“Soldiers should be infuriated at their ex-commander in chief Bush who hijacked the memory of those that died on 9/11 by using it as a springboard to launch two devastating wars. They should be infuriated that their current commander in chief turned out to be another war mongering lying neocon dictator.”
“Along with an Infrastructure bank (by Executive Order if need be), how about an Executive Order to expand the Tennessee Valley Authority nationwide, creating a new clean energy mandate and jobs. Getting around this obstructionist congress is going to require some creativity.”
wagthedog1001 on Aug 30, 2011 at 11:07:38
“Agreed! Don't know how legal that is, but it's what is needed. I'll be your first fan.”
ekg on Aug 30, 2011 at 10:51:00
“Tennessee is in the South, the Democratic Elite does not like the South”
Excellent post. I agree that a WPA-like project is needed (was needed two years ago).
I don't agree that this would turn the midterms on their head. Much of the left lacks faith in the Democrats ability to execute - we ended up with healthcare insurance subsidies, not healthcare reform or even healthcare insurance industry reform.
Dems WPA project would likely end up being more corporate welfare in the form of subsidies for job creation (if they were able to get something through the house and senate at all). Meanwhile, the Right would scream socialism and stoke fears of government competing against struggling American businesses.
That said, for the sake of our country and their party, the Democrats need to come up with something bold and communicate it concisely right now.”
“Oh come on - don't you wish more politicians would have told Bush to go to Hell? How about a little bit of perspective people? Don't get your panties in a bunch over a non-issue - there are plenty of legitimate panty-bunching issues.”
MARYHOBE on Sep 29, 2010 at 15:00:21
“It shows a level of disrespect for the office of the President of the US. This is the level of intelligence that you expect from your leaders. The bar is low in Maine! (or is it?)”
hstdem on Sep 29, 2010 at 14:58:33
“You can dislike the man but you should never disrespect the office- no matter who is in it, including Bush.”
"The president defends his and Congress's stimulus package, which was crippled because a third of it was wasted on tax cuts designed to win the votes of Republicans who all voted against it anyway"
(he needed the Republicans with the -D's after their names too)
You quote Obama "And yes, it means passing a comprehensive energy and climate bill with incentives that will finally make clean energy the profitable kind of energy in America. (emphasis added)"
Then you say: "Mr. President, if you need to rig the market to make something profitable, it ain't profitable."
Exactly. If you need to subsidize coal and oil by failing to make the industry or consumers pay for the real costs and environmental impact of their products, then you're rigging the market to make something profitable that isn't.
I don't say any of this to defend Obama or Democrats, just to lend a different perspective on those two points you put forth in your article.”
“These banks would have been insolvent without TARP funds, now we're talking about giving them more TARP funds. This time Pelosi wants an equity share in the banks, but doesn't want to nationalize them.
These are failed institutions that fueled the credit bubble, over leveraged with credit default swaps, etc.
Bank of America has a total market cap of $31 billion today - we've committed far more funds to B of A than that already.
What % stake do we want in exchange for more billions in government funds?
What % stake in an insolvent company is worth more of our billions?
Nationalize the banks already. For those that are worried about the sacrosanct shareholder equity, just cash out their measly $31 billion in share value (would be a hell of a lot cheaper than letting these crooks continue to run our financial industry), and give them first options to buy shares in whatever form the nationalized banks take.
Outside of the TARP plan, the Federal Reserve is ballooning their balance sheet, taking anything the banks want to shuffle off in exchange for money created out of thin air through a ponzi scheme with Treasury: http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/data/BASE.txt
We have a core meltdown of our financial system. This requires a new system which is based on centralized planning, utilizing cooperation at all levels rather than competition given the current situation.
“I wouldn't have voted for either of these guys, but come on - does anyone really think we'll ever know who truly received the majority of the legitimate votes in this election?
When election results are within a ridiculously small percentage of what you would expect to be the margin of error in vote counting, this legal wrangling is always going to occur & we're never going to know who the true winner is.
Can everyone just admit that reality?
I don't know the answer is, but again we're seeing party hacks on both sides adopt whatever position suits their desired results.”
BarryChamplain on Jan 24, 2009 at 13:21:58
“Geez, what a Republican talking point: "We may never know..!"
This one began during Reagan, and we heard it a lot from the mainstream media about his admin's wrongdoing. It's a mind-bleep, designed to sow uncertainty by spreading the impression that the Truth is not Out There; that there is really no way to find out and put closure to an injustice... so hey, let's just drop the whole thing.
Problem is, sweetie... we're almost 30 years beyond Reagan, and we've been through Rove. Most of us are hep to the jive.
We KNOW, okay? Franken won, after a fair and thorough recount, as mandated by MN law. All this is, is the use of the justice system and those "frivolous lawsuits" the GOP spent decades warning us that them librul New York Jewish ACLU lawyers were all about, to impede democracy and hijack the Senate by preventing a duly-elected Senator from being seated.
Time WE showed a little of their patented and trademarked "Outrage"!”
Wildcat93 on Jan 24, 2009 at 12:56:25
“Well, since it was a three-candidate race - no one did get a true majority vote.
That being said - Franken will likely come out the winner here, and Coleman is well on his way to ruining any good-will he did have in the state...”
Grunty1 on Jan 24, 2009 at 11:58:20
“Margin of error is meaningless when counting actual, physical ballots.
Margin of error is only a factor when you are taking a sample to predict the result.”
johnie2xs on Jan 24, 2009 at 11:53:21
“Two words. ------ Paper Ballots !!! Please !!!”
lobear00 on Jan 24, 2009 at 11:50:26
“Let the court pick the next senator and throw Coleman to the curb.”
“Silverton is a little larger than Wasilla, population-wise, but it's still a small town (9400 or so).
Everyone knows Stu - he has been mayor before, has long been on the city council and is a smart, accessible leader genuinely concerned about the community he's lived in all his life. The same could be said about long-time resident and prior mayor Ken Hector.
Stu narrowly won the 2006 mayoral election after having spent less than $150 on his campaign. This election was about issues, not Stu's personal life.
Silverton is a small common sense town that works, with conservatives and liberals living and working together relatively well. Silverton has experienced a lot of growth, new subdivisions, developments, traffic lights, new sewer system, infrastructure & school issues. To many people in Silverton, this election was a referendum on how that growth has been handled, and how Silverton approaches growth going forward.
We had three candidates in Silverton & Stu simply represented the views of the majority of voters, plain and simple.
Elections aren't beauty contests - case in point, Henry Waxman. Grow up America!”
TheImpaler on Nov 10, 2008 at 00:22:57
“Waxman doesn’t deserve to be dragged into this. Your point was sound up to the Henry Waxman remark in my opinion.”
“If it hadn't been for Buchanan in Florida in 2000, Bush would have won the state handily.
Blame vote subversion, electronic voting, the Supreme Court, etc.
Here Bernstein is blaming instead a candidate whose positions are antithetical to the two-party corporate monopoly that continues to sell our country's soul to multinational corporations, hedge funds, wall street speculators, etc. Say what you will about Nader, but his positions are wildly different from Obama's, as they were Gore's.
People voted for Nader because they did not want Bush or Gore to be president. People will again vote for Nader because they don't want Obama or McCain to be president.
We had at least one election that was stolen. Shame on you Bernstein - blame the real culprits, not the small d democratic citizens that vote for candidates who best represent them.”
This is a blank check for Paulson, and prohibits oversight by congress and courts.
"(2)entering into contracts, including contracts for services authorized by section 3109 of title 5, United States Code, without regard to any other provision of law regarding public contracts;"
The bill circumvents nearly all law regarding contracts, opening the door for Paulson to turn any aspect over to private industry in the same no-bid fashion that Bush has turned over war to Halliburton/KKR/Blackwater.
During Paulson's tenure as CEO of Goldman Sachs, the company was ranked the world's largest hedge fund company, and a leader in shorting of stocks. '05-'06, Paulson's company issued 83 home-loan-backed bonds valued at $44.5b. In the subprime sector, it grew its business by 59% from 2005, offloading some $12.9b to fund managers.
During yet another time of panic & crisis, will the mainstream media again cheerlead Bush's "BOLD ACTION"? After 7+ years bankrupting this country, will Bush scare congress into further capitulation?
"There will be ample time to debate the origins of this problem," Bush said after listing some of the key developments that have rocked global markets in recent days and weeks. "Now is the time to solve it."
Paulson is a big player in the "origins of this problem". Let's tie the following to Paulson's $700b check: