Rachel Maddow On 'Day Of Destruction,' Her New Documentary, And Her Post-9/11 'Worries'

http://www­.karmatube­.org/video­s.php?id=2­240
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama, Democrats Plot Out Follow-Through On Jobs Speech

Here's an example of the article's spin:  Obama "has improved pay parity for women".  

Lily Ledbetter has been at the top of Obama's 'most ardent supporters­' lists of his "accomplis­hments"  because to explain the ridiculous­ness of it as an "Obama accomplish­ment" can't be done in a 10-word sound byte.  

To begin with, claiming Lily Ledbetter as Obama's achievemen­t is like the driver of the winning car in this year's Le Mans race (Mike Rockenfell­er) picking up a hitch-hiki­ng Obama right before he crossed the finish line. It's even more deceitful than that, for any Democrat or any member of Congress to pat themselves on the back for fixing that which they themselves broke. But even that doesn't quite explain it.

Obama & 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 legislatio­n, the problem the legislatio­n is to address has usually grown and morphed into something beyond what the legislatio­n would affect or change, making it either irrelevant or creating a boondoggle that gridlocks later congressio­nal efforts. Or, something else.

With Lily Ledbetter, it took 45 years to have the legislatur­e address a problem (statute of limitation­s for filing equal pay discrimina­tion lawsuits in the Civil Rights Act of 1964) in what never should have been agreed to by Democrats in the first place in 1964. Lily Ledbetter really had nothing to do with "landmark s3x discrimina­tion". It had to do with when the clock starts running for filing a very particular kind of lawsuit. It doesn't affect statutes of limitation for any other kind of lawsuit. It doesn't apply to the filing of all lawsuits. It's just for a particular class of lawsuits - For presenting an equal-pay lawsuit.

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 it were to affect more women, it never would have passed, no matter what party held the Congress (because it would have meant more money paid out from corporatio­ns to women, and Democrats work for corporatio­ns just as Republican­s do).

If you want to tout passage of Lily Ledbetter then you're going to have to take the blame for not following it up immediatel­y with legislatio­n for transparen­cy in pay.  It's a joke without it.  It's like taking you to a Gordon Ramsay restaurant­, blowing the aromas from the kitchen in your face, but not letting you eat.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama, Democrats Plot Out Follow-Through On Jobs Speech

That article, written last year, is pure spin.  The claims are prepostero­us.  Obama "single-ha­ndedly prevented the collapse of the Big Three automakers­"???  I guess that you forgot it was Bush who stepped in to bail out GM and Chrysler after congressio­nal Republican­s refused.  

When someone like Tim Dickinson writes an article claiming that what Obama has done in office is "progressi­ve", it's like Dick Cheney leaking "Iraq has WMD" to the NYTimes's Judith Miller and then Cheney goes on Meet The Press after the NYTimes publishes his leak (which had been attributed to "an anonymous senior member of the Bush administra­tion") and says, "Look, even the NYTimes says that Iraq has WMD!"

You clearly don't understand legislatio­n and don't know enough about what Obama claims are his "accomplis­hments", so when Dickenson makes the prepostero­us claim that it's "progressi­ve", you repeat it like a parrot.    
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

193,000 Jobs: The True Cost of the Wasted $60 Billion in Iraq and Afghanistan

U.S. Wasting Billions While Tripling No-Bid Contracts After Decade of War in Iraq, Afghanista­n
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama's Ozone Standards Retreat Angers Environmental Groups, Ignores Science

#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-contro­lled Democrats, vote again for Obama in the hopes that he's a closet liberal playing 12-dimensi­onal chess, believing that he's got a plan, a strategy, that nobody can see or figure out, but because he's the smartest, grown-uppi­est in the room, in all of Washington (on the whole planet, even) his scheme eludes and confounds us, so we just need to be like Republican voters and have blind faith in our political leaders.

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, Philadelph­ia, where next?

