Categories
Barack Obama Politics Republican United States

Save Us First, Mr. President

After eight years of the Bush Administration living way beyond its means and charging up a debt that has now put the country on the brink of disaster, NOW the GOP wants to introduce “cap, cuts and balancing”  in their never-ending quest to pin this insurmountable mess on President Obama.

The offer from Harry Reid and the Democrats to cut $2.7 trillion from our spending budget with no tax increase to the rich and no additional revenue is a travesty. Who’s going to suffer from those cuts? The poor and the soon to be devastated middle-class that’s who!

The pressure is on President Obama in this no-real-win situation. He can either allow the bills to go unpaid and be the first United States (Black) President in history to default on the country’s debt repayment schedule – but still illuminate the despicable, uncooperative stance of the GOP and thus hopefully proving to the skeptical and undecided that any faction of the  Republican Party is incapable of running anything, let alone the governing challenges of the US.

Or, he can drop his losing bi-partisan stance, take control, raise the debt ceiling as he knows – and reputable non-partisan economists have advised him – must be done, eliminate tax loopholes for the super wealthy who live like kings on the backs of the labor force  and steer Boehner and his bunch clear of the Big 3.

Mr. President, you may have to deal with this bullsh**t again in 2012 when you’re re-elected, but because of the sacrifices you would  make for us today, with hope and good sense the People will stand by you, especially in lieu of the odds we’ve witnessed you up against for the last 7 months with Republicans and the Tea Party.

What would I want you to do? I’d want you to save us first,  Mr. President! And come what may in 2012! You have more than proven that you are up for the challenge!

Categories
Barack Obama democrats Politics

President Obama’s Speech On Raising The Debt Ceiling – Transcript

Remarks of President Barack Obama – As Prepared for Delivery

Primetime Debt Speech

Monday, July 25, 2011

Washington, DC

As Prepared for Delivery –

Good evening. Tonight, I want to talk about the debate we’ve been having in Washington over the national debt – a debate that directly affects the lives of all Americans.

For the last decade, we have spent more money than we take in. In the year 2000, the government had a budget surplus. But instead of using it to pay off our debt, the money was spent on trillions of dollars in new tax cuts, while two wars and an expensive prescription drug program were simply added to our nation’s credit card.

As a result, the deficit was on track to top $1 trillion the year I took office. To make matters worse, the recession meant that there was less money coming in, and it required us to spend even more – on tax cuts for middle-class families; on unemployment insurance; on aid to states so we could prevent more teachers and firefighters and police officers from being laid off. These emergency steps also added to the deficit.

Now, every family knows that a little credit card debt is manageable. But if we stay on the current path, our growing debt could cost us jobs and do serious damage to the economy. More of our tax dollars will go toward paying off the interest on our loans. Businesses will be less likely to open up shop and hire workers in a country that can’t balance its books. Interest rates could climb for everyone who borrows money – the homeowner with a mortgage, the student with a college loan, the corner store that wants to expand. And we won’t have enough money to make job-creating investments in things like education and infrastructure, or pay for vital programs like Medicare and Medicaid.

Because neither party is blameless for the decisions that led to this problem, both parties have a responsibility to solve it. And over the last several months, that’s what we’ve been trying to do. I won’t bore you with the details of every plan or proposal, but basically, the debate has centered around two different approaches.

The first approach says, let’s live within our means by making serious, historic cuts in government spending. Let’s cut domestic spending to the lowest level it’s been since Dwight Eisenhower was President. Let’s cut defense spending at the Pentagon by hundreds of billions of dollars. Let’s cut out the waste and fraud in health care programs like Medicare – and at the same time, let’s make modest adjustments so that Medicare is still there for future generations. Finally, let’s ask the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations to give up some of their tax breaks and special deductions.

This balanced approach asks everyone to give a little without requiring anyone to sacrifice too much. It would reduce the deficit by around $4 trillion and put us on a path to pay down our debt. And the cuts wouldn’t happen so abruptly that they’d be a drag on our economy, or prevent us from helping small business and middle-class families get back on their feet right now.

This approach is also bipartisan. While many in my own party aren’t happy with the painful cuts it makes, enough will be willing to accept them if the burden is fairly shared. While Republicans might like to see deeper cuts and no revenue at all, there are many in the Senate who have said “Yes, I’m willing to put politics aside and consider this approach because I care about solving the problem.” And to his credit, this is the kind of approach the Republican Speaker of the House, John Boehner, was working on with me over the last several weeks.

