Deep Thought

Everything stays the same, until you change it.

Ayn Rand Received Medicare and Social Security

Right wing heroine and famous conservative/libertarian author, who spent her entire adult life arguing and writing fictional books against the modern welfare state, (and whose name is the basis for Rand Paul) received both Medicare and Social Security under a false name so as not to undermine her life ideology.

Is there any wonder tea baggers and Republicans constantly reference her work so much???

FL. Judge Rules Entire ACA Void

A Republican federal district judge in Florida ruled this morning that the Republican individual mandate proposal, that was adopted in the Affordable Care Act last year, unconstitutional. In addition, Judge Vinson voided the entire law along with it. Today's ruling was expected given the political nature of the health care debate and the Republican dependence on judicial activism.  So far 2 judges have decide in favor of the individual mandate and 2 against it, both along ideological lines.

Rampant Civil Liberties Abuse

A civil liberties group filed a FOIA request on the FBI to see what exactly they've been doing with all that digital information they've been collecting since 9/11 via that wonderful Patriot Act that is keeping us all so safe.

In a review of 2,500 documents, the Electronic Frontier Foundation has uncovered at least 800 confirmed violations of the law and the Constitution by the FBI in the years between 2001-2008.  In other words, that means the FBI is illegal obtaining information about American citizens without a warrant, a direct violation of our 4th Amendment rights.

The group explicitly notes that even though these violations occurred during the Bush administration, there is no reason to believe any of it has stopped since Obama became president.

From 2001 to 2008, the FBI frequently and flagrantly violated laws intended to check abusive intelligence investigations of American citizens. While many hoped the era of abusive FBI practices would end with the Bush Administration, there is little evidence that President Obama has taken significant measures to change past intelligence abuses. Two years into his term, the President has not publicly disclosed any appointments to the IOB, and his campaign promise of unprecedented transparency within the executive branch has gone largely unfulfilled — especially within the intelligence community.

When people ask where is the change, this is what they are talking about.

The Dictator You Don't Know

It always seems to be the case in American foreign policy that we choose to prop up the dictators we know rather than having them toppled and being stuck with one we don't. This wasn't always the case, however.  We are all familiar with the disastrous Bay of Pigs that was designed to overthrow Castro in Cuba.  There's also the 1953 coup in Iran where we actually helped overthrow a democratic government.  That turned out great didn't it??  There's the 1973 coup in Chile that was also largely backed the by U.S.  Truth be told, none of those turned out all so great for America.  Their results were either failure or governments that were much less free than before with regions entirely destabilized.

To be sure, what's happening in Egypt currently is not a coup.  So far it's an uprising from the people who want change from their government.  As it stands, the Egyptian government is entirely propped up by U.S. money and military support.  So it would be a definite conflict of interest for President Obama to encourage the protests intended to topple the government that is only in place because of, well, right now because of President Obama.

But the real reason for the cautious hope for the return of the status quo by the Obama administration is that there is no guarantee an uprising by the people of Egypt will result in anything remotely democratic.  It's possible it could leave Egypt with a populist strong man who would destabilize the region even more than it already is. It's a chance you take and one that is as hypocritical as anything could possibly be. Given our track record of inciting uprisings to topple governments, it's a much safer chance to go with the dictator you know.

Now I'm not saying it's right to back an oppressive dictator simply because he's friendly to our interests.  What I am saying is until Mubarak is actually gone there isn't much we can do.  But once he is gone our rhetoric must change to being supportive of the uprising if we want any sort of legitimacy in the new government.

Deep Thought

You know sometimes I read through blogs that I really respect like Atrios and Digby and I leave there glad that they aren't all giddy about the Obama presidency.

My guess is had there been blogs during the Clinton administration, you know before Gore invented them, bloggers like Atrios, Digby and writings from other liberal Democrats, would have been very critical of him as well. I just don't see Dibgy writing in support of President Clinton's Defense of Marriage Act, or his decision to bomb Yugoslavia into submission. Nor do I see Atrios jumping for joy at Clinton's plan to reignite the Reagan star wars program, which was essentially a massive Military Industrial Complex stimulus act.  Something tells me that today's elite liberal bloggers would have been very critical of what was a very moderate two-terms by Bill Clinton.  I was a little young to remember all of the 90s and the political discussions of the day; I just don't see the liberal blogosphere getting too excited about NAFTA or Welfare to Work.

Quickies

• The economy grew at a solid 3.2 percent annual rate in the final three months of 2010, the Commerce Department said, after expanding at a 2.6 percent pace in the third quarter. The rise was a touch below economists' expectations for a 3.5 percent rate. Look for a readjustment of this number later next month. Like I've been saying since 2009, we need 5-6% growth to get us out of the mess we are in. Three percent growth is good but not for an economy in recovery mode.

• The Republican Attorney General of Idaho tells his fellow Republicans that nullification is unconstitutional. "It is hardly surprising, given this specter, that no court has ever upheld a State effort to nullify a federal law," the AG sternly stated.

• Senate Democrats decide not to change the filibuster.  A super majority will still be required in the senate to vote on legislation even though the Constitution plainly states a simple majority is all that is required to pass legislation.

• I'm going for the Steelers in the Super Bowl.

• Wow, could Republicans been any more wrong about bailing out Chrysler?

Republican Ideology vs. Reality

Quite to the contrary of Kristen in the comments section of my deficits and Republican ideology post, GOP leaders have most certainly said-- numerous times-- that tax cuts do not have to be paid for or offset.

Kristen writes:

...no one is saying that tax cuts fully pay for themselves, but what we are saying is that lowering tax rates encourages the taxed behavior and expands the tax base, offsetting some of the revenue loss.

Yes plenty of Republicans in leadership positions have said the exact opposite of that quote.  They have in fact said tax cuts do not have to be paid for or offset at all.

Sen. Jon Kyl: "[Y]ou should never raise taxes in order to cut taxes," Jon Kyl said on Fox News Sunday. "Surely Congress has the authority, and it would be right to -- if we decide we want to cut taxes to spur the economy, not to have to raise taxes in order to offset those costs. You do need to offset the cost of increased spending, and that's what Republicans object to. But you should never have to offset cost of a deliberate decision to reduce tax rates on Americans."

Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH): "I tend to think that tax cuts should not have to be offset."

Sen. Tom Coburn: "Continuing the [Bush] tax cuts isn't a cost, if you added new taxes, new tax cuts, I would agree that's a cost."

I'm sure I could post more and more quotes by Republicans but you get the point. Heck, even Sen. Mitch McConnell said that tax cuts not being offset is the belief of "virtually every Republican."  So saying that no one is saying such stuff is far from the truth.  Now maybe Kristen isn't saying such stuff but the post wasn't about what Kristen was saying.  It was about what the people Kristen votes for were saying. And they have maintained as repetitively as possible that tax cuts do not have to be paid for.

That brings us to another point of fiction left in the comment.  "What people HAVE been saying but you won't open your mind is that the Bush tax cuts are not the main reason why we have trillion dollar deficits today."  Just not true.

The largest contributor to the budget deficit is the Bush tax cuts, which were renewed last month.

Kristen calls these charts "stupid."  They are stupid because they do not reflect the Republican Fantasy World where cuts in revenue don't have to be offset, George Bush was a popular president, and Iraq had something to do with 9/11.  It's a world where the sun always shines and endless war is patriotic.