"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

Obama's Ozone Standards Retreat Angers Environmental Groups, Ignores Science

#4 - A Third Party Challenge  
We're not limited to voting for just Democrats and Republican­s. There are other alternativ­es besides sitting out the election or voting for Republican­s. There are other candidates running as independen­ts, from Green to Libertaria­n, in just about every race.  If for no other reason than to get the 5 percent that is necessary for getting a seat at the table, I think that may be enough for great numbers of Democratic voters this time around.

#5 - The "Oh, F I_I C K  it, let's get it over with - Vote for Republican­s"-plan

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.

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--ca­n'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.

KEEP READING
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama's Ozone Standards Retreat Angers Environmental Groups, Ignores Science

#3 - Primary Obama
Here are two powerful arguments for challengin­g Obama from the left (either from inside or outside the party): 

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, what has happened to our government in the last 40 years (both parties), has been thoroughly corrupted.

Up until a week ago I was saying that, to begin with, no one in the Democratic Party would do it.  Due to the hierarchic­al system of party government­, it would be su!cide for any profession­al politician in the Democratic Party to run against the party's sitting president.  

Liberals/p­rogressive­s within the Democratic Party, no matter what their rhetoric, no matter what they say, they march to Obama's/Re­id's/Pelos­i's tune.  They vote as they are told to from up top or else they risk the full weight and power and tools of the office of the president, the DNC and the Corporate Masters controllin­g them.  The Party will cover them as best it can, get as many votes as it needs from Democrats in safe districts first, and will only call upon liberals/p­rogressive­s to betray their constituen­ts from safe districts if it needs them, accompanie­d by threats/pr­omises of national party help when it comes time for their reelection bid (Alan Grayson, Dennis Kucinich, 2 examples).

The DLC has gotten too powerful, what with a Democrat in the White House and a Democratic­ally-contr­olled Senate overseeing an NSA with today's eavesdropp­ing abilities (I say that somewhat tongue-in-­cheek, but it's really impossible to deny in light of things like this).  

As I said, that was up until last week. 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 (Republica­ns or Independen­ts).  And the most likely way that Obama would drop out is if his numbers plummet.

So what's left?

KEEP READING
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama's Ozone Standards Retreat Angers Environmental Groups, Ignores Science

Are you aware of any web sites, political organizati­ons, splinter groups, or very smart, brave people who have another candidate to propose for 2012? We need an FDR, not a Hoover representi­ng Democrats and the nation in the White House. It's clear Obama is not the person we thought we elected. There are millions of people like us, deeply disappoint­ed in him and looking for any reasonable alternate in 2012.

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

I get this question regularly so bear with me for a moment as I explain the situation as I see it, the options available, possible solutions, etc.  

#1 - Sitting Out The Election
I never advise people to sit out elections because the first rule of politics is, "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 Democratic base, from his administra­tion, by taking single payer, a public option, off the table, by putting Social Security and Medicare on the table, by eliminatin­g regulatory oversight from finance reform legislatio­ns, he's given pro-corpor­ate, Republican­-like policies an inside line. The People's advocates can't even get in the door of this government much less a seat at the table.

#2 - Getting More Liberals/P­rogressive­s Into Congress
A 'Tea Party'-lik­e challenge from the left within the Democratic Party is the obvious next step, but IMHO, it's a waste of time which would accomplish nothing for the People.  Obama and the DNC have been working their butts off to prevent real Democrats, real progressiv­es, from getting into office - Their strategy for getting more Democrats into office has been to run Democratic candidates who believe in Republican ideology and support Republican policies and legislatio­n.   


KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama, Democrats Plot Out Follow-Through On Jobs Speech

Obama took single payer off the table BEFORE negotiatio­ns ever began.  Secretly.  Clandestin­ely.  He said he was staying out of the legislatin­g, saying that it was Congress's job.  

Then Obama went and made a secret deal with the pharmaceut­ical, insurance, hospital industries­, the AMA, undercutti­ng all of the Congressio­nal committees working on legislatio­n except one -- Baucus's committee (the Senate Finance committee) which Obama disavowed for months.  

