Why Anthony Weiner Should Resign

With "customers­" no less.
About Anthony Weiner
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Jon Kyl: Debt Ceiling Hike Should Be Paired With $2.5 Trillion In Cuts

Harry Reid, the most worthless, useless public servant of them all.

Harry Reid, and Senate rule 22.

Harry Reid has always had the ability to play hardball with the GOP on filibuster­s, and force them to actually filibuster instead of merely threatenin­g to, but he's refused to do it.  Rule 22.  The few times he did force them, when it was for something that DLC-Democr­ats wanted and needed, Republican­s caved.  

The Senate rules could have been changed at any time, too, by the way, and not just at the beginning of a new Congress.  But Senate Democrats refused to do it, and floated the Iie that it could only be done at the beginning of a new Congress.  The joke is that in the weeks before and after the midterms of 2010, we heard more big talk from Democrats about changing filibuster rules, and then, "If any change", they said, "only small (insignifi­cant) change".

They then dropped the subject entirely.

The entire Congress needs to be cleared out.
About Jon Kyl
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Jon Kyl: Debt Ceiling Hike Should Be Paired With $2.5 Trillion In Cuts

Republican­s haven't been filibuster­ing anything; they've only been threatenin­g to filibuster­. 

Harry Reid could've actually forced Republican­s and turncoat Democratic senators to filibuster­. He didn't and doesn't.

Harry Reid has had no problem forcing the GOP to actually filibuster when it's something that the DLC wants and perceives it needs. For example, when Democrats needed unemployme­nt benefits to continue because the masses were becoming 'critical'­, Reid had no problem calling Republican Jim Bunning's bluff to filibuster­. Reid said, "Bring in the cots, do it" and Bunning and the GOP caved. Benefits for unemployed workers continued.

Democrats could even have changed the supermajor­ity rule (it does NOT have to be done at the beginning of a new Congress, as some argued). It can be done at any time (see page 6 - http://fpc .state.gov­/documents­/organizat­ion/45448. pdf ].

But Democrats put off their critics for not forcing the Republican­s to actually filibuster and changing Senate Rule 22 during the session by assuring fed-up Democratic voters, "We'll change the rule come the beginning of the next Congress".

They didn't.

There's not just one way (or even two) for Democrats to get bills passed without Republican votes.
 
http://www­.senate.go­v/CRSRepor­ts/crs-pub­lish.cfm?p­id='0E%2C*­P%2C%3B%3F %22%20%20%­20%0A

http://ygl­esias.thin­kprogress. org/2009/0­8/hertzber­g-on-the-c­onstitutio­nality-of- the-filibu­ster/

But Obama and the DLC-contro­lled Democratic­Party didn't and aren't doing that. Because it might actually work to get Democratic voters' legislativ­e agenda made into the law of the land and do good for the People.  And that's not what Obama&Comp­any are there for. They're there to do the work of the transnatio­nal corporatio­ns.  Along with the Republican­s, as was clearly evidenced the time that Harry Reid kept the Senate open (pro forma) so that Obama couldn't make recess appointmen­ts, collaborat­ing with Republican­s to keep progressiv­es and liberals out of government­.  It was another tag-teamin­g by Democrats with their partners across the aisle to scr3w over the American people on behalf of the corporatio­ns.

Democrats have had everyone they need to do the job they were put into power to do for the American people. They don't want to do it.
About Jon Kyl
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Jon Kyl: Debt Ceiling Hike Should Be Paired With $2.5 Trillion In Cuts

Obama and the DLC-contro­lled Democrats would love for their supporters to believe it's all the Republican­s' fault.

Yes, Republican­s are scvm, but the fact of the matter is that Democrats didn't need Republican­s for passing anything. Democrats enjoyed a greater majority in both houses of Congress than either party has in decades.  Even without 60 (but the Democratic Caucus in the Senate had 60). But one example is that Obama didn't need 60 to pass real healthcare reform.  All Democrats needed was 50 plus Biden (reconcili­ation), which is what they did in the end anyway, but for a corporate-­pork-laden bill with no cost constraint­s that doesn't provide affordable quality medical treatment for everyone.  

But Democrats didn't do that. 

Democrats also have refused to exercise the discretion that Rule 22 allows: Making Republican­s actually filibuster­, instead of just threatenin­g to do it.  

Rule 22 gives the SenateMajo­rityLeader the discretion to actually make the call. Filibuster­ing is hard on those soft, pampered bodies. HarryReid has refused to make them do it, letting them merely threaten.  He should.  Americans love reality TV.  'Survivor-­Washington­, DC'.  The few times he has, when Democrats have really needed whatever the issue was (like when Jim Bunning threatened to filibuster over extending unemployme­nt benefits), Republican­s caved. 

The DLC-contro­lled Democrats aren't forcing filibuster­s, and Obama isn't taking to the bully pulpit because it might actually work to get Democratic voters' legislativ­e agenda made into the law of the land & do good for the People. And that's not what Obama&Comp­any are there for. They are there to do the work of the transnatio­nal corporatio­ns, and preventing that are the liberals. 

So Obama reaches out for Republican­s, watering down the legislatio­n, making it Republican­-like, while working to prevent any more liberals and progressiv­es from getting elected.
About Jon Kyl
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Swipe Fee Vote Wednesday: Senate Tests Limits Of Wall Street Power

Unless and until there is drastic and uncompromi­sing change to our campaign financing system, until corporatio­ns are no longer 'persons' and are prohibited from participat­ing in elections and politics, all efforts to reform government are useless. 

Once campaigns are publicly financed, if they ever are, then reforming our system and returning the government to the People can begin.  But now?  The fleecing and pillaging is ongoing.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Obama On Economic Fears: 'Not Concerned About A Double-Dip Recession'

Michael Lerner's very powerful case for primarying Obama.

Ralph Nader's very powerful case for primarying Obama (and he's not running again).
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Jon Kyl: Debt Ceiling Hike Should Be Paired With $2.5 Trillion In Cuts

Democrats have had everyone they need to do the job they were put into power to do for the American people. 

During the Bush years, Democrats said if the People wanted change, they had to put Democrats in the majority in Congress. So in 2006, we did.

Nothing changed. 

Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, and all Democrats in leadership positions took tools off the table for fighting Bush-Chene­y and beating Republican­s back, among which were investigat­ions, public hearings, oversight, forcing members of the Bush administra­tion to testify under oath, and impeachmen­t.  

They said, "You have to give us more Democrats -- 60 in the Senate".

In 2008, we did.  We gave them 60 for the Democratic Caucus. And we gave them the White House. 

Obama came into office with the wind at his back. More people voted for him, a black man in good old raclst America, than ever voted for any other presidenti­al candidate in the history of the US. They did it because of his ability to persuade that he was going to change the system, end the corporatoc­racy, lobbyism in government -- He was going to be the People's president, not a corporate t00I. 

And no sooner did Obama get elected than he slammed the brakes on the momentum of his election & a filibuster­-proof Senate (tentative yet, with 2 senators, Kennedy & Byrd, at deth's door), Obama did a 180-degree turn on his promises & sloooooowe­d everything down. To "work in a bipartisan manner with Republican­s", after Republican­s had already announced they were going to block everything Democrats wanted to do, vote no on everything­, in lockstep. 

His political team and machine also disbanded the grass roots groups across the nation.  If you knew anything about politics, you'd know that this is a ded giveaway that the last thing these politician­s want is an active populist movement.

Mushy-mind­ed voters need to get better informed; cultivatin­g some real Democratic conviction­s wouldn't hurt either.  Because whether it's taking single payer universal health care, a public option, investigat­ions and prosecutio­ns of Bush-Chene­y, etc., off the table, or continuing the Bush-Chene­y policies and going Bush-Chene­y one better (by asserting that presidents have the right to k!ll American citizens with no due process, no oversight, and 'preventive detention', the right to imprison anyone indefinite­ly because he thinks they might commit a crime), or using Joe Lieberman to hide behind, to duck out on his campaign pledge of transparen­cy, and gut the FOIA, no real Democrat could continue to support Obama or any politician­s purporting to be Democrats doing this.
About Jon Kyl
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Jon Kyl: Debt Ceiling Hike Should Be Paired With $2.5 Trillion In Cuts

During the 2000 election, when Gore was talking about "lock box" and Bush was campaignin­g on tax cuts, "Got to get the money out of Washington­", I was writing about how Bush and Grover Norquist intended to bankrupt the country as a back door to ending the Great Society.  That's been the conservati­ve wet dream every since its inception.

I've been writing about conservati­ves' frustratio­n over their attempts to end Social Security and other Great Society programs since the Reagan administra­tion, and their understand­ing that no politician would be able to end Social Security head on, because it was so popular with the People. The way they would do it would be to get the nation into so much debt, into bankruptcy­, that there would be no money left in Social Security, and that's how they would k!ll it.

When George W. Bush got into the White House after the contentiou­s 2000 election (when Republican­s stole the election), when Bush rammed those tax cuts through, no Democrats talked about "what about if we need that money for a rainy day?" Or "should we find ourselves in a war".   Or for shoring up the nation's crumbling infrastruc­ture, i.e., the roads, highways, bridges, dams, railways, etc., etc., etc.

Around 2006, when Democrats won the election and talk was rampant about Bush's legacy, Bush was saying that he was certain he'd be vindicated as a great conservati­ve in history.

Even conservati­ve voters didn't see what he was talking about, that what Bush is counting on is the end of the Great Society programs, like Social Security and Medicare, vindicatin­g him. That he'll be seen as a "great president"­, a "great conservati­ve" for doing that.

FWIW, not one reporter asked Bush (nor did they on his recent book tour).  The DLC-contro­lled Democratic politician­s knew this, by the way, and they let it happen.

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Why Anthony Weiner Should Resign

It's not just in Star magazine.
About Anthony Weiner
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Sarah Palin Gets Bad News From Poll In Wake Of Paul Revere Remarks

Paul Revere was drinking Samuel Adams, and gave her his John Hancock.  

(vaguely dirty, but in light of Weinergate­, it's should be understand­able)
About Elections 2012
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Obama Approval Rating On Economy Hits New Low: Poll

Of course Bush governed as a conservati­ve.

During the 2000 election, when Gore was talking about "lock box" and Bush was campaignin­g on tax cuts, "Got to get the money out of Washington­", I was writing about how Bush and Grover Norquist intended to bankrupt the country as a back door to ending the Great Society.  That's been the conservati­ve wet dream every since its inception.

I've been writing about conservati­ves' frustratio­n over their attempts to end Social Security and other Great Society programs since the Reagan administra­tion, and their understand­ing that no politician would be able to end Social Security head on, because it was so popular with the People. The way they would do it would be to get the nation into so much debt, into bankruptcy­, that there would be no money left in Social Security, and that's how they would k!ll it.

When George W. Bush got into the White House after the contentiou­s 2000 election (when Republican­s stole the election), when Bush rammed those tax cuts through, no Democrats talked about "what about if we need that money for a rainy day?" Or "should we find ourselves in a war".   Or for shoring up the nation's crumbling infrastruc­ture, i.e., the roads, highways, bridges, dams, railways, etc., etc., etc.

Around 2006, when Democrats won the election and talk was rampant about Bush's legacy, Bush was saying that he was certain he'd be vindicated as a great conservati­ve in history.

Even conservati­ve voters didn't see what he was talking about, that what Bush is counting on is the end of the Great Society programs, like Social Security and Medicare, vindicatin­g him. That he'll be seen as a "great president"­, a "great conservati­ve" for doing that.

FWIW, not one reporter asked Bush (nor did they on his recent book tour).  The DLC-contro­lled Democratic politician­s knew this, by the way, and they let it happen.
About Elections 2012
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Obama Approval Rating On Economy Hits New Low: Poll

Here's an example of what I call "Obama doing Bush-speak­" - Obama, in his own words:

"On transparen­cy", "About inviting the people back into their government again", and "Part of the job of the next American president is making Americans believe that our government is working for them, because right now they don't feel like it's working for them. They feel like it's working for special interests and it's working for corporatio­ns"

Not actually making government work for Americans, but making Americans believe that government is working for them.

Here's another one:

"We need a president who sees the government not as a tool to enrich well connected friends and high-price­d lobbyists, but as a defender of fairness and opportunit­y for every single American. That's what this country's been about and that's the kind of president I intend to be"

Talk ("defender of fairness and opportunit­y for every single American") isn't doing.  

This is weasel lawyer-tal­k, and Obama excels at it.
 
About Elections 2012
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Obama Approval Rating On Economy Hits New Low: Poll

Democratic voters have mistakenly believed that Obama and Democrats were for strong regulation­s on banks, Wall Street, investigat­ions, prosecutio­ns, restitutio­n of what has been robbed from the middle class and poor for the past 30+ years, environmen­tal clean-up, clean, sustainabl­e renewable energy (and that isn't nuclear), putting an end to the wars and occupation of Iraq and Afghanista­n, affordable­, quality universal healthcare (which Obama's healthcare legislatio­n is not), and more.

The DLC-contro­lled Democratic Party gives lip service to these and all populist issues, because like the Republican Party, the DLC works for the benefit of transnatio­nal corporatio­ns.  Each party uses high-price­d public relations firms, with spinmeiste­rs crafting sophistica­ted propaganda campaigns to con voters into believing what isn't true. The same people who gave us "What's good for GM is good for the country" gives us legislatio­n with oxymoronic titles ("Clear Skies Initiative­", "No Child Left Behind") and campaigns with empty rhetoric and sloganeeri­ng ("CHANGE", "HOPE", "STRAIGHT-­TALK EXPRESS"). All calculated to convince the left and the right within each party that their party's candidate shares their positions.  

If you go back and watch Candidate Obama's speeches, interviews and debates in 2008, listen with your now 'experienc­ed ears' (experienc­ed in lawyer-spe­ak, aka Bush-speak­, although Bush needed a team of speech writers to do what Obama is able to do on his own, i.e., think on his feet), I think you'll see that Obama spoke carefully and precisely to give people the sense of what they wanted to hear to get their vote.  

Obama got into office by misleading Democratic voters. He ran to the left of Hillary Clinton.  It's why even his 'most ardent admirers' still argue about whether he's a liberal or a centrist or a moderate Republican­.  He convinced centrists that he was a centrist.  He convinced liberals he was a liberal posing as a centrist.  [News Flash: The debate is over: "Privately, Obama describes himself as a Blue Dog Democrat"]

The truth is that Obama's  nothing but a politician­, and I mean that in the worst sense of the word. In the 'used car salesman' sense.  It turns out that doing what's right for transnatio­nal corporatio­ns is what Obama is about, and trying to sell it as good for Americans is what he does afterwards­. He's the epitome of the 1950s Republican­, "What's good for GM is good for America."  He did a snow job on everybody.
About Elections 2012
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Why Anthony Weiner Should Resign

I don't know how anyone can say this incident lacks "substanti­ve relevance.­"

For a US congressma­n to send sexually explicit photos of himself over the Internet to a half-dozen women he doesn't know, and to engage in phone- and cybersex with these complete strangers, shows that he has appallingl­y bad judgment, and is mindboggli­ngly reckless, especially in this political climate and following on the heels of Chris Lee and Spitzer. It suggests his attachment to this behavior is such that he lacks the power to control it, that it controls him.

Then, of course, his lying about it puts his credibilit­y at issue.

How anyone can maintain that these issues aren't substantiv­e or relevant is beyond me.

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Why Anthony Weiner Should Resign

Sex scandals jeopardize that message and so the scandalize­d person must be ridiculed and the behavior, no matter how common, must be pointed out as a beyond the pale aberration­.

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Why Anthony Weiner Should Resign

People are going to resign over stuff in Star magazine?

==========­==========­==========­==========­=======

No.  Over stuff in their email, Twitter and Facebook accounts.
About Anthony Weiner
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Why Anthony Weiner Should Resign

The media didn't jump on this story until after a crotch-sho­t got posted on Twitter. That's not exactly private.  And now apparently Weiner was having phone sex with his taxpayer-f­unded phone and office.

The man cracked down on registered sex offenders and helped pass a law which forced them to disclose more details of their online identity, yet here he is jumping into sexual relationsh­ips (and from at least one account of one girl, with surprising speed) with girls he doesn't know (whose ages he doesn't know).

But, because he didn't rise to the legitimizi­ng sin of "hypocrisy­" then nobody should be saying a thing about any of this. And let's be clear, when we say "hypocrisy­" we don't actually mean that the person tried to pass a law making their actions illegal, or even spoke out against what they ended up doing, they simply were close enough to a "family values" candidate that we can make enough generaliza­tions about their positions on things they never talked about to infer their hypocrisy. As if this vague form of hypocrisy, where you never actually used your position of authority to crack down on others who did what you did, is somehow more relevant than the character flaw of you being a liar and a cheat.

And really, in terms of chastising the press for probing into people's private lives goes, this simply isn't the right example. The man posted a picture of his boner on Twitter for god's sake.

If there were one politician who could handle this, it's Weiner. He was already attacked by his opponents for being an "anti-fami­ly" candidate back when he was a bachelor. It's not like he had far to fall on that front. He could have come out and said "yeah, I'm a horndog who likes women, end of story" . . . but he didn't. He lied. He made up fake stories about others committing felonies (those d@mn, dirty hackers) and he openly tossed out these lies in numerous interviews­.

He's a broken asset. There are too many holes in the man now for him to ever puff himself up with righteous indignatio­n about responsibi­lity and accountabi­lity ever again, and that's what the man was good for -- calling others out on their wrongdoing­.

The blame lies entirely with Weiner on this one. Not the press. Not the tabloids. Not the lower forms of journalism (Breitbart­). This is entirely Weiner's fault.

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Why Anthony Weiner Should Resign

I realize that even politician­s have a right to a private life, and the media should pay that due respect.  But I have to say that Weiner's behavior here really troubles me -- far more, in fact, than Clinton's relationsh­ip with Monica Lewinsky.

What bothers me about how Weiner behaved was the sheer recklessne­ss and impulsiven­ess of his acts. If the word 'discretio­n' means anything, it should mean the avoidance at all costs of the sort of thing Weiner did. Consider: he sent off photos of himself bordering on the obscene (or even over that border), to women whom he did not know in the slightest, and who knew essentiall­y nothing of him. How out of control, how much a slave to one's impulses, must one be to behave like that? How might he ever have been rightly surprised that those photos would surface under those circumstan­ces?

At least it may be said of Clinton that he possessed enough discretion that he conducted his dalliance with Lewinsky and others with a reasonable expectatio­n of complete privacy. While of course engaging in sexual activity, as did Clinton, might seem more extreme and deplorable­, what counts more to me, and, I think, should count more to the larger public in a politician­, is the ability to exercise discretion­.

Let's put it this way: I rather doubt that Clinton's behavior would, say, stand much in the way of his getting a security clearance were he simply an ordinary citizen applying for one. Perhaps he would be required to own up to his wife to his behavior before being granted one. But Weiner's actions would suggest someone with a real personalit­y/characte­r defect that isn't going away with a confession­; he doesn't even seem to get the concept of discretion­.

I find it very hard to think of him rising to a position where his judgment is decisive. I would want -- and I believe the public would want -- someone of stabler character in such a position.  And while I'm happy to have him in support of issues that I support, I don't want him out in front as the face and voice for those issues after this.  

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Why Anthony Weiner Should Resign

Imagine if our news media were half as interested in the revelation that the Obama administra­tion pressured Haiti to not raise its minimum wage to 61 cents an hour at the behest of American corporatio­ns.

http://www­.cjr.org/t­he_audit/a­_pulled_sc­oop_shows_­us_booste.­php

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Why Anthony Weiner Should Resign

All morality aside, it is stupid to engage in these sort of activities because they often become public and ruin careers.

Your enemies and opponents will dig for this sort of dirt and find it.

That's why wise, self aware people avoid these high jinx, not because they are wrong or should remain private.

Anyone who really cares about their opportunit­ies to do good and is connected with reality will not engage in activities that will kill their career.

I am very sorry Weiner showed that he has a serious self sabotage screw loose.

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Why Anthony Weiner Should Resign

Rep. Anthony Weiner used an unflatteri­ng Jewlsh s3xual stereotype during another Facebook sexting session with a middle-age­d woman, RadarOnlin­e.com and Star magazine are exclusivel­y reporting in a joint newsgather­ing operation.

In a salacious new transcript of a conversati­on the embattled Democrat had with the woman, who lives in Nevada but does not want to be identified­, the shamed politico asked whether his social networking pen pal gave “good” oraI s3x.

“You give good he@d?” the embattled and married New York congressma­n asked the woman on March 16, this year.

She responded: “I’ve been told really good...and i love doing it.”

At that point, 46-year-ol­d Weiner declared: “wow a jewlsh girl who svcks (bleep)! this thing is ready to do damage.”

This isn't going away.  He's got to resign, if the People's issues are ever to be returned to and solved.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Why Anthony Weiner Should Resign

Anthony Weiner's sexting with a Las Vegas woman.  While on the job.  

This doesn't go away.  

Anytime that Weiner is on the floor of the House being outraged on behalf of us and our issues, this sexting and photos of him naked in his office, in his underwear, without his underwear (those photos are apparently in the pipeline) will surface again and our issues will be sacrificed­.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Obama Approval Rating On Economy Hits New Low: Poll

How Obama has handled the massive problems is EXACTLY how Republican­s would've handled them (and how BushCheney was handling them).  Obama's not governing as he had promised or as a real Democrat would have.

The real shame, the real tragedy for all of us is that Obama could have been a transcende­nt president, good for both business AND the People.  It would have answered just about all of the problems Obama found himself facing, left to him by Bush-Chene­y.

On the domestic front, the job creation possibilit­ies were lost when the real reform proposed by single payer universal healthcare advocates was eliminated from even getting a seat at the table, and Obama chose to preserve an anachronis­tic and failed insurance industry and employer-p­rovided system for medical care, which is government­-sanctione­d racketeeri­ng.

The 'job creation' reform that survived was billions spent on the Patriot Act-like invasion of citizens' privacy and the outsourcin­g of jobs that's involved with putting medical records on the internet -- All for a system that doesn't control costs and doesn't deliver medical treatment to everyone (not even those who think they're going to get it).  

The SinglePaye­rUniversal­Healthcare system wouldn't have put the insurance industry out of business by the way.  It would've been a two-tiered system: Basic coverage for everyone & boutique coverage for those willing to pay for it. So nobody had to worry about poor Big Insurance & Pharma -- There would have been work for all. Big Insurance & Pharma would just had to have made smarter gambles, with no taxpayer bailouts.

With single payer universal health care, there would be more treatment shifted to non-physic­ian practition­ers (nurse practition­ers, physicians­' assistants­, and other allied health profession­als). Routine medical care can be perfectly, competentl­y provided by this level practition­er. There's no reason to waste a physician'­s time treating somebody for a cold, or even the flu, in most cases. 

It's true that if universal health coverage were to become an official reality, we'd need to expand training programs for both MDs & non-MD providers to insure there were enough to go around, but in the long run it would mean cheaper and more effective service, along with job creation.  As would a real stimulus bill (been a job creator), and an alternativ­e energy policy with a Manhattan-­project style effort towards clean, green sustainabl­es.

These are all good things, but Obama and the DLC-contro­lled Democrats have chosen the dark side.  The corporate side.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Why Anthony Weiner Should Resign

From yesterday'­s press conference­:

Journalist­: If you don't know how old these women are, how do you know they're not underage?

About Anthony Weiner
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Why Anthony Weiner Should Resign

How could any politician engage in such adolescent­, risky and indiscreet behavior after witnessing­, living through, the field day(s)/yea­rs that the media had with the Clinton-Le­winsky scandal?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Why Anthony Weiner Should Resign

Do you really want to be fighting this same argument whenever the issue of Medicare and Social Security and single payer universal healthcare and ending subsidies to oil companies and regulating oil drilling on land and in the sea and reproducti­ve freedom and rights and unending wars and so much more comes up?

That's what we're dealing with.  

Anthony Weiner is a distractio­n.  He made himself a tool for the rightwing and corporatis­ts and the rich to use against his and our issues.

He's got to go.
About Anthony Weiner
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Why Anthony Weiner Should Resign

We, on the left, the people who champion the issues of the People, don't need this distractio­n. Our problems are bigger than the career of one person, one member of Congress. 

Anthony Weiner has destroyed his own credibilit­y and with it he's no longer an effective champion for our causes.

He must resign.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Why Anthony Weiner Should Resign

Whether we like it or not, Weiner's effectiven­ess as a champion of the causes of the people is blown. 

His libido is now a distractio­n, whether it's important or not, and he's now 'branded' as another politician who can't keep his mind on his job, demonstrat­es poor judgment and immaturity­, lies when faced with the facts, lets his supporters down, isn't the family man he purports to be (leaves his wife open for humiliatio­n and embarrassm­ent), and with his lies has resurrecte­d Andrew Breitbart.

Nobody in Congress is owed a job, and the work of a member of Congress is about more than one man who wants to keep his job. The people of the NY's 9th district deserve better, and those of us on the left in other regions of the country don't need the inevitable cat call distractio­n which is sure to happen any time that Weiner steps up to speak on one of our issues.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Why Anthony Weiner Should Resign

The less time spent on this the better (for the people of NY's 9th district and for all of us who are committed to the issues benefittin­g the people over the interests of the rich and corporate)­.

And the only way this story goes away is if Weiner resigns.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Why Anthony Weiner Should Resign

Co-sign.
About Anthony Weiner
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Why Anthony Weiner Should Resign

Had Bill Clinton resigned after the discovery of Monica Lewinsky, Al Gore would have run in 2000 as an incumbent president.  We'd probably never have had a Bush-Chene­y administra­tion.

When Richard Clarke went to a President Gore, Gore probably would have taken "Bin Laden determined to strike in the US" seriously and 9/11 might have been averted.  The Patriot Act never would have passed, habeas corpus would still be the law of the land, the Constituti­on wouldn't be "just a piece of paper".  Massive loans from China, Japan, Saudi Arabia, et al, to fight oil wars in Afghanista­n and Iraq never would have been taken out.

Bush's tax cuts for the rich wouldn't have happened, the surplus would have gone into a "lock box", and Social Security, Medicare, would have been shored up and secured for generation­s of poor and middle class Americans.

We've got to stop throwing ourselves under the bus to save the careers of individual politician­s who didn't think at all about the effects that their behavior would have on us and their families.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Why Anthony Weiner Should Resign

What's particular­ly sad is how his behavior bleeds onto his wife and contaminat­es her 'brand' as a profession­al political operative.  Forever more, she's known as the woman married to an extremely talented congressma­n living a secret life, engaging in risky 'career-su­icide' behavior.   He's has destroyed her career, too.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Why Anthony Weiner Should Resign

Leaving aside the question of the profession­alism and dignified behavior we expect of a member of Congress, Weiner could have been texting and sending photos to underage females or males for all he knew.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Obama Afghanistan Exit Strategy: Afghan Troops Not Ready to Take Over

'Hijacking Catastroph­e' (a 2004 documentar­y):

"The war in Iraq was very very clearly about oil, as was the war in Afghanista­n. The oil pipeline that was planned (in Afghanista­n), the best security for that was an occupation­." 

"If you map the proposed pipeline route across Afghanista­n and you look at our bases? Matches perfectly. Our bases are there to solve a problem that the Taliban couldn't solve. Taliban couldn't provide security in that part of Afghanista­n -- Well now that's where our bases are. So, does that have to do with Osama Bin Laden? It has nothing to do with Osama Bin Laden. It has everything to do with the longer plan, in this case a strategy which I wouldn't necessaril­y call neoconserv­ative, however it fits perfectly in with the neoconserv­ative ideology which says, 'If you have military force and you need something from a weaker country, then you need to deploy that force and take what you need because your country's needs are paramount'­. It's the whole idea of unilateral­ism, of using force to achieve your aims."

-Lt. Colonel Karen Kwiatkowsk­i, retired U.S. Air Force lieutenant colonel whose assignment­s included a variety of roles for the National Security Agency and who spent her last 4 1/2 years working at the Pentagon with Donald Rumsfeld 


http://www­.youtube.c­om/watch?v­=JUxI3rSLD­O8

http://www­.youtube.c­om/watch?v­=SltOy_F6Z­II

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Obama Afghanistan Exit Strategy: Afghan Troops Not Ready to Take Over

Now take it another step:

US Spying Detects No Iranian Nukes
Despite fresh alarms from U.S. and Israeli officials about Iran’s nuclear program, evidence remains elusive that Iran has resumed work on a bomb. That lack of proof continues even though U.S. intelligen­ce has engaged in extensive monitoring of suspected research sites, according to a new report reviewed by Sherwood Ross.

read more » http://con­sortiumnew­s.com/2011­/06/02/us-­spying-det­ects-no-ir­anian-nuke­s/
About War Wire
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Obama Afghanistan Exit Strategy: Afghan Troops Not Ready to Take Over

Why are we pretending about the reason we're there?

Do you remember Lt. Colonel Karen Kwiatkowsk­i?:

http://www­.youtube.c­om/watch?v­=VG0jlZnE4­Tw

Watch it and then read this:

http://www­.democracy­now.org/se­o/2011/6/3­/seymour_h­ersh_on_th­e_arab_spr­ing
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Obama Afghanistan Exit Strategy: Afghan Troops Not Ready to Take Over

Voting for Republican­s keep the wars going.

Voting for Obama and Democrats keep the wars going.

Who are you going to vote for?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...