As you can clearly see from the chart, Bush's tax cuts and his endless wars add more to the deficit than TARP or the stimulus act.  Actually, by the end of this year alone, you could combine all the rescue measures together and they wouldn't even equal the loss in revenue produced by the tax cuts and the wars.

Another "stupid" chart that visibly spells out the impact of the tax cuts on the deficit is this one.

Again you can clearly see the largest contributors to the budget deficit are Bush policies like his tax cuts, his wars, his huge unfunded expansion to Medicare and whatnot. But again these calculations are not acceptable versions of reality to Republicans.  Such charts show the devastating impact of Republican policies on this country.  They are "stupid" and obviously created by tree hugging hippies that want to destroy America.  Toss them aside they are not to be believed.  No one Serious or Mainstream could possibly suggest Bush policies created huge deficits.

When such flat rejection of reality is used to debate politics it becomes impossible to converse.  And all that's left are the people trying to clean up the mess and those who think everything is spotless.

The Intent of Our Founders

It's pretty clear if we consider the U.S. Constitution to be a dead document that women are not allowed to be president.

Article II, Sec. 1

"The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice-President chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows:"

I'll also note that no where in the whole document does it say anything about a black man named Barack Hussein Obama being eligible.

Tax Cuts the Deficit and Republican Ideology

On Tuesday CBO released its latest round of number crunching. Their figures showed the 2011 deficit will most likely reach $1.5 trillion. That's a staggering number no doubt. The confusing part for Republicans, however, is that last year CBO projected the 2011 deficit would be slightly over $1 trillion.

Genius Republicans are reading this a couple different ways. One, they are insisting CBO's numbers were so off last year because CBO is prone to mistakes. And/or Obama's out of control spending has increased the deficit nearly $500 billion in one year. Both are ridiculous.

The $500 billion difference comes from the tax cuts that were passed in December 2010.

The Bush tax cuts were set to expire on Dec. 31st, 2010.  So last year when CBO was doing its projections for 2011 they figured in the expiration of those cuts, which was the one trillion number.  But since the tax cuts were extended for another two years with other cuts added onto them, CBO had to revise its numbers to reflect the new round of cuts.  That gives us the new $1.5 trillion deficit.

For those who are not genius Republicans, that means tax cuts added $500 billion to the deficit, or $442 billion to be exact.

Now something like this flies in the face of Republican thought.  They purport to believe tax cuts do not add to the deficit and that they do not have to be offset by spending cuts.  But tax cuts do indeed add to the deficit if they are not paid for with spending cuts.  In fact, this latest round of tax cuts increased the budget deficit by 50%.

They Really Do Love Them Some Socialist Health Care

Republican Tea Bagger and freshman Congresswoman, Renee Elmers, ran her campaign just like every other nut slapping Republican out there, repeal the socialist Affordable Care Act at all costs. She is so against what she calls "socialized health care" that she has decided to partake in it herself.  But not for the reasons you might think.  Oh no, Rep. Elmers is gladly using her socialized medicine because she thinks her $174,000 a year (minimum salary) is not enough to pay for a private plan.

Of the 100 or so new Republicans in Congress this year, all of which campaigned to repeal President Obama's signature health care reform package, only 14 have opted out of the socialized plan to pay for a private Patriotic plan.  If that number doesn't sound hugely hypocritical, consider that less than two weeks ago 242 Republicans voted to repeal the ACA.  Only 11 of those 242 have opted out of their tax-payer funded plan.

None of this is surprising to regular Fold Blog readers.  Tea Baggers are anything but small government conservatives.  And Republicans are against anything but tax-payer funded health care for themselves.  Just please, whatever you do, don't judge such hypocrisy as a party problem.

Deep Thought

Republicans haven't cared so much about the deficit since the last time they were out of power.

Ryan's Response Neglects His Very Own Plan

Paul Ryan is apparently the Republican budget guy. He's chairman of the House Budget Committee and the author of what he calls the Roadmap.  His Roadmap is supposed to bring America endless prosperity through "a comprehensive, alternative approach to the Nation’s most pressing domestic priorities."  If Republicans were to return to complete power like they were during their Permanent Majority era, they would presumably adopt this Roadmap to guide the country into the future.  That's why Rep. Ryan was selected to give the Republican rebuttal to the president's speech last night.  As a way to show America the variances of our voting decisions, to explain to the public what they would do differently from the president and his party.  So why didn't Ryan mention his Roadmap one single time?

It's not because CBO says Ryan's plan would not balance the budget until 2063.  Or because CBO says his plan would add to the national debt rather than paying it off. Trust me that has nothing to do with it.  Remember Republicans only use CBO figures when it benefits them.  When it doesn't, they do their own study, using their own math and then release it to the media calling it a Super Patriotic version of how to save America from evil liberals.  Very similar to how Saddam Hussein insisted on using his own weapons inspectors.

The real reason Ryan didn't mention his Roadmap is because it would have opened him up to questions about it.  Remember we aren't supposed to ask questions of Republicans.  We are only supposed to do and believe what they tell us.  Questioning them is like questioning God.  It's wrong and unpatriotic.  When a Republican tells us that spending is out of control and our debt is critical and that they are going shrink it all, we are just supposed to believe them.  After all, cutting spending, reining in the deficit and shrinking government is what Republicans do.

Business As Usual

I love the title of this AP story: Republicans Back At Work Cutting Spending

Makes it appear as Republicans are back to business as usual even though Republicans have never cut spending.

Not only have they never cut spending, they've done anything they claim as the bedrock principles of their party. They've never cut spending. They've never shrunk a deficit. They've never paid down the debt. They've never reined in government. Yet the media tells us they are back at work cutting spending. Everything is normal; they're just doing what they always do. Wheee!!

Winning the Future

I was a little busy last night so I didn't get to watch the president's speech. I rarely watch speeches anyway. I did, however, read the text this morning.

From what I could tell there wasn't much new said last night. I was a bit surprised he didn't push a little harder against Republican repeal efforts of HCR. I guess it's better to not bring it up only to rehash old arguments.

We have to look at the context of this speech, however. For the first time President Obama stood before divided government. Gone was Speaker Pelosi in the background and in her place was a very tanned and probably drunk Speaker Boehner.  The economy, too, is different from his last SOTU.  The uncertainty still remains but the overall strength of the economy is in a much better place than last year.  And health care, well health care is a closed book no matter how many times the GOP-controlled house votes to repeal it.

Maybe now the future is something we can quit talking about and start working toward.

*Update:

Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) used his twatter page during the president's speech to call him a Socialist.  Really, what's the point in that?  I couldn't imagine the reaction if a Democratic Member of Congress had posted on the internet that George Bush was a terrorist during his SOTU.  I couldn't imagine the heated reaction that would have followed something like that.  Mr. Broun you are a pathetic person.

Don't Mess With Texas, Unless You're a Federal Handout Then They Can't Get Enough

I vividly remember being explained to by a friend that the more conservative states, especially that of Texas, were experiencing a lesser extent of the recession. Mainly, my friend stated numerous times, was because the Red States were utilizing conservative principles to guide their state budgets. Unlike how George W. Bush led the federal government, Republican governors were actually controlling spending while keeping taxes, unemployment and recession symptoms to a minimum.  You see, Bush simply didn't govern like a Republican.

I laughed the whole time my friend was explaining his economic theory to me. We were at a bar so it's not like I could bring up a document on the Internet to prove him wrong. The more I laughed the more he insisted he was right and that Texas was a microcosm for the whole nation.

My friend, of course, was mainly repeating what he was hearing in the MSM and from his hate radio.

Writing in National Review, Rich Lowry called Texas prudent and stable especially compared to the implosion of California, a disastrous model Lowry claimed President Obama wanted to follow.

Right wing hero, Republican economist Arthur Laffer, called Texas a counterexample to liberal economic policies.

Fruity Newty Gingrich, writing on the Bush-era famed website of the American Enterprise Institute, called Texas a "pro-business, anti-waste model that could be replicated across the country."

And Space Alien Man Child, Ross Douthat wrote on the most read op-ed page in America that President Obama should adopt Texas' Red State economic strategy for the rest of the country.

My friend was simply passing on information he had heard from Republican talking heads.  Information that is as inaccurate as saying Iraq had something to do with 9/11-- another favorite talking point by Republicans.

Turns out Texas was the state that depended the most on those very stimulus funds to plug nearly 97% of its shortfall for fiscal 2010, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Texas, which crafts a budget every two years, was facing a $6.6 billion shortfall for its 2010-2011 fiscal years. It plugged nearly all of that deficit with $6.4 billion in Recovery Act money, allowing it to leave its $9.1 billion rainy day fund untouched.

"Stimulus was very helpful in getting them through the last few years," said Brian Sigritz, director of state fiscal studies for the National Association of State Budget Officers, said of Texas.

Even as Perry requested the Recovery Act money, he railed against it. On the very same day he asked for the funds, he set up a petition titled "No Government Bailouts."

I just wonder at what point does publicly decrying federal stimulus money while privately lobbying to get as much of it as you can to fix your state budget become psychotically delusional?

(h/t Jon Chait)

I Guess She's Never Heard of the Civil War

I'm not sure what's behind the Republican fascination with the America founders being men who did no wrong. They treat them as if they are god-like superheroes who forged a nation together comparable to how Superman bends metal with his mind.

They were men, all white upper class elitists who out of political expediency created a pragmatic way to allow only white, upper class, men just like themselves to live freely.  The founders had no intentions of including women, blacks or aboriginal natives in their little Constitution thingy.  If they had, they would have simply written them in.

I suppose in their Texas history books it says something about how the founders were really a diverse group of people who hated slavery and cheered on equal rights.  At least that's what batshit crazy Michelle Bachmann seems to think.

"How unique in all of the world, that one nation that was the resting point from people groups all across the world," she said. "It didn't matter the color of their skin, it didn't matter their language, it didn't matter their economic status."

"Once you got here, we were all the same. Isn't that remarkable?" she asked.

Except for IT DID MATTER GREATLY the color of your skin and your language and your economic status.  If you were black you were brought over in chains, sold on an auction block and put into bondage.  Ask immigrant Italians if their language mattered.  And ask the Irish if their economic status mattered.  All of it did.  Only someone who has no clue about the history of this country could stand before--an all white-- crowd of people and pretend that during the early inception of this country everyone was equal when they got here.  It's ludicrous to say such.

Bachmann goes a step further with her stupidity by telling the Iowa crowd that our founders were such great men that they "worked tirelessly until slavery was no more in the United States."

You have to be kidding me!  Has she never heard of the Civil War?  This is just amazing.  The founders did not end slavery.  Almost half of the delegates to the Constitutional Convention were slave owners.  They even agreed to count slaves as 3/5 a person in order to appease the Southern states.  Not one single founder was alive when slavery was brought to an end.  The bloodiest war America has ever fought ended slavery.  None of it had anything to do with our founders working to end it.  But it had everything to do with how our founders instituted slavery into our national character.

We don't have to agree on the political issues of the day.  We don't even have to like each other.  But my God we at least have to hold certain historical truths as being the moral fabric of our society whether they are pleasant to talk about or not.  Rewriting history to fit the Republican tea bagger narrative is a dangerous attempt at destroying our future.

*Update:

Come to think of it, Bachmann's distorted tea bagger view of American history coincides perfectly with the Republican tea bagger insistence to read the Constitution on the House floor.  Republicans in charge of the Patriotic reading session intentionally left out the parts in the Constitution, written by our founders, dealing with slavery.

Republicans said they left that part out because they only wanted to read the parts that have not been "superseded by amendment."  But that's not true.  They read the 18th Amendment that prohibit alcohol and then read the amendment which repealed it.  They read the 14th and 26th Amendments which supersede each other.  They just didn't want to read the parts where our founders wrote slavery into our national identity.  Because to them, in their sick and twisted make-believe world, our founders "worked tirelessly until slavery was no more in the United States."  They are liars and deranged to their core.

**Update:

Reader CL writes in to tell me that as part of the very Patriotic demands of the Tea Baggers they are wanting states all over the country to quit forcing schools to teach accurate history to students.  In the place of accuracy they want to replace it with deranged versions of Tea Bagger revisionism.  Most notably, their insistence that our founders were not hypocrites regarding equal rights and that minority history should not overshadow our founders great contributions in ensuring the freedom of said minorities.

In other words, Tea Baggers want schools to teach exactly what Bachmann says above: that our founders worked diligently to end slavery and that when everyone came to this country they were treated equally.

***Update:

Wow, here's something I didn't even catch the first 30 times reading this.

During her totally amazing revisionist speech of American history, a speech she was giving to conjure up more support for her 2012 presidential run, Michelle Bachmann lamented "it is high time that we recognize the contribution of our forbearers who worked tirelessly -- men like John Quincy Adams, who would not rest until slavery was extinguished in the country."

Now read the bold face again.  Now read it again just to be certain.  John Quincy Adams was not a founding father or a forbearer.  He had nothing to do with the Declaration of Independence or the writing of the Constitution.  Bachmann obviously meant John Adam, John Quincy's father, but she's too stupid to know the difference. In case she really meant to say JQA, she's still wrong because he rested almost two decades before the 13th Amendment was adopted which forever "extinguished" slavery in America-- again something he had nothing to do with.

SURPRISE! Bushies Routinely Broke the Law

The independent Office of Special Counsel finally released its report detailing its investigation of the Bush White House and accusations of Hatch Act violations during the 2006 midterm elections. The OSC concluded the Bushies broke the law when at least seven cabinet secretaries traveled numerous times on tax payer's dime for what were political trips.

According to the report, the White House improperly orchestrated the use of assets throughout the government to help key congressional allies as the voting drew near, including arranging more than 100 ostensibly official appearances by top appointees in battleground states such as Pennsylvania, New Mexico, Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana and Connecticut.

This federally funded travel was organized, approved and closely tracked by Bush's political office, the Office of Special Counsel found, describing the activity as leading to the illegal diversion of federal funds and workers' time.

At one point in 2006, it disclosed, operatives employed by the Republican National Committee moved into White House quarters where they worked in tandem with the political-office staff to coordinate the campaign.

But He's Our Bill O'Reilly!

Whatever!!

I have never watched a single episode of Countdown. I couldn't even tell you what time it came on. Come to think of it, I couldn't even tell you what channel MSNBC is on my teevee. I have DirecTV, which sucks by the way, so I'm assuming it's somewhere around C-SPAN. Off the top of my head I don't know the exact number though.

So I don't care if Keith Olbermann is doing his usual punditry or not.  He'll find something else to do I'm sure.  And besides progressives don't need an O'Reilly. Mean old men who are mad the world has passed them by isn't really a progressive theme.  Supplying an alternative to that only makes the former more popular.  The world will go on.

The Alliance Isn't New and Neither are the Issues

What if I said I supported legalizing marijuana, auditing the Federal Reserve, substantially cutting the Dept. of Defense's budget, removing our troops from Iraq, ending our hopeless involvement in Afghanistan, and believed corporations are not people and are not protected by the Constitution what would I be politically? Since I'm a Democrat the media and Republicans would label me a liberal tree hugger.

But I could simply call myself a libertarian and calm the fears of the MSM.

Doing that, however, ignores the fact the issues listed above have always been staunchly supported by the political left for decades. That the right wants to make them theirs is fine with me but this "progressive-libertarian" alliance is Fox News fantasy. Show me a self-labeled libertarian and I'll show you a Very Serious Liberal.

Hensarling Might Be Crazy...Or Just Not Very Smart

Yglesias leaves me hanging on this one. I'm confused as to whether or not Rep. Jeb Hensarling's mother is actually on Medicare.  It's possible she has a private plan and chose to opt of out Medicare even though she may qualify for it.  Chances are, though, she is on Medicare but Yglesias never says that.  Only that she is eligible.

The point is if she's on Medicare then Hensarling (R-TX) saying the following makes him eligible for a room with rubber walls.

Here’s my story, two days ago, I was in San Antonio, Texas, and my mother had a large tumor removed from her head. They wheeled her away at 7:20 in the morning, and by noon, I was talking to her along with the rest of our family. It proved benign, thanks to a lot of prayers and good doctors at the Methodist hospital in San Antonio. My mother’s fine. I’m not sure that would be the outcome in Canada, the U.K., or anywhere in Europe.

No disrespect to our President, but when it comes to the health of my mother, I don’t want this President or any President or his bureaucrat or commissions making decisions for my loved ones. Let’s repeal it today, replace it tomorrow.

Medicare is a single-payer government-run health care program.  President Obama's health care reform is neither.  In fact, it uses private companies to supply people with access to health care.  The government's role is merely that it forces private businesses to offer insurance to everyone.  But Medicare is completely different.  It is absolutely "bureaucrats or commissions making decisions" for loved ones.  And unless Rep. Hensarling's mother is wealthy and has opted out of Medicare, it's exactly the program Hensarling claims saved his momma.

Like I said, Yglesias doesn't follow through on this one. If she had a private plan and used that for treatment then his post is baseless. But if she did use Medicare then yes Hensarling is a complete idiot and Matt is only mildly retarded.

What We Have Here is a Failure to Communicate

How can this be? Those who identify as Republican would rather see cuts in military spending than cuts to Medicare or Social Security?

It seems as if the party that wants to privatize Social Security and do away with Medicare because it believes both programs are unconstitutional does a really crappy job at representing the views of its members.

Of course this is nothing new to people who pay attention to politics.  Republicans are not against social services no more than they are against low taxes.

People expect Democrats to support cuts in military spending over social services. The public expects a poll to show Democrats favor higher taxes over spending cuts to programs that benefit people.  And the poll does just that.  It also demonstrates Republicans aren't as anti-government or as conservative as they want you to believe. But let's pretend that they are so we can continue with our insane national debate about the role of government and who knows the intentions of the founders the best.

After Running Up the National Debt, Republicans Are Now Worried About It

With the announcement the other day the national debt had topped $14 trillion, Republicans again used it to ridicule President Obama. It's convenient to now blame the current president for the debt situation since he is not a member of the GOP. There's no doubt that if John McCain had won the GOP and its usual round of deficit frauds would never mention the huge debt. Since a Democrat is now in power, Republicans have all of a sudden become fiscal conservatives again and gravely worried about debts and deficits.

While Republicans are busy worrying about the national debt, someone should remind them that over 75% of that $14 trillion comes from Reagan, George H.W. Bush and the Great Fiscal Conservative himself George W. Bush.

Needless to mention, or maybe it's only fitting and proper to mention that Barack Obama inherited a national debt that was over $11 trillion and rapidly counting when he took office and the $3 trillion or so that has been added to it since comes mostly from Bush's 2009 budget.  For Republicans, though, it's easier to pretend none of that ever happened.

Two Years Later and More Work Still To Do

On this day two years ago I was standing in the freezing cold at the National Mall with 2 million other people watching Barack Obama become the 44th President of the United State of America. You can read some of my Inaugural Blogging here, here and here.  It was a proud day and I'm still proud as can be that Barack Obama is our president.

Two years after President Obama's inauguration he still enjoys moderately high approval ratings. His current approvals are higher than Reagan's and Clinton's at the same point in their first term.  According to the latest polls from CNN, Gallup, and ABC his approvals are 50% or higher each time.  Any suggestions that his numbers are low or that he is unpopular are not supported by any facet of reality.  It's also worthwhile to point out that Obama's approvals have been steady since November 2009.  But polls change on a dime and aren't worth the paper they are printed on.  They capture a screen shot of a moment in time that ends the second the poll is taken.  Yet they are still very accurate to gauge mood, sentiment and trends.  Below is a trend line that is as average as any president's since WWII.



It's been two years full of great accomplishments, setbacks, promises kept and promises broken, but a two years as good as any president could hope for.

Deep Thought

When is Obama going to come take my guns away?

House Republicans Vote to Repeal Health Care to 30 Million People, Vote Down Law That Would Have Stripped Theirs

In a twisted sense of entitlement, House Republicans voted to keep their own government sponsored health care but voted en masse to repeal the Affordable Care Act which grants 30 million people access to private health care coverage and shrinks the deficit.

House Democrats pressed Republicans for motions that would strip members from their tax-payer funded health care if the repeal of the Affordable Care Act passed. Republicans struck each and every attempt down.  As we all know, Republicans are not against government-run anything.  They are only against other people receiving such benefits.

The Republican gimmick will go nowhere.  Sen. Leader Harry Reid has said he won't even give the repeal effort the time of day in his chamber.  In addition to voting to strip access to health care away from 30 million people, House Republicans also voted to increase the budget deficit by $230 billion over the next ten years.

Never before has one group of people done so much to downtrodden the middle class and massively increase budget deficits and still get to be called compassionate conservatives and fiscal hawks.

No Joe in 2012

I will give Sen. Joe Lieberman props on being a leading voice to repeal DADT. Other than that, I can't think of anything in the last 8 years I'd agree with him on. Losing his Democratic label in 2006 only to win an Independent run later that year pretty much sealed his fate with Democrats and the public at large. And now it seems he sees the writing on the wall as well by deciding not to seek a 5th term in 2012. 

I've met Lieberman a couple different times.  In 2000, while running for VP, he appeared as the bastion of Democratic thinking.  By '04 when I spent some time with him again, everything had changed.  He seemed consumed with war and ridding the world of evil.  I remember thinking my former boss, Sen. Paul Simon, who was great friends with Lieberman, would not have recognized the post-9/11 Lieberman.  Paul passed away in 2003 so he never got to see the person Lieberman turned into.  In a way, I'm glad for that.  On the other hand, I would have liked to have heard Paul hammer him on the merits of political gain at the expense of personal dignity in the amenable fashion only Senator Simon could have done of course.

