Ed Schultz, Dylan Ratigan Have Angry Exchange Over Obama Jobs Bill (VIDEO)
You (and the NYT) are demonstrab
Single payer universal health care is generally defined as 'Medicare For All', meaning a government fund collects and distribute
Hillarycar
During the campaign, Obama supported "healthcar
Obama actually did campaign on single payer universal health care. In addition to the now infamous video clip from 2003 -http://www
See the part where he says he has a plan to "cover everyone'? That's called "universal coverage". Just in case that confuses you, there's even a graphic in the ad that says "The Obama Plan - UNIVERSAL coverage for all Americans"
Here is another reference where Obama campaigned on a public option.
Candidate Obama was against and/or for everything
What Obama did was preserve an anachronis
Insurance adds NOTHING to the medical model. The insurance industry is the 'Don Fanucci' (Godfather
About MSNBC
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
Occupy Wall Street Protesters Fed Up With Both Parties
Not only does it include unions, it also includes candidates themselves not being able to donate to themselves
So anybody worrying about only rich people being able to run for office can relax.
All federal elections would be publicly financed, the way it used to be.
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
Eric Holder Hits Back At Rep. Who Called Obama Administration 'Accessory' To 'Murder'
Obama is operating a secretive panel in the White House that is targeting American citizens for assassinat
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
#OccupyWallSt v2: What Cross-Partisanship Must Mean
The list of issues that 'pragmatis
If 'pragmatis
If 'pragmatis
If 'pragmatis
If they're not a 'brown' person, if they're not criticizin
[Here's another example of the folly of 'pragmatis
If it isn't affecting them, it won't affect them, and so it's nothing that they should have to waste their time on. Or in their 'bottom line'.
There's nothing "pragmatic
But it's certainly not a Democratic value.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
#OccupyWallSt v2: What Cross-Partisanship Must Mean
The #1 obstacle to getting to what we thought we were voting for when we put Obama and Democrats into power: The'Pragmatis
Lord, help us from those ever "well-mean
We hear about "pragmatis
'Pragmatis
'Pragmatis
Two of the best recent examples of the Obama Administra
See here.
And here.
And here.
And here.
KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
#OccupyWallSt v2: What Cross-Partisanship Must Mean
All this talk of compromise -- What's the compromise position on ending Bush's Obama's tax cuts? Do Obama's 'most ardent supporters
What's the compromise position on enforcing regulation
What's the compromise position on a woman's right to choose? Make it impossible for her to actually obtain an abortion?
What's the compromise position on Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid and veterans' care and SCHIP, etc.? Empty out the trust funds to pay bond holders and war profiteers so that there's nothing left for those who paid into into the trust funds?
What's the compromise position on getting out of Afghanista
What's the compromise position on closing CIA black sites and ending torture and commiting crimes against humanity? Prison Ships, Ghost Prisoners and Obama's Interrogat
There is no 'center' on most issues. We're 'centered-
Democrats can't claim to be for all that and then get behind building nuclear power plants, fracking, offshore oil drilling, cutting or not enforcing air quality regulation
In 2008, ten million more voters went to the polls to vote for Obama and Democrats NOT because those voters wanted Republican policies and legislatio
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
A Decade in Afghanistan: Thousands Dead, Billions of Dollars Wasted
'Hijacking Catastrophe' (a 2004 documentar y):
"The war in Iraq was very very clearly about oil, as was the war in Afghanistan. The oil pipeline that was planned (in Afghanista n), 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 Afghanista n -- 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 necessaril y call neoconserv ative, however it fits perfectly in with the neoconserv ative 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 unilateral ism, of using force to achieve your aims."
-Lt. Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski, retired U.S. Air Force lieutenant colonel whose assignment s 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.c om/watch?v =JUxI3rSLD O8
http://www.youtube.c om/watch?v =SltOy_F6Z II
About Veterans
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost Read more...