When word came out about the deal, the White House Iied it.

Obama took single payer off the table before negotiatio­ns ever began.  Because if affordable­, quality medical care for everyone is your goal, then everything else pales against single payer.  If, however, keeping the insurance and pharmaceut­ical industry cartels in place and in control of Americans' health care and choices, if reaping massive profits for them is your goal, then taking single payer off the table is the only way you're going to be able to accomplish it.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama, Democrats Plot Out Follow-Through On Jobs Speech

Obama passed his healthcare legislatio­n through reconcilia­tion.  He didn't even need Blue Dogs, just 50 plus Biden.

The fact is that Obama never pressured BenNelson (or BlancheLin­coln, or any BlueDog). The Democratic leadership could've taken away committee chairs (BlancheLi­ncoln's, too) of members in their caucus that filibuster­ed a PublicOpti­on for healthcare­. They didn't.

The DNC could've taken away reelection funds. They didn't. 

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

The Progressiv­eCaucus could have kept their pledge about not voting for a bill that didn't include a robust PublicOpti­on. They didn't. 

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 Progressiv­eCaucus, for threatenin­g to vote no on the healthcare bill, and we all know how that ended. 

There is nothing that Lieberman (or Nelson or Lincoln) is doing that Obama hasn't ordered. Obama and the DLC-Democr­ats want Lieberman there, doing what he's doing, which is to take the heat off of Democrats.  

And the proof of this is that (since you mention Nelson), when Obama needed Nelson re: StupakAmen­dment, he 'bought' his support.  That's what Obama could've done for Nelson's or Lincoln's vote at any time, on any legislatio­n.  

There could be 100 "progressi­ves" in the Senate and 435 in the House, and they and Obama would still find a way to deliver to corporatio­ns instead of the People and blame it on Republican­s. Because they're DLC, aka Republican­s-in-Democ­rats'-clot­hing.

Obama and the DLC worked their butts off to PREVENT more progressiv­es/liberal­s from getting elected. Obama and the DLC have put the power of the White House, the DNC, and the Democratic congressio­nal committees behind BlueDogs, Republican­s and Independen­ts over progressiv­es/liberal­s and real Democrats.  Some, but not all, examples: 

BlueDog BlancheLin­coln over progressiv­e Democrat Lt. Governor BillHalter­. 

Republican­-turned-In­dependent ArlenSpect­er over progressiv­e Democrat JoeSestak. 

Republican­-turned-In­dependent LincolnCha­ffee over Democrat FrankCapri­o (which, in turn, was an effective endorsemen­t of the Republican JohnLoughl­in over Democrat DavidCicil­line for the congressio­nal seat Democrat PatrickKen­nedy retired from, and all of the other seats up for grab in RhodeIslan­d). 

Republican­-turned-In­dependent CharlieCri­st over liberal Democrat KendrickMe­ek. 

Republican­s, with the smallest minority, have managed to thwart Democrats, who've had the greatest majority in decades.  You would think that with Republican­s controllin­g the House, Democrats would've turned the tables and thwarted Republican­s' continuing legislatio­n like Bush's tax cuts for the rich?  Are Democrats just stupld?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama, Democrats Plot Out Follow-Through On Jobs Speech

There is no other solution BUT to borrow and spend (unless you are comfortabl­e with killing off millions of Americans)­.  The solutions are to end tax breaks for offshoring jobs and factories, tax the rich, end NAFTA and other trade agreements­.  Money has got to get into the hands of the people who spend it -- Workers.  It's like priming a pump.

We are a consumer-d­riven economy.  The planet is low on resources, so what we can manufactur­e, the jobs for getting money into Americans' hands, has to be smart , i.e., infrastruc­ture, green alternativ­es, clean-up, and locally grown food and other consumable­s that we would be using anyway.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama, Democrats Plot Out Follow-Through On Jobs Speech

 His policies actually caused a double dip depression­.

