tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-59718029926950657422023-11-16T09:11:43.344-05:00InterposerSteve Flynnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09330866407110887057noreply@blogger.comBlogger84125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5971802992695065742.post-27723026328557524062017-01-03T12:47:00.000-05:002017-01-03T12:47:18.896-05:00The Dawn of the Trump EraI have neglected this blog for quite some time. Instead turning inwards to reflect on our state of affairs and to spend valuable time with our growing family. We welcomed our fourth grandchild into the world last Friday. As I try to imagine the world these little beauties will inherit from us, I am compelled once again to do my small part, through actions and constructive criticism, by attempting to influence those in government making decisions about our collective future.<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Ideas about how to proceed don't arrive fully formed. I'm not always sure about how or when to act and where I should prioritize my time and efforts.You can help with your feedback and insight. Let me know when I'm off track. Share your stories and send me links which you feel are pertinent to the subject at hand.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
My interests are many and varied. This blog will focus mainly on politics. I have been deeply distressed in the wake of the recent US Presidential election and intend to do all in my limited power to expose the many contradictions, half-truths and outright lies of Donald Trump and his band of kleptocrats. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The latest atrocity of note is the House seeking to remove ethical oversight of themselves by dissolving the Office of Congressional Ethics. Thankfully, a day after secretly voting for this in a strictly partisan vote, the GOP have come to their senses and <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/03/us/politics/trump-house-ethics-office.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0">reversed themselves</a>. While the final outcome is looking more hopeful, the fact that this was proceeding for even a moment is deeply concerning. If ever we needed government ethics oversight, it's now in the dawning of the Trump era. </div>
Steve Flynnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09330866407110887057noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5971802992695065742.post-13317261728267584802015-02-08T15:30:00.003-05:002015-02-08T15:30:50.914-05:00National Prayer Breakfast speech prompts ugly GOP responses
<span style="color: #444444; font-family: "Century Gothic",sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Republican commentators and
elected officials alike have a tendency to manufacture outrage in response to
routine presidential comments, appearances and activities. Case in point,
comments made by President Obama at the 2015 National Prayer Breakfast.</span></span><br />
<span style="color: #444444; font-family: "Century Gothic",sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span></span><br />
<span style="color: #444444; font-family: "Century Gothic",sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"></span><span style="color: #444444; font-family: "Century Gothic",sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Congressman Lynn Westmoreland of
Georgia characterized the President’s remarks as “preaching political
correctness and excuses” and showing “deference” to ISIL. Apparently reciting
historical facts is considered by Westmoreland to be “criticism of Christian
and American history”. There are no words in this speech, or any other for that
matter, which could be construed as the President expressing respect or esteem
for ISIS/ISIL. It does make one wonder what the hell Rep. Westmoreland is talking about and why
he is so upset. </span></span><br />
<span style="color: #444444; font-family: "Century Gothic",sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span></span><br />
<span style="color: #444444; font-family: "Century Gothic",sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"></span><span style="color: #444444; font-family: "Century Gothic",sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">These are the actual words spoken
by the President with respect to atrocities committed in the name of religion: </span></span><blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">“Humanity
has been grappling with these questions throughout human history. And lest we
get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember
that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds
in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often
was justified in the name of Christ."</span></blockquote>
<br />
<span style="color: #444444; font-family: "Century Gothic",sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span></span><br />
<span style="color: #444444; font-family: "Century Gothic",sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"></span><span style="color: #444444; font-family: "Century Gothic",sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Recounting historical fact is not
and should not be construed as political correctness, excuse-making or criticism
of Christianity. We’re all well aware that ISIS has recently committed
horrendous, indefensible acts in the name of Islam. We all grapple with the
contradictions of killing and torture in the name of God. Recent images and
videos are disturbing. There haven’t always been documentarians able to share
these stories in real time, but they have always happened. Throughout the
course of human history human beings of all faiths have killed, tortured and
abused others while claiming a divine rationale. </span></span><br />
<span style="color: #444444; font-family: "Century Gothic",sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span></span><br />
<span style="color: #444444; font-family: "Century Gothic",sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"></span><span style="color: #444444; font-family: "Century Gothic",sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Predictably the “weak leadership”
meme crept into Westmoreland’s diatribe. It is ironic that this president continues
to lead extremely aggressive actions against ISIS and radical Islam, without
excuses and without tolerance, for their profession of acting in the name of
Islam.</span></span><br />
<span style="color: #444444; font-family: "Century Gothic",sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span></span><br />
<span style="color: #444444; font-family: "Century Gothic",sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"></span><span style="color: #444444; font-family: "Century Gothic",sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">There is no alternate
reading of history at work here. The president is not condemning or persecuting
Christians with his comments. This knee-jerk outrage response has become far
too common. Rep. Westmoreland has no real point. He’s just a sore loser with no
ideas of his own, and like many in a position of weakness on the wrong side of
history he’s lashing out at the wrong things for all the wrong reasons.</span></span><br />
<span style="color: #444444; font-family: "Century Gothic",sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span></span><br />
<span style="color: #444444; font-family: "Century Gothic",sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"></span><span style="color: #444444; font-family: "Century Gothic",sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Georgia
deserves representation with integrity and decency. Rep. Lynn Westmoreland
continues to come up short on both counts. Sadly he’s not alone in his unfounded
attacks on the President. The only outrage here is that Westmoreland was sent
back to Congress, virtually unopposed in the last election. Surely we can do
better.<o:p></o:p></span></span><br />
Steve Flynnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09330866407110887057noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5971802992695065742.post-74721336611751900032013-06-25T21:38:00.001-04:002013-06-25T21:38:15.564-04:00Countries with Socialized Healthcare. Are they or were they Socialist?<br />
<div>
<span style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.230469); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.230469); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.296875);"><b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;">A list of countries with socialized healthcare systems that are not socialist states, because some people can't tell the difference between socialized and socialist.</span></b></span></div>
<div>
<span style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.230469); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.230469); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.296875);"><b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></b></span></div>
<div>
<span style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.230469); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.230469); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.296875);"><b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></b></span></div>
<div>
<span style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.230469); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.230469); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.296875);"><b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;"> Socialist by </span></b></span><div style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.230469); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.230469); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.296875);">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;">Country Type of Government Declaration or </span></b></div>
<div>
<b style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.230469); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.230469); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969);"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;"> Constitution Formerly</span></b><div>
<div style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.230469); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.230469); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969);">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></b></div>
<div>
<span style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(130, 98, 83, 0.0976563); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(191, 107, 82, 0.496094); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; line-height: 24px;"><b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;">New Zealand Unitary Parliamentary Constitutional Monarchy No </span></b></span><div>
<b style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(130, 98, 83, 0.0976563); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(191, 107, 82, 0.496094); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; line-height: 24px;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;">United Kingdom Unitary Parliamentary Constitutional Monarchy </span></b><b><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0); font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;">No </span></b></div>
<div style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(130, 98, 83, 0.0976563); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(191, 107, 82, 0.496094); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; line-height: 24px;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;">Sweden Unitary Parliamentary Representative Monarchy No</span></b></div>
<div style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(130, 98, 83, 0.0976563); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(191, 107, 82, 0.496094); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; line-height: 24px;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;">Iceland Unitary Parliamentary Constitutional Republic No</span></b></div>
<div style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(130, 98, 83, 0.0976563); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(191, 107, 82, 0.496094); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; line-height: 24px;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;">Norway Unitary Parliamentary Constitutional Monarchy No</span></b></div>
<div style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(130, 98, 83, 0.0976563); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(191, 107, 82, 0.496094); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; line-height: 24px;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;">Denmark Unitary Parliamentary Constitutional Monarchy No</span></b></div>
<div style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(130, 98, 83, 0.0976563); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(191, 107, 82, 0.496094); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; line-height: 24px;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;">Finland Parliamentary Republic No</span></b></div>
<div style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(130, 98, 83, 0.0976563); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(191, 107, 82, 0.496094); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; line-height: 24px;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;">Japan Unitary Parliamentary Democracy No</span></b></div>
<div style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(130, 98, 83, 0.0976563); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(191, 107, 82, 0.496094); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; line-height: 24px;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;">Canada Federal Parliamentary Democracy No</span></b></div>
<div style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(130, 98, 83, 0.0976563); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(191, 107, 82, 0.496094); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; line-height: 24px;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;">Australia Federal Parliamentary Constitutional Monarchy No</span></b></div>
<div style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(130, 98, 83, 0.0976563); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(191, 107, 82, 0.496094); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; line-height: 24px;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;">Italy Unitary Parliamentary Constitutional Republic No</span></b></div>
<div style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(130, 98, 83, 0.0976563); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(191, 107, 82, 0.496094); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; line-height: 24px;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;">Portugal Unitary Semi-Presidential Constitutional Republic No Yes </span></b></div>
<div style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(130, 98, 83, 0.0976563); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(191, 107, 82, 0.496094); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; line-height: 24px;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;">Greece Unitary Parliamentary Constitutional Republic No</span></b></div>
<div style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(130, 98, 83, 0.0976563); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(191, 107, 82, 0.496094); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; line-height: 24px;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;">Spain Unitary Parliamentary Constitutional Monarchy No</span></b></div>
<div style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(130, 98, 83, 0.0976563); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(191, 107, 82, 0.496094); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; line-height: 24px;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;">South Korea Unitary Presidential Constitutional Republic No</span></b></div>
<div style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(130, 98, 83, 0.0976563); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(191, 107, 82, 0.496094); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; line-height: 24px;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;">Taiwan Unitary Semi-Presidential Constitutional Republic No </span></b></div>
<div style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(130, 98, 83, 0.0976563); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(191, 107, 82, 0.496094); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; line-height: 24px;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;">Israel Unitary Semi-Presidential Constitutional Republic No</span></b></div>
<div style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(130, 98, 83, 0.0976563); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(191, 107, 82, 0.496094); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; line-height: 24px;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;">Austria Federal Parliamentary Republic No</span></b></div>
<div style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(130, 98, 83, 0.0976563); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(191, 107, 82, 0.496094); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; line-height: 24px;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;">Belgium Federal Parliamentary Constitutional Monarchy No</span></b></div>
<div style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(130, 98, 83, 0.0976563); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(191, 107, 82, 0.496094); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; line-height: 24px;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;">France Unitary Semi-Presidential Constitutional Republic No</span></b></div>
<div style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(130, 98, 83, 0.0976563); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(191, 107, 82, 0.496094); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; line-height: 24px;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;">Germany Federal Parliamentary Constitutional Republic No</span></b></div>
<div style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(130, 98, 83, 0.0976563); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(191, 107, 82, 0.496094); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; line-height: 24px;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;">Luxembourg Unitary Parliamentary Constitutional Monarchy No</span></b></div>
<div style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(130, 98, 83, 0.0976563); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(191, 107, 82, 0.496094); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; line-height: 24px;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;">Netherlands Unitary Parliamentary Representative Monarchy No</span></b></div>
<div style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(130, 98, 83, 0.0976563); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(191, 107, 82, 0.496094); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; line-height: 24px;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;">Switzerland Directorial Federal Republic No</span></b></div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.230469); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.230469); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969);">
<br /></div>
</div>
</div>
Steve Flynnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09330866407110887057noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5971802992695065742.post-62660599806727609372012-08-29T20:54:00.000-04:002012-08-29T20:54:48.643-04:00"We Built That"Signage and big screens at the RNC read "We Built It". <br />
<br />
The Tampa Bay Times Forum, draped with this message, is a publicly financed and publicly owned venue, financed using $80 million in city and county bonds, backed in part by taxes.<br />
<br />
Both the Republican and Democratic National Conventions are directly financed, in part, by taxpayer money. According to the FEC, The Presidential Election Campaign Fund gave public grants of over $18 million to each convention.<br />
<br />
The city of Tampa Bay, financed by federal and local dollars, paid $2.7 million for beautification projects and infrastructure upgrades to get ready for the RNC, which improved highways, planted trees and redesigned signage. <br />
<br />
The city has also received $11 million from the federal government to complete The Riverwalk, a two-mile greenspace near the Forum utilized by RNC attendees.<br />
<br />
The federal government also provided a $50 million grant to provide security for the RNC, which is being used to pay police overtime and enhance equipment.<br />
<br />
I get that they're not claiming that they built the arena, but it serves to illustrate the point that "we" are direct and indirect beneficiaries of state, local and federal spending. Spending made possible by our collective contributions.<br />
<br />
Infrastructure spending is needed and important. It's how and why we have public spaces, with roads and bridges and bike paths allowing for, among other things, consumers and producers to get together. <br />
<br />
We did build it in a sense, but that's not really the underlying message of those signs. The message seeks to divide us, but we're all in this together. <br />
<br />
It may sound trite and possibly naive. Maybe, but I'd still like to have issues framed in a way that doesn't seek to push us hither and yon. <br />
<br />
I expect we'll see more, yet different "messaging" at the DNC. In either case, pandering to low-brow BS is not helping.Steve Flynnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09330866407110887057noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5971802992695065742.post-59620501552731115722012-03-12T21:07:00.001-04:002012-03-12T21:40:17.257-04:00Saxby Chambliss and manufactured outrage<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiFzXqqwHTyr3aFIQTJZadq_JN1EuI3jJT9hb6Tw_gPEe59vnoRPK6Y1-6P_DGhyphenhyphen8eoSqd082jnH2VOxv9zhXoqXNsTpiGYwwZvuodkV-IZZpsCrcgBD3yS6a53ewmD0O-FYMKVmp-uV1uQ/s1600/recess-graph.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="306" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiFzXqqwHTyr3aFIQTJZadq_JN1EuI3jJT9hb6Tw_gPEe59vnoRPK6Y1-6P_DGhyphenhyphen8eoSqd082jnH2VOxv9zhXoqXNsTpiGYwwZvuodkV-IZZpsCrcgBD3yS6a53ewmD0O-FYMKVmp-uV1uQ/s400/recess-graph.png" width="400" yda="true" /></a></div>Saxby and the other numb-nuts Republicans representing Georgia, my current home state, have asserted that presidential recess appointments are an egregious over reach of executive power. However, the facts tell a diferent story. Pay particular attention to St. Ronnie's numbers.<br />
<br />
The chart was plucked from a piece on ThinkProgress.comSteve Flynnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09330866407110887057noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5971802992695065742.post-71688644919712286862011-12-29T08:50:00.000-05:002011-12-29T08:50:18.977-05:00Iowa means what?This multi-ring circus is a media feeding frenzy. The effectiveness and usefuleness are debatable.<br />
<br />
This year we have Newt and Mitt polling at a combined 47%, with the rest of the pack combined at 50%. In other words half of Iowa does not support the front runners. This is shaping up to to actually mean something.<br />
<br />
If Newt continues to slide and stumble, his supporters may turn their gaze to one of the conservatives at the back of the pack. There is still a glimmer of hope in the Bachmann, Santorum, Perry and Paul camps. Ron Paul will have a difficult time convincing voters of his conservative bona fides given his positions on abortion, drugs and foreign conflict. Choice, pot and peace are not rallying cries amongst Iowans.<br />
<br />
The caucus process itself is an odd thing. People who work, or are sick, or who must take care of their children are challenged to participate due to the time demands of hours spent caucusing during a weekday. Absentee voting is barred, so active-duty Iowan soldiers lose the opportunity to participate, as do locally-registered college students who leave the state during winter holidays. This is not a simple popular vote. The rules are complex.<br />
<br />
Advocates of the caucus process argue that the system favors the most motivated voters, and that supporters of non-viable candidates are able to realign with a more popular candidate and still make their vote count. Caucus-goers praise the interactiveness of the process. With all of the last minute speechifying caucus-goers tend to get more information before making their vote, so those voting are potentially be more educated than primary-goers. (Even if it means they'll need to go to re-education camps afterwards)<br />
<br />
The complexity enters as each precinct's vote is weighed differently due to its past voting record. (That sounds fair!) Ties can occur and may be solved by picking a name out of a hat or a coin toss, leading to anger over the true democratic nature of these caucuses. (Grandma's gonna be pissed if that happens!)<br />
<br />
Aguably the biggest who-gives-a-rats-ass quality of the Iowa caucus is the traditionally low turnout. All this fuss and money to win over a bunch of conservative retirees. A helluva lot of money for a candidate to gain a foothold and for about one percent of the nation's delegates to be chosen by the Iowa State Convention.<br />
<br />
I predict the second and third place finishers to declare victory. (They do that you know!) A slim glimmer of hope may yet await the next not-Romney contestant. This means more money and potentially matching funds. The winner in Iowa will likely not be the Republican nominee.<br />
<br />
Up next...New Hampshire. Yay! I am nearly paralyzed with boredom.Steve Flynnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09330866407110887057noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5971802992695065742.post-59549503974604015252011-12-21T14:43:00.000-05:002011-12-21T14:43:31.240-05:00Twas the Newt before Christmas...when all through the house <br />
<br />
<br />
Not a creature was stirring, not even a justice from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals .<br />
<br />
The accusations of "infringement on the executive" were hung by the Speaker with care,<br />
<br />
In hopes that arrests and impeachments of judges soon would be there.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
The Obama's were nestled all snug in their beds,<br />
<br />
While visions of overturning Citizens United danced in their heads.<br />
<br />
And mamma in her ‘kerchief, and Barrack in his cap,<br />
<br />
Had just settled their brains for a long winter’s refusal to accept an unacceptable SCOTUS ruling on health care legislation.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
When out on the south lawn there arose such a clatter,<br />
<br />
they sprang from the bed to see what was the matter.<br />
<br />
Away to the window they flew like a flash,<br />
<br />
Tore open the shutters and threw up the sash.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
The moon on the breast of the Newtster out in the snow<br />
<br />
Gave the lustre of mid-day to objects below.<br />
<br />
When, what to their wondering eyes should appear,<br />
<br />
But a desperate fear message pandering to the conservative base in Iowa.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
The little old Newtster, so lively and quick,<br />
<br />
I knew in a moment it must be that old dick.<br />
<br />
More rapid than eagles his coursers they came,<br />
<br />
And he whistled, and shouted, and called them by name! "Traitors!"<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
"Now Vixen! now, Vixen! now, Vixen and Vixen!<br />
<br />
On, Vixen! On, Vixen!, On, Vixen and Vixen!<br />
<br />
To the front seat of my car! or behind yonder wall!<br />
<br />
Now blow away! Blow away! Tickle my balls!" <br />
<br />
<br />
OK that's enough!Steve Flynnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09330866407110887057noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5971802992695065742.post-47535944825410040112011-11-22T11:29:00.000-05:002011-11-22T11:29:23.112-05:00Newt Totally Gets OWS!<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="300" mozallowfullscreen="" src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/32409179?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0" webkitallowfullscreen="" width="400"></iframe><br />
<a href="http://vimeo.com/32409179">Actual Audio: Newt Gingrich Totally Gets Occupy Wall Street</a> from <a href="http://vimeo.com/user175271">scottbateman</a> on <a href="http://vimeo.com/">Vimeo</a>.<br />
<br />
Pompous windbags indeed! <br />
<br />
Love these actual audio animations. It's much like Tina Fey using Palin's actual words as comedic content. <br />
<br />
I read somewhere this week that Newt Gingrich is considered to be a really smart guy... provided of course that you are a really dumb guy.Steve Flynnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09330866407110887057noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5971802992695065742.post-6420665463811948772011-11-03T09:38:00.000-04:002011-11-03T09:38:27.085-04:00What if the 2nd coming actually came?In today's divisive political climate, the Son of Man would not be well received by neo-conservatives, evangelicals and tea-bagging wingnuts.<br />
<br />
Can you imagine our Lord and Saviour appearing amongst the OWS crowd? The response from the right to a homeless man espousing socialist principles would make the OPD response seem tame. There would be the inevitable skull cracking, illegal detention and calls for criminal prosecution of the very same saviour to whom the right wing crowd claim an unbreakable allegiance.<br />
<br />
The criminal insanity of, what are now mainstream, conservative politicians and candidates demonstrates their total lack of empathy for other people not lucky enough to be born into financial security. <br />
<br />
Can't find a job - you must be lazy. <br />
Can't afford insurance - too bad, it's not a right and by the way you're too fat. <br />
Can't afford college - not our problem really. <br />
Can't afford food - go to your local church. Oh you don't have a church....No soup for you! <br />
Can't afford to retire - OK we'll raise the retirement age for you.<br />
<br />
Given their total lack of concern for the citizenry at large, how can anyone, self-identified as part of the 99%, continue to vote against their own self interests? How is it that this collection of liars and hypocrites has managed to bamboozle the voting public?<br />
<br />
The FAUX news propaganda channel certainly helps. People tune in day-after-day and start to believe the BS. I've seen it with members of my own family, completely transfixed by the messages of fear and loathing of the "the other". They have forgotten their values, their ethical foundation and their empathy. Jesus might not recognize them. Steve Flynnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09330866407110887057noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5971802992695065742.post-53345832085553622242011-10-12T10:39:00.000-04:002011-10-12T10:39:02.560-04:00The nth DebateI want to stay informed, I really do, but there's only so much GOP debate coverage I can handle. The echo chamber of the echo chamber has grown tiresome. <br />
<br />
Call me crazy, but I don't think any of these wannabees has a legitimate chance of unseating Obama. They're all flawed in one way or another, some more deeply and profoundly than others. Frankly, it's all very disturbing, so I think I'll give myself a break for a few months while they thin the field while slogging it out amongst themselves, and wait for the Cheney and Koch Brothers endorsement of either Perry or Romney.Steve Flynnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09330866407110887057noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5971802992695065742.post-89019464462710044312011-10-05T23:36:00.002-04:002011-10-05T23:42:46.972-04:00Occupying Wall Street is a start, but it's not enough.Austerity doesn't work, but it’s being promoted as some sort of fiscal balm, ointment or cure-all. It is not discussed enough that government spending is part of the economy. A big part.<br />
<br />
In the U.S. tax levels have dropped along with spending. However spending has a multiplier effect and is not analogous to household belt-tightening where income remains relatively steady.<br />
<br />
Plate spinners at the financial institutions are trying to keep enough energy in the system, but the plates are wobbling. They’re gonna start falling. The banks are too powerful and need to be taken down and restructured. Bond holders and stock holders will need to take a bath in order to clean up the balance sheets. But we're still fed this austerity bullshit.<br />
<br />
Stress testing U.S. banks was an effort to fool the market into false confidence. They continued to pay themselves huge bonuses and didn't improve their balance sheets. But we're still fed this austerity bullshit.<br />
<br />
The big banks have knowingly and fraudulently gamed the system, stripping the middle class of trillions of dollars, and raiding the treasury to boot, by getting bailed out of their own self-inflicted criminal injuries. But we're still fed this austerity bullshit.<br />
<br />
Foreclosure judges are now seeing the scope of the serious problems associated with mortgages transferred into securities. It used to be that if you or I got into financial difficulty your bank would make some sort of mortgage adjustment to help keep you in your home. Lenders used to prefer to recover half of their money.<br />
<br />
Banks are violating their own contracts with robo-signing, fabrications and forgeries. Documents are being generated by banks that no longer exist. Because of this, many foreclosures are not valid. Judges used to view us mortgage holders as the problem, but then it became clear that banks have been providing false affidavits. Judges are now skeptical of bank foreclosure submissions. But we're still fed this austerity bullshit.<br />
<br />
Countrywide had an internal investigator digging in to problems and found significant abuse. Cutting and pasting documents to make deals. The investigator was frozen out. Fraud IS the cause of the mortgage meltdown. The banks, not Fannie or Freddie, were systematically trading known, bad deals, making them directly responsible for blowing themselves up. Self-administrated risk management has not worked. Risk management = plausible deniability. But we're still fed this austerity bullshit.<br />
<br />
The bottom is about to fall out of the 2nd mortgage market. HELOC's have lost value as a result of plummeting home values. They are essentially worthless. Banks securitized the first mortgages and have applied very aggressive debt collection on delinquent 2nd mortgages. US banks have yet to acknowledge the huge losses in the second mortgage market. But we're still fed this austerity bullshit.<br />
<br />
BofA currently has a market value of less than 50% of their book value. There’s a way out, but it would involve dilution of the stock value and turnover of senior management. So they sell off parts of the business. Nobody wants to buy the crappy bits, so they sell the profitable bits and are left with the crap. If I needed cash I’d sell my best stuff to make money quickly.<br />
<br />
The rich need to be saved from themselves. They're creating an environment of empty factories and empty office buildings. Income disparity is a real problem. Rich people save, and working people spend, but the working class is shrinking and the right-wing nut jobs think this is good for America. But we're still fed this austerity bullshit.<br />
<br />
European leaders are now panicked. Large bank failures are imminent. The market is shaky and could cause a panic driven sell-off before the end of the year. The ECB could print money and monetize the debt, but the Germans are very afraid of hyper-inflation. They’ve been down that road, and it led to Hitler. But we're still fed this austerity bullshit.<br />
<br />
Someone needs to take a bath, and I'm afraid it's going to be me....again.Steve Flynnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09330866407110887057noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5971802992695065742.post-73353713541834656932011-09-28T20:48:00.000-04:002011-09-28T20:48:57.908-04:00Debunking GOP debate talking pointsContrary to the bloviating Newtser, Ben Bernake is <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/is-bernanke-the-most-inflationary-fed-chairman-in-history/2011/09/08/gIQAvNITCK_blog.html">not</a> the most inflationary Fed Chairman in history.<br />
<br />
Despite what all of the GOP candidates have to say about tax cuts, they are <a href="http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/18/were-the-bush-tax-cuts-good-for-growth/">not</a> good for growth.<br />
<br />
American companies are <a href="http://doingbusiness.org/rankings">not</a> over regulated.<br />
<br />
The Mexican border is <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2011-07-15-border-violence-main_n.htm">not</a> out of control and super scary.<br />
<br />
Obama's plan to resuscitate the economy, including getting rich people to pay more tax, is <a href="http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/robert-schlesinger/2011/09/20/poll-most-americans-support-obama-deficit-plan-to-tax-rich">not</a> radical socialism.<br />
<br />
Sorry Handsome Rick! Social Security is not a Ponzi Scheme and it's <a href="http://pol.moveon.org/ssmyths/">not</a> broke.<br />
<br />
The earth is <a href="http://www.climate.gov/#understandingClimate">not</a> getting cooler.<br />
<br />
Any questions?Steve Flynnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09330866407110887057noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5971802992695065742.post-64614867516171874622011-09-26T08:55:00.000-04:002011-09-26T08:55:41.355-04:00Not so fast there Handsome Rick!It's all very tiring, trying not to throw up on one's self and to keep up with who's on top, as Deathmatch 2012 winds its way through the gauntlet of debates and straw polls fueled by deep fried sticks of butter.<br />
<br />
Results of the Florida straw poll: Cain 37%, Perry 15%, Romney 14%, Rick Santorum 11%, Paul 10%, Newt Gingrich 8%, Jon Huntsman 2%, Bachmann less than 2%.<br />
<br />
37%....Really! How does this happen? Who was voting in this thing?<br />
<br />
Maybe we should simply conclude that straw polls are not a valid indicator of where things will be in a primary. After all we've had other straw poll winners in this silly season. Bachmann won in Iowa and now she's in the cellar.<br />
<br />
The base is not content. Perry didn't bring it. Romneycare makes Mitt unacceptable to the right. Santorum is ridiculous. Paul gets alternately booed and cheered. Newt is show-boating and not at all serious and Huntsman is too damned moderate for the tea-baggers. Bachmann is toast.<br />
<br />
So who's on next? Christie....doubt it. Jeb Bush....nope. Sarah Palin....no way.<br />
<br />
Mitt's gonna ride out the storm for the next 6 months and emerge as the least worst candidate the GOP can muster. By the time the primaries start to happen, he will have been torn to shreds by the other candidates from his own party. That's good news for Obama.Steve Flynnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09330866407110887057noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5971802992695065742.post-31966426222567768482011-09-23T02:29:00.004-04:002011-09-23T11:10:08.430-04:00Goofy Times in OrlandoThe FAUX News Republican Presidential Debate - Hosted by the vapid, yet well-manicured Brett Baier Sponsored by FAUX News and Google <br />
<br />
Before we start I feel like I have to ask…Can this really be called a presidential debate? <br />
<br />
OK let’s move on in a self-aware state of denial.<br />
<br />
Tonight we’re streaming on YouTube …alongside the Dookie Cannonball guy and Mr. Balloon Hands…”Get Real!”<br />
<br />
The candidates are already podiated …so let’s get this party started.<br />
<br />
Thumbs up from Handsome Rick, a royal wave from The Mittster, a quick raise of the eyebrows from Congressman Paul, a starchey perma-smile from googley-eyes Bachmann, a relaxed slouch from super-giant-brain, former-Speaker Gingrich, a salute from pizza-boy Cain, a giant spread-finger uncomfortable wave from Google—me Santorum, a twitch and a salute from that reasonable guy and …. wait a minute! Who’s that guy? Big Johnson? With the LIVESTRONG bracelet and the bad hair. OK this might be interesting after all. Fresh blood in the arena! Spartacus!<br />
<br />
Joining Brett (BB) at his “big desk” are FAUX News regulars Megyn “I may interrupt you” Kelley (MK) and Chris “registered Democrat” Wallace (CW).<br />
<br />
Let’s look at the Google map with lots of pins, and our first YouTube video question:<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">“I’m a small business owner with no confidence. I’d like to throw you a high, hanging curveball. How can you guys make me, a small business owner, feel all warm and fuzzy in these troubling times?”</span><br />
