We've probably referenced this quote some time in the past before, but we haven't heard anything more concise than Lewis Black's. "The difference between Republicans and Democrats is that Republicans suck and Democrats blow."
And it is the latter that we more concerned with today because really, Democrats hold all the cards. They're just not playing them well. How lame is it that Democrats pass historic healthcare reform and none of them campaign on it, but David Axelrod, today's first guest, stated concise bullet points as to why they should and they still won't do it. In the roundtable discussion, Ron Brownstein said that there is a disconnect between performance and results for the Democrats, but additionally it's not seeming to have confidence in their convictions. We not talking about President Obama and his administration, we're talking about Congress people.
1. Seniors paying less for prescription drugs
2. Not being denied insurance because of a pre-existing condition
3. Not being dropped by your insurance company if you get sick
Those three right there are more than enough to win people over. Explain to people that they have more control over their healthcare than an insurance company.
The explanations have not been clearly put forward by the two most important messengers after the President and those are Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Leader Harry Reid. This is another much longer conversation but as readers of this column you should have a good concept of why we're making that statement.
Mr. Axelrod issued a warning today that with Republicans in power, they will repeat the policies that put the country in the financial hole we're still in now. When Mr. Gregory asked him about a timeframe for when people would see the results of the policies they've put in place, he skirted around it... wisely and we rarely condone a non-aswer. In this case, if Mr. Axelrod said any number, the clip would be everywhere and if it were not to come to fruition it would obviously become a shot in ones own foot. Additionally, Mr. Axelrod, as well as everyone else, knows that we can not afford to extend the tax cuts for the top 2%, and we do not expect the Administration to flinch on their position, Congress on the other hand, again, we're not so sure. Conversely, and sadly, we find out today courtesy of The New York Times that more and more families are moving into homeless shelters.
Also noteworthy is that Mr. Axelrod was looking much thinner today. His suit and shirt were too big. Other Democrats [read: Congress] could really stand to lose some weight and sweat it out legislating and talking to the people... and do it on television... make that news.
Speaking of quotes, Vice President Joe Biden said it best simplifying Mayor Giuliani to "Noun, verb, and 9/11." The former Mayor is a cartoon character at this point, you can not trust what he says anymore it seems. Not to mention that we find it a bit of a shame that with every anniversary of this tragedy, it's necessary to have Mr. Giuliani's perspective every time... as if only seeing that event through his prism. Lastly, Author Reza Azlan, at the top of the roundtable made a good point that anti-muslim sentiment is becoming mainstream due to people, like Mr. Giuliani painting all muslims, moderate and radical alike, with the same brush. It is bigotry, as Mr. Azlan put forthworth, but what he didn't qualify is the case of Mr. Giuliani is that it is now at an unconcious level.
Sunday, September 12, 2010
Sunday, September 05, 2010
9.5.10: Pavlov and The Republicans
If you think our cultural climate has been grossly, politically charged this year so far, get ready because after this Labor Day weekend, the pols are going to be strapping on the battery booster packs for the run up to Nov. 2nd, and let's face it, President Obama is getting hammered from every side and the key overarching questions for today's program were, Is the President an asset or liability for Democrats leading up to that date and is what his administration doing right for this country. With regard to the latter, for the Republicans the answer will always be no so we have to try and give some perspective.
Every Republican politician you see on television these days has to practically stop him/herself from salivating on camera when discussing the November midterms. Collectively, they are supremely confident that they will take control and the Congress. The mainstream Republicans are embracing the Tea Party Republicans to capture that majority and according to every pundit, it is a certainty. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), today's first guest, was no exception in his confidence.
The Senator's tactical logic for both topics of discussion, Iraq and the economy, was that it didn't matter at this point what initial actions were responsible for the state of both, but now that we're here, it is President Obama that bares the burden of history for both.
We, at The Opinion, are not at all excited by this Administration's messaging since the election, where they had done so well with communication, and in the town of spin the Administration is dizzy and confused. They are unable to make people understand the chain of events and they aren't being honest about timing.
Usually, any Administration's policy choices are felt by the people years down the line, and when we say years we mean if something is passed in the months after a President's first term, you will not see the effect until perhaps half way through his second term. Maybe even after he's out of office. This is the exact dynamic you had with the Bush Administration, but he was no exception and neither willl be Obama. The point is, that the United States is a huge ship that takes years to turn just 90 degrees (forget about 180 degrees), and people simply don't have the patience to wait for the full turn.
So when Lindsey Graham says on today's Meet The Press, that right now the government taxes and spends too much you have to wonder about his judgement. By extending the Bush tax cuts for the top 2% of Americans, in terms of wealth, as he advocated today, the debit will rise even more, hence we're spending more money we don't have.
With regard to the Healthcare Bill, he saying that we headed for government run healthcare and the we should replace the just-passed bill with something the puts control into the private sector. This is just another way of saying that the insurance companies should continue to dictate the terms of coverage. The result: everyone's premiums will continue to climb and the government will continue to put even more money adding, again, to the debt and spending more money we don't have. He also said that the Democrats used every parliamentary trick to pass the bill, which is simply political posturing and not true. The bill ended up being compromised to the point where the base of the Democratic Party was dissatisfied, and no Republican was voting for it any way.
MSNBC's Erin Burnett, pointed out twice (during the today's roundtable) that from her reporting and researching she has found that the recovery from this particular recession is the fastest of any in the past 25 years, hence turning the ship faster than normal.
The Washington Post's E.J. Dionne advised to pick a fight over the Bush tax cuts but that could be a losing proposition because tax cuts are an easy sell, the wrong thing to do, but an easy sell. Additionally, when asked if the President was an asset or a liability, he said 'both.' Well, if the President can get his message across to the people, you'll definitely see a vote of no confidence.
Every Republican politician you see on television these days has to practically stop him/herself from salivating on camera when discussing the November midterms. Collectively, they are supremely confident that they will take control and the Congress. The mainstream Republicans are embracing the Tea Party Republicans to capture that majority and according to every pundit, it is a certainty. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), today's first guest, was no exception in his confidence.
The Senator's tactical logic for both topics of discussion, Iraq and the economy, was that it didn't matter at this point what initial actions were responsible for the state of both, but now that we're here, it is President Obama that bares the burden of history for both.
We, at The Opinion, are not at all excited by this Administration's messaging since the election, where they had done so well with communication, and in the town of spin the Administration is dizzy and confused. They are unable to make people understand the chain of events and they aren't being honest about timing.
Usually, any Administration's policy choices are felt by the people years down the line, and when we say years we mean if something is passed in the months after a President's first term, you will not see the effect until perhaps half way through his second term. Maybe even after he's out of office. This is the exact dynamic you had with the Bush Administration, but he was no exception and neither willl be Obama. The point is, that the United States is a huge ship that takes years to turn just 90 degrees (forget about 180 degrees), and people simply don't have the patience to wait for the full turn.
So when Lindsey Graham says on today's Meet The Press, that right now the government taxes and spends too much you have to wonder about his judgement. By extending the Bush tax cuts for the top 2% of Americans, in terms of wealth, as he advocated today, the debit will rise even more, hence we're spending more money we don't have.
With regard to the Healthcare Bill, he saying that we headed for government run healthcare and the we should replace the just-passed bill with something the puts control into the private sector. This is just another way of saying that the insurance companies should continue to dictate the terms of coverage. The result: everyone's premiums will continue to climb and the government will continue to put even more money adding, again, to the debt and spending more money we don't have. He also said that the Democrats used every parliamentary trick to pass the bill, which is simply political posturing and not true. The bill ended up being compromised to the point where the base of the Democratic Party was dissatisfied, and no Republican was voting for it any way.
MSNBC's Erin Burnett, pointed out twice (during the today's roundtable) that from her reporting and researching she has found that the recovery from this particular recession is the fastest of any in the past 25 years, hence turning the ship faster than normal.
The Washington Post's E.J. Dionne advised to pick a fight over the Bush tax cuts but that could be a losing proposition because tax cuts are an easy sell, the wrong thing to do, but an easy sell. Additionally, when asked if the President was an asset or a liability, he said 'both.' Well, if the President can get his message across to the people, you'll definitely see a vote of no confidence.
Sunday, August 22, 2010
8.22.2010: Football Season Begins... But It Never Really Ended
Well, it's football season again, but in reality it is always football season when it comes to politicians using political footballs and intellectual dishonesty toward issues for their own political gain. One of the worst culprits of this appeared on today's Meet The Press, Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. With regard to the essential two topics discussion, the building of the Islamic Community Center in lower Manhattan and the extension of the Bush tax cuts for the top 2% in this country.
Senator McConnell said that we are to take the President 'on his word' that he is a Christian and not a Muslim, he can't explain why one in four republicans think the President is NOT a Christian. This is the worst kind of political shiftiness, knowing that people who represent Republican interests are out there spreading this kind of false information to further their own agenda and then turning around and saying, "I don't know where this comes from."
Senator McConnell additional stated that the President is ignoring public opinion of this 'issue' in not condemning the construction of this facility at this particular location. Then later in the interview, the senator quips that the President shouldn't be weighing in on a local zoning decision. This basically says that no matter what the President had said or didn't say would be used against him.
Mr. Gregory, to his credit, called out Mr. McConnell on this, pointing out that up until this very moment, it was a much bigger topic (not an issue really) than a zoning decision. And with regard to the extension of the Bush tax cuts, we finally got answer!
The answer is that Mr. McConnell is either being intellectually dishonest with regard to these taxes to serve his own political agenda or he that he simply doesn't understand how the finances of the government works. We're beginning to believe the latter because of his answer.
When asked how the tax cuts extension would be paid for, Senator McConnell said that they are existing tax cuts and there is no paying for them. It's a matter of reeling in spending, but in typical style, he never bothers to explain what cuts Republicans would be inclined to make. He seems to not understand that by giving these tax breaks there is a loss in governmental revenue and then hence, the government needs to borrow more money to compensate for the shortfall.
Again, what's sad is that he doesn't understand this, that he can be totally oblivious to the statements by Alan Greenspan from August 1st's program, and then sit and blame the President and his policies for what is happening in the country right now.
Politically, it is pretty obvious what the Republicans will do if they score some luck and come out ahead in the midterm election. What's dangerous is they are not saying what they would do, and in the meantime, only contributing negatively to the general political discourse - assigning blame.
What is out there is Congressman Paul Ryan's (R-WI) platform for economic reforms, a bill which only has 13 co-sponsors at the moment. Mr. McConnell, when asked, didn't really answer why there were so few. We suspect it is because contained within Mr. Ryan's roadmap are radical cuts to Social Security and Medicare, practically to the point of eliminating those programs as we know them.
These cuts are politically unpopular, but they are in line with the Republican agenda to dismantle all social safety nets. So the question is: If the Republicans gain control of the House and/or Senate, will there then be more sponsors of Mr. Ryan's ideas.
Dick Armey appeared on today's Meet The Press alongside Jennifer Granholm, the Governor of Michigan, to discuss the economy, and the former Republican Congressman from Texas said that Mr. Ryan is the most creative thinker in Washington right now. He also emphatically stated that standing alongside of Mr. Ryan and his platform is determined by courage.
Mr. Armey is no longer a politician, but in reality he is far worse. He is the example of politics beholden to corporate interest. With a new book out, Give Us Liberty (A Tea Party Manifesto), Mr. Armey uses proxies to further his corporatist agenda and enjoy wide influence over the political landscape without ever being beholden to the public. Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich are feeling quite empowered from being private politicians, but it is Mr. Armey who rallied the corporate donors to fund his organization, Freedomworks, that spawned the Tea Party movement. Hence, now we have his, excuse us - 'their' manifesto, which calls for limited government in matters of social safety nets. Mr. Armey uses the example of the Christian Scientist...
"Let, let me ask you a simple question. If you happen to be a Christian Scientist and have never seen a doctor in your life and never intend to go to a doctor in your life and never bought insurance in your life, is it right to, to be told at the age of 65 if you don't buy--sign up for Medicare, we'll take away your Social Security? That's not in the law. "
Hmmm... then one could ask... if there is a shaman in the deepest rainforests of Borneo who had never heard of Christianity, the Bible, of Jesus, and he is approached one day by a Christian preacher and told of Jesus, but still doesn't believe in Christianity, is the shaman now condemned to hell? The Christian preacher would say yes. This is simply presenting contrarian logic.
However, here's the real rub with Mr. Armey's example. He said that he agrees with Congressman Ryan that Medicare should be optional, and that you can elect to pay into it at 65 instead of mandating. However, at 65, if you have never paid into the system. Can that individual afford to them buy into Medicare. The answer is most likely no, and then at the time when an individual most needs health care and has no income to pay for a doctor's visit, they end up with nothing. It's all a ruse to funnel more money into private corporate hands.
As Governor Granholm pointed out, 85% percent of Americans do not want Social Security drastically cut to reduce the deficit. Mr. Armey rebutted that politicians who don't cut it drastically lack courage. Also, we like the fact that Governor Granholm accidentally called Mr. Armey "Mitch," but she may as well have been talking to the Senate Minority leader and the views of the two men fall in line with one another.
Lastly, with regard to the proposed community center/mosque in lower Manhattan, it really comes down to this: In The United States of America we have religious freedom and that freedom gives the right to a group to build a religious facility on private property.
Now, if we uphold this right, even if it's tough to swallow, and we understand that point of view completely, the light of this country's ideals still glows brilliantly. When we start selectively employing our Constitution, that is when our institution is broken.
Senator McConnell said that we are to take the President 'on his word' that he is a Christian and not a Muslim, he can't explain why one in four republicans think the President is NOT a Christian. This is the worst kind of political shiftiness, knowing that people who represent Republican interests are out there spreading this kind of false information to further their own agenda and then turning around and saying, "I don't know where this comes from."
Senator McConnell additional stated that the President is ignoring public opinion of this 'issue' in not condemning the construction of this facility at this particular location. Then later in the interview, the senator quips that the President shouldn't be weighing in on a local zoning decision. This basically says that no matter what the President had said or didn't say would be used against him.
Mr. Gregory, to his credit, called out Mr. McConnell on this, pointing out that up until this very moment, it was a much bigger topic (not an issue really) than a zoning decision. And with regard to the extension of the Bush tax cuts, we finally got answer!
The answer is that Mr. McConnell is either being intellectually dishonest with regard to these taxes to serve his own political agenda or he that he simply doesn't understand how the finances of the government works. We're beginning to believe the latter because of his answer.
When asked how the tax cuts extension would be paid for, Senator McConnell said that they are existing tax cuts and there is no paying for them. It's a matter of reeling in spending, but in typical style, he never bothers to explain what cuts Republicans would be inclined to make. He seems to not understand that by giving these tax breaks there is a loss in governmental revenue and then hence, the government needs to borrow more money to compensate for the shortfall.
Again, what's sad is that he doesn't understand this, that he can be totally oblivious to the statements by Alan Greenspan from August 1st's program, and then sit and blame the President and his policies for what is happening in the country right now.
Politically, it is pretty obvious what the Republicans will do if they score some luck and come out ahead in the midterm election. What's dangerous is they are not saying what they would do, and in the meantime, only contributing negatively to the general political discourse - assigning blame.
What is out there is Congressman Paul Ryan's (R-WI) platform for economic reforms, a bill which only has 13 co-sponsors at the moment. Mr. McConnell, when asked, didn't really answer why there were so few. We suspect it is because contained within Mr. Ryan's roadmap are radical cuts to Social Security and Medicare, practically to the point of eliminating those programs as we know them.
These cuts are politically unpopular, but they are in line with the Republican agenda to dismantle all social safety nets. So the question is: If the Republicans gain control of the House and/or Senate, will there then be more sponsors of Mr. Ryan's ideas.
Dick Armey appeared on today's Meet The Press alongside Jennifer Granholm, the Governor of Michigan, to discuss the economy, and the former Republican Congressman from Texas said that Mr. Ryan is the most creative thinker in Washington right now. He also emphatically stated that standing alongside of Mr. Ryan and his platform is determined by courage.
Mr. Armey is no longer a politician, but in reality he is far worse. He is the example of politics beholden to corporate interest. With a new book out, Give Us Liberty (A Tea Party Manifesto), Mr. Armey uses proxies to further his corporatist agenda and enjoy wide influence over the political landscape without ever being beholden to the public. Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich are feeling quite empowered from being private politicians, but it is Mr. Armey who rallied the corporate donors to fund his organization, Freedomworks, that spawned the Tea Party movement. Hence, now we have his, excuse us - 'their' manifesto, which calls for limited government in matters of social safety nets. Mr. Armey uses the example of the Christian Scientist...
"Let, let me ask you a simple question. If you happen to be a Christian Scientist and have never seen a doctor in your life and never intend to go to a doctor in your life and never bought insurance in your life, is it right to, to be told at the age of 65 if you don't buy--sign up for Medicare, we'll take away your Social Security? That's not in the law. "
Hmmm... then one could ask... if there is a shaman in the deepest rainforests of Borneo who had never heard of Christianity, the Bible, of Jesus, and he is approached one day by a Christian preacher and told of Jesus, but still doesn't believe in Christianity, is the shaman now condemned to hell? The Christian preacher would say yes. This is simply presenting contrarian logic.
However, here's the real rub with Mr. Armey's example. He said that he agrees with Congressman Ryan that Medicare should be optional, and that you can elect to pay into it at 65 instead of mandating. However, at 65, if you have never paid into the system. Can that individual afford to them buy into Medicare. The answer is most likely no, and then at the time when an individual most needs health care and has no income to pay for a doctor's visit, they end up with nothing. It's all a ruse to funnel more money into private corporate hands.
As Governor Granholm pointed out, 85% percent of Americans do not want Social Security drastically cut to reduce the deficit. Mr. Armey rebutted that politicians who don't cut it drastically lack courage. Also, we like the fact that Governor Granholm accidentally called Mr. Armey "Mitch," but she may as well have been talking to the Senate Minority leader and the views of the two men fall in line with one another.
Lastly, with regard to the proposed community center/mosque in lower Manhattan, it really comes down to this: In The United States of America we have religious freedom and that freedom gives the right to a group to build a religious facility on private property.
Now, if we uphold this right, even if it's tough to swallow, and we understand that point of view completely, the light of this country's ideals still glows brilliantly. When we start selectively employing our Constitution, that is when our institution is broken.
Sunday, August 15, 2010
8.15.2010: Gerneral David Petraeus
We'd prefer that today's program didn't start as if it were an episode of 60 Minutes and we'd like to think that viewers of Meet The Press would not need the contextual primer before the actual interview, but at least Mr. Gregory didn't over do it. Throughout the program, we gleaned a few important statements from General Petraeus, but most of the program kept repeatedly reiterating one big fact: The success of the U.S. mission there is in complete doubt and no one seems to know how this, the longest war in our history, will turn out.
Politically, troops are scheduled to start rotating back home in July of next year, but the general made it clear that that would depend on the situation on the ground, in which he is seeing 'small pockets of progress.' For a war going into its tenth year, small pockets of progress mean almost nothing. General Petraeus consistently tried to keep the context within a timeframe of the last 18 months, which is interesting because though he says that his decisions have nothing to do with politics, he focuses on from when the new Administration came into office.
Conditions on the ground will dictate the timetable for a responsible drawn... well, that's at least the idea. Then again General Petraeus said that it will take a substantial, enduring commitment. The beginning of a troop withdrawal by next July seems unlikely, but the general did say that approximately 2,000 troops would be going home. 2,000? There are 100,000 in country so that 2% number is simply a token.
From where we sit, the one somewhat positive conclusion we can glean is that Al Qaeda and the Taliban elements supporting them are being disrupted in a major way in the region. Whether the Pakistani government is doing enough is anyone's guess, but the conflict has been pretty much regionalized. Al Qaeda is pretty much gone and has taken off for the mountains of Yemen - the next front and a conversation for a different time.
The other significant topic during the program today is the state of the Karzai Government in Afghanistan. We've heard tales of corruption in the press and to confirm it, Ambassador Karl Eikenberry said it's running rampant. Ironically, General Petraeus has to take the more diplomatic route saying that the U.S. and President Karzai have a strong relationship in that the two parties can have a frank discussion and don't necesssarily always agree. calling him a 'strong partner.' Despite disagreements, the dialogue remains open. We believe that President Karzai, who says that Afghanistan could be the new silk road with all it's mineral deposits, is playing the same waiting game that the Taliban are but for different reasons. Without an American presence, the Karzai Government would not be a democratic one, this much is for certain. They would leverage the mineral wealth to control the country, and would probably be content not controlling all of it, just the land masses that matter money-wise.
One thing is for sure, at the end of the hour we still simply know one thing: we don't know how long the longest campaign will be in the long war.
Politically, troops are scheduled to start rotating back home in July of next year, but the general made it clear that that would depend on the situation on the ground, in which he is seeing 'small pockets of progress.' For a war going into its tenth year, small pockets of progress mean almost nothing. General Petraeus consistently tried to keep the context within a timeframe of the last 18 months, which is interesting because though he says that his decisions have nothing to do with politics, he focuses on from when the new Administration came into office.
Conditions on the ground will dictate the timetable for a responsible drawn... well, that's at least the idea. Then again General Petraeus said that it will take a substantial, enduring commitment. The beginning of a troop withdrawal by next July seems unlikely, but the general did say that approximately 2,000 troops would be going home. 2,000? There are 100,000 in country so that 2% number is simply a token.
From where we sit, the one somewhat positive conclusion we can glean is that Al Qaeda and the Taliban elements supporting them are being disrupted in a major way in the region. Whether the Pakistani government is doing enough is anyone's guess, but the conflict has been pretty much regionalized. Al Qaeda is pretty much gone and has taken off for the mountains of Yemen - the next front and a conversation for a different time.
The other significant topic during the program today is the state of the Karzai Government in Afghanistan. We've heard tales of corruption in the press and to confirm it, Ambassador Karl Eikenberry said it's running rampant. Ironically, General Petraeus has to take the more diplomatic route saying that the U.S. and President Karzai have a strong relationship in that the two parties can have a frank discussion and don't necesssarily always agree. calling him a 'strong partner.' Despite disagreements, the dialogue remains open. We believe that President Karzai, who says that Afghanistan could be the new silk road with all it's mineral deposits, is playing the same waiting game that the Taliban are but for different reasons. Without an American presence, the Karzai Government would not be a democratic one, this much is for certain. They would leverage the mineral wealth to control the country, and would probably be content not controlling all of it, just the land masses that matter money-wise.