A Decade in Afghanistan: Thousands Dead, Billions of Dollars Wasted
Just a few months ago, Rachel Maddow and Richard Engel walked the dusty, garbage-st
Or to be more precise, on the money that was put on the US taxpayers' tab (borrowed from China and Saudi Arabia and Japan) that you, me, our children and grandchild
Learn how we are not "nation-bu
You won't know whether to laugh or to scream over this.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
Occupy Wall Street Protesters Fed Up With Both Parties
My comment that preceded the one above (which listed more of the same Obama policies that we would have expect from McCain) didn't get published, but you can see it here. It's why I've said that over the course of US history, corporatio
Democrats (controlle
Those who continue to delude themselves into thinking Obama's a good guy who never would have started those wars, and who has only the best of intentions but got a bad deal (I don't share that opinion anymore) should think of all this as a business plan where the CorporateM
And after 8 years of BushCheney the American people aren't going to go for another team like that. They're going to want HOPE and CHANGE, with a persona they can believe in and trust. BarackObam
The truth is that Obama is no better than BushCheney
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
Occupy Wall Street Protesters Fed Up With Both Parties
Not that I agree with you about unions, but they would be prevented from donating money, too.
NO PERSON, no corporatio
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
Occupy Wall Street Protesters Fed Up With Both Parties
Dick, The Butcher: The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.
-Henry VI, William Shakespear
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost Read more...
Occupy Wall Street Protesters Fed Up With Both Parties
Unless and until there is drastic and uncompromi
Dylan Ratigan kicked off the campaign to GET MONEY OUT OF POLITICS last week.
Ratigan has committed to using his show on MSNBC as a platform to force this issue to the center of the 2012 elections with a petition for a Constituti
The new threshold is to double the number of signatures
Here is the proposed Constituti
"No person, corporation or business entity of any type, domestic or foreign, shall be allowed to contribute money, directly or indirectly , to any candidate for Federal office or to contribute money on behalf of or opposed to any type of campaign for Federal office. Notwithsta nding any other provision of law, campaign contributi ons to candidates for Federal office shall not constitute speech of any kind as guaranteed by the U.S. Constituti on or any amendment to the U. S. Constituti on. Congress shall set forth a federal holiday for the purposes of voting for candidates for Federal office."
Sign the petition, tell friends, Facebook it, Tweet it. #GetMoneyO
Or Text SIGN to +191772068
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost Read more...
Occupy Wall Street Protesters Fed Up With Both Parties
First and foremost, McCain would've undoubtedly selected as TreasurySe cretary an individual nominated by WallStreet —which has a strangleho ld on the economy due to its enjoying 30 to 40 percent of all corporate profits. If he didn’t select TimGeithne r, a reliable servant of financial interests whose nomination might have allowed McCain to trumpet his “maverick” credential s, whoever he did select would clearly have also moved to bail out the financial institutio ns and allow them to water down needed financial reforms.
Ditto for the head of his NationalEconomicCoun cil. Although appointing LarrySumme rs might have been a bit of a stretch, despite his yeoman work in destroying financial regulation —thus enriching his old boss RobertRubi n and helping cause the Crash of 2008—McCai n could easily have found a JackKemp-l ike Republican “supply-si der” who would have duplicated Summers’ signal achievemen t of expanding the deficit to the highest level since 1950 (though perhaps with a slightly higher percentage of tax cuts than the Obama stimulus). The economy would have continued to sputter along, with growth rates and joblessnes s levels little different from today’s, and possibly even worse.
But McCain’s election would have produced a major political difference: It would have increased Democratic clout in the House and Senate.
Read more here.
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost Read more...
Occupy Wall Street Protesters Fed Up With Both Parties
They might as well voted for Hillary McCain!
If McCain Had Won
McCain would probably have approved a failed troop surge in Afghanistan, engaged in worldwide extrajudic ial assassinat ion, destabiliz ed nuclear-ar med Pakistan, failed to bring Israel’s BenjaminNe tanyahu to the negotiatin g table, expanded prosecutio n of whistle-bl owers, sought to expand executive branch power, failed to close Guantanamo , failed to act on climate change, pushed both nuclear energy and opened new areas to domestic oil drilling, failed to reform the financial sector enough to prevent another financial catastroph e, supported an extension of the BushTaxCuts for the rich, presided over a growing divide between rich and poor, and failed to lower the jobless rate.
Nothing reveals the true state of American politics today more, however, than the fact that has undertaken all of these actions and, even more significantly, left the Democratic Party far weaker than it would have been had McCain been elected. Few issues are more important than seeing behind the screen of a myth-makin g mass media, and understand ing what this demonstrat es about how power in America really works—and what needs to be done to change it.
