Obama's Africa trip gives Tea Partiers something else to bristle about

Social media is lighting up on the far-right after the announcement of President Obama's planned trip to Africa.  Adding to the list of things the Tea Party wing of the Republican Party has developed as evidence this President is the worst ever, the projected cost of the trip to sub-Sahara Africa to be in the rang of $60 - $100 million.  According to this Washington Post article from Thursday, June 13, 2013 by Carol D. Leonning and David Nakamura, these costs and deployment of resources are well in line with previous Presidential trips abroad to less developed countries.  The most recent of which was President George W. Bush's trip to Africa in 2008. 

The list of grievances the Tea Party has compiled is a mixture of the justifiable and asinine.  Pealing back the layers of each "scandalous" story that has dogged the Obama Administration since the President's re-election reveals most are instances of human error, poor decision, and lapses in judgment by people under extreme pressure - not malfeasance.   

Among the justifiable are is the NSA leaks by the former Booze Allen intelligence contractor, Edward Snowden.  Every American should be outraged that the government has this level of capacity to gather intelligence on anyone (in the world as it seems), regardless of the layers of legal hoops they have to jump through.  Another is the Justice Department's phone tapping of the Associated Press to discover who leaked classified information about intelligence operatives in Yemen.  Lastly, is the enhanced scrutiny by the IRS of Tea Party leaning or connected groups.  But this has led to more questions about what truly constitutes a social welfare organization worthy of tax exempt status and one who's sole purpose is to affect politics and election outcomes. 

As for the asinine, the insistence the Federal Government is stockpiling weapons and ammunition by the Social Security Administration in anticipation of brewing domestic unrest that could lead to a second American Civil War.  Then there's the one where Tea Partiers insist that Obama is running the nation into a financial abyss that we'll never be able to recover.  Every analysis that's come out about the Federal Government's spending during the last 11 Presidential Administrations (including the current one) relative to GDP shows the Obama Administration comes in lower than all others with the exception of Dwight D. Eisenhower's back in the 1950s. 

Then there's the Marine holding the umbrella over the President, and the one where Obama's playing with the dog, or that Obama is giving out free cell phones to deadbeat welfare mooches (when in fact this was a program started under the Reagan Administration for low cost phone service to the poor that has been reauthorized and updated over the years).  Then there's this latest one about the cost to taxpayers for the President to travel abroad to Africa (which is something both Clinton and Bush did during their terms). 

The credibility of Tea Party aligned Republicans is a factor heading into the 2014 Federal elections.  Up first are the statewide races for Governor in New Jersey and Virginia.  New Jersey Governor Chris Christy (R) is well position to get a second term, largely due to the fact he has governed in large part from the middle rather than on the fringe.  Virginia is a different story altogether. 

The Republican ticket is made up of Tea Party aligned nominees.  For Governor is Ken Cuccinelli (current Attorney General) who is best known for his pit bull pursuit of climate change scholars.  Then there's Attorney General nominee Mark Obenshain, who's signature piece of General Assembly legislation is a requirement that women who have a miscarriage notify law enforcement.  Then there's the circus known as E.W. Jackson who, among the laundry list of extreme views, beliefs and a checkered past, thinks that practicing yoga could lead to Satanism.  Even the most ardent conservatives have heart burn when Jackson speaks. 

The Tea Party is well positioned to follow in the footsteps of Protestant Fundamentalist who championed Prohibition, and burned out when their views were outright rejected by the American public.  With a national economy trying to find the right gear to propel it into a higher speed, the majority of Americans accepting the fact that gay people deserve the same rights guaranteed under the constitution, the public realizing that the Sequester cuts were a bad idea, it would behoove the Tea Party to find more substantive issues to wine about than the President doing the job of the Executive and flying the flag in promotion of freedom and liberty in emerging democracies. 

Bravo Michael Gerson! Bravo.

At a secretly recorded, high dollar fundraising event in Boca Raton, Florida back in the spring, way before Mitt Romney secured the GOP Presidential nomination, the truth about how conservatives view the world was articulated with the line, "the 47% who don't pay income taxes in this country,...".  To put a finer point on it, Mitt went further by describing these 47% as "victims" and wove it all together with the Ayn Rand narrative of the "makers" and the "takers".

Like a luxury cruise ship emerging from a fog bank, the full view of conservative ideology (at least this version of conservatism) has come into focus.  In today's Washington Post, editorial writer Michael Gerson concisely articulates the problems with embracing this radical ideology by today's Republican Party, and how Romney has spilled the beans on how the monied elites of the GOP really think about people who don't even make enough money to have to file a Federal Income Tax form.  Gerson states,...

Yet a Republican ideology pitting the "makers" against the "takers" offers nothing.  No sympathy for our fellow citizens.  No insight into our social challenge.  No hope of change.  This approach involves a relentless  reductionism.  Human worth is reduced to economic production.  Social problems are reduced to personal vices.  Politics is reduced to class warfare on behalf of the upper class.  