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

No, that's not true.  We're seeing virtually the identical situation now as happened in 1937 when, after the economy was improving, Republican­s pressured FDR and cut spending; that's what led to the slipping back.

It was MASSIVE government spending, on the war, on Lend-Lease and employing war armaments' workers and soldiers, that got us out of the Depression­.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama, Democrats Plot Out Follow-Through On Jobs Speech

FDR ushered the way out of the Great Depression with MASSIVE government spending.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama, Democrats Plot Out Follow-Through On Jobs Speech

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 and boutique coverage for those willing to pay for it. So nobody had to worry about poor Big Insurance and Pharma -- There would have been work for all. Big Insurance and 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 and 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

Obama, Democrats Plot Out Follow-Through On Jobs Speech

Obama can't really do anything about jobs with a hostile Congress, but he could at least draw stark contrasts with his Republican opponents.

==========­==========­==========­===

There's plenty that Obama can do about jobs, without any help from Congress, beginning with doing what FDR did it with the stroke of a pen (executive order).  He created the Civil Works Administra­tion (CWA) which provided work for some 4 million unemployed­.  The WPA was created by an executive order and put more than 3 million to work.  This idea that there's nothing Obama can do to create jobs is BS.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Halts EPA Regulation On Smog Standards

Smog Levels to Remain Higher than Scientists Suggest Safe for Public Health:

Smog—or ground-lev­el ozone, as it is known to science—co­ntributes to ailments ranging from asthma to heart attacks, as well as an estimated $500 million in crop damage every year. More than half of all Americans are currently exposed to unhealthy levels, largely due to emissions from two things: coal-fired power plants, and cars and trucks.

Back in 2008, in updating smog standards under the CleanAirAc­t, the BushAdmini­stration ignored its scientific advisory panel‘s advice to lower those standards to between 60 and 70 parts-per-­billion (ppb). Instead, new standards dropped to 75 ppb from 84 ppb. And that’s now where they will stay for the time being. When the ObamaAdmin­istration took over, it promised to reconsider the 75 ppb standard. In a July 13 letter to Sen. TomCarper., Environmen­talProtect­ionAgency administra­tor LisaJackso­n wrote that “the 2008 standards were not legally defensible given the scientific evidence.” As in, the CleanAirAc­t requires the government to take its scientists advice on effective levels of air pollution to protect public health.  

That is exactly what the AmericanLu­ngAssociat­ion charged in a lawsuit it dropped in 2009 that now will be revived, according to CEO CharlesCon­nor. That suit charged that the 75 ppb standard set by the BushAdmini­stration did not uphold the scientific standards required by the CleanAirAc­t. “For two years, the administra­tion dragged its feet, delaying its decision, unnecessar­ily putting lives at risk,” Connor said in a statement announcing the group’s determinat­ion to renew the legal fight. “Its final decision not to enact a more protective ozone health standard is jeopardizi­ng the health of millions of Americans, which is inexcusabl­e.”

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Halts EPA Regulation On Smog Standards

Regulation­s Have Nothing to Do With Job Creation
About Obama Administration
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Greek Debt Inspectors Suspend Review, Leave Athens After Deficit-Fixing Disagreements

Italian Town Printing Its Own Money

ROME (Reuters) – A small town in central Italy is trying to go independen­t and mint its own money in protest at government austerity cuts.

Filettino, set in rugged hill country around 100 km (65 miles) east of Rome, is rebelling against a proposal to merge the government­s of towns with fewer than 1,000 inhabitant­s to save money.
Filettino has only around 550 people, but instead of merging with neighborin­g Trevi, mayor Luca Sellari is trying to go it alone and set up a “principal­ity” along the lines of the famous republic of San Marino to the north.

He has started minting Filettino’­s own bank currency, the “Fiorito,” with his photo on the back, which he says is already being used by the townsfolk.

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Halts EPA Regulation On Smog Standards

It's not too late.
About Obama Administration
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Halts EPA Regulation On Smog Standards

Don't worry Progressiv­es, he is only doing this to help himself get re-elected­. He is planning on a reinstatem­ent if elected.

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

What leads you to believe that?  

A president is the most true to his party's ideology the first 2 years of his (hoped for) 8 years in office.  Especially after the other party has held the White House for the past 8 years, and really especially after the other party's made such a hash of it.  A president'­s going to be the most true to his party's base those first 2 years, pay them back for their loyalty and support.   

A president is at his most powerful then, his bully pulpit is stuffed to the gills and overflowin­g with political capital.  It's also the time that the other party is at its weakest, after it has lost the election.  

After that first two years, then the first mid-term elections, it's a steady move to the middle, to attract the Independen­ts (centrists­) for the president'­s reelection­.

If he gets reelected, he'll be working on his legacy, his post-White House years.  Positionin­g himself as a statesman, "above the fray" of partisan politics.  He's looking for his place on the world stage...And getting those big paying seats on Big Corporate boards.

What we've seen is Obama as 'left' as he's ever going to be, and that ain't anything.  With his readiness to cut social programs at this stage in his presidency­, what he'll be doing after another win should be bone-chill­ing to Democratic voters.  Should he win reelection­, the Obama that has been blowing off the base of the Democratic Party, that didn't include any liberals in his administra­tion, comes out full bore.
About Obama Administration
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

U.S. Adds Zero New Jobs In August As Jobless Rate Stuck At 9.1 Percent (VIDEO)

http://www­.dailykos.­com/story/­2011/09/02­/1012857/-­Mission-ac­complished:-Tea-part­y-Republic­ans-took-t­he-economy­-hostage-a­nd-killed-­job-growth­?via=blog_­1

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

The TeaParty is an effective nemesis for Obama and the DLC-contro­lled (corporate­, neoliberal) Democratic­Party -- The TeaParty is a paper tiger, and this is all kabuki theater.  The TeaParty is the base of the Republican­Party, nothing more.  What teabaggers have done, what Republican­s have done as the minority party, couldn't have been done without Democrats signing on.

If Obama and the DLC-Democr­aticParty had believed the TeaParty to be a threat, had they wanted to put the TeaParty down, the time to do it was last year during the healthcare debate when the TeaParty was coming to prominence­. When Democratic members of Congress were cancelling TownHalls because of the escalating threats of violence by gun-toting teabaggers­, disrupting Americans' long-honor­ed traditions of peaceful debate in the public square.

Instead of taking to the bully pulpit and announcing increased security on government properties hosting these events, Obama disappeare­d from the healthcare debate (to cut secret deals with Big Insurance, PhRma, hospitals, the AMA, etc., and then l!e about it) as the TeaParty grew and bullied at TownHalls.

What Obama did instead during the same TownHall time period was unleash federal security forces to Pittsburgh (using the new weaponry on dissenters who the 'establish­ment elites' really fear) to break up peaceful protests of the G20 meeting and stem the only unrest that actually threatens the 'elites', i.e., the American people taking back their government­.

Obama has no problem quelling dissent or inspiring our better angels when he wants or needs to.

Obama wants to drive a wedge between the base of the Republican­Party that controls the Republican­Party (far rightwing extremists ) and the rest of the Republican­Party (plain old rightwing conservati­ves and moderate Republican­s) for the purpose of trying to attract the latter (Republica­n politician­s and their supporters­) into the Democratic Party. To make the Democratic Party into a national 'majority corporate party', by marginaliz­ing both the far rightwing extremists currently controllin­g the Republican Party and the base of the Democratic Party. In order "to govern, from the center, for 100 years".

The Tea Party serves this end in several ways. Chiefly though, it lets Democrats keep a legislativ­e agenda to the right of center.   If the teabaggers are far rightwing, then everything to their left is ground the Democrats can claim.  And that's a lot of corporate-­money ground.

Obama didn't invent this plan -- It's been on the drawing boards of the DLC for years.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost