Postal Service On Brink Of Default
Monday, September 5, 2011
Read this and read this.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
Read this and read this.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
So I have to wonder if Chait is serious, whether he and the White House believe this is a credible defense of President Obama. Chait either doesn’t know, or chose to ignore the many and far more serious reasons why liberals/progressive s are in varying stages of disappoint ment, dismay, disgust or outright contempt for this President. But I should have suspected a lack of seriousnes s when Chait’s piece gave us this:
"The most common hallmark of the left’s magical thinking is a failure to recognize that Congress is a separate, coequal branch of government consisting of members whose goals may differ from the president’s."
Does he really expect anyone to believe that?
And it’s insulting for Chait to equate Glenn with supposed “right wing equivalents.” Greenwald is a deeply ethical, thoroughly honest and highly respected journalist who, with many others, is simply appalled by the Administra tion’s lawlessnes s; there are no “right wing equivalent s.”
Also missing from Chait’s lecture to the “left” is any mention of the Obama Administration’s embrace of the deeply corrupting influence of corporate wealth, its corrosive effect on democracy, and the huge disparity in income and wealth that now divides the richest 1 percent from almost everyone else. Every week we read of the White House adopting some position advocated by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and friends, whether it’s about permissive and damaging energy extraction, lack of health and safety regulation s, failure to protect labor rights in misnamed “free” trade agreements , killing environmen tal standards, and so on. This White House seems bent on becoming the President of Big Oil, Big Nukes, Big Banks and Big Business, even as Obama betrays labor and neglects the needs of working America.
And what are we to think of the President’s destructio n of public campaign financing and embrace of fat cat funding? Has Chait not noticed that Obama is working Wall Street and corporate America as hard as any President in history, to ensure he has a billion dollars with which to buy his reelection ? Is that not something the “left” or indeed any ordinary American should care about?
Matt Stoller’s must read critique makes the point that “Obama has ruined the Democratic Party.” I and others here warned about this over a year ago. By now, some may not care, having given up on Democrats. But whether the party can be salvaged or an alternative emerges, it’s clear that Barack Obama’s embrace of GOP talking points, economic and other policies has made it impossible for any responsibl e Democrats to support the President and still work for the values their supporters want and that got them elected.
Such a transition would have been a Herculean task, but if it could not be achieved outright — a debatable point – then any “reform” worthy of the name needed to contain workable mechanisms by which a steady transition could evolve and be achieved within a reasonable time. Instead, Obama’s “reform” bill imposed the private insurance system over tens of millions of Americans, killed even a weakened version of the transition mechanism, and left funding of the expanded public health system vulnerable to the predictablKEEP READINGe onslaught on government budgets. Several states are slashing Medicaid, and Congress will likely do the same.
Jon Walker, Marcy Wheeler and I and others at this site have written electronic reams about the President’s utter failure to address these real needs. Jane Hamsher also reported the secret White House deals with hospitals and drug companies to shield them from either competitio n or adequate regulation , yet the White House continued for almost a year to mislead supporters about his supposed support for even a weak public option. The entire process reeked of Obama’s bad faith.
The theme could go on about immigration, environmen tal protection , women’s rights, labor protection s,DADT, and so on. The stories are disturbing ly similar: promises, hopes, delays, disappoint ment, betrayal.
It is telling that Chait’s defense of Obama attempts to rebut only a small sliver of Robert Reich’s critiques — I’ll leave that to Reich. His reference to Glenn Greenwald is to Glenn’s comments on domestic policies. But everyone knows the major criticism from Glenn, Marcy Wheeler and many other civil liberties and rule of law defenders concern the President’s embrace, extension or coverups of Bush’s anti-civil liberties, kidnapping and detention, illegal surveillan ce, and unilateral war policies, along with Obama’s unwillingn ess to hold torturers and other criminal enablers accountabl e. Chait offers no defense here, because there is none.
Liberal economists were practicall
Thus, by 2010, on economic policy Obama was governing — or revealed himself — as a moderately conservati
The financial sector needed fairly radical downsizing and re-regulat
After the US Treasury and the Fed bailed out dozens of large banks and financial firms during 2008-2009, the Administra
Health “reform” also followed the pattern of leaving the malefactor
KEEP READING
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
So it wasn’t just the not really mindboggling size of the first stimulus that was problemati c; it was the deliberate policy of ignoring evidence and credible advice that much more would be needed and for an extended period, probably years. Even worse was the rhetoric about budget cuts that would undermine any effort to achieve further fiscal stimulus. Again, highly credible voices warned this was a serious problem, but Obama ignored them.
As many of us warned, Obama’s pivot to deficit reduction proved to be devastating. Not only did it completely undermine any ability to argue persuasive ly for more supportive federal spending; it poured the foundation for the right wing’s radical anti-gover nment attacks on funding all of the beneficial public programs enacted since the New Deal.
Instead of mounting a vigorous defense of these programs and government’s role in protecting the public interest, the President’ s budget rhetoric repeatedly undermined them. In statement after statement, Obama falsely equated a household budget and the supposed need to tighten family belts with the federal budget and the need for government to cut back on spending.
Obama’s austerity message was dead wrong; every responsible economist knew that massive deficit spending was the one thing keeping the economy afloat while the private sector reduced its debts, and such deficits might be needed for years.
Thanks in part to NancyPelosi’s troops, some of the latter elements were in the ARRA — the stimulus bill the Administra tion offered and Congress passed — at least for a year or two. Chait rightly notes the debate over the size of the stimulus but questions whether it could have been larger and still pass Congress.
His excuse that “those who mattered” saw the stimulus size as “mindboggling” tells us we should not rely on the people Chait regards as those who matter. So Firedoglak e’s BlueTexan correctly quotes various prominent economists who not only understood the nature of the problem but got the follow up policy right in case matters proved even worse than they feared — which is what happened. All of these “didn’t matter” people who got it right were ignored or worse by the Obama WhiteHouse . But Chait seems unaware that the initial size issue was not the most important liberal/le ft critique of the President’ s failed economic leadership .
The economists the President ignored were saying publicly what, according to BradDeLong, some on the President’ s economic team were telling the President privately: you’re going to need a bigger boat. See, e.g., Dean Baker in 2009. Just as important, given the nature and size of the housing and associated economic collapse, the economy could well need another boat and yet another later for an extended period. So you’d best be preparing the public for what might be needed, given the depth of the recession. Instead, as DeLong notes, we got one “unforced error” after another.
The President and his incompetent political advisers insisted that all was well and that we just needed patience. And they continued to say that long after the data showed the Administra tion had badly underestim ated the seriousnes s of what we now call the “lesser depression .” They are still doing that.
But the story gets worse. Soon after Congress passed the first stimulus, the President resurrected the notion, partly ignored from his campaign, that what the economy needed was substantia l budget reductions , including “reforms” — benefit cuts — to make Social Security and Medicare sustainabl e. Obama strongly pivoted to budget cutting even though the recovery was not assured and unemployme nt was persistent , and even though his economic advisers knew, as Krugman et al were saying, that we could face a long and uncertain recovery with lingering and unacceptab le levels of unemployme nt.
To assess the President’s performanc e, one must start with a more coherent story of what Obama and the country faced in January 2009 and what those conditions called for after eight disastrous years of the Bush presidency . Some of us said both before and after the election that the devastatio n wrought by Bush on the Constituti on, on the idea of government , on the rule of law and on the economy was so crippling and massive, it would likely take years to reverse it. But some things were clearly priorities and needed to be addressed immediatel y.
On the economic front, we needed to keep the economy from falling into a great depression as a result of the burst housing bubble and financial collapse of 2008. We would soon need substantial restructur ing of the financial sector, particular ly a serious down-sizin g and reregulati on of the too-big-to -fail/fix/ control banks and Wall Street investment firms. We needed thorough investigat ions of fraud and regulatory malfeasanc e, and then to hold the malefactor s accountabl e. The prescient James Galbraith warned there would be “no return to normal.” We’re still waiting.
But more immediately, we needed major, sustained help for the victims of the massive mortgage fraud and housing collapse, as well as the millions of people that would surely face extended unemployme nt, loss of health insurance, and loss of housing wealth and income. There would be related requiremen ts for collapsing state budgets, formulas for sharing of Medicaid and UI sharing, and so on. That effort would need to be massive, sustained, and securely funded.
If NYT is your source for your conclusion then read this
What Jonathan Chait Doesn’t Understand About Obama:
I suppose we should be grateful that TNR’s Jonathan Chait volunteered to write an apologia for President Obama as a way to explain to those he identifies with “the left” why Obama’s not such a bad President and to remind the “left” there were extenuatin g circumstan ces that explain the President’ s failure, or refusal, to achieve what the left wanted and the country needed.
But one has to wonder: is Chait’s defense all the President’s supporters have left? Because when Chait leaves out what really matters to Obama’s liberal critics, the piece comes off as an argument for Obama announcing “I shall not seek, and I will not accept . . .”
english 101.
you can do it.
people like YOU gave us bush.
==========
Bashing Nader again?
2000 was a stolen election. It was a coup d'etat; a bloodless coup, but a coup nonetheles
Al Gore won. Gore got more votes in Florida. Any way it was counted (and the biggest point that people seem to forget is that there were 179,000 perfectly readable ballots that never got counted), Gore got more votes than Bush.
Whatever the means necessary to get BushCheney into the WhiteHouse would have happened. Had Nader been in the race, had he not in the race, whatever. Had Nader not run, the outcome would've been the same. The powers that be were not going to let Gore win, no matter what, and gamed it innumerabl
If the means for getting BushCheney into the WhiteHouse required a close election and Nader not run, some other means would've been used.
For pity's sake, the CIA was working on GOP absentee ballots in the weeks leading up to election day in Florida. That was the most amazing revelation from the televised court hearings in the post-elect
Have people really forgotten all the different ways that this election was gamed by the GOP? And that's just in Florida. And just the ways that we learned about because of legal proceeding
There was a coup d'etat in this country in 2000. A bIoodless coup, but a coup nonetheles
We were about to embark on that national discussion 9 months into the BushAdmini
By Wednesday, September 12th, all copies had been removed from the stands nationwide
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
and by the way, apparently the left agenda IS a hard sell to the average person, or else they'd VOTE for the person, like kucinich, who actually believes it and would enact it.
Laura Flanders?
She's British-Am
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
#6 - Continue the Insanity, meaning we keep doing the same thing* over and over again hoping for a different outcome.
[* - Same thing = Continue to refuse to believe our own 'lyin' eyes', keep doing what we've been doing for the past 20 years, continue voting for DLC-contro
Clue: There aren't any grown-ups to save us; we're 'it'.]
What happens when millions are out of work, no jobs, no money, no hope. London, Philadelph
"Quickly Brad, there are thousands of lives at stake... Brad any answer..." - Roy Neary, 'Close Encounters of the Third Kind
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
#4 - A Third Party Challenge
We're not limited to voting for just Democrats and Republican
#5 - The "Oh, F I_I C K it, let's get it over with - Vote for Republican
The horse is out of the barn and we should just let the radical right have its way. It's not like Obama and the gutless Dems are going to stop them.KEEP READING
It would be carnage for a few years, people eating other people (though that really only happens in the southern tier of states), old people dying (why are we so eager to keep them alive, anyway?) and cats and dogs living together...
Let it all come crashing down--but let's make sure to kill Soc Sec and Medicaid/Medicare. These Tea Partiers should be allowed to pay what the market will bear, right?
By the way, while our Tea-Party/Real Men (or whatever those guys who wouldn't pay taxes a few years ago are called) friends talk about how they'd like to keep more of their hard earned money and give less to the idiots who "gave us Vietnam and Iraq," perhaps they'd like to pick up the bill for the grading and paving of the road that leads from their home to their office--ca n't be what, more than $60K a year.
While they're at it, maybe they'd like to cut a check for the police and fire people they'd have to employ to protect their home and valuables from damage. If they could get one guy for another $30K, they'd be lucky. Oh, and then there's that water and waste service, if you've got that.
Really, just let these fI_Ickers get what they want.
#3 - Primary Obama
Here are two powerful arguments for challengin
Michael Lerner's very powerful case for primarying Obama.
Ralph Nader's very powerful case for primarying Obama (and no, he's not running again).
Michael Lerner's argument is sweetly naive, IMHO, in that he's hopeful that Obama and Democrats can be moved to the left. I don't think that's true anymore. I think the party and the culture of Washington
Up until a couple of weeks ago I was saying that, to begin with, no one in the Democratic Party would do it. Due to the hierarchic
Liberals/p
The DLC has gotten too powerful, what with a Democrat in the White House and a Democratic
As I said, that was up until a couple of weeks ago. Word has it that a challenge is coming, but it's really not a serious one, not intended for anyone to get the nomination from Obama.
So unless Obama drops out (in which case another corporate tool will take his place), the only legitimate challenges to him will come from outside the Democratic Party (Republica
So what's left?
KEEP READING
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
i really think you missed the point of my post entirely.
apparently i know where to send the congratulations salutation s when we have a president perry, though.
the ones who lost the elections were NOT the "sitting presidents who wouldn't have been re-elected even if there had been no primary challenge.
==========
Who are you referring to?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
http://www
The only thing remotely 'liberal' about Obama is his neoliberal
It shouldn't take somebody else's word to tell you what Obama is; if you don't know enough about politics, about policy and legislatio
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
http://www
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
You're not limited to voting for just Democrats and Republican
I never advise people to sit out elections, because if you're not at the table, you're on the menu. It's what p!sses me off about Obama, and one of many reasons I know him to be a con man betraying them that brung 'im. Because by shutting out liberals, the base, from his administra
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
So who will you vote for with the facts as they are today?
In name only.
"Privately, Obama describes himself as a Blue Dog Democrat", which means he might as well re-registe
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
There could be 100 "progressi
Real Democratic policies aren't that hard to sell to Americans. When most Americans want Medicare and other government programs which they've benefitted from to continue and teabaggers shout "No government control of healthcare
The DLC got into power by refusing to defend the word 'liberal' when RonaldReag
When informed of the issues, most Americans agree with liberal policies. Neither they (nor I) would characteri
If the Bush years taught us anything, it's that anyone can sell anything to Americans, if you're stolid and relentless in your sales pitch and tactics. It's not that Bush and Rove were geniuses and knew something that nobody else knew; Bush and Rove were just more ruthless doing what politician
The only time we see that from Obama is toward the Democratic Party's base.
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
Obama passed his healthcare legislatio
The fact is that Obama never pressured BenNelson (or BlancheLin
The DNC could've taken away reelection funds. They didn't.
Reid could've actually forced Republican
The Progressiv
Obama DID unleash the attack dogs to go after HowardDean when Dean said it was a lousy bill. Dean was then forced to get back into line. Obama went after Kucinich, the last remaining holdout on the Progressiv
There is nothing that Lieberman (or Nelson or Lincoln) is doing that Obama hasn't ordered. Obama and the DLC-Democr
And the proof of this is that (since you mention Nelson), when Obama needed Nelson re: StupakAmen
The week before and the week after the healthcare bill passed in the Senate was the one and only time a PublicOpti
A group of senators had mobilized behind it since the bill had to be passed through reconcilia
Obama nixxed it.
The excuse was that if the Senate did that, the bill would have to go back to the House for a vote and "There's no time!"
After the (allegedly
It was all designed, upfront, to be a massive giveaway to the insuance and pharmaceut
KEEP READING
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
Obama and the DLC worked their butts off to PREVENT more progressiv
BlueDog BlancheLin
Republican
Republican
Republican
Republican
KEEP READING
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
As far as "getting more progressiv
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.
NancyPelos
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 presidenti
And no sooner did Obama get elected than he slammed the brakes on the momentum of his election & a filibuster
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 dead giveaway that the last thing these politician
You need to get better informed. And cultivatin
KEEP READING
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
We've been doing it your way, the DLC's way, for 20 years now, and the government and the Democratic
If you and I are on the same side and want real Democratic policies, and going about getting them your way (protectin
When do you realize that you've become that classic definition for 'insan!ty' ("Doing the same thing over and over again, expecting different results")?
Do you ever realize it?
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
historically, anytime that an incumbent' s been successful ly primaried, the nominee has lost the presidenti al election.
I obviously care more about your family's well-being than you do if you believe American companies can't hire workers unless they're allowed to make our air so dirty our people get sick, miss work and die.
Companies hire workers to fill orders for their products and services. Cleaning up after themselves is a cost of doing business, and it's a necessary cost. This isn't about jobs; it's about profits.
The fact is, federal safeguards for public health, worker safety and our environmen
Even on a strict economic analysis, in other words, the national benefits of federal safeguards outweigh costs by more than 10 to 1. Read the report for yourself.
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
I'm sorry that didn't come through.
http://vod
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
Republican
Just to show you where Obama's and the DLC's real heart lies, there are so many things he and the DLC/DNC could have done, could be doing, to get real Democratic legislatio
Obama and the DNC could have cut off support to any Blue Dogs, cut money, cut committee assignment
There is plenty that a President and a Speaker of the House and a Senate Majority Leader can do to pressure representa
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, and all Democrats in leadership positions took tools off the table for fighting BushCheney and beating Republican
Obama and Democrats in Congress continuing BushCheney
There is nothing that the Blue Dogs are doing that Obama and the DLC doesn't want them to do.
Before the midterms of 2010, I asked, facetiousl
How much evidence do you need before you realize that Obama isn't any kind of Democrat?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
You know I'm an old OLD liberal Democrat who does not vote for Republican
But thanks for making my holiday with your frantic and desperate replies; it's always good to know that my words are hitting the mark.
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
This happens to be wrong. If they instituted the rule today, they wouldn’t have to do another review of the science until 2016, per the law.
So consider what we have here. A bunch of enviro groups were ready to sue over ozone standards. The Obama Administration came in and said “don’t worry, we agree with you, we have the authority, we’ll impose the higher standards you want.” Then they waited for two years, and finally, they punted. It’s a total sellout and a de-fanging of the enviro groups who wanted to go to court to get the rules changed.
As a result, the 2008 rules promulgated by the Bush Administra tion won’t be implemente d either; the EPA already directed states not to comply with them. So most states are operating under the objectivel y worse 1997 standards. And that is expected to continue. So the Obama Administra tion is allowing, for his entire first term, ozone standards that are worse than George Bush’s.
The environmental groups, which haven’t exactly been vocal opponents of this President, feel completely betrayed. And this is the second betrayal in a week. Remember, climate activists are getting arrested in front of the White House on a daily basis over the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline, and the State Department just released a whitewash environmen tal review of the project.
The ozone rules aren’t a game: the EPA estimated that ozone pollution can trigger all kinds of health problems and lead to the deaths of up to 12,000 Americans annually. The reason the regulation seems so expensive is that you’re talking about complying up from 1997 rules. Of course fixing a 14-year gap will be expensive. It will only get more expensive. And people will die as a result of inaction.
This is a microcosm of many frustrations between advocacy groups, progressiv es and this President. And in this case, there is no Congress on which to blame it.
Obama's Capitulati
This delay of ozone regulationKEEP READINGs is an even bigger deal if you consider the context. Brad Plumer has that story.
Basically, what happened is that the Bush Administration dragged its feet on new national ozone standards for years. Under the law, there must be a five-year review. EPA’s review of the science in 2006 showed that the current standards, set in 1997, were woefully inadequate . The Bush Administra tion countered with a new rule in 2008 that was well below the recommenda tion from EPA scientists .
And then…
"Groups such as the American Lung Association quickly filed a lawsuit to stop the Bush rules, which they claimed were too weak and would lead to thousands of unnecessar y deaths and cases of respirator y disease. However, when Obama came into office, the new EPA said it basically agreed with the critics and would issue revised rules by August 2010. At that point, the ALA agreed to hold off on its lawsuit. But August 2010 rolled around. Still no rules. Then October. Then November. Still nothing. Then the EPA said it wanted to go back and look at the science again, just to double-che ck. Sure enough, EPA’s scientific review board said that 60 to 70 parts per billion was the way to go. And EPA administra tor Lisa Jackson announced that the final rules would be more or less in line with the science [...]
So now, today, the White House announced that it’s not going to have any new rules. On a call with reporters, White House officials argued that it doesn’t make sense to put out new rules in 2011 when there’s going to be another scheduled review of the ozone science in 2013."
I'm not supporting Obama's reelection because I think he's a great Democrat. He isn't. Barely a mediocre one, but he's better than ANY Repub currently on the stump.
Sometimes, heck most of the time, our choices in life suck.
"I don't want to present myself as some sort of singular figure. I think part of what is different is the times. I do think that, for example, the 1980 election was different. I think Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not. He put us on a fundamentally different path because the country was ready for it. They felt like with all the excesses of the 60s and the 70s and government had grown and grown but there wasn't much sense of accountabi lity in terms of how it was operating. I think he tapped into what people were already feeling. Which is we want clarity, we want optimism, we want a return to that sense of dynamism and entreprene urship that had been missing."
When Obama wants something, he's shown he can go all Rove-like, relentless
Obama's in the Oval Office to mellow-tal
Obama is the grifter leading off the second half of the con game, which is to squeeze the rest of the dimes from the poor & middle classes. It's been going on since Reagan, but It began in earnest, for all to actually see, with part 2 of Bush's Medicare Reform Act of 2003 (high-pric
If you haven't seen this, you might find it enlighteni
FYI: As the IMF bails out Greece, Greece is being forced to sell off (privatize
UPDATE: Check this out - WikiLeaks: China Wanted to Invest in U.S. Banks During '08 Crisis
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
I don't vote for Republican
What I'm saying is clearly resonating as the truth with many, even you, given as how you are squealing like a stuck pig.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
The speech Obama, had he been a sincere and real Democrat, should have given:
In The Future, The Only Jobs Left Will Be Green
Last year, the NY Times reported, “In the energy sector alone, the deployment of new technologies, like wind and solar power, has the potential to support 20 million jobs by 2030 and trillions of dollars in revenue, analysts estimate.”
Averting catastrophic climate change will generate far more jobs by 2050, as we must deploy more than 10,000 GW of clean energy (see here). Failing to avert catastroph ic climate change will probably generate more jobs, especially post-2030, since we still have to make the transition off fossil fuels, but on top of that we will have to have to make probably 10 times as much investment in sea walls, levees, relocating people and cities, and the like (see Real adaptation is as politicall y tough as real mitigation , but much more expensive and not as effective in reducing future misery).
Most People Disapprove of Free Trade, yet Obama is expected to push, big time, three new trade treaties that will outsource more of Americans' jobs overseas.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
Talk of Democratic politician
Democratic voters have mistakenly believed that Obama and Democrats want what they want. The DLC-contro
If the Bush years taught us anything, it's that anyone can sell anything and ANYONE to Americans, if you're stolid and relentless in your sales pitch and tactics. It's not that Bush and R0ve were geniuses and knew something that nobody else knew; Bush and Rove were just more ruthless in doing what politician
Obama didn't get to be the first black president, vanquish the Clinton machine (to get the nomination
Obama and Democrats know how to do it -- They don't want to do it.
The trick for them has been to keep the many different populist groups believing that they really do support our issues, but they're merely inept. And to get us to keep voting for them despite their failure to achieve our alleged shared objectives.
Getting Democratic voters (and Obama's 'most ardent supporters
The latest in the long line of betrayals are Obama's reversal on smog regulation
No, it's not just the Republican
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
Best read on Obama and speeches, by Drew Westen (a psychologi
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
4 Ways Government Policy Favors the Rich and Keeps the Rest of Us Poor
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
Overworked America: 12 Charts That Will Make Your Blood Boil
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
“One year from now, we have the chance to tell all those corporate lobbyists that the days of them setting the agenda in Washington are over. I have done more to take on lobbyists than any other candidate in this race - and I've won. I don't take a dime of their money, and when I am President, they won't find a job in my White House. Because real change isn't another four years of defending lobbyists who don't represent real Americans - it's standing with working Americans who have seen their jobs disappear and their wages decline and their hope for the future slip further and further away. That's the change we can offer in 2008.
When I am President, I will end the tax giveaways to companies that ship our jobs overseas, and I will put the money in the pockets of working Americans, and seniors, and homeowners who deserve a break. I won't wait ten years to raise the minimum wage - I'll raise it to keep pace every single year. And if American workers are being denied their right to organize when I'm in the White House, I will put on a comfortable pair of shoes and I will walk on that picket line with you as President of the United States."
-Candidate Obama, November 3, 2007 in Spartanburg, South Carolina.
A real stemwinder of an article - 'What Jonathan Chait Doesn't Understand About Obama'
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
© Blogger templates Newspaper by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008
Back to TOP