One thing is for sure, at the end of the hour we still simply know one thing: we don't know how long the longest campaign will be in the long war.
Sunday, August 08, 2010
8.8.10: No End Game
We just have a brief word about today's first guest, President Obama's Energy Adviser, Carol Browner, and the discussion about the Gulf oil crisis. And it continues to be a crisis even though the static kill (pouring tons of mud down the well) has seemed to have stopped most all the oil spouting from the well. That's the good news. The not so great news is that it's obvious that the administration has as much information as the rest of us, seeming to be observers as well. At this point, we're all getting the same information and our fear is that we'll never get the full story from BP. As a matter of fact, we'll never get the full story.
Where the government needs to step in big is to restore the Gulf Coast, environmentally and economically because BP sure as hell isn't going to do it. Why the big news outlets don't have teams of scientists and scientific reports down there getting the full story is irresponsible at the least. The story's that BP are blocking access should be made into huge front page story, simply for the fact that a corporation is now dictating the terms of what we're, the American people, are to know about their own country? This is a travesty on a 206 million gallon scale. Ms. Browner did make a very good point on the moratorium on drilling during the crisis, which was the moratorium on drilling during the crisis was the right thing to do because if there had been another accident while this was going on, we wouldn't have had the resources to combat both. Logical. What's not logical is that Republicans got the concessions they wanted on a clean energy bill, most notably the removal of cap-and-trade, and they still voted against it.
This brings us to today's second guest, House Minority Leader, John Boehner (R-OH), who said that the moratorium should be lifted because "a mistake was made with this well." He also said that BP has stepped up and should return the Gulf Coast to where it was before the spill. It is the right thing to say, but there is no utter way that BP has the will, the wear-with-all, or the inclination to do any such thing. And it was a 'mistake' as Mr. Boehner put it, it was negligence on the part of BP, plain and simply. They bypassed safety concerns on the rig for the sake of profit, and unfortunately it bit us all in the ass. Not them.
What kind of leader can not give a straight answer? You can quite clearly see the impatience on Mr. Gregory's face, and for good reason. Mr. Boehner could not answer the key question of the interview, which was if he agreed with Alan Greenspan (from last week's Meet The Press) that an extension of the Bush Tax Cuts would pay for themselves. All Mr. Boehner can utter is the mantra of how the Obama Administration wants more mandates, higher taxes, which lead to higher costs.
What Mr. Boehner and other Republicans don't realize is that simply cutting taxes will not levee our economic troubles. What's the end game with this play? Is it that we'll eliminate taxes all together? In some cases we actually have, with corporations like G.E. and Exxon Mobil not paying any taxes due to off-shore tax loopholes. And these companies who don't pay their fair share of taxes aren't creating more jobs for Americans. Yet, we can not raise taxes in this economy, not even selectively according to Mr. Boehner.
Something's got to give, there has to be another answer out there beside 'tax cuts.' Contrary to what Republicans would tell you, those two words are not a panacea. They're actually two words that keep our spending addiction going... keeping the withdrawal chills away.
Where the government needs to step in big is to restore the Gulf Coast, environmentally and economically because BP sure as hell isn't going to do it. Why the big news outlets don't have teams of scientists and scientific reports down there getting the full story is irresponsible at the least. The story's that BP are blocking access should be made into huge front page story, simply for the fact that a corporation is now dictating the terms of what we're, the American people, are to know about their own country? This is a travesty on a 206 million gallon scale. Ms. Browner did make a very good point on the moratorium on drilling during the crisis, which was the moratorium on drilling during the crisis was the right thing to do because if there had been another accident while this was going on, we wouldn't have had the resources to combat both. Logical. What's not logical is that Republicans got the concessions they wanted on a clean energy bill, most notably the removal of cap-and-trade, and they still voted against it.
This brings us to today's second guest, House Minority Leader, John Boehner (R-OH), who said that the moratorium should be lifted because "a mistake was made with this well." He also said that BP has stepped up and should return the Gulf Coast to where it was before the spill. It is the right thing to say, but there is no utter way that BP has the will, the wear-with-all, or the inclination to do any such thing. And it was a 'mistake' as Mr. Boehner put it, it was negligence on the part of BP, plain and simply. They bypassed safety concerns on the rig for the sake of profit, and unfortunately it bit us all in the ass. Not them.
What kind of leader can not give a straight answer? You can quite clearly see the impatience on Mr. Gregory's face, and for good reason. Mr. Boehner could not answer the key question of the interview, which was if he agreed with Alan Greenspan (from last week's Meet The Press) that an extension of the Bush Tax Cuts would pay for themselves. All Mr. Boehner can utter is the mantra of how the Obama Administration wants more mandates, higher taxes, which lead to higher costs.
What Mr. Boehner and other Republicans don't realize is that simply cutting taxes will not levee our economic troubles. What's the end game with this play? Is it that we'll eliminate taxes all together? In some cases we actually have, with corporations like G.E. and Exxon Mobil not paying any taxes due to off-shore tax loopholes. And these companies who don't pay their fair share of taxes aren't creating more jobs for Americans. Yet, we can not raise taxes in this economy, not even selectively according to Mr. Boehner.
Something's got to give, there has to be another answer out there beside 'tax cuts.' Contrary to what Republicans would tell you, those two words are not a panacea. They're actually two words that keep our spending addiction going... keeping the withdrawal chills away.
Sunday, August 01, 2010
8.1.2010: Agreeing with Greenspan
The case of Wikileaks disclosing some 92,000 pages of classified documents with regard to the Afghan War will lead to some positive developments and some negative ones, but we feel that the positives will outweigh the negatives. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen addressed the leaks on today's MTP and he did explain that the Taliban and our adversaries would know what our tactics are and the kinds of things that the Allied Forces are doing. What he failed to mention are the uglier instances reported in the paper that can only motivate the Taliban and cause even more feelings of long-term animosity toward the United States.
However, Mr. Gregory asked about the larger point being is the strategy in Afghanistan working? Is the war a lost cause, keeping in mind that the Taliban is at its strongest right now. Admiral Mullen did point out that we're sending more troops in despite July being the deadliest month in Afghanistan since the war started - 66 soldiers died. His answer indicates that he does not feel the war is a lost cause. This is where we feel the leaks can be more of a positive. First, it keeps people's collective attention on the war, which has the massive ripple effect of the government putting it in the fore with the media and then hence the people. Secondly, it's important that war atrocities are vetted out into the open. These acts are committed in the name of the American people and we do have a right to know. Again, this will lead to a change in tactics by our military.
Still, we continue to ask - What is the goal at this point in Afghanistan? To crush the Taliban? It's not going to happen. To secure the government and the people so that Taliban elements are marginalized to the point where they can not be a threat? Highly unlikely.
And then there is Pakistan, the place where our troubles most solidly reside. Admiral Mullen explained that our relationship with Pakistan is continually evolving. There's an understatement for you. The statistic from today's program that bears importance - 59% of the Pakistani people feel the U.S. is an enemy. Did Admiral Mullen say 'evolving' or 'dissolving?'
The bottom line there is that the U.S. is going to be in Afghanistan for a very long time if we plan to seriously achieve these goals.
From there, Mr. Gregory turned the conversation to Iran and their nuclear capabilities, but what he should have asked about is, in fact, Iraq. When will we see our final withdrawal from there. The Obama Administration should get on this message a little bit. It would say that we're, as a whole, trying to draw down the fighting an our troops abroad. Also, given that the public is tired of hearing about two wars, it's more appropriate for Admiral Mullen to comment on Iraq rather than Iran, which is more of a political challenge right now.
Lastly, they talked about the rate of suicide among U.S. servicemen. It's up in all the services and the Admiral admitted that they don't have the answers. Again, the two wars, the atrocities, the lack of public support in both countries (having to reason with the public after Blackwater mercenaries shoot up the place), and of course the multi-deployments. It's truly sad what were doing to these elite Americans, asking so much from them and giving back so little.
___
[New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg (I); the man who served as Chairman on the Federal Reserve for 19 years, Alan Greenspan; and the Governor of the state with the 6th largest economy in the U.S., Gov. Ed Rendell (D-PA).]
It's completely insane what is happening right now in American business, that corporations are totally flush with cash but aren't hiring. Alan Greenspan said he has never in his life seen this level of animosity between government and business. Actually, it was Mr. Greenspan who made today's most provocative statements, starting first with letting the Bush Tax Cuts lapse. Mr. Greenspan, by saying so, is once again embracing the economics of the Clinton era, and at this point, who wouldn't... except Republicans? The other side of the coin is that Mr. Greenspan opined that he sees nothing in the near future that will effect the jobless rate in this country. And given the mindset of the corporations, maximizing profits and continuing to lower respective workforces, we can see his point. Usually we don't. Mr. Bloomberg, typically, feels that we should extend the tax cuts a couple more years, lowering this said animosity. This is ridiculous because someone has to pay to increase the government's revenue. It's key to turning around confidence by lowering the deficit and hence the debt.
"Tax cuts do not pay for themselves," Mr. Greenspan stated today. And Governor Rendell, also on this panel, stated the hard fact that there have to be some tax increases and given all the tax shelters corporations take advantage of, the Bush tax cuts have to lapse for the top 2% of the population. He also pointed out, what we all know, is that the gridlock being caused by Republicans is stifling relief for the unemployed and impeding recovery.
President Obama this week was in Detroit touting a new auto plant with re-hired workers, and that for the first time since 2004, the big three automakers are turning a profit. This is the soapbox in which he should stand.
Presidential Historian Doris Kearns Goodwin gave him the best advice possible: Use the bully pulpit! We say, yes, use it and throw it at people who stand in your way to get things done. The last administration never hesitated.
However, Mr. Gregory asked about the larger point being is the strategy in Afghanistan working? Is the war a lost cause, keeping in mind that the Taliban is at its strongest right now. Admiral Mullen did point out that we're sending more troops in despite July being the deadliest month in Afghanistan since the war started - 66 soldiers died. His answer indicates that he does not feel the war is a lost cause. This is where we feel the leaks can be more of a positive. First, it keeps people's collective attention on the war, which has the massive ripple effect of the government putting it in the fore with the media and then hence the people. Secondly, it's important that war atrocities are vetted out into the open. These acts are committed in the name of the American people and we do have a right to know. Again, this will lead to a change in tactics by our military.
Still, we continue to ask - What is the goal at this point in Afghanistan? To crush the Taliban? It's not going to happen. To secure the government and the people so that Taliban elements are marginalized to the point where they can not be a threat? Highly unlikely.
And then there is Pakistan, the place where our troubles most solidly reside. Admiral Mullen explained that our relationship with Pakistan is continually evolving. There's an understatement for you. The statistic from today's program that bears importance - 59% of the Pakistani people feel the U.S. is an enemy. Did Admiral Mullen say 'evolving' or 'dissolving?'
The bottom line there is that the U.S. is going to be in Afghanistan for a very long time if we plan to seriously achieve these goals.
From there, Mr. Gregory turned the conversation to Iran and their nuclear capabilities, but what he should have asked about is, in fact, Iraq. When will we see our final withdrawal from there. The Obama Administration should get on this message a little bit. It would say that we're, as a whole, trying to draw down the fighting an our troops abroad. Also, given that the public is tired of hearing about two wars, it's more appropriate for Admiral Mullen to comment on Iraq rather than Iran, which is more of a political challenge right now.
Lastly, they talked about the rate of suicide among U.S. servicemen. It's up in all the services and the Admiral admitted that they don't have the answers. Again, the two wars, the atrocities, the lack of public support in both countries (having to reason with the public after Blackwater mercenaries shoot up the place), and of course the multi-deployments. It's truly sad what were doing to these elite Americans, asking so much from them and giving back so little.
___
[New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg (I); the man who served as Chairman on the Federal Reserve for 19 years, Alan Greenspan; and the Governor of the state with the 6th largest economy in the U.S., Gov. Ed Rendell (D-PA).]
It's completely insane what is happening right now in American business, that corporations are totally flush with cash but aren't hiring. Alan Greenspan said he has never in his life seen this level of animosity between government and business. Actually, it was Mr. Greenspan who made today's most provocative statements, starting first with letting the Bush Tax Cuts lapse. Mr. Greenspan, by saying so, is once again embracing the economics of the Clinton era, and at this point, who wouldn't... except Republicans? The other side of the coin is that Mr. Greenspan opined that he sees nothing in the near future that will effect the jobless rate in this country. And given the mindset of the corporations, maximizing profits and continuing to lower respective workforces, we can see his point. Usually we don't. Mr. Bloomberg, typically, feels that we should extend the tax cuts a couple more years, lowering this said animosity. This is ridiculous because someone has to pay to increase the government's revenue. It's key to turning around confidence by lowering the deficit and hence the debt.
"Tax cuts do not pay for themselves," Mr. Greenspan stated today. And Governor Rendell, also on this panel, stated the hard fact that there have to be some tax increases and given all the tax shelters corporations take advantage of, the Bush tax cuts have to lapse for the top 2% of the population. He also pointed out, what we all know, is that the gridlock being caused by Republicans is stifling relief for the unemployed and impeding recovery.
President Obama this week was in Detroit touting a new auto plant with re-hired workers, and that for the first time since 2004, the big three automakers are turning a profit. This is the soapbox in which he should stand.
Presidential Historian Doris Kearns Goodwin gave him the best advice possible: Use the bully pulpit! We say, yes, use it and throw it at people who stand in your way to get things done. The last administration never hesitated.
Sunday, July 25, 2010
7.25.10: Shirley Sherrod is Correct (It's Actually About the Poor)
The first topic posed to today's round table, as expected, concerned this week's episode of the misrepresented video of Ms. Shirley Sherrod by Breitbart and the fall out of the media and, stupidly, the Administration's knee-jerk reactions.
But with regard to today's Meet The Press - it's first guest, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, and the panel, Ms. Sherrod had it absolutely correct, if you watched the entire video of the story she told. It's not about black and white, it's about the poor, the haves and have-nots.
Sec. Geithner most important message is that the Administration feels it is good policy to let the Bush Tax Cuts expire for the top two economic percent of the population. As part of these tax cuts, which are set to expire at the end of the year, middle class Americans also enjoy some relief, but it is nothing in comparison to what the wealth reap in relief. As we've stated before in this column, the gap between the wealthiest and the poorest of this nation is at its highest level in over 80 years. If that disparity doesn't shrink, it will eventually lead to the destruction of the American capitalist society. We say this thinking about the myth of the former Soviet Union, where before its end, it appeared powerful and in tact, but in reality it was just a fresh coat of paint over a rusted out infrastructure.
We digress, but the point is that what Geithner is saying is that someone has to pay for something, it can no longer be put on the credit card. Capital needs to be self-generated and Mr. Gregory, who brought it up again today, asked what hard choices are going to be made so that for every dollar the government spends, it doesn't have to borrow forty-one cents of it (from China). Letting the Bush Tax Cuts expire is a necessary step to generate tax revenue and understandably, it difficult to get people to go backward on their income, no matter how much they make. But politically, the Administration will again fail to communicate clearly that when the tax cuts expire, the result will not affect the middle class.
A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. A trite cliche, yes, but cliches are what they are because they are true. There's no confidence in the economic chain of this country, there are simply too many weak links and as Mr. Gregory rightfully reiterates, difficult choices need to be made.
Mr. Dionne distilled the Shirley Sherrod saga accurately, saying that it was using race for political gain. Mr. Santelli - the spark plug for the Tea Party movement - equates this usage of race to spending and it's ripple effect on entitlements. But his spending-based assessment implies that entitlements are synonymous with minorities. They are synonymous with the poor.
The meta-narrative, that Ms. Dunn referred to, is that it is in fact President Obama who is the cause of problematic race relations according to the right. But the question that posed was that shouldn't they be getting better with the election of the nation's first black president. Vindictiveness is a powerful motivation, and there is an element... of the Tea Party Movement... let's not pretend that are white and feel like they have been cheated somehow and are now going to have what they have taken away from them. It seems naive when you write it in the context of a piece, but it is spurred by fear. This, coupled with the economic uncertainty we face, and its not surprising that the side that is out of power would use the sharpest bone from our skeletal past to cut the other anew. What makes this episode of Ms. Sherrod's misfortune particularly unseemly is Mr. Breitbart's statements after the full story was reveled. He said the NAACP was racist for essentially denouncing certain elements of the Tea Party - subtly burrowing deeper into the reverse-racist argument And what he didn't offer was an apology, and no recognition of the ripple effect his actions will have down the road.
Roundtable
The New York Times' David Brooks; The Washington Post's E.J. Dionne; Former Obama White House Communications Director Anita Dunn; National Urban League President Marc Morial and a man often credited with helping to spark the tea party movement, CNBC's Rick Santelli.
But with regard to today's Meet The Press - it's first guest, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, and the panel, Ms. Sherrod had it absolutely correct, if you watched the entire video of the story she told. It's not about black and white, it's about the poor, the haves and have-nots.
Sec. Geithner most important message is that the Administration feels it is good policy to let the Bush Tax Cuts expire for the top two economic percent of the population. As part of these tax cuts, which are set to expire at the end of the year, middle class Americans also enjoy some relief, but it is nothing in comparison to what the wealth reap in relief. As we've stated before in this column, the gap between the wealthiest and the poorest of this nation is at its highest level in over 80 years. If that disparity doesn't shrink, it will eventually lead to the destruction of the American capitalist society. We say this thinking about the myth of the former Soviet Union, where before its end, it appeared powerful and in tact, but in reality it was just a fresh coat of paint over a rusted out infrastructure.
We digress, but the point is that what Geithner is saying is that someone has to pay for something, it can no longer be put on the credit card. Capital needs to be self-generated and Mr. Gregory, who brought it up again today, asked what hard choices are going to be made so that for every dollar the government spends, it doesn't have to borrow forty-one cents of it (from China). Letting the Bush Tax Cuts expire is a necessary step to generate tax revenue and understandably, it difficult to get people to go backward on their income, no matter how much they make. But politically, the Administration will again fail to communicate clearly that when the tax cuts expire, the result will not affect the middle class.
A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. A trite cliche, yes, but cliches are what they are because they are true. There's no confidence in the economic chain of this country, there are simply too many weak links and as Mr. Gregory rightfully reiterates, difficult choices need to be made.
Mr. Dionne distilled the Shirley Sherrod saga accurately, saying that it was using race for political gain. Mr. Santelli - the spark plug for the Tea Party movement - equates this usage of race to spending and it's ripple effect on entitlements. But his spending-based assessment implies that entitlements are synonymous with minorities. They are synonymous with the poor.
The meta-narrative, that Ms. Dunn referred to, is that it is in fact President Obama who is the cause of problematic race relations according to the right. But the question that posed was that shouldn't they be getting better with the election of the nation's first black president. Vindictiveness is a powerful motivation, and there is an element... of the Tea Party Movement... let's not pretend that are white and feel like they have been cheated somehow and are now going to have what they have taken away from them. It seems naive when you write it in the context of a piece, but it is spurred by fear. This, coupled with the economic uncertainty we face, and its not surprising that the side that is out of power would use the sharpest bone from our skeletal past to cut the other anew. What makes this episode of Ms. Sherrod's misfortune particularly unseemly is Mr. Breitbart's statements after the full story was reveled. He said the NAACP was racist for essentially denouncing certain elements of the Tea Party - subtly burrowing deeper into the reverse-racist argument And what he didn't offer was an apology, and no recognition of the ripple effect his actions will have down the road.
Roundtable
The New York Times' David Brooks; The Washington Post's E.J. Dionne; Former Obama White House Communications Director Anita Dunn; National Urban League President Marc Morial and a man often credited with helping to spark the tea party movement, CNBC's Rick Santelli.
Sunday, July 18, 2010
7.18.2010: Pure Politics
Cut right to the round table discussion on today's Meet The Press for some pure politics with the following guests: Chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), Chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ), Chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX), and Chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD).
The talk was all about political control and which party has the better ideas to fix an economy suffering from financial pneumonia. Where we are right now, and what these gentlemen proved today is that we're definitely in a state of limbo. If you've just seen the movie Inception, you'll know this is not good. Democrats have passed and want to pass initiatives, namely Healthcare and financial reform, but on both points, the American people don't have a clear idea of how these two bills will benefit them. In particular with Healthcare, the benefits that Democrats talk about have not all taken affect so the spin that Americans are left with is that all the bill has done is add to an already crippling deficit and over debt. Senator John Cornyn stayed with his party's line in that we should repeal and replace the Healthcare bill, citing that the cost is outrageous (2.6 Trillion) and that the American people don't want it. The Republican worry here is that once the new healthcare benefits kick in, there will be no way to repeal it because Americans will like the benefits, and then hence we'd be stuck with these costs. However, the cost is not the main concern with Republicans. How could they be given how much was put on the Chinese credit card under the prior administration. It's the political success for Democrats that this bill may bring it that trouble Republicans the most. However, we must keep in mind that Republicans may have a point with costs. It's simply impossible with a bill of this size how much it will ultimately cost. 'Repeal and Replace' is a nice easy notion to run a campaign on, but the reality is that this is a false promise. It will take more political leverage than the Democrats had in passing it then Republicans will be able to ganer for some time. Senator Menendez pointed out the child healthcare benefit that the bill brings and, more importantly, not being denied insurance for a pre-existing condition. The latter is where the insurance companies make a ton of revenue. And that's what it is all about, not denying any revenue to corporations. So conservatives will oppose any measure in any bill that impedes the furthering of corporate profit.
With With regard Financial reform, the fight goes even though the bill has passed on with Democrats wanting to make changes to regulations and the Republicans contending that things should not be altered as they will stifle business. Along with this, are the Bush tax cuts. What to do with those?
Mr. Sessions stated that the Bush economic policies doubled the size of the economy, essentially asking - why change that? However, what Mr. Sessions failed to note is the telling statistic that the disparity between the wealthiest one percent of Americans and the rest of the population is the highest it has been in the last 80 years. Additionally, Mr. Sessions said that we should live within our means. Mr. Cornyn reiterated this notion. Translated, it means pay as you go, which is something that President Clinton had instituted, and it's also an idea that the Bush Administration blew up, enabled by a Republican controlled Congress. This is simply 20-20 hindsight. Republicans, in actuality, want to return to the Bush era of financial philosophy, this was something that Representative Chris Van Hollen made a point to illustrate.
Unlike Healthcare, the Democrats have the upper hand with financial reform. Mr. Sessions could not give one specific example of what hard choices Republicans would make to turn the economy around. Then when pressed about it again by Mr. Gregory, Mr. Sessions still couldn't come up with anything. Mr. Gregory, sensing the bullshit, cut off the Representative from Texas and tried to get it out of his Senate counterpart - Mr. Cornyn - to no avail. Mr. Sessions stated emphatically that we need to balance the budget. Mr. Gregory simply asked him how and he could even answer that question. Easy to state the problem, coming up with the solution, not so much.
This is the Republicans main problem. They want to kill all the Democratic initiatives and maintain Bush Administration fiscal policies, and the underlying truth is that they don't know how to do it. Or, at the very least, they aren't saying because they know the consequences. In the news this week was the question of how Republicans can be for maintaining the Bush tax cuts, but no for extending unemployment benefits. It's something they simply don't want to grapple with and it seems that if they just stay on message that it will all align in their favor. Could work, but it won't if the Democrats can make compelling arguments against this, which they have yet to be able to do.
All of this is prelude to the uncertainty of the November mid-term elections - which way will the House turn? Lastly, Mr. Greogory steered the conversation to the Tea Party and how this group will affect the aforementioned outcome. Republicans have downplayed the far right, out of the mainstream statements that the candidates have made and really the jury is still out on how the establishment Republicans want to embrace this movement, if at all. Especially when you have a candidate like Sharon Angle in Nevada. She is just simply unhinged, a wack-o, who really doesn't understand the gravity of the statements she makes. One in particular is quite disturbing, which is to use Second Amendment remedies against her opponents. Second Amendment remedies? This is the biggest load of crap euphemism. What it means is to take up a gun and shoot the people who oppose you. And this is an insightful contribution to the national discourse? Republicans want Harry Reid to lose for sure, but how do they get on board with that?
The talk was all about political control and which party has the better ideas to fix an economy suffering from financial pneumonia. Where we are right now, and what these gentlemen proved today is that we're definitely in a state of limbo. If you've just seen the movie Inception, you'll know this is not good. Democrats have passed and want to pass initiatives, namely Healthcare and financial reform, but on both points, the American people don't have a clear idea of how these two bills will benefit them. In particular with Healthcare, the benefits that Democrats talk about have not all taken affect so the spin that Americans are left with is that all the bill has done is add to an already crippling deficit and over debt. Senator John Cornyn stayed with his party's line in that we should repeal and replace the Healthcare bill, citing that the cost is outrageous (2.6 Trillion) and that the American people don't want it. The Republican worry here is that once the new healthcare benefits kick in, there will be no way to repeal it because Americans will like the benefits, and then hence we'd be stuck with these costs. However, the cost is not the main concern with Republicans. How could they be given how much was put on the Chinese credit card under the prior administration. It's the political success for Democrats that this bill may bring it that trouble Republicans the most. However, we must keep in mind that Republicans may have a point with costs. It's simply impossible with a bill of this size how much it will ultimately cost. 'Repeal and Replace' is a nice easy notion to run a campaign on, but the reality is that this is a false promise. It will take more political leverage than the Democrats had in passing it then Republicans will be able to ganer for some time. Senator Menendez pointed out the child healthcare benefit that the bill brings and, more importantly, not being denied insurance for a pre-existing condition. The latter is where the insurance companies make a ton of revenue. And that's what it is all about, not denying any revenue to corporations. So conservatives will oppose any measure in any bill that impedes the furthering of corporate profit.
With With regard Financial reform, the fight goes even though the bill has passed on with Democrats wanting to make changes to regulations and the Republicans contending that things should not be altered as they will stifle business. Along with this, are the Bush tax cuts. What to do with those?
Mr. Sessions stated that the Bush economic policies doubled the size of the economy, essentially asking - why change that? However, what Mr. Sessions failed to note is the telling statistic that the disparity between the wealthiest one percent of Americans and the rest of the population is the highest it has been in the last 80 years. Additionally, Mr. Sessions said that we should live within our means. Mr. Cornyn reiterated this notion. Translated, it means pay as you go, which is something that President Clinton had instituted, and it's also an idea that the Bush Administration blew up, enabled by a Republican controlled Congress. This is simply 20-20 hindsight. Republicans, in actuality, want to return to the Bush era of financial philosophy, this was something that Representative Chris Van Hollen made a point to illustrate.
Unlike Healthcare, the Democrats have the upper hand with financial reform. Mr. Sessions could not give one specific example of what hard choices Republicans would make to turn the economy around. Then when pressed about it again by Mr. Gregory, Mr. Sessions still couldn't come up with anything. Mr. Gregory, sensing the bullshit, cut off the Representative from Texas and tried to get it out of his Senate counterpart - Mr. Cornyn - to no avail. Mr. Sessions stated emphatically that we need to balance the budget. Mr. Gregory simply asked him how and he could even answer that question. Easy to state the problem, coming up with the solution, not so much.
This is the Republicans main problem. They want to kill all the Democratic initiatives and maintain Bush Administration fiscal policies, and the underlying truth is that they don't know how to do it. Or, at the very least, they aren't saying because they know the consequences. In the news this week was the question of how Republicans can be for maintaining the Bush tax cuts, but no for extending unemployment benefits. It's something they simply don't want to grapple with and it seems that if they just stay on message that it will all align in their favor. Could work, but it won't if the Democrats can make compelling arguments against this, which they have yet to be able to do.
All of this is prelude to the uncertainty of the November mid-term elections - which way will the House turn? Lastly, Mr. Greogory steered the conversation to the Tea Party and how this group will affect the aforementioned outcome. Republicans have downplayed the far right, out of the mainstream statements that the candidates have made and really the jury is still out on how the establishment Republicans want to embrace this movement, if at all. Especially when you have a candidate like Sharon Angle in Nevada. She is just simply unhinged, a wack-o, who really doesn't understand the gravity of the statements she makes. One in particular is quite disturbing, which is to use Second Amendment remedies against her opponents. Second Amendment remedies? This is the biggest load of crap euphemism. What it means is to take up a gun and shoot the people who oppose you. And this is an insightful contribution to the national discourse? Republicans want Harry Reid to lose for sure, but how do they get on board with that?
Sunday, July 11, 2010
7.11.2010: Expectations
Guests: White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs; Roundtable - New York Times columnist David Brooks; Fmr. Rep. Harold Ford Jr. (D-TN); Republican Strategist and Fmr. Counselor to President George W. Bush, Ed Gillespie; and msnbc's Rachel Maddow.
David Gregory's topics and questions all circled back around to the politics of the situation. Unarticulated political stance continues to plague this administration. Every answer White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs gave was further testament to this fact.
Our notion of the Administration becomes further solidified with each passing day. It consists of very talented and smart individuals, all of whom do not know how to communicate their ideas effectively to the American people to show them that the measures being taken to correct the various disasters that we're facing. Frankly, in most interviews, Administration officials sound defensive... like wimps. This was capped off, pardon the pun, of Mr. Gibbs acknowledging that the Republicans could potentially take the House this fall. There's confidence for you.
First, and foremost, the oil spew is a bullet wound for this country and we just can not stop the bleeding. For most people, this catastrophe is not in the collective daily consciousness but the ripple [read: wave] effect of this will be felt for decades. Mr. Gibbs stated that we're containing 25,000 barrels a day at this point, but this is in light of the fact that BP took the cap off the well and at this moment the oil is flowing freely into the Gulf. His reassurance is that Thad Allen is approving all of BP's methods for stopping the spew. What is he not going to approve? We're at the mercy of this oil company to stop this. However, what the Administration could and should do is stop BP from manipulating the entire situation with regard to press access, claim money distribution, and the scientific community assessing. BP does not have the right to essential quarantine areas of the United States coast. This is where the government should force a strong hand and we're just not seeing it.
What we hope doesn't fall into collective deafness is the program Mr. Gibbs outlined for the new battery plant opening in Michigan. By opening this plant, it will make fuel batteries for the Chevy Volt and has the potential to create 40% of the world's fuel batteries. We're one of the few nations to be able to facilitate innovation like this, which needs to be stepped up ten-fold.
The other overarching problem is that what everyone has to realize is that the problems that the Obama Administration inherited are going to take longer than two years to fix, longer than four years to fix. That's the reality that every politician knows and each party is trying to manage that unsaid truth. Obviously, this is harder on the Democrats since they're holding power. The result of course is very poor poll numbers.
Before moving on to Afghanistan, Mr. Gregory asked Mr. Gibbs if expectations for the Administration were too high going in. Rightfully, he asked it twice and Mr. Gibbs never answered it. So we'll have to...
(By the way, we hope that viewers are settling in with Mr. Gregory as time goes by, as we are. We're glad to see that his style has evolved. At first, he was going at interview guests like he was still part of the White House Press Corps where you get two questions, maybe and you'd better make them good. But now, he's using tone and time much more effectively.)
And the answer is YES. Expectations on both sides, the people's and the Administration's, were very high. Going in, The Obama Administration had 67% of the people on board, but what the Administration underestimated was the fact they didn't have 67% of the Senate onboard. Factor in the shenanigans played by Democratic Senators Nelson of Nebraska, Landreau of Louisiana, and Lincoln of Arkansas and the potential, on which the expectations are build, is plundered.
Speaking of expectations, we'll be coming up on ten years in Afghanistan, matching the Soviets escapade there in its futility. No one expected that, but here we are. And we need to get out as soon as possible. Instead of nation building, which is a large part of what we're doing, we should be focusing on the elements - the Taliban - that needs to be defeated. The reality is that the nation building is a smoke screen for us using Afghanistan as a launching pad for attacks in Pakistan against Taliban and Al Qaeda extremists. We can not openly claim this as one of our objectives, but if we're going to be hawkish in this respect, go all the way with it, up the intensity and shorten the duration and then get out. We can all conclude that we're not going to determine the ultimate future of Afghanistan, and simply trying to shape it for a certain trajectory if an iffy proposition at best. The Administration is stuck in a morass here and hasn't articulated a clear purpose.
We haven't even gotten to the panel, which honestly, is barely worth mentioning because of the following: Harold Ford made the good point that it's all about jobs, but it's easy to be right when you're not on the hook for creating them. David Brooks today was more or less a Republican apologist, and rightly so. Ed Gillespie is still trying in futility to defend the Bush record. And lastly, Rachel Maddow just wants to make sure her opinion in this forum sounds like the right one.
David Gregory's topics and questions all circled back around to the politics of the situation. Unarticulated political stance continues to plague this administration. Every answer White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs gave was further testament to this fact.
Our notion of the Administration becomes further solidified with each passing day. It consists of very talented and smart individuals, all of whom do not know how to communicate their ideas effectively to the American people to show them that the measures being taken to correct the various disasters that we're facing. Frankly, in most interviews, Administration officials sound defensive... like wimps. This was capped off, pardon the pun, of Mr. Gibbs acknowledging that the Republicans could potentially take the House this fall. There's confidence for you.
First, and foremost, the oil spew is a bullet wound for this country and we just can not stop the bleeding. For most people, this catastrophe is not in the collective daily consciousness but the ripple [read: wave] effect of this will be felt for decades. Mr. Gibbs stated that we're containing 25,000 barrels a day at this point, but this is in light of the fact that BP took the cap off the well and at this moment the oil is flowing freely into the Gulf. His reassurance is that Thad Allen is approving all of BP's methods for stopping the spew. What is he not going to approve? We're at the mercy of this oil company to stop this. However, what the Administration could and should do is stop BP from manipulating the entire situation with regard to press access, claim money distribution, and the scientific community assessing. BP does not have the right to essential quarantine areas of the United States coast. This is where the government should force a strong hand and we're just not seeing it.
What we hope doesn't fall into collective deafness is the program Mr. Gibbs outlined for the new battery plant opening in Michigan. By opening this plant, it will make fuel batteries for the Chevy Volt and has the potential to create 40% of the world's fuel batteries. We're one of the few nations to be able to facilitate innovation like this, which needs to be stepped up ten-fold.
The other overarching problem is that what everyone has to realize is that the problems that the Obama Administration inherited are going to take longer than two years to fix, longer than four years to fix. That's the reality that every politician knows and each party is trying to manage that unsaid truth. Obviously, this is harder on the Democrats since they're holding power. The result of course is very poor poll numbers.
Before moving on to Afghanistan, Mr. Gregory asked Mr. Gibbs if expectations for the Administration were too high going in. Rightfully, he asked it twice and Mr. Gibbs never answered it. So we'll have to...
(By the way, we hope that viewers are settling in with Mr. Gregory as time goes by, as we are. We're glad to see that his style has evolved. At first, he was going at interview guests like he was still part of the White House Press Corps where you get two questions, maybe and you'd better make them good. But now, he's using tone and time much more effectively.)
And the answer is YES. Expectations on both sides, the people's and the Administration's, were very high. Going in, The Obama Administration had 67% of the people on board, but what the Administration underestimated was the fact they didn't have 67% of the Senate onboard. Factor in the shenanigans played by Democratic Senators Nelson of Nebraska, Landreau of Louisiana, and Lincoln of Arkansas and the potential, on which the expectations are build, is plundered.
Speaking of expectations, we'll be coming up on ten years in Afghanistan, matching the Soviets escapade there in its futility. No one expected that, but here we are. And we need to get out as soon as possible. Instead of nation building, which is a large part of what we're doing, we should be focusing on the elements - the Taliban - that needs to be defeated. The reality is that the nation building is a smoke screen for us using Afghanistan as a launching pad for attacks in Pakistan against Taliban and Al Qaeda extremists. We can not openly claim this as one of our objectives, but if we're going to be hawkish in this respect, go all the way with it, up the intensity and shorten the duration and then get out. We can all conclude that we're not going to determine the ultimate future of Afghanistan, and simply trying to shape it for a certain trajectory if an iffy proposition at best. The Administration is stuck in a morass here and hasn't articulated a clear purpose.
We haven't even gotten to the panel, which honestly, is barely worth mentioning because of the following: Harold Ford made the good point that it's all about jobs, but it's easy to be right when you're not on the hook for creating them. David Brooks today was more or less a Republican apologist, and rightly so. Ed Gillespie is still trying in futility to defend the Bush record. And lastly, Rachel Maddow just wants to make sure her opinion in this forum sounds like the right one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)