All Good News is Because of the GOP, Part 415

Within 48-hours of Republicans taking back the House of Representatives and ushering in a new era of American Liberty, God sent us a message: the Dow jumped about 150 points.

To me it couldn't be any clearer.  God was rewarding his people for taking back America.  I was so compelled by this showering of blessedness from God that I immediately posted it on my blog.  Coincidences do not exist for people of faith and/or Republicans.  And today, on Fox News (did you really think God would use any other network?) House Rules Committee Chair David Dreier (R-CA) contended the GOP deserves all the credit for recent economic growth.

Sit Still and Look Pretty

In order to prove her victimization to fellow Republican victims, Sarah Palin turns to co-victim Uber Patriot Sean Hannity to defend her claim of being a perpetual victim under the guise Republicans are being unfairly treated in America today.

All this leads Republican pundit, David Frum, to tell Palin to "stop talking now."

In the Republican Fantasy World this can only lead to one outcome.  David Frum is going to have to apologize to Rush Limbaugh.

Quickies

• The Grand Ole Patriots have selected a new leader after brushing aside Michael "too legit to quit" Steele.

• A new poll shows more people want the Affordable Care Act expanded than repealed.

• Remarkable breakthrough! Fox News host Chris Wallace realizes just because you don't agree with someone it doesn't make them a fascist or socialist.

• Glorious War edition...Obama Pentagon official says MLK would support the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan because the world is complicated.

• Further adding to their perpetual victimization, many Republicans are pointing to public reaction to Sarah Palin's nonsensical prerecorded, video taped message as proof they are treated unfairly and are a mistreated lot.

Republicans to Extend Patriot Act

Julian Sanchez at CATO writes:

...the new House Intelligence Committee Chair, Mike Rogers (R-Mich.), has introduced yet another one-year extension, which would push the sunset of the expiring provisions back to the end of February 2012. Given the very limited number of days Congress has in session before the current deadline, and the fact that the bill’s Republican sponsor is only seeking another year, I think it’s safe to read this as signaling an agreement across the aisle to put the issue off yet again.

Maybe they can tie on Republican Dan Burton's proposal to wrap the Capitol Building in some sort of shrink wrap turning it into a terrorist-proof bubble and pass what would officially be the scariest piece of legislation ever.

Maybe next year the public will realize just how wrong the Patriot Act is.  Maybe next year someone will care.

The Great Wisconsin Escape Doesn't Add Up

Where I'm from in Illinois we tell Kentucky jokes. My favorite being why did they build the bridge at Shawneetown?  So Kentuckians can swim over in the shade, the punchline goes. When we see slow moving cars on the roads we immediately assume they somehow escaped from Kentucky and are now lost in Southern Illinois. That's just how things are in deep south Illinois.  I assume in the northern part of the state the casual joke telling falls on Wisconsin, at least it appears that way judging by the latest media war between the Dairy State and the Land of Lincoln.

The latest swarm of competition stems from the Illinois General Assembly voting to increase tax rates.  The Assembly approved and Governor Quinn signed legislation that raises the personal income tax from 3% to 5%.  That's a two-cent on the dollar raise. The legislation also raised the corporate income tax rate from 4.8% to 7%.

The media is portraying the increases as a 66% increase in personal income taxes and a 46% increase in corporate taxes.  Be that as it may, the new Republican governor of Wisconsin, Scott Walker, saw this as a way to attract Illinois citizens and Illinois business to his neighboring state.  Gov. Walker released a massive media blitz onto the Chicago media market yesterday inviting people and businesses to "Escape to Wisconsin," where he claims taxes are lower.

One tiny mistake with all that.  Wisconsin has higher taxes, even after Illinois' massive increases voted in this week.

Refugees fleeing to the cheese factories of Wisconsin will be rudely slapped with a personal income tax of 6.15%, a full 1.15 points higher (or 23% higher to use media math) than Illinois'.  Those making over $20k, which I hope is a vast majority of them, will see a personal tax rate between 6.5- 7.75%!  If we use the media's formula again to calculate the increase that's-- in the very least-- a personal tax rate 30% higher than Illinois.

Even the corporate tax will still be lower in Illinois, 7% versus 7.9% in Wisconsin.

In no uncertain terms would anyone move to Wisconsin for lower taxes.  It's not possible.  Only in a make-believe fantasy world is 6.5 a lower tax rate than 5.

What the Republican governor of Wisconsin is wanting to do is use the media's 66% increase label to scare people into thinking their taxes are going to be 66 times higher than what they are now.  If we apply that same misleading math to the Wisconsin escape, Illinois citizens that move up there will see a personal income tax increase of over 100%.  Why can't the media report that?  And why can't normal, everyday people ask a couple simple questions instead of depending on flashy and inaccurate headlines?

GOP to Host Cocktail Party During Tuscon Memorial Service

While President Obama and the rest of the nation give remembrance to the victims of the mass shooting in Tuscon, Arizona, Republicans led by Speaker of the House John Boehner are having an alcohol party at Maryland's upscale National Harbor Resort.

Boehner is known to be a heavy drinker. Even right wing bloggers are aware of his love for the sauce.  It's no secret that Boehner practically grew up in a tavern either, of which he cries profusely any time he tells the story which is at least 6 times a day.

*Update:

The un-likeliest of supporters, TPM comes to the aid of Boehner and why he missed the Tuscon memorial.

I'm not buying it.

Boehner chose not to go.  It's that simple.  Chalking it up to a tight scheduling day, like TPM does, is nonsense.  No one had this on their schedule.  It wasn't even in the works until Monday so everyone's schedule had to be rearranged in order to attend the Tuscon memorial.  Do you think the 26,000 people in attendance didn't have to make adjusts to get there?  No one had this planned ahead of time.  It was spur of the moment.  Everybody there had to choose what to skip or move around in order to attend.  The same is true for Boehner.  He just chose not to that's all.

If a Dem leader had done this Fox News would have it plastered as breaking news and talked about it for days.  They would have portrayed it as an example of "Democrat" values and morals.  When Boehner does it, one of the most progressive media outlets in America comes to his aid.

Prez Obama Bests Reagan in Approvals

According to Gallup, President Reagan's approval rating was 37% after 719 days in office. Compare that to President Obama's 722 days in office and Gallup has him at roughly 50% approval.  That's some 23 points higher than the Republican's poster boy.  If you were to watch the mainstream media you would never know that Obama is actually a decently popular president for the post-Nixon era.

Just for comparison, George W. Bush was at 58% and Clinton at 47% during their respective times in office.

Historical Presidential Approvals after 719 days in office

Way Too Much Credit

I knew as soon as I read former half-term governor of Alaska Sarah Palin's video recorded message what "blood libel" meant. I read the transcript because I wouldn't dare watch the video. Nonetheless I knew what the term "blood libel" meant in the historical context at least.

"Blood libel" is a term wrongly used to suggest Jews murdered Christian children as a sacrifice or for some sort of medicinal purposes.  The term has been around for hundreds of years and used to incite fear in Christian populations about Jewish conspiracy theories, most recently for our collective memories in Nazi Germany.

It's very doubtful Sarah Palin knew anything about that.  She's never been accused of being smart a day in her life.  So it's more accurate that just like many on the right who endlessly watch Fox News, she was simply spreading around one of their new catch-phrases they routinely use to lament their own victimization, which TPM lays out the convincing paper trail here.

She really doesn't need to apologize to Jewish people for using such a derogatory term cause I'm certain she had no clue about the history of it.  She should, however, apologize for spreading the hate and fear she learned from watching Fox News but to do that would cost her millions of dollars.

I also found it interesting, if not ironically accurate, that just like bin Laden, Palin prefers to address her flock and the media via prerecorded video taped messages.  It keeps the press from asking questions and allows for their followers a personalized feel to the video.  I just hope for Palin's sake she wasn't reading the script from a teleprompter but instead had the entire 7-minute thing memorized.  One can only hope.

Commemorative Assault Rifle Components (*Update)

The non-violent right wing has begun issuing commemorative assault rifle components with the inscription "you lie" honoring Rep. Joe Wilson's (R-SC) outburst at last year's State of the Union Address.

"Palmetto State Armory would like to honor our esteemed congressman Joe Wilson with the release of our new 'You Lie' AR-15 lower receiver," the weapon manufacturer's site writes in the product description. "Only 999 of these will be produced, get yours before they are gone!"

I wonder when they are going to come out with their "mission accomplished" version to prove that both sides do this.

Rep. Joe Wilson paling around with known liars

*Update:

Well, well, well what do we have here? The Great Patriot Joe Wilson seems to have personally endorsed the product. But since a deranged gunman actually targeted a member of government while killing many innocent bystanders Joe Wilson doesn't think it's such a great idea at the moment to be endorsing an assault rifle brandishing his diatribe that was aimed toward President Obama so the company has taken down his picture holding the rifle.  Not before the Columbia Free Times was able to get a screen shot of it first suckas!!

Happy Birthday Howard Stern

The Fold Blog extends its warmest wishes of Happy 56th Birthday to the legendary Howard Stern. The world wouldn't be the same without him.

Illinois General Assembly Votes to Raise Taxes

Illinois Senate votes to increase individual income tax rate and business tax rate bringing in much needed state revenue.  The increase is expected to generate about $5 billion in new revenue.  Neither the Democratically-controlled senate nor house had any votes to spare on the measure.

She's a Victim Too!!

Sarah Palin, the biggest joke in modern political history, still doesn't get it. She, predictably, paints herself as a victim in all this. Of course she does. It's what Republicans always do. They are perpetual victims.

How Not to React Part 2

Another edition of how not to react after a national crisis.

Rep. Dan Burton (R-IN) wants to enclose the House Gallery in "a transparent and substantial material" such as Plexiglas, an aide told CBS News.

His legislation aims to keep the public from being able to throw explosives or other materials at members while they are on the House floor.

Ummm...Okay that's just insane.

Rep. Peter King of New York, is advancing a bill that would make it a crime to bring a firearm within 1,000 feet of a government official.

Dumb

Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) and Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY), two of the most outspoken gun control advocates in Congress, were also sponsoring legislation that would restrict high-capacity ammunition clips like the one used Saturday.

Dumb

Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-IL) has proposed increasing lawmakers' budgets by 10 percent to pay for extra security in district offices.

Completely retarded

Want to know how to react?  Do nothing.  Stop the enemies talk, tone done the rhetoric about 12 notches and quit pandering fear.

Teevee Mimics Life?

Simply the smartest guy to ever live:

I do think it is important for us to watch our rhetoric. I do think it is a worthwhile goal not to conflate our political opponents with enemies. If for no other reason than to draw a better distinction between the manifestos of paranoid madmen and what passes for acceptable political and pundit speak. You know, it would really be nice if the ramblings of crazy people didn't in anyway resemble how we actually talk to each other on TV.

DeLay Going to Prison

"Austin, Texas (CNN) -- Former House [REPUBLICAN] Majority Leader Tom DeLay will serve three years in prison on his November conviction on money laundering and conspiracy charges, a Texas judge ruled Monday."

DeLay is the third Republican Congressman to be sent to prison in as many years.  Duke Cunningham and Bob Ney being the other two.

How Not to React

One of the things I learned in grad school is that democracies are slow moving in pretty much whatever they are doing. This is a good thing usually. It is not always the case but a democracy that turns on a dime is seldom described as self restraining. Overreaction is also another way to describe it.

In situations like the shooting in Tuscon, the attacks of Sept. 11th and other historical events, Congress always wants to appear as if it's working to protect us. Members are usually more concerned with getting their names on a signature piece of legislation during a crisis more than anything else. The Patriot Act is the first thing that comes to mind. It was a knee-jerk reaction to 9/11 and it is one of the biggest invasions on civil liberties since WWII. Just a terrible piece of legislation that only one member voted against of which we will be stuck with forever.

A little cautious restraint would do us some good after Saturday's shooting. There isn't a law in the world that will prevent someone from doing what their mind is intent on doing. Legislating a national tragedy is pointless.

Reactions like Rep. Robert Brady (D-PA) who plans to introduce a bill that would make it a federal crime to use rhetoric or symbols — such as Palin’s infamous gun sights — that could be perceived as a threat to a member of Congress, goes way too far.  Restricting speech and distancing members of congress even more from their constituents than they already are is not the answer to anything.  Brady's legislation is a classic way of how not to react to what is already a very bad situation.

A Monday Quickie Never Hurt Anyone

**Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords remains in a Tuscon hospital listed in critical condition after suffering a gunshot wound to the head while hosting a town hall style meeting in her home district on Saturday.

**After removing her map image of Congressional districts targeted with gun sights including that of Rep. Giffords who was shot in the head over the weekend, Sarah Palin claims no responsibility.  If the target list was so innocent, then why take it down?

**Whatever the motivation for such a senseless act, violent political rhetoric needs to stop.  Labeling political opponents as enemies, socialists, communists, fascists, terrorists and various other un-American slogans is wrong and can be interpreted by unstable people not in the way the speaker may have intended.  Just stop it.

**Yikes!  President Obama has given the Commerce Dept. the go ahead "to give each American an online ID as part of an ambitious—and currently ambiguous—cybersecurity initiative."

**More than 30 days since either team has played a football, Auburn and Oregon square off tonight for the completely made up "national championship game." Anyone care?  BCS is a joke.

Rep. Giffords Shot

Democratic representative Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona was killed by an apparent assassin while hosting an event in her district.

*Update:

Reports coming in now indicate Giffords may be alive and in surgery.

Reading of the Constitution, or at least some of it

One of the biggest complaints from self-labeled conservatives and tea baggers is that we need to get back to the Founder's intent of the Constitution.  Their battle cry for some time has been we've strayed too far away from what the Founders intended for this country, and unless we return to those founding principles we risk destroying the nation.

I'm cool with that. I really think we should return to the strictest intent of the Constitution possible. Women had no rights. Blacks were slaves and counted as 3/5 a person.  Only land owning white men could vote.  The right to bear arms unequivocally meant a single shot muzzle.  And the only function of the federal government was to run the post office.  Those were no doubt the intentions of the framers.

So how does the party who has whined and cried for years that we as a nation have strayed from the original intent deal with such unpleasantness when it decides to read, for the first time ever, the Constitution on the House floor?  Simple really. They just skip over those parts.

In other words, the reading of the Constitution yesterday was not the full document. It was the amended, Republican approved-version, not the document containing the original intent of our Founding Fathers.  By not reading the original intent of the Constitution, Republicans proved the Constitution is not a dead document but a living, thriving instrument that has to be applicable to the 21st or wither and die, which is the exact opposite of their argument.  They proved the Constitution has flaws and ultimately so did the Founders.

It's not as if they only read the Constitution with its updated amendments because they didn't.  For instance they read the 18th Amendment that prohibits alcohol and then also read the amendment repealing it.  They read the 14th Amendment's clause for only males over 21 to vote.  And then turned around and read the 26th Amendment which overturned all voting rights ever contained in the whole document.  They took out the ugly parts, read the parts they were comfortable with and then patted themselves on the back for being Great Patriots.

The Constitution is not just the Amendments.  It's the entire document.  Slavery, inequality, imperfections all the same.  Leaving out those parts goes against the very fabric of the Founder's intent-- literally.

CBO Scores Repeal Effort, Makes John Boehner Cry

The Congressional Budget Office landed a devastating blow to Republican efforts at repealing the Affordable Care Act today.  The very first matter taken up by the so-called fiscal conservatives-- who endlessly talk about an out-of-control budget deficit and a spiraling national debt-- will increase the deficit by $230 billion over ten years according to CBO.  Luckily for Republicans increasing the national debt and running huge budget deficits are the only requirements by modern media to qualify as a fiscal conservative.

Immediately Republicans rejected CBO findings by calling them incomplete and cited a study of their own that showed the health care reform bill would turn men into feeble monkeys and force your grandma into oncoming traffic.

Among some of the complaints from Republicans are CBO double counted, left out implementation costs and did not include the price of "doc fix" even though the ACA had no provisions for "doc fix" and contained nothing whatsoever to do with fixing Medicare payments to doctors.  Nevertheless, Republicans insist something not even contained in the bill should be when considering its costs.  That's like saying we owe China two trillion dollars for buying our debt so we better include that in the costs of the ACA.  Makes no sense whatsoever.  Then again, making sense isn't something Congress is especially good at.  And now that people who think tax cuts don't have to be offset are in charge, they'll be even better at it.

*Update:

Ezra Klein has an excellent smack down of just how stupid and dishonest it is for Republicans to even suggest "doc fix" should be included in a CBO score of the Affordable Care Act.  Ezra must be a Fold Blog reader because he makes the same point I do in that if "doc fix" must be included in the scoring of the passage of ACA, then it also must be included in the GOP's bill to repeal it, which would make the costs of repeal skyrocket to $540 billion. 

But Republicans don't want "doc fix" scored on their bill only the Democratic bill.  In part because "doc fix" has nothing to do with the Affordable Care Act and isn't even contained in the legislation and Republicans know this.  They just want to be able to add costly items to Dem bills without doing the same for theirs.  Sometimes we call that hypocrisy but when it's this prevalent it's called go suck a cock Repubs.

Speaker Can't Name One Item He Will Cut?

This is nuts. The new Speaker of the House, John Boner, who ran his mouth for two years about cutting government spending, you know like Bush did, can't name one single item he plans to cut.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

One thing we do know.  A Republican Congress has never cut spending.  There's no reason to believe this group of self-labeled fiscal conservatives will do it either.

BO Picks Daley

President Obama has chosen Bill Daley, son of infamous Chicago mayor Richard J. Daley, as his next Chief of Staff.

Get ready for the Chicago Machine conspiracy theories to pick back up again.

*Update:

I know a lot of people, especially on the left, well, and the right since they always do, will bash the president's choice of Bill Daley to head his office and that's their stance to take.  I for one could care less who his chief of staff is if it's not going to be me. Understanding what the president is doing with this requires a step out from academia and political commentary and a step into politics.  Daley is a man the financial institutions trust.  And right now job creation is numero uno.  It's not that hard to figure out what's going on here.  It's about building confidence and trust.  But most of all it's about jobs.  Yes this is politics as usual.  Hate the game just don't hate the player.  Say hello to President Palin if you do.

With all that rant said and done now, even the tree hugging hippy liberals at HuffPost know what's going on here and wouldn't mind 6 more years.

With his low-key demeanor, sense of personal decorum, and yen for privacy and upright behavior in personal life, the 62-year-old Daley has accumulated a lifetime of allies who now will help and respond to him in his new White House job. In Chicago terms, the president has moved from being a South Side activist to the Man in the Loop. The president hopes that the move will get him what he really wants: another term.

That just about sums this whole thing up perfectly.

Health Care Rises to Almost 18% of Total Economy

WSJ reports health care spending rose to 17.6% of GDP in 2009. Yeah I have no idea why Republicans think Congress can't regulate something that is almost 1/5 of the total largest economy in the world. Oh yeah, Republicans do think Congress can they just don't think Democrats can do it especially when led by a black president named Barack Hussein Obama.  It's only unconstitutional when Democrats do it.  Wheee!

1700th Post

Chipping away at record pace!

Let the Reading Begin

Democrats to join the Patriotic Republicans in reading of the Constitution on the House floor.  I wonder if they are going to read the parts of the Constitution Republicans don't believe in and the parts they want repealed?

Google's Chrome Has Some Competition

About 4 years ago I switched to the Firefox browser. It was much cleaner and way friendlier than Internet Explorer. I've been a faithful Firefox user ever since. Then about two months ago I thought I would give Google's Chrome a try, mainly because I was having some issues with Firefox freezing all the time. So I thought I would try something new.

At first Chrome was foreign to me. I couldn't find anything and I really missed my little shortcut icons on the tool bar. And for some reason Google's toolbar doesn't work with Google's browser. But I kept using it just to give it a chance. For about three days I hated it. Then, without realizing, I discovered I really liked Chrome.

It was much faster, much smoother and it seemed to know what I was thinking while I was typing. I began using it more and more. And now I'm hooked. I love it. I really don't see myself giving it up.

And then today I discovered Firefox had a beta version for its 4.0 release. It is sweeeeeet! Very fast. Very easy to maneuver and it's just similar enough to the previous version of Firefox I used for years that I fell right back in the groove within minutes. I'm typing this post right now on Firefox and I really think this is the best competitor to Chrome there is. I'm not fully ready to recommit back to Firefox just yet. But I am going to keep working with 4.0 and who knows what might happen. Until then I'm torn between two browsers at the moment. I'll have to keep ya updated.

Basic Sanity is Still a Goal (*Update)

When you hear people say there is a huge gap separating the two major political parties nowadays, it's really quite the understatement. Quite possibly it may be all together inaccurate to say such a thing. What we have is not ideological separation or even an ideal separation, it's a basic sanity separation.

Being able to communicate with anyone requires a simple yet basic understanding of certain knowledgeable attainments. If two people speak different languages they are incomprehensible to each other. The same is true if people have a completely different set of realistic perceptions on a subject matter. Even if two people speak the same language if they don't agree on the most basic understanding of the conversation they aren't going to get very far. And that's what we have happening today in our political discourse.

It's not that people have to agree on the solution or even the problem. But they have to agree on the existence of the tangibles involved. That's where the breakdown is occurring. That's where the notion of "basic sanity" becomes essential to discussion.