KEEP READING
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost Read more...
Jalaluddin Haqqani, Once CIA's 'Blue-Eyed Boy,' Now Top Scourge For U.S. In Afghanistan
Everything the CIA touches turns to chit and blows back on American citizens.
Burn CIA to the ground and salt the ashes.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
Occupy Wall Street Protesters Fed Up With Both Parties
That’s why — contrary to the conceit of Obama loyalists that conservatives would condemn him for the Awlaki killing — the most vocal praise has been heaped on Obama by the likes of RickPerry, Dick and LizCheney, MittRomney, BillO’Reil ly, NewtGingri ch, CharlesKra uthammer, and BillKristo l. It’s also why the legal justificat ion for Obama’s actions is being supplied by the likes of former Bush DOJ official JackGoldsm ith, whose views on the War on Terror and executive power led him to approve of Bush’s warrantles s NSA eavesdropp ing program and to demand detention without charges.
It’s because, at least in this case, those right-wing warriors (in stark contrast to their DemocraticParty “adversari es”) are being principled and consistent rather than changing their views based on which party controls the White House: they cheered for such actions and the authoritar ian, lawless mindset behind them during the Bush years and they are doing so again now. They insisted no due process, checks or evidence were needed to justify President Bush’s actions against accused Terrorists back then, and they still think that way now about President Obama (the President says he’s a Terrorist, and therefore he is). That’s why, as I’ve argued before, Dick Cheney’s demand for an apology (expressed again this weekend) is not unreasonab le: it is simply a fact that many of the actions for which he was so harshly condemned by Democrats and Obama himself (not all, but many) have become Democratic Party dogma under Obama, beginning with the notion that slogans such asWe’re at War! and He’s a Terrorist! justify whatever the Leader does and dispenses with quaint, obsolete, pre-9/11 concepts like evidence, charges, trials and due process.
[...]
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost Read more...
Occupy Wall Street Protesters Fed Up With Both Parties
The reason they do this is because they know it will work: as the Bush years proved, the American population is well-trained to screech Kill Him!! the minute the Government points to someone and utters the word “Terrorist“ (especiall y when that someone is brown with a Muslim-ish name, Muslim-ish clothes, and located in one of those Bad Muslim countries) . If Our Government Leaders say that someone named “Anwar al-Awlaki” — who looks like this, went to a Bad Muslim-ish place like Yemen, and speaks ill of America — is a Bad Terrorist, then that settles that. It’s time to kill him. Given those “facts,” only a “civil libertaria nabsolutist” would think that things like “evidence” and “trials” are needed before accepting his guilt and justifying his state-sanc tioned murder.
This was absolutely the heart and soul of the Bush War on Terror: the President can do whatever he wants to anyone he wants — with no oversight, due process, or checks — because we’re at War and these are Bad Terrorists (says the President, unilaterally and in secret); again, read what I wrote back in December, 2005 about the justificat ions for the NSA eavesdropp ing program offered by Bush followers — or what I wrote about their justificat ions for merely imprisonin g (rather than killing) a U.S. citizen without due process— to see how true that is. The heel-click ing, blind faith in secret, unproven accusation s of the President that someone is a Terrorist is what drove support for Bush’s secret War on Terror excesses, and it is now exactly the mindset driving support for Obama’s killing of Awlaki.
KEEP READING
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost Read more...
Occupy Wall Street Protesters Fed Up With Both Parties
That mentality — he’s a Terrorist because my Government said he’s one and I therefore don’t need evidence or trials to subject that evidence to scrutiny — also happens to be the purest definition of an authoritarian mentality, the exact opposite of the dynamic that was supposed to drive how the country functioned (Thomas Jefferson: “In questions of power, let no more be heard of confidence in men, but bind him down from mischief with the chains of the Constituti on“). I trust My President and don’t need to see evidence or have due process is the slavish mentality against which Jefferson warned; it’s also one of the most pervasive ones in much of the American citizenry, which explains a lot.
Providing evidence and proving their accusations is exactly the opposite of what Obama officials did in the Awlaki killing. Not only did they refrain from indicting this Obviously Guilty Terrorist Against Whom There is So Much (Secret) Evidence, but even when they were brought into court by the ACLU and CCR, they adhered faithfully to the Bush/Chene y playbook of invoking an array of procedural and secrecy arguments as to why they need not present evidence of Awlaki’s guilt before killing him. And rather than present evidence to the public, The Most Transparen t Administra tion Ever did what it normally does in such cases: it ran to the media, usually anonymousl y, to justify its actions by — as Time put it — “dishing about classified intelligen ce which they say shows Awlaki was not just a YouTube inciter but also an operationa l planner for al Qaeda’s dangerous Yemen branch.” In other words: we have evidence to prove our accusation s, but it’s secret and we won’t show it to you; instead, the media will go forth and dutifully assure everyone we said there is secret evidence and you’ll just trust us.
KEEP READING
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost Read more...
Occupy Wall Street Protesters Fed Up With Both Parties
That is the mindset of the U.S. Government and its followers expressed as vividly as can be: we can spy on, imprison, or even kill anyone we want — including citizens — without any due process or any evidence shown, simply because we will tell you they are Bad People, and you will trust us and believe us. That was absolutely the principal justification offered by Bush followers for everything their Leader did — I know they’re Terrorists because My President said so, so no courts or evidence is required – and that is now exactly the mindset of Obama loyalists to justify what he does (back in December, 2005, I described that defense as the ”Very Bad People” justificat ion for lawless, due-proces s-free acts).
KEEP READING
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost Read more...
Occupy Wall Street Protesters Fed Up With Both Parties
Please watch this amazing video of ABC News‘ JakeTapper persistently questionin g a stonewalli ng, imperious WhiteHouse spokesman JayCarney about this issue; remember: he’s asking the WhiteHouse what evidence justified the US Government ’s targeting of its own citizen for assassinat ion with no due process, and the White House is telling him: we have it in secret but don’t need to show anyone.
KEEP READING
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost Read more...
Occupy Wall Street Protesters Fed Up With Both Parties
Now that hordes of Obama defenders are running around justifying the President’KEEP READINGs due-proces s-free assassinat ion of U.S. citizen AnwarAwlak i based on exactly the same claim and mindset — our President targeted a Very Bad Terrorist, so no due process or disclosure of evidence was needed — the same question obviously arises: if there’s so much evidence showing that Awlaki was involved in plotting Terrorist attacks on the U.S. (as opposed merely to delivering anti-U.S. sermons protected by the First Amendment), isn’t that even more of a reason to have indicted him and charged him with crimes before killing him?
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost Read more...
Occupy Wall Street Protesters Fed Up With Both Parties
So Much Evidence, There's No Need To Show It:
During the NSA eavesdropping controvers y, Bush defenders insisted there was no harm from bypassing the FISA court because they were only eavesdropp ing on Bad Terrorists (who could possibly object to that?), which prompted this obvious, unanswerab le question (one I asked here, among other places): if you really have so much evidence proving that the targets of your eavesdropp ing are Terrorists , then why not go show it to the court and get a warrant? After all, the more incriminat ing evidence you claim exists, the more (not less) reason there is to show it to a court. Similarly, during the controvers y over Bush’s (and now Obama’s) detentions without due process, administra tion defenders insisted there was no need to charge the detainees or try them in a court because they were only imprisonin g the-worst- of-the-wor st, too-danger ous-to-rel ease Terrorists (who could possibly object to that?), which prompted the same question: if there’s so much evidence proving they’re Terrorists , isn’t that even more of a reason to prove that in court?
KEEP READING
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost Read more...
Occupy Wall Street Protesters Fed Up With Both Parties
Click on the link, the blue text - http://www
American militants like Anwar al-Awlaki are placed on a kill or capture list by a secretive panel of senior government officials, which then informs the president of its decisions, according to officials.
There is no public record of the operations or decisions of the panel, which is a subset of the White House's National Security Council, several current and former officials said. Neither is there any law establishing its existence or setting out the rules by which it is supposed to operate.
The panel was behind the decision to add Awlaki, a U.S.-born militant preacher with alleged al Qaeda connections, to the target list. He was killed by a CIA drone strike in Yemen late last month.
The role of the president in ordering or ratifying a decision to target a citizen is fuzzy. White House spokesman Tommy Vietor declined to discuss anything about the process.
Current and former officials said that to the best of their knowledge, Awlaki, who the White House said was a key figure in al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, al Qaeda's Yemen-based affiliate, had been the only American put on a government list targeting people for capture or death due to their alleged involvemen t with militants.
The White House is portraying the killing of Awlaki as a demonstration of President Barack Obama's toughness toward militants who threaten the United States. But the process that led to Awlaki's killing has drawn fierce criticism from both the political left and right.
KEEP READING
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost Read more...
Rachel Maddow On Gay Marriage: 'I Don't...Feel Any Urgency About It'
She's a Phd in politics, that's about as "measurable" as it gets.
==========
On a Rhodes' scholarshi
About Gay Marriage
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost Read more...
Afghanistan War: Ex-Commander Stanley McChrystal Says U.S. Started War With 'Frighteningly Simplistic' View Of Country
Just a few months ago, Rachel Maddow and Richard Engel walked the dusty, garbage-st
Or to be more precise, on the money that was put on the US taxpayers' tab (borrowed from China and Saudi Arabia and Japan) that you, I, our children and grandchild
Learn how we are not "nation-bu
You won't know whether to laugh or to scream over this.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
Ed Schultz, Dylan Ratigan Have Angry Exchange Over Obama Jobs Bill (VIDEO)
You're ill-inform
Obama took single payer off the table before negotiatio
The week before and the week after the healthcare bill passed in the Senate was the one and only time a public option had any chance of happening until another generation passes.
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
And 60 votes (Lieberman
Obama's healthcare legislatio
It's obvious you don't know what Hillarycar
About MSNBC
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
Occupy Wall Street Protesters Fed Up With Both Parties
Yes. Misleading
Lily Ledbetter has been at the top of Obama's 'most ardent supporters
To begin with, claiming Lily Ledbetter as Obama's achievemen
Obama and Democrats got into power on a pledge to change the way Washington works. Little is ever said or explained about what that really means. I'm going to attempt it:
By the time that elected officials manage to enact legislatio
With Lily Ledbetter, it took 45 years to have the legislatur
And it wasn't 45 years of Congresses trying to fix it. It was a year and a half. It was in response to the Supreme Court's decision in 2007 in one woman's lawsuit. It's not going to affect millions, or thousands or even hundreds of others - Ironically
If you want to tout passage of Lily Ledbetter then you're going to have to take the blame for not following it up immediatel
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
Occupy Wall Street Protesters Fed Up With Both Parties
Unless and until there is drastic and uncompromi
Dylan Ratigan kicked off the campaign to GET MONEY OUT OF POLITICS last week.
Ratigan has committed to using his show on MSNBC as a platform to force this issue to the center of the 2012 elections with a petition for a Constituti
The new threshold is to double the number of signatures
Here is the proposed Constituti
"No person, corporation or business entity of any type, domestic or foreign, shall be allowed to contribute money, directly or indirectly , to any candidate for Federal office or to contribute money on behalf of or opposed to any type of campaign for Federal office. Notwithsta nding any other provision of law, campaign contributi ons to candidates for Federal office shall not constitute speech of any kind as guaranteed by the U.S. Constituti on or any amendment to the U. S. Constituti on. Congress shall set forth a federal holiday for the purposes of voting for candidates for Federal office."
Sign the petition, tell friends, Facebook it, Tweet it. #GetMoneyO
Or Text SIGN to +191772068
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost Read more...
Occupy Wall Street Protesters Fed Up With Both Parties
I keep reading the old 'lesser of two evils'-arg
When Obama has continued just about all of BushCheney
What would Obama/Demo
He/They are for more *AFTA treaties, which means more Americans' jobs leaving the US, as well as deregulati
Are Obama/Demo
Are Obama/Demo
Are Obama/Demo
Are Obama/Demo
Are Obama/Demo
Didn't Obama just have an American citizen killed, no charges, no due process? Yes.
Is Obama operating a secret panel in the White House that is targeting American citizens for assassinat
If George W. Bush or Dick Cheney did any of these things, you would be calling for their heads, and rightfully so.
Obama's/De
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)