The only reason this balanced approach isn’t on its way to becoming law right now is because a significant number of Republicans in Congress are insisting on a cuts-only approach – an approach that doesn’t ask the wealthiest Americans or biggest corporations to contribute anything at all. And because nothing is asked of those at the top of the income scales, such an approach would close the deficit only with more severe cuts to programs we all care about – cuts that place a greater burden on working families.

So the debate right now isn’t about whether we need to make tough choices. Democrats and Republicans agree on the amount of deficit reduction we need. The debate is about how it should be done. Most Americans, regardless of political party, don’t understand how we can ask a senior citizen to pay more for her Medicare before we ask corporate jet owners and oil companies to give up tax breaks that other companies don’t get. How can we ask a student to pay more for college before we ask hedge fund managers to stop paying taxes at a lower rate than their secretaries? How can we slash funding for education and clean energy before we ask people like me to give up tax breaks we don’t need and didn’t ask for?

That’s not right. It’s not fair. We all want a government that lives within its means, but there are still things we need to pay for as a country – things like new roads and bridges; weather satellites and food inspection; services to veterans and medical research.

Keep in mind that under a balanced approach, the 98% of Americans who make under $250,000 would see no tax increases at all. None. In fact, I want to extend the payroll tax cut for working families. What we’re talking about under a balanced approach is asking Americans whose incomes have gone up the most over the last decade – millionaires and billionaires – to share in the sacrifice everyone else has to make. And I think these patriotic Americans are willing to pitch in. In fact, over the last few decades, they’ve pitched in every time we passed a bipartisan deal to reduce the deficit. The first time a deal passed, a predecessor of mine made the case for a balanced approach by saying this:

“Would you rather reduce deficits and interest rates by raising revenue from those who are not now paying their fair share, or would you rather accept larger budget deficits, higher interest rates, and higher unemployment? And I think I know your answer.”

Those words were spoken by Ronald Reagan. But today, many Republicans in the House refuse to consider this kind of balanced approach – an approach that was pursued not only by President Reagan, but by the first President Bush, President Clinton, myself, and many Democrats and Republicans in the United States Senate. So we are left with a stalemate.

Now, what makes today’s stalemate so dangerous is that it has been tied to something known as the debt ceiling – a term that most people outside of Washington have probably never heard of before.

Understand – raising the debt ceiling does not allow Congress to spend more money. It simply gives our country the ability to pay the bills that Congress has already racked up. In the past, raising the debt ceiling was routine. Since the 1950s, Congress has always passed it, and every President has signed it. President Reagan did it 18 times. George W. Bush did it 7 times. And we have to do it by next Tuesday, August 2nd, or else we won’t be able to pay all of our bills.

Unfortunately, for the past several weeks, Republican House members have essentially said that the only way they’ll vote to prevent America’s first-ever default is if the rest of us agree to their deep, spending cuts-only approach.

If that happens, and we default, we would not have enough money to pay all of our bills – bills that include monthly Social Security checks, veterans’ benefits, and the government contracts we’ve signed with thousands of businesses.

For the first time in history, our country’s Triple A credit rating would be downgraded, leaving investors around the world to wonder whether the United States is still a good bet. Interest rates would skyrocket on credit cards, mortgages, and car loans, which amounts to a huge tax hike on the American people. We would risk sparking a deep economic crisis – one caused almost entirely by Washington.

Defaulting on our obligations is a reckless and irresponsible outcome to this debate. And Republican leaders say that they agree we must avoid default. But the new approach that Speaker Boehner unveiled today, which would temporarily extend the debt ceiling in exchange for spending cuts, would force us to once again face the threat of default just six months from now. In other words, it doesn’t solve the problem.

First of all, a six-month extension of the debt ceiling might not be enough to avoid a credit downgrade and the higher interest rates that all Americans would have to pay as a result. We know what we have to do to reduce our deficits; there’s no point in putting the economy at risk by kicking the can further down the road.

But there’s an even greater danger to this approach. Based on what we’ve seen these past few weeks, we know what to expect six months from now. The House will once again refuse to prevent default unless the rest of us accept their cuts-only approach. Again, they will refuse to ask the wealthiest Americans to give up their tax cuts or deductions. Again, they will demand harsh cuts to programs like Medicare. And once again, the economy will be held captive unless they get their way.

That is no way to run the greatest country on Earth. It is a dangerous game we’ve never played before, and we can’t afford to play it now. Not when the jobs and livelihoods of so many families are at stake. We can’t allow the American people to become collateral damage to Washington’s political warfare.

Congress now has one week left to act, and there are still paths forward. The Senate has introduced a plan to avoid default, which makes a down payment on deficit reduction and ensures that we don’t have to go through this again in six months.

I think that’s a much better path, although serious deficit reduction would still require us to tackle the tough challenges of entitlement and tax reform. Either way, I have told leaders of both parties that they must come up with a fair compromise in the next few days that can pass both houses of Congress – a compromise I can sign. And I am confident we can reach this compromise. Despite our disagreements, Republican leaders and I have found common ground before. And I believe that enough members of both parties will ultimately put politics aside and help us make progress.

I realize that a lot of the new members of Congress and I don’t see eye-to-eye on many issues. But we were each elected by some of the same Americans for some of the same reasons. Yes, many want government to start living within its means. And many are fed up with a system in which the deck seems stacked against middle-class Americans in favor of the wealthiest few. But do you know what people are fed up with most of all?

They’re fed up with a town where compromise has become a dirty word. They work all day long, many of them scraping by, just to put food on the table. And when these Americans come home at night, bone-tired, and turn on the news, all they see is the same partisan three-ring circus here in Washington. They see leaders who can’t seem to come together and do what it takes to make life just a little bit better for ordinary Americans. They are offended by that. And they should be.

The American people may have voted for divided government, but they didn’t vote for a dysfunctional government. So I’m asking you all to make your voice heard. If you want a balanced approach to reducing the deficit, let your Member of Congress know. If you believe we can solve this problem through compromise, send that message.

America, after all, has always been a grand experiment in compromise. As a democracy made up of every race and religion, where every belief and point of view is welcomed, we have put to the test time and again the proposition at the heart of our founding: that out of many, we are one. We have engaged in fierce and passionate debates about the issues of the day, but from slavery to war, from civil liberties to questions of economic justice, we have tried to live by the words that Jefferson once wrote: “Every man cannot have his way in all things…Without this mutual disposition, we are disjointed individuals, but not a society.”

History is scattered with the stories of those who held fast to rigid ideologies and refused to listen to those who disagreed. But those are not the Americans we remember. We remember the Americans who put country above self, and set personal grievances aside for the greater good. We remember the Americans who held this country together during its most difficult hours; who put aside pride and party to form a more perfect union.

That’s who we remember. That’s who we need to be right now. The entire world is watching. So let’s seize this moment to show why the United States of America is still the greatest nation on Earth – not just because we can still keep our word and meet our obligations, but because we can still come together as one nation. Thank you, God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America.

Categories
Medicare Politics

Final Debt Ceiling Plan – Democrats Cave To Republicans

In what will likely be the final plan offered to raise the nation’s debt ceiling from $14.3 trillion, Harry Reid offered the unofficial-official surrender for Democrats – a plan that cut spending by $2.7 trillion dollars, with zero, nada, zilch revenue increase – just what Republicans have asked for all along.

Harry Reid, the Democratic Senate Majority Leader revealed the plan late Sunday, and asked the Republicans to join in what he called a “compromise.”

“We hope Speaker Boehner will abandon his ‘my way or the highway’ approach, and join us in forging a bipartisan compromise along these lines,” Reid said

And if you think House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi is objecting, think again. Mrs. Pelosi released a statement congratulating Reid for the new plan, saying;

“I applaud Senator Reid for putting forward an approach to reduce the deficit that protects Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries.”

Democrats and President Obama have pushed Republicans to raise the debt ceiling, with a “balanced approach” to attacking the nation’s debt. That “balanced approach” was an original plan requiring around $3 trillion is spending cuts, but also asked Republicans to close some of the tax loopholes that the rich have profited from for decades.

Republicans held their ground and demanded more spending cuts with no revenue increase and this white flag from Harry Reid and the Democrats give the Republicans their win.

And although Nancy Pelosi indicates that the Big 3 will be left in tact, in time we will know if Republicans will celebrate another victory with spending cuts to Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.

Categories
democrats Politics

While Washington Postures, World Markets React To Debt Ceiling Debate

The rest of the world is beginning to react to what is being described, by a British Minister, as “Right Winged Nutters” in Washington DC. Speculating that the U.S. may not be able to come to some term of agreement on raising the debt ceiling before the August 2nd deadline, financial markets around the world are starting to show some signs of uncertainty. Early Monday morning trading reflected the following.

Stocks fell Monday morning in New York, with the S&P 500 dropping nearly 1 percent before paring losses, to settle around 0.8 percent below Friday’s close. The Dow was down 0.9 percent.)

Major stock indices around the world felt strain. The Stoxx Europe 600 Index dropped 0.4 percent, biting into a four-day run of gains, and in Japan, the Nikkei 225 Stock Average fell 0.8 percent, down from a recent high, Bloomberg reports.

Yields on 10-year U.S. Treasury notes increased slightly, reflecting increased nervousness about the nation’s debt. The 30-year rate rose to a nearly two-week high, Bloomberg reports. Treasury rates are still low enough, though, to suggest that investors see default as a remote possibility.

John Silvia, chief economist at Wells Fargo, held an interview before the U.S. stock market opened Monday and said, “we have enough plans. All we really need are people to come to some kind of an agreement on what’s going to get done.”

Try telling that to the Teaparty and Republican leaders, who still believe there is no cause for alarm.

Categories
Barack Obama Democratic democrats Politics

President Obama – I Cannot Invoke The 14th Amendment

So you think President Obama has the authority to invoke the 14th Amendment and raise the Debt Ceiling all by himself? Think again. According to the President himself, the debt ceiling is a statutory rule, not a constitution rule.

Speaking at an event in Maryland on Friday, the question of invoking the 14th amendment arose. President Obama responded by saying;

“There’s a provision in our Constitution that speaks to making sure that the United States meets its obligations, and there have been some suggestions that a president could use that language to basically ignore this debt ceiling rule, which is a statutory rule; it’s not a constitutional rule.

“I have talked to my lawyers … They’re not persuaded that that is a winning argument.”

Republicans have already suggested impeaching President Obama if he tries to use the 14th amendment to get the debt ceiling raised. Based on the President’s own words, it will seem this is a moot point.

The 14th amendment states that “the validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.” Many have suggested this to mean that President Obama has all the authority he needs to raise the debt ceiling if Congress fails to do their job.

Republicans have shown a preference to allowing the United States to default on its debt if it means the rich will loose some of their tax loopholes. They have been fighting the president and Democrats, who have suggested that the only plausible way to move forward on raising the debt ceiling would be to raise revenue along with spending cuts.

The debt ceiling now stands at $14.3 trillion, and the United States will run out of the ability to continue paying it’s debt if the debt ceiling is not raised by August 2nd.

Categories
Politics right wing nutters

British Minister Says “Right-Winged Nutters” In U.S Are Our Biggest Threat

Vince Cable

Think the calamity developing in Washington over raising the debt ceiling is just an American problem? Well think again! The rest of the world, realizing that their economic prosperity is directly linked to what happens in Washington DC, are beginning to weigh in on the matter.

British Minister Secretary of State for Business, Vince Cable, called the developing debate over the debt ceiling “irresponsible,” according to this report on Reuters. Mr.  Cable went on to describe the Republicans and Teaparty members who are fighting against raising the debt ceiling as “right-winged nutters.” He said;

“The irony of the situation at the moment, with markets opening tomorrow morning, is that the biggest threat to the world financial system comes from a few right-wing nutters in the American congress rather than the euro zone,” he told BBC television.

For political reasons, Republicans are willing to destroy America and potentially the world’s economy, to protect the loopholes for a few millionaires.

Categories
Featured Politics

Thuggish Allen West Refuses To Apologize. Fund-raises Instead.

The Republican thug who, for absolutely no valid reason, criticized and defamed Debbie Wasserman Schultz, went on Fox Business News on Thursday and flat-out said he will not be apologizing to Mrs. Schultz. When asked about the possibility of an apology, Allen West replied;

“That is not happening. This is a pattern I referred to in that email that goes back to 2010. Finally I think I have the right to stand up and defend my honor and make sure that this type of activity does cease. I sent her a private email, she decided to make it public by releasing it to the news media.”

A day before, the so-called congressman told a reporter from the Huffington Post that he did in fact apologize to Schultz, but later, his team released a statement saying that it did not happen.

Amazingly, Allen West is using this occasion to fund raise, telling his defenders that it’s “moments like this”  when he needs “friends.”

From: Allen West For Congress Date:

Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 2:32 PM

Subject: Vile, Despicable, and Unprofessional

Those three words sum up my feelings about Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee.

By now, you’ve probably heard the story. But I wanted you to hear it from me. Yesterday, on the floor of the House, I publicly expressed my support for “Cut, Cap, and Balance” –the leading conservative proposal to help us get our spiraling debt and spending under control.

Once I left the floor, Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (DNC Chair) –who it seems does little except act as an attack dog for the “vast left wing conspiracy” –attacked me personally for supporting the legislation.

It’s not a coincidence that she is the Chairwoman of the DNC and that the Democrats are making me target #1 for defeat. In a discussion of grave importance to this nation’s future, she somehow finds time to try to score political points. And she doesn’t have the guts to do it to my face!

Episodes like these show that her agenda isn’t to improve the lives of Floridians or to stand on principle. She’s an attack dog for the liberal, progressive wing of the Democratic Party –plain and simple. And it’s times like this that I need friends with me.

Please make a donation of $25 or more at my website right now. And join thousands of other patriotic Americans in standing up against the vicious attack from the Democratic National Party.

Steadfast and Loyal,

Allen B. West LTC(R) Member of Congress

But why should this shock anyone? Allen West is a Congressional Republican, and like the rest of them, no wrong doing ever warrants an apology. Well, maybe that’s not correct. They will apologize if your bank account has over 7 zeros in it, and donations to their coffers are promised.

Categories
Politics

Republicans – President Obama’s Political Assassins

When, then Senator Barack Obama campaigned for the office of the president in 2008, Republicans accused him of running against George W. Bush. This was because Mr. Obama compared all of his opponent’s policies to the unpopular president, suggesting that a vote for John McCain would result in re-electing Mr. Bush.

One of the ways Mr. Obama proved this point was to show Americans that there was no difference between the Bush Tax policies and those of McCain. Barack Obama was against these taxes, which amounted to giving more money to the rich in hopes that they would create more jobs, better known as Trickle-Down Economics. These policies were considered part of the reason the American economy had  into a recession, and Mr. Obama campaigned vigorously against them.

After defeating John McCain and being sworn in as the 44th President of the United States in January 2009, President Obama faced a Republican Party with one main goal in mind – his defeat, making him a one term president. Collectively, Congressional Republicans said “no” to everything, from Healthcare reform to issues they were once for, like tax cuts. In their efforts to defeat the newly elected President, Republicans managed to slow down and in some cases, reverse some of the economic progress the Obama administration had made.

After winning control of the House of Representatives on a promise of jobs creation, Republicans were now even closer to fulfilling their number one priority of defeating the President. Not only did they simply say “no” to the President’s policies, but they now had the ability to control the policies that came up for votes on the floor of the House of Representatives. Their plan was in full swing and they knew it.

Then came December 2010 and the Bush Tax cuts that President Obama campaigned against, were set to expire. With unemployment hovering around 10% and unemployment benefits running out, Republicans played their hand well, and demanded that the newly elected President go back on his campaign promise and continue the Bush Taxes. The negotiations began, the deals were made and the President walked up to the microphone and announced that in order to get a continuation of some unemployment benefits, he agreed to continue the cuts. This was a win for Republicans which meant a major loss for the President.

Fast-forward to July 21st, 2011. The issue is the debt ceiling and Republicans chose to use what has become a tradition, a norm in American politics – raising the debt ceiling – to establish their next fight against the President.

Like his predecessors, Mr. Obama wants to implement policies that he feels will make the country better. And for that reason, he continually asked for bipartisanship from both parties. He insists that both parties must work together to solve America’s problems.

And therein lies the problem.

With a Republican party that is determined to see him fail, working together to solve problems is not on their agenda. But the President and Democrats continue to negotiate, continues to look for ways to solve this manufactured debt ceiling crisis that Republicans have created.

The President would like a deal. He wants a long-term plan before the August 2nd deadline that would include a combination of spending cuts along with revenue increases to bring down the deficit. Republicans want all spending cuts with no revenue increase, because doing so would require some taxes and some of the corporate loopholes the rich have enjoyed and profited from for decades, to change. The Democrats are so willing to get this deal done, that they’ve even put “The Big 3”- Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid – on the table. These services, which benefit the poor and middle class, have been a target for Republicans since the 60’s.

Even with the “Big 3” and a proposed $4 trillion spending cut, Republicans walked away from the table. No deal!

In a blatant attempt to appear concerned about whether America is able to raise the debt ceiling and pay its bills, House Republicans this week voted and approved a new bill called “Cut, Cap and Balance.” This new bill would add an amendment to the Constitution and require the government to cut spending, cap future spending, and balance the budget.

Of course, with the largest economy in the world trying to recover from a recession and with unemployment presently around 9.1%, economists agree that this measure by Republicans will surly spiral the economy back into another recession/depression. The president has promised to veto the bill if it passes the Senate.

But because of Obama’s very nature and his insistence on compromise and bipartisanship, even Republicans are calling Mr. Obama’s veto threat a bluff. One may even go as far as to say that they are daring President Obama to veto the bill. Mr. Tom Coburn, the Republican representative for Oklahoma had this to say;

“This is the only viable plan right now that will do, and I will bet you a porterhouse steak that, if it lands on his desk, he’ll sign that puppy!”

Coburn continues;

“The president said he’d never take a short-term increase. What did they say yesterday? He’d take a short-term increase. That’s how good his veto threat is.

“He’s going to do what’s necessary to fix this country, and if he gets presented this bill, he’s gonna sign it!”

Other Republicans are saying things along those same lines. Senator Jim DeMint calls the House bill “the only one that can be passed before the August 2nd deadline,” and Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said “the political reality in this place is subject to changing on a dime.”

Yes, Congressional Republicans are pompous. They are still the minority, controlling only the House of Representatives while Democrats control the Senate and the White House. But this minority has reasons to be pompous. Unlike the last president, Mr. Obama wants this economy to flourish. He wants all Americans – the middle class and the rich – to prosper. But because of his flaw in thinking and need to compromise, this president has shown that he will go back on his words if the appearance of seeming bipartisan exists.

Time and time again,this president has exhibited the willingness to reach across the political aisle, and grab hold of the hand of the Republican Party who operate in one mode only – as his political assassins.

Are they correct? If this bill – which is considered worst than the Paul Ryan Plan – makes its way to the President’s desk, will he “sign that puppy?”

Yes, he will.

Another bullet from the assassins!

Categories
Barack Obama Politics Republican White House

Gang Of Six Plan “Killed” Because President Is For It – Says Republican Aide.

It was just a matter of time before this came out. A top Republican aide is sending around an email stating that President Obama’s endorsement of the “Gang of Six” just “killed” the bill from passing.

The so-called “Gang of Six” is composed of three Republicans and three Democrats, all working together to come up with an alternative plan to the negotiations going on in the White House in regards to raising the debt ceiling. Because of the plan’s close resemblance to what the President originally said he wanted in any deal – at least $4 trillion in cuts and changes in the taxes for the rich to allow for revenue increases – Mr. Obama came out on Tuesday and praised the efforts being made.

What it says is we’ve got to be serious about reducing discretionary spending, both in domestic spending and defense. We’ve got to be serious about tackling health care spending and entitlements in a serious way. And we’ve got to have some additional revenue, so that we have an approach in which there’s shared sacrifice and everybody is giving up something.

So for us to see Democratic senators acknowledge we’ve got to deal with our long-term debt problems that arise out of our various entitlement programs, and for Republican senators to acknowledge that revenues will have to be part of a balanced package that makes sure nobody is disproportionately hurt by us making progress on the debt and deficits, I think is a very significant step.

And that almost endorsement triggered the email from the anonymous aide. Politico reports;

A Senate Republican leadership aide emails with subject line “Gang of Six”: “Background guidance: The President killed any chance of its success by 1) Embracing it. 2) Hailing the fact that it increases taxes. 3) Saying it mirrors his own plan.”

No surprises here, really. It was just a matter of time. Anything this President endorses, even if it was originally a Republican idea, gets these same Republicans to run for the hills.

Watch them run!…

Categories
Politics

Reporter Runs Into Bachmann’s Bodyguards… Somewhat!

Michele Bachmann thought the event was over. Apparently, that was the plan all along – after the main political event was over, approach the microphone, make your statement, then exit the stage to extremely loud music, loud enough to drown out any questions reporters might toss your way.

The plan was in effect. Bachmann approached the podium and made her statement. It was a response to a piece on the Daily Caller about the migraines she often gets. The migraines that sometimes leave her “incapacitated” for days. Bachmann made her statement: “I’m prescribed medication that I take on occasion whenever symptoms arise and they keep my migraines under control, but I’d like to be abundantly clear, my ability to function effectively has never been impeded by migraines and … will not affect my ability to serve as commander in chief.”

She turned away from the microphone as the music started blasting. The plan was in full effect. Reporters were shouting questions to no avail, the music was doing its job.

But Brian Ross wouldn’t take the hint. The ABC News investigative reporter just wanted to get one question answered, “have you ever missed a house vote because of your migraines?”

The following recollection is from Time correspondent Michael Crowley as he described, to CNN’s Lisa Sylvester, the drama that unfolded next:

“As soon as she finished the statement, they turned the PA system on really loud with the music playing so loud that it was really hard to even try to ask her a question if you wanted to,” Crowley said. “But Brian [Ross], you know, started asking, you know, in a kind of dogged voice, ‘Have you ever missed a house vote because of your migraine – have you ever missed a roll call vote.’ And she ignored him and walked away quickly.”

Crowley continued: “Brian started to chase after her, you know, just repeating the question the way a reporter does … but there was nothing particularly unusual about it. And then at one point, she kind of went behind the stage she was on – her car was parked there – and Brian sort of went around behind the stage as well.”

Then the account turns especially dramatic: “A couple of guys really just came at him [Brian Ross],” Crowley said. “There were a few cops there and there were what looked to me like two bodyguards…and their hands were on him. They were…sort of manhandling and pushing him and you know at one point it looked like they were kind of holding him back, pulling him away from her as he was just trying to ask her this question. And she just ignored the question…And got in her car and drove away.”

Crowley’s account of what happened was confirmed by ABC News.

Categories
Politics Republican Wisconsin

Democrats Win First Recall Effort In Wisconsin

In the first recall election in Wisconsin, a Democratic Senator manhandled his Republican opponent, convincingly defeating the sorry sap by a 2 to 1 ratio. With 65% of the polls reporting, the Associated Press called the election for Senator Dave Hansen, Democratic Senator for Green Bay.

“Scott Walker and his cronies pulled out all the stops trying to defeat Dave Hansen,” said the Wisconsin Democratic Party, “and the people of the 30th Senate District said loudly and clearly Tuesday, ‘Enough!’”

And former Democratic Senator Russ Feingold sent his congratulations via the Twitter machine, saying;

“Congratulations to WI Senator Hansen on his victory. We are one step closer to stopping Gov. Walker’s agenda. Forward.”

Hansen’s win on Tuesday now leaves eight more recall elections – 2 recalls for Democrats and 6 for Republicans. Most of the other recall elections will take place in August.

To win control of the upper chamber, Democrats need a total of three wins. By taking control, Democrats can block most of Governor Scott Walker’s policies.

Soon after taking office in January, Scott Walker began a series of far-reaching policy initiatives, including stripping public workers in Wisconsin of their collective bargaining rights. That move triggered massive protests throughout Wisconsin, leading to the present recall efforts. Walker himself would be eligible for recall in January of 2012.

Categories
Politics Repeal

President Obama Supports Defense Of Marriage Act.

President Obama will support a recent bill to repeal DOMA – Defense Of Marriage Act. In so doing, the President is signalling his acceptance of marriage as between two people, not necessarily a man and a woman. In answering a question today from Metro Weekly, the White House Press Secretary Jay Carney had this to say about the President’s support of the repeal bill called Respect of Marriage Act.

 I can tell you that the President has long called for a legislative repeal of the so-called Defense of Marriage Act, which continues to have a real impact on the lives of real people — our families, friends and neighbors. He is proud to support the Respect for Marriage Act, introduced by Sen. Feinstein and Congressman [Jerrold] Nadler [(D-N.Y.)], which would take DOMA off the books once and for all. This legislation would uphold the principle that the federal government should not deny gay and lesbian couples the same rights and legal protections as straight couples.

Exit mobile version