In eight sentences, Michael Gerson sums up what's wrong with today's Republican Party and tells you why Mitt Romney's path to victory in November is fading, and the window is closing for him to right his campaign.  The damage is done and it is likely too late.

With anything that involves competition and a long season that has to be played, a warning of peaking too soon is often uttered.  I've never heard anything warning about tanking too early.

Just 47 days to go until Tuesday, November 6, 2012.

Image found at:  http://andygrosslive.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/usher_standing_ovation.350w_263h.jpg

Republican political priorities - scoring political point or creating jobs?

The GOP controlled House of Representatives has voted for the 33rd time to repeal - the constitutionally upheld - Affordable Care Act (a.k.a. Obamacare).  Votes on jobs bills - ZERO.

You'd figure that with Congressional approval ratings fluctuating around the mid-teens, and more people holding Republicans at fault than Democrats (which fare only a little better) for the paralyzing polarization in Congress, creating jobs would be the top priority.  But the GOP seems to be more concerned about scoring political points than helping people score a job.

I came across a blog posting highlighting a new proposal by Senate Democrats that looks very promising.  The blog, VeracityStew.com, has a story on the Small Business Jobs and Tax Relief Act that according to some estimates "could generate almost a million jobs nationwide, with over 630 thousand jobs for small businesses alone,..."

One of the main features of the bill is a 10% tax break for either raising wages for current employees or hiring new ones.  Another is extending the 100% depreciation deduction.  This appears to be a good proposal, so why not work with Democrats to pass some meaningful job growth legislation?

If Republicans want to win the public perception war with Democrats, it would be in their best interest to start voting on legislation that either helps create the right economic conditions for job growth, or helping people land a good paying job.

Image found at:  http://futurepredictions.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/depression-unemployment-line1.jpg

Kaiser SCOTUS Health Care Poll: Time to move on folks...

After more than a two month absence from the blogosphere, Off K Street is back.  We've been more focused on our Facebook page for stirring the pot and posting articles for discussion.  But this will only take the discussion and voice of this blog so far.  From this point forward we'll be making every effort to make regular posts, and if possible, to expand beyond by contributing original content and first person perspective.

The Kaiser Family Foundation conducted a poll from June 28 - 30, after the Supreme Court ruled to uphold the Affordable Care Act, that clearly states what the American public wants to happen from this point forward - its time to move on.  While reading through the top sheet of a poll is sometimes very wonkish, there are some very interesting tidbits to glean.  Here's the link to the poll.

Of particular interest are questions #9 and #10.  On the question of what opponents of the law should do, 56% of respondents say opponents of the law should "stop their efforts to block the law and move on to other national problems."

On the question of what would you like to see Congress do when it comes to the health care law, the number to "Expand" or "Keep it" have been consistently 50% or higher since February of 2011.

Despite Republican assertions that the majority of Americans don't like the law and want it repealed, there also been a pretty consistent 15 to 16 percent of liberals that don't like it because it doesn't go far enough, meaning that the majority of Americans have always been on the other side of keeping "Obamacare".

In the minds of a majority of Americans, this issue is settled.  If anything, they would like to see the law improved, not repealed or replaced with a Republican alternative.

Offshore Oil and Gas - can anything stop the drilling?

Since the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, offshore oil and gas exploration is zooming along in Latin America, despite the largest oil spill in history and one of the greatest environmental disasters of all time.  With world oil prices remaining high for the last few years, Mexico, Brazil, and even Cuba have made strategic energy policy decisions to take advantage of this reality. 

Brazil, having declared itself virtually energy independent in 2006, is poised to become one of the top five leading oil producers within the next ten years.  With estimates of 20 to 50 billion barrels of oil, the presal deposits discovered off the coast of Brazil in "ultra deepwater" in 2007, have encouraged Brazil to modify its strategic energy plan and invest heavily in the development of the presal. 

Plagued with declining production from its largest oil fields, and recognizing the bloated and inefficient size of it's state-run oil company Pemex, the Mexican government signed an agreement with the United States in February of this year, to regulate oil and gas production along their maritime boarder.  This has set the stage for Mexico to work with international oil companies - like BP and Exxon/Mobil - for the first time in more than 80 years, to jointly develop deepwater drilling projects off the western Gulf of Mexico. 

And now Cuba is getting into the deepwater drilling game.  According to a blog Memorandum from the Council on Foreign Relations, as a result of exploratory drilling done in January of this year by the Spanish oil company Repsol, the Cuban government moving forward to develop their substantial offshore oil and gas deposits, estimated to be in the range of five to twenty billion barrels of oil and eight billion cubic feet of natural gas.  This raises the prospects of another oil spill off the coast of the United States.  Lets not forget that there's suppose to be this embargo of Cuba.  Does that mean the United States will embargo its oil too? 

Now offshore oil and gas drilling discussions are ramping up in Virginia.  Poised to begin test drilling this year, the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill put this on hold after President Obama called for a top to bottom review of offshore drilling regulations and safety rules.  Recently two public meetings were held on offshore oil and gas drilling in Norfolk.  With domestic oil production on the rise, and the process of hydraulic fracturing opening the floodgates for shale gas  - which has produced a natural gas glut - the question now, is there anything that can stop offshore oil and gas drilling off the coast of Virginia or anywhere off the coast of the United States? 

The short answer appears to be "no".  Since this is the case, can this boom be effectively, safely, and responsibly managed? 

Rush Limbaugh: Apology or not, Rush is WRONG

Last week's statements made by conservative talk radio personality, Rush Limbaugh, about the testimony of a Georgetown Law student, Sandra Fluke, over her contention that health insureres should cover contraception went well beyond the norms of public discourse.  Since then, Limbaugh has apologized but only after an exodus of sponsors have dumped his nationally syndicated radio show. 

Somehow in this whole episode, the issue of health insurance coverage for contraception, somehow got morphed into the boogeyman of government funded contraception - which isn't what this was about or the point Sandra Fluke was trying to make.  Not only did Rush Limbaugh misrepresent the issue (shocker) but he further proved that his conservative flamethrowing style is not remotely concerned about substantive public debate, but is intended to incite anger and further a divisive nature that eats at the bones of our great nation. 

The words he used, calling Sandra Fluke a "slut" and a "prostitute", for her position that the government should require health insurers to include contraception in their coverage, saying that she wants "to be paid to have sex", have also touched a nerve in me along with millions upon millions of fellow Americans. 

As a father of two beautiful girls, who are nowhere close to the age where they would have to use contraception (thank God), I'm outraged at the implication that women who use birth control, who might be single, are "sluts" or "prostitutes".  I stand in admiration at Sandra Fluke's courage for standing up for what she believes.  But if I were her father, brother, uncle, or friend of the family, I would be hopping the first plane or jumping in the car to come see Mr. Limbaugh where an exchange would occur that no words would be spoken. 

Sponsors dumping Rush Limbaugh are not enough.  Every station that broadcasts his show should also give him the boot.  Limbaugh's time has past, and it's now time to move beyond his brand of "political discourse". 

Image found at:  http://static7.businessinsider.com/image/4dd53ac9ccd1d51629080000/rush-limbaugh.jpg

Ragging Populism

Class Warfare! Both political parties are using it and both sides are crying foul. Republicans don't want to be chastised for being successful or portrayed as greedy Robber Barons and Democrats don't want to be portrayed as welfare dependents. There has to be a name for what both parties are doing. It's called POPULISM.

In times like these, who wouldn't at least identify with the general sentiments of populist thinking? While populism generally centers around income and anger from the middle class, working class, and the working poor, there's more than one shade of populism. The two dominant forms these days is Tea Party Populism and Occupy Wall Street Populism.

The Tea Party sees the Federal Government as the primary reason for the nation’s economic distress. They see a government that's over spent, taxes too much, is too intrusive into personal lives, assaulting individual liberties, redistributing hard earned personal wealth to those that they perceive shouldn’t be helped, and regards anyone that uses or is dependent on social welfare as part of the unemployment problem.

On the other hand, the Occupy Wall Street movement has a much stronger connection to the turn of the century Trust Busting of “Teddy” Roosevelt, the Women’s Suffrage movement, the rise of Organized Labor during the Great Depression, the FDR New Deal social programs that are the sacred cows of many of today’s fiscal debates.

Occupy Wall Street sees big financial firms, banks, and massive corporations as the problem. They look at how lawmakers in Washington, D.C. were influenced to loosen regulations on their respective industries which allowed them to take on huge financial risks that were fueled by pure speculation and greed. They see a corporate financial sector that gets bailed out with taxpayer money, receives preferential treatment through corporate tax deductions and loopholes, and acts as if they are entitled to all these benefits and don’t have to be accountable for the money they have received from the American Taxpayer.

They also pull a great deal from the 1960s Civil Right Era and tendencies towards inclusivity and strength through diversity. Occupy Wall Street sees social and economic inequity as the driver of the nation’s economic distress, brought on by corporate greed and capitalism run amuck. Occupy Wall Street also reflects some of the outgrowth of protests against globalization across the globe, many of which are marked by violence and hooliganism.

Both forms of Populism have their roots in early American political thought, but they are more a collection of different periods rather than being tied to one definitive historical event. The Tea Party can trace their theoretical justification all the way back to the Anti-Federalists, like James Madison, Patrick Henry, James Winthrop, and even to some degree Thomas Jefferson. These were people that advocated for a small Federal Government and significant local control. They also championed low taxes, especially as they related to the Federal Government, and advocated for states rights over Federal control.

The Tea Party also reflects a strong religious fundamentalist streak that harkens of Puritanical influences and hard line socially conservative policies. There are strong tendencies toward regionalism, nativism and anti-immigrant sentiment, racism, and islolationism. There is also a fear and paranoia element to the Tea Party that flashes back to Senator Eugene McCarthy and the “Red Scare”.

Regardless of which side of Populism you stand, both parties are using the nation's economic distress as political fodder for the November elections and are totally ignoring the realities of poverty than over 15% of our fellow Americans have fallen into. According to Washington Post opinion writer, Michael Gerson,

"GOP candidates seldom mention the problems of the poor, for fear of being viewed as ideological weaklings. Elected Democrats are advised by their pollsters to focus on the challenges of the voter-rich middle class. No President - indluding Barack Obama - is naturally inclined to talk about conditions that have grown worse on his watch." 

The Roanoke Times is featuring a series called "Making it".  These are stories about the new reality for many that were in the Middle Class, or at least the Working Class.  This past Sunday's story focused on Piper Lane and Paul Davis who are "Learning to live without." It's a very powerful story of how people that were working hard and playing by the rules are living on the edge.  My hat goes off to them.  If I were in their shoes, I'd be angry and wanting to blame someone, but these folks are doing something about it. They're making it, but just barely.

For all intents and purposes, they're the example of those that were solid middle class, small business owerns, who have seen the work dry up and have bills piling up - not from living beyond their means, but from the basics of trying to live and having little to no work.  They aren't just sitting around feeling sorry for themselves, but scratching and clawing together anything they can, and they're also getting politically involved.  So watch out!  This is the reality of poverty today, regardless of how inflamed Populism gets or how much either political party tries to leverage it to their advantage. 

GOP Presidential candidates channeling Occupy Wall Street

What's that?  Did I hear what I think I heard?  Could it be a change of heart within the field of GOP Presidential candidate about "class warfare".  After months of belittling and bashing the Occupy Wall Street movement for bringing attention to concentrated wealth and income inequity, Newt Gengrich, John Hunstman, Rick Santorum, and Rick Perry are all channeling some form of populist outrage towards Mitt Romney.  

According to Harold Meyerson's Op-ed in the Washington Post, it appears the GOP field has finally become aware of "the economy that most people experience."  Almost to a person, with the exception of Ron Paul - who's coming to Romney's defense for his affinity to fire people and companies for poor performance - all are jumping on the front runner for his work at Bain Capital, a venture capital firm that Romney lead, which seems to have killed rather than created jobs. 

But this seems too simple of an explanation.  A story in Wednesday's Politico cites a Pew Research Center Poll that show nearly two-thirds of Americans see very strong or strong class conflict in society.  (To view the complete Pew Research Center Poll report, click here.)  While this field of GOP Presidential hopefuls are battling for the support of Republican voters, its likely they are seeing the same thing in their polling.  If not, they're not asking the right questions. 

While John Huntsman is a multi-millionaire in his own right, Mitt Romney is the obvious target and most importantly the "frontrunner" heading into South Carolina.  Also, contrary to his self-promotion that he knows how to create jobs - having done so to the tune of over 100,000 while at the helm of Bain Capital, Romney's presidential rivals are painting him as the embodiment of everything that's wrong with American Capitalism. 

Not to worry, Newt and the gang still have plenty to say about Obama's handling of the economy and unemployment.  Doesn't matter that the economy was well on its way into a virtual death spiral before he even took the oath of office, they're still going to try and deflect as much attention from their embrace of failed Supply-side economic policies as possible, and in the same breath call for less regulation which is what got us to this point in the first place.  But when you're the frontrunner for the GOP nomination, to hell with Reagan's 11th Commandment - Thou shalt not speak ill of another Republican. 

Image found at:  http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/dam/assets/120108081441-gop-candidates-at-saturday-new-hampshire-debate-story-top.jpg 

OWS: A ship in search of a rudder

A few days ago, someone I went to High School with and haven't spoken to in over 20 years (but none the less is one of my Facebook "Friends") posted a picture on Facebook of some National Guardsmen with a sign that said - Occupy Bagram: Quit your bitchin' and get back to work.  This set off a response from me and a little back-and-forth about the OWS movement.  Needless to say, I was put-off,...no, offended, by this little protest by men and women who I have enormous respect for.  Mainly because most of these same National Guard personnel will be in the very same boat as the OWS folk when they get back to the States - no job and little prospect of getting one anytime soon. 

The image that's being conveyed by the conservative right about OWS is being fed by the liberal left - a mob of out-of-work slackers with no leadership and no sense of direction.  Regardless of what narrative or picture the right wing establishment wants to portray, the reality of who these people are (the Occupiers) is far from their truth but also confirms what is painfully obvious.  This movement is a rudderless ship drifting out to sea, in desperate need of rescue. 

The facts that get in the way of the truth, on how OWS grew, are somehow debatable.  But regardless of how the right wing establishment wants to frame "the Occupiers", there is a national consensus for a re-balancing of relative equality between the 99% and the top 1%.  So what are the organics behind this movement? 

From the post WWII era up to the late 1970 to early 1980s, Democrats & Republicans (Liberals, Moderates, and Conservatives), were in relative agreement on Corporate accountability and responsibility to the nation. The same goes for personal and corporate taxes, as well as Capital Gains taxes. During that time, while the nation went through some incredible social changes, our overall economy was relatively stable, with small to moderate recessions that we were able to come out of relatively quickly. 

Since the late 1970s early 1980s, people that felt success and those that take risks (in business) were not being rewarded enough for their "prosperity" were able to gain incredible access to elected officials. This started a movement to massive tax cuts and deregulation that eroded the relative economic stability we had as a nation. Within this thirty year time frame or so, we have had three Stock Market crashes - two directly attributed to financial bubbles and one as a direct result of the Terror Attacks on 9/11. Prior to that, the last Stock Market Crash was in 1929. 

All during this 30 year time frame, our nation has run continual budget deficits as a result of cutting taxes and deferring to the judgement of Wall Street hacks (which has developed into a defacto fourth branch of our Federal Government that is more powerful than the three branches that our Constitution is structured on). This has piled up to our current level of national debt. 

To bring my point to a close, the American Taxpayer has given these folks on Wall Street bailout after bailout - whether it be two rounds of stimulus, direct bailouts, deregulation, or tax loopholes where the largest corporation pay next to nothing or nothing at all in taxes. What have we gotten in return? More bonuses for Wall Street CEOs, Hedge Fund Managers, and their lobbying firms on K Street. They have shipped manufacturing and high tech jobs overseas, and parked their corporate profit in off-shore banks to avoid paying taxes.  But somehow this is OK, because they are rewarded with disproportionate influence over our lawmakers in DC and in every state capital in this nation.  All because they have money to fund political campaigns. 

So, why not protest the place and the people that are clearly running this nation. The people we elected to do what's in the best interest of this nation are clearly answering to the Wall Street CEOs and their Boards of Directors.  As for the folks that are being told to get back to work in the sign being held by these warriors, believe me if there were jobs to get back to - that were in a relative pay range or income level prior to the Great Recession - they would be there in a heart beat. 

The students that have graduated college during this time, most (I'm not going to say all) don't want to be living back at home with mom and dad - in the basement or attic playing Call of Duty on their XBox 360 - and would rather have a job. The older folks that got laid-off or lost their job, they're not getting hired because their "too old" and have too much experience. You might say, start a small business.  But the banks are so tight with their lending, that it's next to impossible to get a loan.  They'd rather give their top managers and Board Members bonuses for hording money.  By the time a loan gets approved (if they do at all), they're out on the street or living out of their car - if they even have a car. 

Take a good look and it will become clear that these folks that are part of the OWS movement are doing almost the only thing they can do - bringing attention to the massive income, wealth, access, and accountability disparity between those with money, power and access and those without. I agree that folks need to get back to work, but there are not jobs to get back to work to. 

For a long time, we were a nation where if something wasn't working for us (individually) we could change gears or take a different path professionally. What we've lost is the security of being able to do just that. Making the case to prospective employers that you have transferable skills is falling on deaf ears. Same goes for trying to start a small business and prove to lenders that you are a smart and safe business risk. We have lost that ability and its frustrating, and in many ways - depressing. 

So, where does this put the OWS movement?  Almost all of the encampments have been cleared.  With the exception of clashes with local or campus police, the press coverage has slowed to a trickle.  The decision making structures of the disparate OWS groups has been modeled off of a group consensus format, where participants are held accountable by each other.  In the short-term, this method has worked fine but the momentum has stalled and the larger message is being repackaged by those outside the movement - that of a movement of unemployed, upper-middle income and liberal trust fund babies, just stirring up trouble, that are disconnected from working class Americans. 

A movement that once sparked global action is now drifting out to sea, mainly because there is no focus, no cohesive message, and most importantly no leadership.  Someone, please rescue this movement before it sinks under a wave of obscurity. 

Image found at:  http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/2011/10/10/news/economy/occupy_wall_street_protest/occupy-wall-street-rich-homes.gi.top.jpg 

Is poverty being mischaracterized?

A few weeks ago, the United States Census released their latest report on Poverty in America.  It showed that the official number of people who now live in poverty rose to 15.1% in 2010 from 14.3% in 2009.  This is the highest level since the Federal Government started tracking it in 1959.  This breaks down to a little more than 46 million Americans that are living in poverty. 

While these numbers are depressing enough, the part of their report that is starting to receive more attention is the number of people that are living in EXTREME POVERTY.  This has reached a record level over 20.5 million people. 

Extreme Poverty is classifieds as people living 50% below the poverty line.  The Federal Government sets the poverty line at just under $23,000 per year for a family of four.  So, those 20.5 million Americans living on half of that is pretty awful. 

This week, CNN's Belief Blog tackled some misconceptions about poverty.  They ranged from questioning if poverty exists in America, are people doing fine if they make above the poverty line, the rational for Safety Net programs, and why only half of Americans pay taxes.  Needless to say, much of this was to address lack of understanding about poverty and how many of us view the poor. 

One perception about poverty that was not addressed was the view that if you are living in poverty, it's your fault.  There are lots of people out there that are of the opinion that poverty is the result of bad life choices. 

While some of that might be true, the reasons for why more people are living in poverty these days is largely due to a bad economy.  Millions of Americans are now living in poverty because their jobs were directly and indirectly tied to poor financial and management decisions made by our national business leaders. 

In short, to paint all people that find themselves in poverty with the same broad brush of generalization, disgust, and sanctimony by those that are not in these dire straights, mischaracterizes the underlying reasons for poverty today.

By and large poverty is not the result of bad life choices, but to a certain degree bad timing and the result of bad decisions made by a very few that affected millions of Americans who were just trying to live their life to the best of their ability.  The reality is that there are more people that are living in poverty, or just above it, that look like you, me, close family, and your neighbor down the street.  Whether we realize it or not, we are being judged by how we treat the least of us among us. 

Image found at:  http://realestateimpresario.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/poor-man.jpg 

Does Bob Goodlatte even get it?

Forget the 12% approval rating of Congress, and the 6 out of 10 people polled that are not willing to re-elect their own Congressman.  And let's just ignore the fact that back at the end of July and beginning of August, we had a very small group of House members who couldn't find common ground with the President on the Debt Ceiling, even if they fell out of a tree and landed on their heads.  This last little maneuver brought the nation to the brink of default and let to a downgrade of the country's credit rating. 

As posted on the Roanoke Time's Blue Ridge Caucus blog, Congressman Bob Goodlatte continues to obsessively push his signature piece of legislation, that, by the way, every economist that's worth the title "Economist" says will cause more harm than good to the US economy.  Let's not forget, Bob Goodlatte led that small group of House members to hold the nation hostage over the Debt Ceiling if the Balanced Budget Amendment (BBA) wasn't added to the House Bill, which was Dead On Arrival (DOA) in the Senate. 

They say that the definition if insanity is doing the same thing, over and over again and expecting a different result.  Not only will the BBA never pass Congress or make it to the President's desk, where it will be VETOED, it will never be added to the Constitution of the United States.  Good bumper sticker, bad economic policy. 

So, take you pick.  Bob Goodlatte either a) doesn't get it? or b) doesn't care?  The BBA is a cure that's worse than the disease.

The name of this GOP natural disaster: STUPIDITY

How many different ways can the GOP shoot themselves in the foot?  Here are a few examples from just this past week:

• In response to the 5.8 magnitude earthquake that rattled Virginia and states up and down the eastern seaboard, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor commented that in order to assist those people affected, “those monies” need to be “offset with appropriate savings or cost-cutting elsewhere.”

• As Hurricane Irene approached, Tea Party darling and GOP Presidential hopeful, Congressman Ron Paul renewed his call for the elimination of FEMA, stating that funding FEMA contributes to the “deficit financing” of the Federal Budget.

• This past week Republicans actually came out in support of a TAX INCREASE. Would the proposed tax increase come from letting the Bush Era Tax Cuts for the wealthy expire? Oh no. It would come from letting the Payroll Tax Holiday expire on those that earn less than $107,000 of earned income. That translates into a tax increase of $1,000 on those earning $50,000 per year, and $2,000 for those that make $100,000 per year.

If you're keeping a running tally, add all the above plus the bill that Speaker Boehner was pushing just prior to the August 2nd deadline to raise the Debt Ceiling, which was held hostage by Republican Congressman Bob Goodlatte, until the Balanced Budget Amendment (BBA) was added to the bill.  Should I mention that Boehner's bill was DOA without the BBA?  Or that virtually every credentialed economist, to a one, has concluded that a BBA is one of the dumbest public policy ideas ever conceived?  

It seems as if the GOP is going out of its way to say “screw the working poor and middle class in this country. They don’t pay their fair share anyway. And you can clean up your own mess, figure out how to restore your own power, get clean drinking water, bandage your own wounds, search and recover your own dead bodies from the aftermath of an earthquake and hurricane.” 

WOW!  And this group want to lead our nation?  Thanks but no thanks.  I'll take my chances with another natural disaster over leadership like this, ANYTIME. 

How in the world can this political party say they care about America, they love this country, but if you don't do as they say, they'll destroy the nation unless their political agenda and policies are adopted?  How can any American support people like this?  

Image found at:  http://www.carolinalifestyles.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/hurricane-warning-flag.jpg 

Robert Reich on the Economy: KISS (Keepin' It Super Simple)

I'm not the biggest fan of MoveOn.org, but this is one of the easiest to understand videos about the current state of the economy I've seen.  Former Labor Secretary Robert Reich does an excellent job of "Keepin' It Super Simple" explaining the truth about our economy.  Take a look: 

DOW DROPS OVER 400 PTS: GOP & Tea Party cure worse than the disease

Just when people were catching their collective breath from the drama that was the Debt Ceiling Crisis, the Dow has dropped over 400 points. 

This hasn't happened since December 1, 2008.  The day's not over yet, and stocks could claw their way back, but this is a bad day on Wall Street. 

I sure hope holding the nation hostage over no tax increases for the wealthy and the Balanced Budget Amendment was worth it?  Consumer demand is the problem, not Government spending. 



Image found at:  https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxt5IpC-Uzg3RyWf0idxyYD_k0cV9l_03ztodDvBOyUk6GQ7qQHluD01WglrnpeevRKpQttjh9lAo_RRF_SVQuHdYCP3bGOekmebc_1etyZMIGtCqxQp1MhO2-I3W-Bb8CmJyb2gos2-E/s1600/ask+Dr_Mom%252C+taking+medicine%252C+children%2527s+health.jpg 

Hold your nose!

There's no other way to say it, but this vote stinks!  While I'm sure that there are plenty of Republicans that held their noses or had one hand over their eyes, this one didn't sit well with the Democrats either. 

There's still the vote in the Senate, and they have to get 60 to cut off debate to even have a vote.  But it will likely just be a process matter. 

What else can be said about this particular vote.  No one was a winner, the losers were the American people, and we still kicked the can down the road to deal with on yet another day. 


Here's the Roll Call for the Virginia delegation: 

Yeas – Cantor (R), Connolly (D), Goodlatte (R), Hurt (R), Rigell (R), Wolf (R)

Nays – Forbes (R), Griffith (R), Moran (D), Scott (D), Whitman (R)

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2011/roll690.xml#Y 

Correction: 

Yeas – Cantor (R), Connolly (D), Goodlatte (R), Hurt (R), Rigell (R), Wittman (R), Wolf (R)


Nays – Forbes (R), Griffith (R), Moran (D), Scott (D)

Goodlatte's fingerprints all over the pulled vote in the House

For years, Congressman Bob Goodlatte has been one of the biggest, if not the biggest, champions of the BBA (Balanced Budget Amendment).  According to CNN this afternoon, one of the reasons why Speaker Boehner pulled the vote last night was that the bill didn't have the BBA in it. 

It pretty clear now that Goodlatte is at the center of this mess, as one of the lead hostage takers of the nation, all because they wanted to insert the Balanced Budget Amendment.

I’ve just got one question: What do we do if the nation finds itself in another situation where we have to actually declare war, or take extraordinary measures to address a national crisis?

In order to address the worst case scenario, we would have to repeal the BBA, which would take weeks or months, and by the time that happens it would probably be too late. Otherwise Congress (both the House and Senate) would have to break the law. 

At that point everyone in Congress that voted to ignore the BBA, and the President once they signed the bill, would be eligible for impeachment because they violated the Constitution in order to save the country.

Talk about a Constitutional Crisis! 

This is just insane!  Goodlatte, Cantor, and all the other Tea Party hostage takers would rather burn down a nation in order to pass a bad law that could usher in a constitutional crisis. 

This isn't leadership.  This is wholesale extortion. 

Call Congressman Goodlatte and tell him to stop holding the nation hostage and give up the Balanced Budget Amendment. 

Harrisonburg Office
P: 540-432-2391

Staunton Office
P: 540-885-3861

Lynchburg Office
P: 434-845-8306

Roanoke Office 
P:540-857-2672

Washington, DC Office 
P:202-225-5431

Image found at:  http://www.thepoliticalguide.com/Images/reps/bobgoodlatte.jpg 

Krugman is right!

No matter how many ways you slice it, President Obama has bent over backwards to work with the GOP and their Tea Party leadership to address: 1) raising the Debt Ceiling, and 2) making painful cuts to entitlements. 

Even when the GOP gets what they want, which is massive, massive cuts in entitlements and other government programs, they are still not willing to concede the other part to the problem - Revenues. 

Nobel Prize winning economist, Paul Krugman, lays it out in his column this morning, how if the GOP and the Tea Party really cared about governing and what's best for the people of the United States, they would have agreed to the President's and Democrats' conditions on revenues by closing tax loopholes and eliminating some very popular exemptions in order to pay down the national debt and start bringing cost under control. 

As further evidence of the willingness of Democrats to do what's best for the financial stability of the nation, and the world, they even proposed taking out most of their demands on the revenue side of the ledger by pointing out that with both Iraq and Afghanistan winding down, we would be able to count that funding towards reductions in spending. 

But yet again, the GOP and Tea Party deny that the money spent on both wars counts towards our deficit spending.  Are they really that departed from reality that they thought the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were freebies?  That Iraq and Afghanistan didn't cost this nation a dime?  Come on! 

So Paul Krugman is absolutely right.  Even when the GOP and Tea Party gets everything they want, and more, they care more about what's best for their own political base than what's best for the nation. 

Even if Obama agreed with them that the world was flat and that the planet was actually cooling rather than heating up, it still wouldn't be good enough for them. 

Don't look, but the GOP and the Tea Party are about to off all the hostages.  In case you're wondering who the hostages are - they're US. 

Image found at:  https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhHNS9y0WzUJ3cOzBoJiqqZlMVOk1jAUMji1tFUKtsRY7x3pLpEkODX82LlDU7VGkhGWs1yoYeA2v6prAclkS5cmF3WnP4yFbwTvOH4XRfaclC6xX62YYxzMEI11rAKpuJevFZ7MLm-gmyX/s1600/hostage.jpg 

GOP playing "Chicken" with the Debt Ceiling

On Tuesday, May 31st, the GOP controlled House of Representatives voted down a "clean" bill to increase the Federal Government's Debt Limit by $2.4 trillion.  By a vote of 97 - 318, the symbolic vote on the "clean" bill went down to defeat as expected.  All House Republicans voted against it and were joined by 82 Democrats. 

The current debt limit is set at $14.3 trillion and if the bill had passes, would have gone to $16.7 trillion.  Now you might say that teaching the Federal Government a lesson, like credit card companies do by not increasing a person's credit limit when they have maxed out their credit card, seems reasonable and the Federal Government should live within their budget.  Fair enough except for one thing,...the Federal Government is not the average consumer. 

Tied to the debt ceiling is our credit rating, which as it stands now is still very, very good.  Just for comparison sake, Greece was recently downgraded, again, from B1 to Caa1.  As one international business analyst on CNBC described it, this is almost Junk Bond level and very close to a point where the nation of Greece could default on its debt payments.  The United States is still in the AAA rating level, but if we can't pay our bills it affects the rest of the world in really bad ways. 

The simple fact is that the Republicans are more scared of the anti-tax, anti-government Tea Party wing of their caucus than they are of an even worse, shall we say nightmare scenario, of the U.S. government possibly defaulting on its debt obligations.  Heck, the GOP won't even consider raising taxes on the wealthy.  Their solution, only balance the budget and reduce our national debt by cutting the Federal Budget.  Tied to that faulty logic is cutting Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security which are paid for separately and aren't even the reason for our national debt.  That's it.  That's their path to prosperity. 

The Democrats on the other hand, don't want to cut any more from the budget and see their best opportunity to drive home the point that while tax payers don't want to pay anymore in taxes, they don't want to see any cuts to Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security.  If it means tax payers have to pay a little more in taxes to continue these programs, as well as other popular social programs, they'll do it. 

This sentiment has been aided by Congressman Paul Ryan's budget proposal that turns Medicare into a voucher program and shifts more of the health care costs away from the Federal Government and onto seniors.  Simply put, this idea has gone over like a lead balloon. 

It seems like the GOP would clue in and be more fearful of the American Voter than the fringe elements of their Tea Party caucus.  During the 2010 Mid-Term elections, Republicans did a masterful job in scaring seniors and others that depend on the very programs they now propose gutting in order to balance the Federal Budget.  They were just as adept at painting Democrats as out of the mainstream and tagging them with the bad guy lable.  It's clear now, the tables have turned. 

It's not an overreach, or a stretch, to label what the GOP and their Tea Party caucus are trying to do as outside of the mainstream of America, or shall we say extreme or FRINGE.  This is a very dangerous game the Teapublicans are playing with the Debt Ceiling, and if they don't stop the losers will not only be their House Majority or chances at regaining the Senate or the White House, but the American people.

Is Trump the second coming of Jesse Ventura?

Some would liken Donald Trumps second flirtation with a Presidential run to that of Ross Perot.  But then again, Trump has taken several steps that indicate he is more serious this time than in the past.   There's no question that Donald Trump is a media darling, but the conventional wisdom from the "eye rolling" political establishment is that he's not a serious candidate.  Or is he? 

According to Politico, Trump has reached out to conservative faith leaders and groups, has contacted several high level Republican consultants and media firms, started looking at potential campaign managers, and is preparing FEC paperwork that would provide more concrete details about his vast financial holdings.  All this seems to be adding up to running in the GOP Presidential Primary.  Then again, the possibility of an independent run is not out of the question. 

With an American electorate that is weary of the overexposed hyper-partisanship, an independent run by Trump would parallel that of former Navy SEAL, former Pro-Wrestling star, and former Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura.  No one took Ventura serious from either side (Democrats or Republicans).  Because of this he was able to tap into frustration with establishment party politics and mobilize a block of non-traditional voters (WWF/WCW/WWE) that propelled Ventura to the Governorship.

Now, we're talking about a Presidential run here and not something small like a Governor's race.  But the reason why any one should even entertain the thought---The Donald has deep, deep pockets and is one of the few people that could even come close to competing with Obama, dollar for dollar.  Nice to speculate but is it really that inconceivable?  We will see... 

Images found at:  http://nymag.com/daily/intel/30_trumpconcern_lgl.jpg and http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/july2005/010705ventura.jpg

Bloomberg News yankin' the ski mask off of TARP recipients

It looks like the American Taxpayer will finally get to see which banks got the bailout.  The Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal by the Banking Industry to keep secret the details of who got what from the TARP.  Thanks to Bloomberg News filing a FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) request, the Federal Reserve will have to disclose the "names and details of the banks that borrowed money from the “discount window,” where U.S. banks have turned for emergency funds — confidentially — for nearly a century." 

This is just another example of the hubris and the disconnect that corporations (specifically the Banking Industry) have from Main Street and reality.  When you take taxpayer (public) money to bailout a private enterprise, the taxpayers get to see who you are and what you spent it on.  Once you've paid us back, then we'll get out of your business.  Simple as that. 

Bloomberg News, you have the thanks of a greatful taxpayer.