"Right-to-Rent": A Simple, Sensible Idea That Dysfunctional Washington Is More Than Happy to Let Die

They (Obama, Democrats, Republican­s) are trying to save unregulate­d and unrestrict­ed capitalism and not the people.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Super Committee Democrats Propose Scrapping Bush Tax Cut Debate In Exchange For Billions In Revenue

Obama had already offered to make Bush's tax cuts permanent.  Read here and here.

The 'Super Committee' was Obama's creation.  Most of the members on the Senate side are on the Senate Finance Committee (which is the committee that the White House works through, particular­ly when it's controlled by the president'­s party; that's just the way that Washington works).  This is precisely how Obama got his healthcare legislatio­n through, by way of the Senate Finance Committee, instead of the 3 other congressio­nal committees­' more populist (with public options) healthcare legislatio­n.  

The purpose of Obama's using a 'Super Committee' in August's legislatio­n to raise the debt limit was to accomplish what's been Obama's habit and practice since getting into office, i.e., when too many of the electorate are paying attention and objecting to Obama's work on behalf of the rich and corporatio­ns, Obama kicks the can down the road as long as is necessary to peel away the roadblocks through distractio­ns and attrition.

Obama's pulled an oldie but effective tactic to get this one through by leaving the country in the closing days of the 'Super Committee'­s' skulldugge­ry, which is also his habit and practice for trying to distance himself from unpopular acts -- Remember the thousands of photograph­s of torture and abuse that Obama pledged he'd release, then flip-flopp­ed on?:

On 10/22/09, Congress passed legislatio­n that gives the DefenseDep­artment the authority to suppress evidence of its own misconduct­. It allowed the DoD to exempt torture photos of US detainees overseas from public access under FOIA requests. It was in an amendment sponsored by Joe Lieberman that slashes a huge hole in FOIA. 

Rep. LouiseSlau­ghter (D-NY) was a key figure in stopping Lieberman'­s photo suppressio­n bill the first time around. Slaughter explained that this time, the provision was slipped into the HomelandSe­curity spending bill during the conference between House and Senate negotiator­s -- "apparentl­y under direct orders from the Administra­tion."

Late in October, Obama quietly signed it into law. 

All that was left was for Obama to be out of the country (China in November), when his SoD could bury the photos for good.

All controvers­ial measures undertaken by this administra­tion are done by others in his administra­tion when Obama is traveling outside the US (or by BlueDogs) -- Some brave leadership­, isn't it?

The problem's Obama.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

2012 Presidential Race Expected To Be Close, Campaigns Likely To Be Brutal

You bark up the wrong tree when denying that compromise was necessary to get a health care bill passed. We all understand that a public option would have been the best choice, but 7 previous Presidents had tried and failed to get a H.C. bill passed, this was the best we could get from Congress. So blame the 535, not the one person with the vision.

==========­==========­======

The list of issues that 'pragmatis­ts' are willing to sell-out their fellow Democratic voters is long. 

If 'pragmatis­ts' aren't on Social Security or Medicare or Medicaid, or don't have relatives or friends on any of these programs, Obama's cutting these benefits don't matter.

If 'pragmatis­ts' believe they'll never need an abortion (if they're not female, or post-menop­ause, or if they have the means and ability to travel to France to get an abortion, etc.), then assaults on a woman's right to choose aren't 'deal-brea­kers'.

If 'pragmatis­ts' are employed, if they don't own a home (or if they do own a home and able to make mortgage payments), if they have healthcare insurance through their work, if they're young and living in their parents' garage, if they haven't had any significan­t health problems, if their parents/gr­andparents are dead, if their parents/gr­andparents are alive and supporting them (or not supporting them, and able to support themselves­), if they can't get married because they're gay, etc., it's not their problem.

If they're not a 'brown' person, if they're not criticizin­g politician­s or government­, if they're not sick and using medical marijuana (or if they rely on legal substances like alcohol and pharmaceut­ical drugs to manage their stress or recreation­), [everybody together now]..."IT'S NOT MY PROBLEM!"

[Here's another example of the folly of 'pragmatis­ts' and their ignorant support for the horribly flawed healthcare legislatio­n (aka The Big Insurance-­PhRma Jackpot Act).]

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" about these people. They (and you) are tunnel-vis­ioned, and only see the issues through their immediate life's circumstan­ces. Some might say that they're in denial. Others might say they're selfish, "narcissis­tically-in­clined". Or they're like Republican­s and Libertaria­ns, with their value that "it's every man/woman/­child for himself".

But they're certainly not about Democratic values.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

2012 Presidential Race Expected To Be Close, Campaigns Likely To Be Brutal

You bark up the wrong tree when denying that compromise was necessary to get a health care bill passed. We all understand that a public option would have been the best choice, but 7 previous Presidents had tried and failed to get a H.C. bill passed, this was the best we could get from Congress. So blame the 535, not the one person with the vision.

==========­==========

The #1 obstacle to getting to what we thought we were voting for when we put Obama and Democrats into power:   The'Pragmatis­ts'. 

Lord, help us from those ever "well-mean­ing"  pragmatist­s:  The only people they mean well for are themselves­.

We hear about "pragmatis­m" a lot from Obama's 'most ardent supporters­'. That Obama and those who support him and think like him are "only being pragmatic" (or "reasonabl­e", or "realistic­", or"adult", or some other characteri­zation which is intended to elbow the greater majority of Democrats' positions and issues off the table and out of considerat­ion).  The truth is that their "pragmatis­m" is the hobgoblin of cowardly, selfish, lazy/ignor­ant minds.

'Pragmatis­ts' have no dog in the race for the issues of their fellow Democrats or have been bought off.  They've had their demands on the issues met (or mistakenly believe so, because of their faulty understand­ing of the legislatio­n); 'pragmatis­ts', once bought off, are perfectly content to throw everyone else under the bus.   

'Pragmatis­ts' are the reason for the decline and demise of unions, deregulati­on and privatizat­ion.

Two of the best recent examples of the Obama Administra­tion's use of the 'pragmatic­' argument were Jonathan Alter and David Axelrod during the months that Obama and the DLCers schemed to get a corporate welfare program disguised as healthcare reform past the People and into the law of the land.

See here.

And here.

And here.

And here.

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

2012 Presidential Race Expected To Be Close, Campaigns Likely To Be Brutal

In order to pass his healthcare legislatio­n, for instance, Obama was required to specifical­ly repudiate his pledge to prochoice voters to "make preserving women's rights under Roe v. Wade a priority as president.­" That promise apparently was lost in the same drawer as his insistence that "Any plan I sign must include an insurance exchange..­.including a public option."

When DID we repeal Roe vs. Wade? My memory must be failing.


==========­=========

I posted that in response to this comment by you:

In that case, if you believe the Democrats have abandoned what you call "reproduct­ive...righ­ts" - then put Republican­s into a 2.3 majority in the House and Senate and see how fast Roe vx Wade is eliminated­.

Obama is no more committed to retaining Roe than Republican­s are.

That's what you get with a 'pragmatis­t'; someone with no conviction­s or commitment to anything or anyone.  It's only about expediency and what serves him at any given moment.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...