Reaching some limit of a basic sanity in this country so we can actually agree to discuss the merits rather than the conspiracy theories is still a goal yet so far unattainable.

*Update:

For a perfect example of what I mean check out this comment thread.  Billy, Shanks, Guest, Rachel, and now Kristen, or whatever multiple personality he's suffering from at the moment, no doubt lives in a parallel universe.  It's a universe where the Bush tax cuts did not cause deficits, where we've spent more on education than Iraq, (which is absurd), and where Bush was a popular president.  You can't have a conversation about substantive policies that will benefit this country with people who refuse reality.  You just can't do it.  You can't just make stuff up and pretend Glenn Beck is an actual political contributor to this country and expect to get things done. There has to come a time when basic sanity is reached.  And we're no where near that right now.

Issa Asks Which Laws to Get Rid Of

The new chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), sent letters to 150 businesses asking them which laws they felt were stifling economic growth. Based on feedback from the businesses Issa will recommend abolishing or rewriting the laws the business community doesn't necessarily agree with.

This off the heels of the new Republican chairman of the financial services committee, Rep. Spencer "Big Bank" Bachus from Alabama, insistence Congress is there to serve the banks.

If the DNC had a Department of Conspiracy Theory and Design this would be prime ammo to state the GOP is fascist.  I'm just saying...

Gibbs to Step Aside

White House Press Secretary to step aside after State of the Union Address. This leaves two big vacancies in the Obama administration with the loss of Gibbs and CoS Rahm.

The Second Permanent Republican Majority Begins Today

Don't call it a come back they've been here for years. The same people who foresaw themselves with a permanent majority just a few years ago return to grace the House of Representatives one more time.   The Second Reich is underway.

*Update:

It must be noted, for the sake of clarity and accuracy, the Democrats are still the majority party.  They still control the White House and the Senate.  Republicans are the minority party.  That means they do not have a mandate to rule the whole country.  Whatever their agenda may be, it is only permissible as much as the majority party allows it.

Republican Garrett: General Welfare Clause Not Adequate Proof

The other day I took the Patriotic step of reprinting words from the Constitution onto this blog. Words given to us by God Almighty reprinted on this blog to demonstrate where in the Constitution it gives Congress the power to provide for the general Welfare of the citizenry.  Article I, Section 8 states:

"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;"

These solemn words give Congress the power to tax and the power to provide for the general Welfare of the United States; and the power to tax in order to provide for the general Welfare.  

I remarked after reposting those words that it all read a little "liberal" for today's audience. I mean taxing and spending money is something only liberals do so the whole clause is kind of a nuisance really. Something like this could very well be used to justify Congress' authority to enact health care reform. And since the GOP will be requiring all bills to contain a statement of Constitutional authority in the very near future we should probably do something about this.

Thankfully, GOP rep Scott Garret of New Jersey wants to exclude the General Welfare clause from such statements.

Garrett's House rule resolution would require all bills and amendments to contain a statement appropriately citing a specific power granted to Congress in the Constitution. Invoking the "general welfare clause" or the "necessary and proper clause" would not be adequate constitutional citations.

That sounds about right. Exclude from legislation the parts of the Constitution that supports stuff you don't like. In other words, if we just ignore the parts of the Constitution that prove you wrong, then the things you don't agree with are unconstitutional. Brilliant move actually.

Freedom Will Return

Jan. 12th is the date House Republicans have set to vote on the repeal of the Affordable Care Act.

Here is the document:

ObamaCare Repeal

After it passes the House it should be immediately taken to the National Archives and placed next to the Declaration of Independence where it can be gazed upon as a reminder of the day tyranny was again cast aside in America. God Bless America, and God Bless the GOP.

*Update:

Well now this is odd.

Republicans plan on tossing aside their rules requiring new legislation to be paid for with spending cuts in order to repeal HCR.  Why?  Well, oddly enough, the Affordable Care Act is a deficit reducer which means repealing it will add to the deficit.  To get around this inconvenient factoid, Republicans will just disregard their own rules.  Don't forget either, Republicans don't believe the CBO numbers when it comes to the Affordable Care Act.  To them it's all a conspiracy so no need to follow rules to repeal legislation that shrinks the deficit when you believe none of it to be true in the first place.  CBO numbers are only accurate when it scores Republican legislation and even then only when Republicans say the CBO is right.

Probably Should Go Find Something Else To Do

If as executive commander of a nuclear powered aircraft carrier when the country is fighting two wars and you have enough time on your hands to make immature videos, I'd say there is a misplace of priorities somewhere.  But hey, I'm no one to judge another's immaturity or lack or discipline.

*Update:

And he's gone.

A Whole New Level of Anti-American Behavior

Focus yourself on the outrage from the Right Wing controlled MSM if Democratic Mayor Richard Daley along with several Clinton administration officials traveled to the anti-American country of France to meet with a Muslim group the Bush administration legally labeled nothing less than a terrorist organization.  While in Paris-- foreign soil mind you-- this same delegation of Democrats used their face time with a bona fide terrorist group to speak out against the policies of the President of the United States.  Could you possibly imagine the outrage that would follow if that did happen??

Well, it did.  Except it was Republicans Rudy Giuliani and former Bush officials Michael Mukasey, Tom Ridge, and Fran Townsend who traveled to Paris to meet with (MEK) -- a group declared by the U.S. since 1997 to be a terrorist organization. And since it was Republicans meeting with terrorists to undermine President Obama the whole Great American Retreat to Paris was faintly covered by the media; and when it was, not even close to the paranoia and hate it would have been if Democrats had done it to Bush.

Glenn Greenwald makes a great case for why according to Bush-era DOJ laws the group of Republicans should be prosecuted.

*Update:

A Patriotic flashback into time, eons ago, to show how the Republican-controlled media focused on and treated Democrats who went abroad to discuss foreign policy with heads of state or members of foreign governments when the Great George Bush was president.  Here, here, here and here for a few examples.

Compare and contrast that to today's scant coverage of Republicans traveling to foreign countries to meet with terrorist supporting organizations for the primary reason of undermining the President of the United States.  Notice, too, that not only is the coverage of what is no doubt blatant anti-Americanism by Republicans next to non-existent, any coverage of it all by the MSM in no way calls it treasonous, anti-American or labels it anything close to the "Neville Chamberlain of our time," like the Republican-controlled media did when Bush was in power.

Gas Prices Will Impact Recovery

A lot of people say rising oil prices is a good sign-- a sign of a growing economy based on demand for more oil. Those people are usually tied in some way to the oil industry and make a living off of Big Oil.

Check this brilliant statement out from an economist at North Carolina State University, Mike Walden [who I don't believe to be tied to the oil industry, I just think his comment is off the mark].

"If they go up slowly, we can accommodate that," he said. "I think, even at $4 a gallon, that will not kill the economic recovery.'"

Ahhh yes, an economy with 10% unemployment and meager GDP growth can accommodate $4 gasoline.  Genius I tell ya.  'Fraid not buddy. Maybe if unemployment was 2% and GDP growth at 5% we could sustain expensive gasoline for the short term. But we are talking about an economy living on the edge of disaster. $4 gas would be all it would take to send us right back into a deep dark recession.  In fact, there may be nothing that would send us back into a recession quicker than $4-$5 gasoline.  And there may be nothing to bring down Obama's approval rating quicker either.