquote> <p>First of all, the primary complaint coming from the Tea Parties was the issue of Government Spending, particularly in the wake of the 2008-2009 Deficit. That would be shown in the following <a href="http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy10/browse.html">chart from OMB</a> in Billions of Dollars (I've added a column showing the difference between these years, item by item, and the percent of increase to the deficit for each item so we can all see exactly where it came from)</p><br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <table style="width: 397px; height: 483px;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tbody><tr bgcolor="#eeeeee" height="13"> <td class="xl25" width="705" height="13">Spending</td> <td class="xl25" width="75" align="right">2008</td> <td class="xl25" width="75" align="right">2009</td> <td class="xl25" width="75" align="right">Difference</td> <td class="xl26" width="75" align="right">% of Deficit</td> </tr> <tr bgcolor="#999999" height="13"> <td class="xl31" height="13">Discretionary Spending</td> <td><br /></td> <td><br /></td> <td><br /></td> <td class="xl24"><br /></td> </tr> <tr height="13"> <td class="xl27" height="13">Defense</td> <td align="right">612</td> <td align="right">726</td> <td align="right">114</td> <td class="xl24" align="right">9.84%</td> </tr> <tr height="13"> <td class="xl27" height="13">Non-Defense</td> <td align="right">508</td> <td align="right">586</td> <td align="right">78</td> <td class="xl24" align="right">6.73%</td> </tr> <tr height="13"> <td class="xl27" height="13"><br /></td> <td><br /></td> <td><br /></td> <td><br /></td> <td class="xl24"><br /></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor="#999999" height="13"> <td colspan="2" class="xl31" height="13">Mandatory Spending</td> <td><br /></td> <td><br /></td> <td><br /></td> <td class="xl24"><br /></td> </tr> <tr height="13"> <td class="xl27" height="13">Social Security</td> <td align="right">612</td> <td align="right">675</td> <td align="right">63</td> <td class="xl24" align="right">5.44%</td> </tr> <tr height="13"> <td class="xl27" height="13">Medicare</td> <td align="right">386</td> <td align="right">425</td> <td align="right">39</td> <td class="xl24" align="right">3.36%</td> </tr> <tr height="13"> <td class="xl27" height="13">Medicaid</td> <td align="right">201</td> <td align="right">262</td> <td align="right">61</td> <td class="xl24" align="right">5.26%</td> </tr> <tr height="13"> <td class="xl27" height="13">Other</td> <td align="right">411</td> <td align="right">429</td> <td align="right">18</td> <td class="xl24" align="right">1.55%</td> </tr> <tr height="13"> <td class="xl27" height="13">TARP</td> <td><br /></td> <td align="right">260</td> <td align="right">260</td> <td class="xl24" align="right"><strong><strong>22.43%</strong></strong></td> </tr> <tr height="13"> <td class="xl27" height="13">Recovery Act</td> <td><br /></td> <td align="right">267</td> <td align="right">267</td> <td class="xl24" align="right"><strong>23.04%</strong></td> </tr> <tr height="13"> <td class="xl27" height="13">Interest</td> <td align="right">253</td> <td align="right">167</td> <td align="right">-86</td> <td class="xl24" align="right">-8.85%</td> </tr> <tr height="13"> <td class="xl27" height="13">Disasters</td> <td><br /></td> <td align="right">4</td> <td align="right">4</td> <td class="xl24" align="right">0.41%</td> </tr> <tr height="13"> <td class="xl30" height="13">Total Outlays</td> <td class="xl28" align="right">2983</td> <td class="xl28" align="right">3801</td> <td class="xl28" align="right">818</td> <td class="xl29" align="right">70.58%</td> </tr> <tr bgcolor="#999999" height="13"> <td class="xl31" height="13">Taxes</td> <td><br /></td> <td><br /></td> <td><br /></td> <td class="xl24"><br /></td> </tr> <tr height="13"> <td class="xl27" height="13">Individual</td> <td align="right">1146</td> <td align="right">953</td> <td align="right">-193</td> <td class="xl24" align="right">-16.65%</td> </tr> <tr height="13"> <td class="xl27" height="13">Corporate</td> <td align="right">304</td> <td align="right">175</td> <td align="right">-129</td> <td class="xl24" align="right">-11.13%</td> </tr> <tr height="13"> <td class="xl27" height="13">Social Security</td> <td align="right">658</td> <td align="right">655</td> <td align="right">-3</td> <td class="xl24" align="right">-0.26%</td> </tr> <tr height="13"> <td class="xl27" height="13">Medicare</td> <td align="right">194</td> <td align="right">192</td> <td align="right">-2</td> <td class="xl24" align="right">-0.17%</td> </tr> <tr height="13"> <td class="xl27" height="13">Unemployment</td> <td align="right">40</td> <td align="right">44</td> <td align="right">4</td> <td class="xl24" align="right">0.35%</td> </tr> <tr height="13"> <td class="xl27" height="13">Retirement</td> <td align="right">9</td> <td align="right">9</td> <td align="right">0</td> <td class="xl24" align="right">0.00%</td> </tr> <tr height="13"> <td class="xl27" height="13">Excise</td> <td align="right">67</td> <td align="right">66</td> <td align="right">-1</td> <td class="xl24" align="right">-0.09%</td> </tr> <tr height="13"> <td class="xl27" height="13">Estate Tax</td> <td align="right">29</td> <td align="right">26</td> <td align="right">-3</td> <td class="xl24" align="right">-0.26%</td> </tr> <tr height="13"> <td class="xl27" height="13">Customs</td> <td align="right">28</td> <td align="right">24</td> <td align="right">-4</td> <td class="xl24" align="right">-0.35%</td> </tr> <tr height="13"> <td class="xl27" height="13">Fed Reserve</td> <td align="right">34</td> <td align="right">25</td> <td align="right">-9</td> <td class="xl24" align="right">-0.78%</td> </tr> <tr height="13"> <td class="xl27" height="13">Other</td> <td align="right">17</td> <td align="right">16</td> <td align="right">-1</td> <td class="xl24" align="right">-0.09%</td> </tr> <tr height="13"> <td class="xl30" height="13">Total Taxes</td> <td class="xl28" align="right">2526</td> <td class="xl28" align="right">2185</td> <td class="xl28" align="right">-341</td> <td class="xl29" align="right"><strong>-29.42%</strong></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor="#dddddd" height="13"> <td class="xl27" height="13">Deficit</td> <td align="right">-457</td> <td align="right">-1616</td> <td align="right">1159</td> <td class="xl24"><br /></td> </tr></tbody></table> <p>It might <em>seem</em> like a legitimate grievance to point out the U.S. Deficit jumped from $400 Billion to $1.6 Trillion in one year, but the truth clearly shows the primary reason why was - <em>Tax Revenues Went DOWN ALMOST 30%!!!</em> There are two reasons for that, one could be the <strong>Tax Cuts Implemented by President Obama in the Recovery Act</strong> (except the real impact of this change won't show up until Fiscal Year 2010) and the other is the fact that people lost their jobs (and homes) during the economic down turn - which came to full-blown fruition under President Bush's "starve the people/feed the corporations policy" - that they weren't able to pay taxes the way they did the previous year. They were Broke! </p> </blockquote> <p>Obama walked into Office with a $1.4 Trillion budget shortfall on DAY ONE. The fact is that the Stimulus Bill actually Cut Taxes for Small Business and the fact that the Banks have actually <a href="http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2009/06/18/10_banks_report_repaying_68b_in_tarp_funds/">been paying back the TARP funds</a> - none-the-less these people still rail on!</p> <blockquote> <p>Wolf Interstate Leasing in Wheat Ridge, Colorado has put up a billboard insinuating that President Obama is somehow tied to Jihadists and the Fort Hood shootings. The billboard features cartoons that show a caricatured President morphing from a suit-wearing politician into a turban-wearing jihadist. The words, "Remember Ft. Hood" appear at the bottom. </p> </blockquote> <p>Let's not pretend that this type of thing is merely coming from a so-called "Fringe" element - not when <em>the Majority</em> of Republicans believe that <a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/11/19/806043/-How-Divorced-From-Reality-Is-the-GOP-Come-Look%21">Acorn Stole the Election</a>.</p> <blockquote> <p>The new national poll from Public Policy Polling (D) has an astonishing number about paranoia among the GOP base: Republicans do not think President Obama actually won the 2008 election -- instead, ACORN stole it. </p> </blockquote> <p>There is a deep seated fear and paranoia at work here. A fear of that which is "Different" - a fear of losing "Their America" - which let's just be frank and admit is, is the "Good White Christian" America. They can not believe or stomach what they see as the oncoming descendency of White/Christian Priviledge and Influence. This is why they have focused laser-like on Obama and in particularly ACORN - because both of them represent the ascendency of the forgotten. The minority becoming the majority and the increasing irrelevance of their own myopic, paranoid concerns.</p> <p>And of course the number one cheerleader for the Fear Parade is Fox News - who are Trawling For Violence against the President and Government.</p> <p>Frank Sheaffer on Maddow:<br /><object width="420" height="360"><param value="http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/flash/player.swf" name="movie"><param value="config=http://mediamatters.org/embed/cfg2?id=200911180017" name="flashvars"><param value="always" name="allowscriptaccess"><param value="all" name="allownetworking"><embed allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" src="http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/flash/player.swf" flashvars="config=http://mediamatters.org/embed/cfg2?id=200911180017" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="420" height="360"></embed></object></p> <p>The Truth About ACORN:<br /><object width="425" height="344"><param value="http://www.youtube.com/v/T2a4MEAoxko&rel=0&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" name="movie"><param value="true" name="allowFullScreen"><param value="always" name="allowScriptAccess"><embed allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/T2a4MEAoxko&rel=0&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="344"></embed></object></p> <p>As the video points out ACORN has only registered 2 Million people - so exactly how did they cast the 9.5 Million Votes that put Obama over the top against McCain?</p> <p>Paranoia and Delusion doesn't have to be logical - it's simply exists and continues to feed itself into further and further frenzy. It doesn't matter if Obama succeeds, they will ignore and deride it - if he fails they will Cheer.</p> <p>They will do whatever it takes, even destroy this nation from the inside - to "Save" it from the future that they fear Obama will bring.</p><a href="http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/11/20/806453/-Missouri-Billboard-Calls-for-Revolution:-War-Against-America">Original here</a>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09408839338139169839noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-800326478289622957.post-59688031962389249872009-11-22T01:24:00.000-08:002009-11-22T01:28:11.683-08:00Senate Votes to Move Health Debate Forward<h3 class="byline"><span style="font-size:85%;">By <a href="http://online.wsj.com/search/search_center.html?KEYWORDS=GREG+HITT&ARTICLESEARCHQUERY_PARSER=bylineAND">GREG HITT</a></span> </h3> <div class="insetContent embedType-image imageFormat-F"><div class="insetTree"><div class="insettipUnit"><div style="text-align: center;"><img style="width: 400px; height: 158px;" src="http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/images/OB-EY197_health_F_20091121211050.jpg" alt="[Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) speaks at a news conference following the Senate's 60-39 vote to bring health-care-reform bill to a full debate on the floor of the Senate.]" vspace="0" border="0" hspace="0" /> <cite></cite><br /><cite></cite></div><cite>Getty Images</cite> <p class="targetCaption">Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) speaks at a news conference following the Senate's 60-39 vote to bring health-care-reform bill to a full debate on the floor of the Senate.</p> </div></div></div><p>WASHINGTON—Democrats and independents closed ranks Saturday and voted to move forward with debate on landmark legislation that would overhaul the nation's health system and extend health insurance to 31 million Americans.</p> <p>The 60-39 Saturday vote came after a handful of undecided senators—centrist Democrats Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas—signaled their readiness to begin action on the $848 billion package crafted by Democratic leaders.</p> <p>The vote was a validation of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's strategy of building consensus first among party loyalists rather than reaching across the aisle to Republicans, a move that would have forced the Nevada Democrat to pare ambitions and push a more modest bill.</p> <p>"They shouldn't be afraid to debate," said Sen. Reid, who was celebratory after the vote. "This is the United States Senate."</p> <p>Republicans, who were threatening a filibuster to stall action, said the legislation would cost too much. "Move over, Bernie Madoff," said Sen. Christopher Bond (R., Mo.). "Tip your hat to a trillion-dollar scam."</p><p>In the final tally, all 58 Democrats, and the two independents allied with the party, joined together to move forward on the bill. The roll call was conducted with senators sitting at their desks, a rarely used show of decorum that underscored the significance of the vote. Thirty-nine Republicans were opposed. One Republican, Sen. George Voinovich of Ohio, didn't vote.</p> <p>Sixty votes are needed in the 100-member Senate to end a filibuster. The vote set the stage for two to three weeks of debate in December and perhaps more in January, in a struggle that is sure to color the 2010 fight for control of Congress.</p> <p>Mr. Reid said he took a call in the Senate cloakroom immediately after the vote from the widow of the late Sen. Edward Kennedy, the Massachusetts Democrat who devoted much of his career to the cause of health care. "Ted would be happy," Mr. Reid said, adding he sees the "finish line" ahead for the bill.</p> <p>The push in the Senate follows approval in the House Nov. 7 of companion legislation that would overhaul the health system.</p> <p>Republicans, who are vowing to use every tactic available to slow action and frustrate the White House's top domestic priority, portrayed the vote as an endorsement of the legislation. It includes new taxes and cuts in Medicare payments to health-care providers, in addition to an expansion of Medicaid, the federal-state health program for the poor, and new government subsidies to help lower- and middle-income people buy insurance.</p> <p>Republicans beseeched wavering moderate Democrats not to fall into line, hoping to derail the bill and force Mr. Reid to deal more directly with the minority party. "Today in the Senate, we don't need 40 Democrats to stand up for what's right. We need just one," said Sen. Mike Johanns (R., Neb.).</p> <p>But they couldn't get it.</p> <p>Beginning Friday, the final undecided Democrats starting coming off the fence. First was Nebraska Democrat Ben Nelson, who said he didn't want to deny the voters in his state a voice on the issue. "The Senate owes them a full and open debate," he said.</p> <div class="insetContent insetCol3wide embedType-image imageFormat-D"><div class="insetTree"> <div id="articleThumbnail_1" class="insettipUnit insetZoomTarget"><div class="insetZoomTargetBox"><div class="insettipBox"><div class="insettip"><p><a>View Full Image</a></p></div></div><a><img src="http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/images/OB-EY194_health_D_20091121133259.jpg" alt="Mary Landrieu" vspace="0" width="262" border="0" height="174" hspace="0" /></a></div> <cite>Getty Images</cite> <p class="targetCaption">Sen. Mary Landrieu, pictured with Sen. Tom Harkin, has decided to vote to advance health-care debate in the Senate.<br /></p><p class="targetCaption">Then came Sen. Landrieu. The Louisiana Democrat said Saturday the bill crafted by Sen. Reid isn't perfect, citing a need for more aid to help small businesses purchase insurance, among other things. But she said her concerns didn't merit standing in the way of action. "I've decided that there are enough significant reforms and safeguards in this bill to move forward, but much more work needs to be done," she said.</p> </div></div></div> <p> A few hours later, Sen. Lincoln of Arkansas took to the Senate floor. She also voiced concerns, noting she didn't favor the proposed government-run insurance plan "as it is written" in the bill. But Sen. Lincoln said she didn't intend to hold up debate, and complained Republicans – who are gunning for her defeat next year -- were simply trying to "revive their political party" by opposing the initiative.</p> <p>"Although I don't agree with everything in his bill, I have concluded that I believe it is more important that we begin this debate to improve our nation's health-care system for all Americans, rather than simply drop the issue and walk away," she said. "That is not what people sent us here to do."</p> <p>Of all the wavering senators, Sen. Lincoln was under the greatest pressure. She faces a tough re-election battle next year, and polls show the health legislation is not popular in her conservative state. Republican strategists swiftly blasted her Saturday for giving Democratic leaders the "60th vote" to take up the bill.</p> <p>"Obviously, the pressure from the left wing of her party finally got to Blanche Lincoln," said Amber Wilkerson Marchand, a spokeswoman for the National Republican Senatorial Committee, the campaign arm of Senate Republicans. She said "the people of Arkansas will have an opportunity to hold" Sen. Lincoln "accountable when they cast their ballots next November."</p> <p>Though the economy is emerging again as a major issue for voters, Democratic leaders in both chambers of Congress, as well as the White House, are heavily invested in enacting health legislation, intending to make good on a major Democratic promise from the 2008 campaign.</p> <div class="insetCol3wide"><div class="insetContent embedType-videoThumb imageFormat-arbitrary"><div class="insetTree"><div class="insetType-video" id="articlevideo_2"> <div id="videodiv_14348"><div class="videoTree"><div class="videoFrame"><a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125882206089559155.html?mod=wsj_share_digg#"><img alt="video" src="http://m.wsj.net/video/20091121/111909foxnewshealthcare/111909foxnewshealthcare_115x65.jpg" width="115" height="65" /><span class="videoBug"> </span></a></div></div><h3 class="first"><a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125882206089559155.html?mod=wsj_share_digg#">Senate Nears Key Vote on Health Bill</a></h3><small>2:03</small><p class="targetCaption">In a rare Saturday session, the senate was expected to approve key procedural motion to proceed with beginning debate on health-care reform after Thanksgiving. Video courtesy of Fox News.</p></div></div></div></div></div><p>The outcome of debate in the Senate – where the push for health-overhaul legislation died in 1994 -- is the biggest uncertainty facing Democratic leaders and the White House. Not only do Republicans have big leverage to shape debate, but Democrats are not united on details, and difficult negotiations lie ahead on issues like the government-run insurance plan and aid to small businesses, among other things.</p> <p>The legislation would create a national "exchange" where small businesses and individuals could purchase insurance. It would require most people to carry health insurance or face a penalty of up to $750 per person.</p> <p>Under the bill, employers with more than 50 workers who don't offer insurance would be required to make a payment to the government to defray the taxpayers' cost of insuring the workers. Additionally, insurers would be barred from engaging in a range of practices – such as denying insurance because of pre-existing conditions -- that critics say have led to gaps in coverage across the country and created turmoil in family budgets. The bill would also create a government-run insurance plan, while giving states the option not to participate.</p> <p>The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates the bill would reduce the deficit by $130 billion over the next decade, in part due to cuts in Medicare payments to health-care providers but also because of a range of new taxes. They include new fees on drug makers and medical-device makers, a tax on high-value insurance plans, and higher Medicare payroll taxes for families making more than $250,000 a year.</p> <p>"Senators who support this bill have a lot of explaining to do," said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.). "Americans know that a vote to proceed on this bill is a vote for higher premiums, higher taxes, and massive cuts to Medicare. That's a pretty hard thing to justify supporting."</p><p><a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125882206089559155.html?mod=wsj_share_digg">Original here</a><br /></p>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09408839338139169839noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-800326478289622957.post-34626604595907220752009-11-22T01:22:00.000-08:002009-11-22T01:24:19.002-08:00Traffic cameras used to harass and limit movement of peaceful protestorsBritain is full of license-plate cameras, cameras used to send you tickets if you're caught speeding, or driving in the bus-lane, or entering London's "congestion-charge zone" without paying the daily fee for driving in central London. And because of Chekhov's first law of narrative ("a gun on the mantelpiece in act one will go off by act three"), the police have decided to also use these cameras as a surveillance tool, to "catch terrorists" (and other bad guys). So any police officer can add any license number to the database of "people of interest" and every time that license plate passes a camera, the local police force will receive an urgent alert, and can pull over the car, detain the driver, and search the car and its passengers under the Terrorism Act. <p>And, of course, police officers are less than discriminating about who they add to this list. For example, "Catt, 50, and her 84-year-old father, John" were added to the list because a police officer noticed their van at three protest demonstrations. And now Catt and John get pulled over by the police and searched as terrorists. </p><p>Environmental activists tend to be pretty forgiving of license-plate cameras, because they're a critical piece of congestion-charge systems that charge people money for driving instead of using public transit. This kind of regressive tax (the £10 charge in London is a pittance and no disincentive to the wealthy, and is crippling to the marginal and the poor) is also much beloved by the law-and-economics crowd, who assume that rational consumers will all be equally disincentivized by a little friction in the system. </p><p>But congestion charges require license plate cameras, and license plate cameras are an enormous piece of artillery to hand to the world's police, who are increasingly pants-wettingly afraid of any sort of public protest -- including environmental protests. I support reducing driving as much as the next green, but environmental change will require lots of protest, and that protest will get exponentially harder with the growth of the traffic cameras that are absolutely integral to congestion charge schemes. </p> <img style="width: 222px; height: 166px;" src="http://craphound.com/images/2824617765_603664b144.jpg" align="left" />The two anti-war campaigners were not the only law-abiding protesters being monitored on the roads. Officers have been told they can place "markers" against the vehicles of anyone who attends demonstrations using the national ANPR data centre in Hendon, north London, which stores information on car journeys for up to five years. <p>Senior officers have been instructed to "fully and strategically exploit" the database, which allows police to mark vehicles with potentially useful inform-ation such as drink-driving convictions. </p><p>The use of the ANPR database to flag-up vehicles belonging to protesters has resulted in peaceful campaigners being repeatedly stopped and searched. </p>Documents released under the Freedom of Information Act reveal Kent and Essex police deployed mobile ANPR "interceptor teams" on roads surrounding the protest against the Kingsnorth power station, in Kent, last year.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.boingboing.net/2009/11/21/traffic-cameras-used.html">Original here</a>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09408839338139169839noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-800326478289622957.post-38891186811705042162009-10-04T01:29:00.000-07:002009-10-04T01:31:47.829-07:00Administration eyes ways to help laid-off workers<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg26Ya_QIIMcxfsqPvgxAswd0gDniv-FJNzn8-a8tZMXLBGa5R6kZplEx8_4yeFE1TdwSt9wf0vQ-nJ-Oigqexlvdc6xaWoCYsyUb9VuiyKhn25ckmPQ8doPZvc04HqUMU_75ral8rE9Aw/s1600-h/capt.e78e55384b8440db85934247459731ac.obama_dcpm109.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer; width: 213px; height: 179px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg26Ya_QIIMcxfsqPvgxAswd0gDniv-FJNzn8-a8tZMXLBGa5R6kZplEx8_4yeFE1TdwSt9wf0vQ-nJ-Oigqexlvdc6xaWoCYsyUb9VuiyKhn25ckmPQ8doPZvc04HqUMU_75ral8rE9Aw/s400/capt.e78e55384b8440db85934247459731ac.obama_dcpm109.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5388659482885889202" border="0" /></a><br /><cite class="vcard">By CHARLES BABINGTON, Associated Press Writer<br /><br /></cite><p>WASHINGTON – The Obama administration is considering steps to ease the burdens of laid-off workers, including possible extensions of unemployment and health benefits, officials said Saturday.</p> <p>The administration has stopped short of calling for a second <span style="border-bottom: 1px dashed rgb(0, 102, 204); background: transparent none repeat scroll 0% 0%; cursor: pointer; -moz-background-clip: border; -moz-background-origin: padding; -moz-background-inline-policy: continuous;" class="yshortcuts" id="lw_1254610147_0">economic stimulus package</span> to augment the $787 billion measure approved this year. But with the <span style="background: transparent none repeat scroll 0% 0%; cursor: pointer; -moz-background-clip: border; -moz-background-origin: padding; -moz-background-inline-policy: continuous;" class="yshortcuts" id="lw_1254610147_1">jobless rate</span> continuing to climb, <span style="border-bottom: 1px dashed rgb(0, 102, 204); background: transparent none repeat scroll 0% 0%; cursor: pointer; -moz-background-clip: border; -moz-background-origin: padding; -moz-background-inline-policy: continuous;" class="yshortcuts" id="lw_1254610147_2">President Barack Obama</span> said Saturday he is exploring "additional options to promote job creation."</p> <p>Administration aides said possibilities include:</p> <p>_extending enhanced unemployment-insurance benefits beyond Dec. 31, when they are set to expire.</p> <p>_extending a tax credit for laid-off workers who buy health insurance through the COBRA program. That program allows workers to keep their company's <span style="border-bottom: 1px dashed rgb(0, 102, 204); background: transparent none repeat scroll 0% 0%; cursor: pointer; -moz-background-clip: border; -moz-background-origin: padding; -moz-background-inline-policy: continuous;" class="yshortcuts" id="lw_1254610147_3">health insurance plan</span> for 18 months after they leave their job, if they pay the premiums.</p> <p>_extending a tax credit for <span style="background: transparent none repeat scroll 0% 0%; cursor: pointer; -moz-background-clip: border; -moz-background-origin: padding; -moz-background-inline-policy: continuous;" class="yshortcuts" id="lw_1254610147_4">first-time home buyers</span>. This credit also is set to expire soon.</p> <p>The administration has discussed these possibilities with congressional leaders, officials said, but no decisions have been made.</p> <p>White House economic adviser <span class="yshortcuts" id="lw_1254610147_5">Lawrence Summers</span> expressed interest in these ideas in an online interview with the Atlantic magazine. "I don't know what the term 'second stimulus package' exactly means," Summers said. "We certainly need to continue to support people who are in need, whether it's <span class="yshortcuts" id="lw_1254610147_6">unemployment insurance</span>, or a COBRA program that for the first time provides that people who are laid off get supported in being able to maintain their health insurance."</p> <p>In his weekly radio and Internet video address Saturday, Obama said his proposed health care overhaul would create jobs by making <span style="background: transparent none repeat scroll 0% 0%; cursor: pointer; -moz-background-clip: border; -moz-background-origin: padding; -moz-background-inline-policy: continuous;" class="yshortcuts" id="lw_1254610147_7">small business startups</span> more affordable. If aspiring entrepreneurs believe they can stay insured while switching jobs, he said, they will start new businesses and hire workers.</p> <p>"I hear about it from <span class="yshortcuts" id="lw_1254610147_8">small business owners</span> who want to grow their companies and hire more people, but they cant, because they can barely afford to insure the employees they have," Obama said. "One <span class="yshortcuts" id="lw_1254610147_9">small business owner</span> wrote to me that <span class="yshortcuts" id="lw_1254610147_10">health care costs</span> are and I quote 'stifling my business growth.' He said that the money he wanted to use for research and development, and to expand his operations, has instead been 'thrown into the pocket of healthcare insurance carriers.' "</p> <p>Dismissive Republicans blamed the continuing job losses on Democratic policies and said the president's health proposals won't help.</p> <p>The <span class="yshortcuts" id="lw_1254610147_11">unemployment rate</span> rose to 9.8 percent in September, the highest since June 1983, as employers cut far more jobs than expected. The government reported Friday that the economy lost a net total of 263,000 jobs last month, from a downwardly revised 201,000 in August. All told, 15.1 million people are now out of work, the <span style="border-bottom: 1px dashed rgb(0, 102, 204); cursor: pointer;" class="yshortcuts" id="lw_1254610147_12">Labor Department</span> said, and 7.2 million jobs have been eliminated since the recession began in December 2007.</p> <p>Obama said he has met people "who've got a good idea and the expertise and determination to build it into a thriving business. But many can't take that leap because they can't afford to lose the health insurance they have at their current job."</p> <p>Small businesses create many of the nation's jobs, Obama said, and some have the potential to become big companies.</p> <p>Obama praised the <span class="yshortcuts" id="lw_1254610147_13">Senate Finance Committee</span> for crafting a <span class="yshortcuts" id="lw_1254610147_14">health care bill</span> that includes many of his priorities. Small businesses could buy health insurance through an exchange, he said, "where they can compare the price, quality and services of a wide variety of plans."</p> <p>The government would subsidize health insurance for many businesses and individuals, the president said.</p> <p>In the weekly Republican address, <span class="yshortcuts" id="lw_1254610147_15">Rep. Candice Miller</span> of Michigan said the original Obama-backed <span class="yshortcuts" id="lw_1254610147_16">economic stimulus package</span> fell far short of its goals. She criticized a House-passed energy bill that would set limits and costs on <span class="yshortcuts" id="lw_1254610147_17">greenhouse gas emissions</span>. The plan, which the Senate has not taken up, "would increase electricity bills, raise <span class="yshortcuts" id="lw_1254610147_18">gasoline prices</span> and ship more American jobs overseas," Miller said.</p> <p>She called for deeper tax cuts for small businesses so the economy can get back on track. </p><p> "Washington Democrats' job-killing agenda makes me think they're living on a different planet from the families living in America's suffering heartland," Miller said.<br /></p><p><a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091003/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama">Original here</a><br /></p><br /><cite class="vcard"><br /><br /></cite>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09408839338139169839noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-800326478289622957.post-78672872737150215162009-10-04T01:28:00.001-07:002009-10-04T01:29:56.209-07:00"Darned good" Republican Whitman endorsed U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer in 2003<div class="postimageleft" style="width: 200px;"><img alt="" src="http://www.sfgate.com/blogs/images/sfgate/nov05election/2007/08/29/SpinCycleBlog200x200.JPG" border="0" height="200" width="200" /></div><p>Former eBay executive <a href="http://megwhitman.com/" target="_blank">Meg Whitman</a>, the 2010 gubernatorial candidate who has recently portrayed herself as a "darned good" conservative Republican, endorsed <a href="http://barbaraboxer.com/" target="_blank">Democratic U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer</a> in 2003, records show.</p> <p>"Whitman contributed $4,000 to Boxer in the 2004 reelection campaign -- and endorsed Boxer as a part of Technology Leaders for Boxer,'' confirmed Boxer aide Rose Kapolczynski today.</p><p>And, she signed <a href="http://cdn.sfgate.com/blogs/sounds/sfgate/chroncast/2009/10/02/opentechletterfin.pdf" target="_blank">an "open letter"</a> appealing for support from the California technology executives, touting Boxer as a "dynamic and courageous leader" on the tech front.</p> <p>Whitman's name was included in <a href="http://cdn.sfgate.com/blogs/sounds/sfgate/chroncast/2009/10/02/techreleasefin.pdf" target="_blank">a "Friends of Boxer" release when the committee of a dozen technology leaders was formed </a>in 2003 to assist the California Democrat in her 2004 re-election effort, which pitted her against GOP former Secretary of State Bill Jones.</p> <p>The move by Whitman to back the Democratic junior Senator came about because "in the spring of 2003, some technology leaders were interested in announcing their support for Boxer, so our campaign went out and talked to a wide range of leaders. And Meg Whitman was among them,'' Kapolcyznski said. </p> <p>"She agreed to endorse the Senator...there was a fundraising event in Silicon Valley later in the year and Whitman maxed out to the campaign,'' she said.</p><p>Why would Whitman, who has repeatedly said that she backs Republican values, throw her support to Boxer -- reviled by Republicans as one of the U.S. Senate's most liberal members?</p><p>"(Boxer) has been a strong supporter of research and development funding, which benefits Silicon Valley,'' Kapolcyznski said. "She's worked to promote exports of technology overseas and she's always had a strong relationship with the technology industry.''</p> <p>Whitman spokesman Sarah Pompei, asked about the endorsement, said today that "at the same time that Barbara Boxer was fighting against internet taxes, which earned Meg Whitman's support, Steve Poizner was arguing for tax increases to support transportation projects and cover budget shortfalls in Sacramento. It's nothing new, Meg Whitman has supported members of both parties who fought against internet taxes."</p> <p>Indeed, Cisco System chair and CEO John Chambers, today a member of Whitman's economic task force and one of her major backers, actually headed the Boxer Tech group. He gushed that he was in full support of her re-election because her "leadership on Silicon Valley issues such as stock options, broadband, R&D tax credit, and export controls shows she is responsible to the needs of the California economy.''</p> <p>Whitman, the eBay CEO, was so convinced of Boxer's strength that she, too, released her own statement. "Barbara Boxer is a courageous leader and friend of California's technology industry,'' Whitman said in the 2003 Democratic campaign release.</p><p>It's a quote Boxer may end up using in her 2010 re-election campaign against either California Assemblyman <a href="http://chuckdevore.com/" target="_blank">Chuck DeVore </a>or former Hewlett-Packard CEO <a href="http://carlyforcalifornia.com/" target="_blank">Carly Fiorina</a>, two Republicans who are aiming for her seat.</p> <p>The news that Whitman backed and endorsed Boxer -- considered Public Enemy Number One for the GOP in California -- comes just days after the eBay CEO faced heat over her failure to vote for decades. She assured grassroots activists at the state GOP convention last week of her solid Republican credentials.</p> <p>"I'm a Republican, and you'll find I'm a darn good one,'' she told them. "I've committed myself to running for one of the toughest chief executive jobs on the planet because I believe Republican ideals, truly and consistently applied, will save this state."</p> <a name="readmore"></a> <!-- 2 --> <p class="credit"><span class="author">Posted By: <a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/nov05election/author?blogid=14&auth=42">Carla Marinucci</a></span></p><a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/nov05election/detail?entry_id=48814">Original here</a>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09408839338139169839noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-800326478289622957.post-11750342952508851802009-10-04T01:26:00.000-07:002009-10-04T01:28:25.558-07:00Is Rep. Alan Grayson The New “Mr. Smith” (Goes To Washington)<span class="postinfo"><p class="feaPostMeta"><b>By <a href="http://newsjunkiepost.com/author/amyba/" title="Posts by Amy Beth Arkawy">Amy Beth Arkawy</a></b> </p><p><b>NEWS JUNKIE POST</b></p></span><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhEEOldduDK5ij_yLymcM6wcRiMPcLhXe1wEjTQaGs5y_-DyPRFZLBgZGs6ja4RMjL9YzlMVDeD1u93gXuRH9ynYCeKC2p92IaVA87Nolz8nJeFqVAvOEwluMYmb1C0btMVGYPVJYWSfGw/s1600-h/graysoni-300x201.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 300px; height: 201px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhEEOldduDK5ij_yLymcM6wcRiMPcLhXe1wEjTQaGs5y_-DyPRFZLBgZGs6ja4RMjL9YzlMVDeD1u93gXuRH9ynYCeKC2p92IaVA87Nolz8nJeFqVAvOEwluMYmb1C0btMVGYPVJYWSfGw/s400/graysoni-300x201.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5388658608163060098" border="0" /></a><br />The Democrats—wishing and hoping for a hero in the health scare debate—may have finally found their guy. Not that he’s perfect. But hey, who is? Freshman Florida Congressman Alan Grayson boldly and succinctly laid out the Republican plan for health care reform late Tuesday night. It’s his Wednesday follow-up that’s raising eyebrows on both sides of the aisle. <p>On Tuesday, the brash reformer, who ran on an anti-corruption platform and has apparently been making good on his campaign promises (so much so, his seat is considered one of the more vulnerable Democratic seats in 2010), with grade school poster board visual aids clearly stated the republican plan as, “Don’t get sick. And if you do get sick, die quickly.”</p> <p>This scathing, sound-bitable description threw the House Republicans into a fast frenzy. These characters—who have spent months stonewalling and spewing fear with the regularity of Old Faithful—quickly demanded an apology. It was the most “mean-spirited statement” Rep. Duncan from Tennessee had ever heard on the House floor. Really? What about Rep. Ginny Brown- Wade’s characterization of the Democrats’ plan as “essentially saying to America’s seniors: ‘Drop Dead’?” Or Rep. Virginia Fox calling for a Republican plan that “will be pro-life because it will not kill senior citizens.” Or Rep. Paul Braun: “Their plan’s gonna kill people?” And on and on all month long from the stop and set the reset repubs.</p> <p>I know liberal and conservatives hear things differently; I’m pretty sure they’ve done a study at Harvard or somewhere to support this thesis (otherwise some scholar’s got a grant application in the mail). But I don’t think Congressman Grayson’s terse comments violated the rules of decorum of that esteemed (and dainty) body. But GOP ears were bleeding red, white and blue indignation. And so Rep. Tom Price from Georgia took to the floor Wednesday morning and demanded an apology from Grayson. Or else. The or else, of course, was a rebuke similar to the one Rep. Joe Wilson received following his infamous “You lie” outburst at President Obama.</p> <p>Again, there are substantial differences between Wilson’s rude blurt hurled at the President during a speech before a joint session of Congress, and the daily rhetoric reps toss at each other in spirited political gamesmanship. But, as I said, liberals and conservatives hear things differently.</p> <p>So on Wednesday Grayson apologized. Sort of. He said, “I apologize to the 45,000 people who die each year because they don’t have health insurance. I apologize to the dead and their families.” So far so good. The guy’s getting fitted for a cape, right? Well, not exactly. Grayson couldn’t resist, I guess, going for the hyperbolic flourish. He ended with, “I apologize that we didn’t vote to end this Holocaust in America sooner.”</p> <p>Uh oh. Even heroes misspeak. As I heard the word leave his lips it started to run in a cinematic slo-mo; I just knew he regretted it as it slipped out, wrapped tightly in righteous indignation. He must have been sweating as visions of himself being lambasted over the Fox News spit flashed through his mind.</p> <p>Maybe not. Grayson appeared on the Rachel Maddow Show on MSNBC Wednesday night and hardly bristled at his own faux pas. To her credit, Maddow—undisputedly the most even-tempered of all cable TV hosts—gave him three chances to rescind the Holocaust reference. He bobbed and weaved in classic pol style. But by the third time, she cornered him, practically spoon-fed him the right answer. “Do you think you should have used the word ‘Holocaust?” she gently pressed. Finally, Grayson gave in, conceding, “It probably wasn’t the best choice of words.”</p> <p>And it wasn’t for obvious reasons. The Holocaust is such a loaded term for so many people. Using it in this context offends many and only serves as a distraction from Grayson’s solid facts, his stats, his sentiment. It allows Republicans to dodge their own culpability by making him, his perceived insensitivity, the issue.</p> <p>But Grayson seems undaunted. After his meek concession to Maddow, he launched into a diatribe about the kind of politicians Americans want and need. “People want Democrats with guts. People want Congress to solve their problems… or at least work on them.” Somewhere along the line he called the repubs, “foot-dragging, knuckle-dragging Neanderthals.” Okay, so we’re back fitting Grayson for his cape.</p> <p>The thing is: as one who has called for folks on both sides to ratchet down the rancor, I can’t pull a double-standard (I don’t, after all, work for FOX News). So, if it’s not helpful for the republicans to offer rabid rhetoric, the same applies to the democrats. But I admit to rooting for Grayson, seeing him as a sort of chunkier, brazen 21st Century Mr. Smith taking on Washington. And wishing there were more like him.</p><p><a href="http://newsjunkiepost.com/2009/10/02/is-rep-alan-grayson-the-new-mr-smith-goes-to-washington/">Original here</a><br /></p>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09408839338139169839noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-800326478289622957.post-35850524923178478452009-10-04T01:24:00.000-07:002009-10-04T01:26:48.692-07:00Conservatives Revel In America's Olympic Defeat<h3 class="byline"><span style="font-size:85%;">Rachel Slajda </span></h3><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi4ohEkoKfjwV9KQFMY3kC4Xp9Qz9RP3WTuyrDmWb7aDUGGLL5D1AtjsN9l3vXFPu2rkRKRgar2MRtZBSQKMa1WCpXYMW9IJWUStw6JM3B4sl_-V9IhHfSHjgOG840XS9Wl_abZ6-Eamhg/s1600-h/chicago-conservatives-1002-cropped-proto-custom_2.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 320px; height: 240px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi4ohEkoKfjwV9KQFMY3kC4Xp9Qz9RP3WTuyrDmWb7aDUGGLL5D1AtjsN9l3vXFPu2rkRKRgar2MRtZBSQKMa1WCpXYMW9IJWUStw6JM3B4sl_-V9IhHfSHjgOG840XS9Wl_abZ6-Eamhg/s400/chicago-conservatives-1002-cropped-proto-custom_2.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5388658187012083938" border="0" /></a><br /><div class="entry_text"> <p>When the International Olympic Committee voted against Chicago's bid for the 2016 Olympics this morning -- after the President and First Lady flew to Copenhagen to push for it in person -- the <em>Weekly Standard</em> newsroom burst into applause. </p> <p>"Cheers erupt at Weekly Standard world headquarters," wrote editor John McCormack in a post titled "Chicago Loses! Chicago Loses!" </p> <p>The line was quickly removed, but <em>ThinkProgress</em> caught it in time and posted a <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2009/10/02/weekly-standard-chicago/">screenshot</a> of the post. </p> <p>But even with the edits, McCormack is <a href="http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2009/10/chicago_loses_chicago_loses.asp">still obviously reveling</a> in America's defeat. </p> <p>"As a citizen of the world who believes that No one nation can or should try to dominate another nation, I'm glad that the Obama White House's jingoist rhetoric and attempt to pay back Chicago cronies at the expense of undermining our relationships with our allies failed," he wrote. </p> <p>McCormack's fellow conservatives joined in the celebration. </p> <p>"Chicago and Tokyo eliminated. No Obamalypics," Michelle Malkin <a href="http://twitter.com/michellemalkin/statuses/4555207697">tweeted</a>, following up with, "Game over on Obamalympics. Next up, Obamacare."</p> <p>"Please, please let me break this news to you. It's so sweet," <a href="http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200910020014">said Glenn Beck</a> on his radio show. </p> <p>"Hahahahaha," wrote Red State's <a href="http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/10/02/breaking-world-rejects-barack-obama-no-chicago-olympics/">Erick Erickson</a>. "So Obama's pimped us to every two bit thug and dictator in the world, made promises to half the Olympic committee, and they did not even kiss him. So much for improving America's standing in the world, Barry O."</p> <p><a href="http://drudgereport.com/">The Drudge Report</a> announced the news like so: "WORLD REJECTS OBAMA: CHICAGO OUT IN FIRST ROUND. THE EGO HAS LANDED." </p> <p>"The worst day of Obama's presidency, folks. The ego has landed. The world has rejected Obama," echoed <a href="http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200910020015">Rush Limbaugh</a>. </p> <p>"For those of you ... who are upset that I sound gleeful, I am. I don't deny it. I'm happy," Limbaugh <a href="http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200910020022">said</a>. "Anything that gets in the way of Barack Obama accomplishing his domestic agenda is fine with me."</p> <p>"President Obama fails to get the Olympics while unemployment goes to 9.8% Iran continues nuclear program. America needs focused leadership," Newt Gingrich <a href="http://twitter.com/newtgingrich/statuses/4555910349">tweeted</a>. Then he added, "Somehow charm and oratory dont seem to work in foreign affirs but historians have warned that foreign policy is different than campaigning." (sic) </p> <p>"ChicagP\/\/n3D!" <a href="http://twitter.com/Newsmax_Media/status/4556944014">tweeted</a> <em>Newsmax</em>, of recent fame for running, then pulling, a column about an <a href="http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/09/newsmax-columnist-military-coup-may-be-needed-to-resolve-the-obama-problem.php">impending military coup</a> against Obama. </p> <p>Apparently no one read the <a href="http://twitter.com/scottstanzel/status/4555311288">tweet</a> from former Bush flack Scott Stanzel. </p> <p>"Note to GOP officials/consultants - resist the temptation to pile on about Chicago losing the Olympic bid just because Obama made the pitch," he <a href="http://washingtonindependent.com/62056/chicago-loses-conservative-celebrate">wrote</a>, advice <a href="http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/1009/Bad_day_for_USA_Good_day_for_GOP.html?showall">reportedly passed on</a> by Former Mitt Romney spokesman Kevin Madden.</p> <p>Fox News, however, saw it coming. A Fox anchor told senior adviser David Axelrod she could "imagine the headlines" that would come out of this, that Obama had been "rebuked," and had "failed." Axelrod simply responded that no one could doubt Obama's influence after watching the G-20, and said neither he nor the President have any regrets about trying. </p> </div> <!-- feature belt --><a href="http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/10/weekly-standard-newsroom-erupts-into-cheers-at-news-of-olympics.php">Original here</a>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09408839338139169839noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-800326478289622957.post-36266588070014687172009-10-04T01:21:00.000-07:002009-10-04T01:24:46.808-07:00BREAKING: Texas Judge: Ban On Gay Marriage Unconstitutional<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhZ_nUg-v3EVcMJsEj0_F91XLfDvOiFmHgfhPoz-HhXXyiwUgfwGeb8FomuZMOuDk7ahSWekaqY08FyhyTfpPMevB2-t-HbFvnGG9SeY44jmru5e0L_X1UFitjgpL3FlEzoW6dATM4qmiY/s1600-h/Texas.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer; width: 200px; height: 131px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhZ_nUg-v3EVcMJsEj0_F91XLfDvOiFmHgfhPoz-HhXXyiwUgfwGeb8FomuZMOuDk7ahSWekaqY08FyhyTfpPMevB2-t-HbFvnGG9SeY44jmru5e0L_X1UFitjgpL3FlEzoW6dATM4qmiY/s400/Texas.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5388657612219918706" border="0" /></a><br />by <span class="author vcard"><a href="http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/author/davidbadash/" class="url fn" rel="nofollow">David Badash</a><br /><br /></span><p>A Dallas, Texas state district judge will hear the case of a same sex couple who have filed for divorce. The state’s attorney general had argued that since Texas doesn’t allow same sex marriage, it cannot allow same sex divorce.</p> <p>The judge disagreed.</p><p><a href="http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/breaking-texas-judge-ban-on-gay-marriage-unconstitutional/legal-issues/2009/10/01/4731">Original here</a><br /></p>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09408839338139169839noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-800326478289622957.post-74667972430381703552009-10-04T01:18:00.000-07:002009-10-04T01:20:07.515-07:00The perils of long-term unemployment<div class="entry"> <p>Alarming as the climb in unemployment is, the growing duration of joblessness is more worrying still.</p> <p>America’s army of long-term unemployed — those without work for six months or more — swelled to 5.4 million, according to today’s figures. This is roughly equal to the combined populations of Los Angeles, San Diego and Sacramento. (For the internationally minded, it is slightly more than the population of Finland.)</p> <p>More and more workers are exhausting benefits. As of the start of this month around 400,000 stopped receiving assistance. Another 1.3 million will use up their entitlement before the end of the year.</p> <p>This calls for stronger action from the federal government.</p> <p>A further extension of jobless benefits is now critical. These have already been stretched out to an unprecedented 79 weeks in some states with high unemployment. Congress should now press ahead with plans for an additional 13 weeks.</p> <p>In addition to preventing large numbers falling into poverty, this is among the best forms of fiscal stimulus. Money given to the unemployed is almost certain to be spent quickly.</p> <p>A recent survey for the National Employment Law Project found that 67 percent of unemployed adults had cut back on basics like food and groceries. Almost half had fallen behind with rent payments and a third had been forced to move in with friends or family.</p> <p>No other form of government spending delivers such an immediate sugar rush to the economy. Unlike the cash for clunkers program, it is not merely stealing consumption from the future.</p> <p>Still, there is a danger in such a stimulus. Allowing Americans the luxury of being pickier about which job they choose can have costs.</p> <p>When it comes to unemployment, time matters. Skills atrophy after extended periods without work. Then, when growth picks up, these workers are no longer in a position to fill new jobs.</p> <p>A slew of academic papers suggest that a quick return to the workforce — even in a humbler capacity — is often a good idea, especially for the young. Research by Tom Mroz at Clemson University showed that a six-month spell of unemployment at the age of 22 reduced wages even a decade later.</p> <p>So the extra spending on unemployment benefit needs to be combined with much more assistance with job searching and retraining. According to the OECD, U.S. funding for retraining and job searching has risen by less than 20 percent during the crisis.</p> <p>Failure to do more to retool the long-term unemployed will create lingering problems for the U.S. economy. Extending benefits is an important first step, but it is not enough to ensure that the administration’s stimulus is effective. For the more Americans are permanently dislocated from the workforce, the less robust any recovery will be.</p><p><a href="http://blogs.reuters.com/columns/2009/10/02/the-perils-of-long-term-unemployment/">Original here</a><br /></p> </div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09408839338139169839noreply@blogger.com0