<br />
What a surprise we’re gonna hear from Handsome Rick first!<br />
<br />
Cameo for Rick Scott right over there (with a VP nod perhaps). <br />
<br />
Perry: “The great state of Texas has lowered taxes, deregulated and told damaged plaintiffs not to sue doctors in Texas” Yeehaw! “Government bad! I’m going to Washington!”<br />
<br />
Oh and a follow up for Handsome Rick as Brett gets serious. “We want details!” “Where’s your jobs plan dude?”<br />
<br />
Perry: “Umm you’ll see one, blah blah blah, Texas, taxes, deregulation, blah, blah, blah, Texas, Rick Scott.. shout out homey!”<br />
<br />
BB: <span style="color: red;">“Mitt after I criticize you vicariously through the WSJ editorial board (Hello Rupert!) and call your plan timid and tactical, how do you respond?”</span><br />
<br />
Romney: ”Check…check…one…two…sibilance…check…one…check…one” “Obama bad!” “I have had a job.” “Cheaters like China!” “I have 59 points!”<br />
<br />
BB: <span style="color: red;">“What is rich?”</span><br />
<br />
Romney: “Everyone should be rich!” “Obama bad!”<br />
<br />
MK: <span style="color: red;">“This one’s for you Googley-eyes. It’s a question from the last debate. How much of my income do I deserve to keep?” </span><br />
<br />
Wait before she answers I have to ask…Is it Christmas already? WTF is she wearing? Oh and Megyn’s eyelashes look fabulous!<br />
<br />
Bachmann: “I wish I could have answered that last time!” “Taxes bad!” “Obama bad!” “Government bad!” “Keep your money, but pay some to the government…of course!” “Am I still talking?” “I know I’m still smiling, cause my face hurts.”<br />
<br />
MK: <span style="color: red;">“Santorum this one’s for you via a YouTube video….Right to work or the right to get fucked over by your corporate master…Which do you prefer?”</span><br />
<br />
Santorum: “Public worker unions bad!” “Let me reel off some bullshit wage numbers about how much money teachers and fireman make.” “I do not believe that unions should be involved in unions!” “Unions bad!” “No negotiations of wages and benefits!” “Fuck you!” <br />
<br />
(tea-bagger cheers)<br />
<br />
MK: <span style="color: red;">“Newt you criticized giving people money for nothing and their chicks for free.” (a.k.a. unemployment benefits) “As president , how would you tell the unemployed to go fuck themselves?”</span><br />
<br />
Gingrich: “The government will train you if you want to collect unemployment….you know the same shitty government that I complain about… yeah that one!” “Mandatory training, but not from Washington!” “I am spinning really fast and I’m getting kind of dizzy!”<br />
<br />
CW: <span style="color: red;">“Governor Huntsman…You are far too reasonable to be on this stage so I’m now going to tie you to Solyndra and make you defend green energy bullshit. Good luck asshole!”</span><br />
<br />
Huntsman: “Thanks Chris!” “My wife is awesome!” “We have to fix the un-natural economy!” “Can’t we all just get along?” “We’re broke!” “Natural gas good!”<br />
<br />
CW: <span style="color: red;">“You’re for government subsidies!” “I’m taking you down mother-fucker!”</span><br />
<br />
Huntsman: “I am a reasonable man!”<br />
<br />
CW: <span style="color: red;">“Mr. Cain can I get you to say 999 a few more times?”</span><br />
<br />
Cain: (smiling broadly) “999!” “I am a businessman!” “Taxes bad!” “999!” “Romney bad!”<br />
<br />
CW:<span style="color: red;"> “Whadya got Mitt?”</span><br />
<br />
Romney: “Obama bad!” “Taxes bad!”<br />
<br />
CW: <span style="color: red;">“Congressman Paul a question from some earnest YouTube folks. “How do plan to retore the 10th Amendment?” “Government bad!”</span><br />
<br />
(tea-bagger cheers)<br />
<br />
Paul: “Veto all bills violating the 10th amendment!” “Government bad!” “Public schools bad!” Healthcare bad!”<br />
<br />
BB: <span style="color: red;">“OK new guy, whatcha got?”</span><br />
<br />
Johnson: “I am fresh!” “I have experiences!” “I have promises!” “I am the veto-ing-est governor evah!”<br />
<br />
44% of googlers say rich is having an income of over $1 million<br />
<br />
(commercial break) red meat teaser…BB: “We’re gonna talk about illegals after the break!” Chevron...NumbersUSA.org (xenophobes united)…Drive movie promo…GE Capital the NBA and Wendy’s all in one…AUDI…RoomsToGo…Prime Suspect…RoomsToGo again…<br />
<br />
Rick “Skeletor” Scott: “I might be drunk!” “Republicans can steal Florida again!” (wink, wink)<br />
<br />
MK: <span style="color: red;">“Rick…Mitt has been pounding you on Social Security. How the hell are fifty separate state run programs supposed to work? Seriously dude!”</span><br />
<br />
Perry: “You’ve got nothing to worry about!” “This Ponzi scheme is awesome!”<br />
<br />
Romney: “Rick’s book… bad!” “Social Security good!”<br />
<br />
Perry: “Mitt’s book…bad!”<br />
<br />
Romney: “Oh…Oh….you want to go?” “Well actually it’s like this…blah, blah, blah.” “My book good!”<br />
<br />
MK: <span style="color: red;">“Mitt how much of a socialist is Obama?”</span><br />
<br />
Romney: “Obama is a liberal!” “You’re not gonna make me say socialist!” “Capitalism good!” “Government bad!” “I was a governor!”<br />
<br />
MK: <span style="color: red;">“Americans think that tax increases on the wealthy are good. What say you?”</span><br />
<br />
Huntsman: “Reagan!” “Percentages, details, blah, blah blah” “Obama bad!”<br />
<br />
MK: YouTube vidiot <span style="color: red;">“Which government department would you shitcan?</span><br />
<br />
Cain: (smiling broadly at the softball question) “EPA!” “Breathe that shit!” “Government Gone Wild!” “Dust!...Really?” “Chilean retirement accounts!”<br />
<br />
MK:<span style="color: red;"> “The government is broke! Newt what do you think?”</span><br />
<br />
Gingrich: “Government bad!” “Next week I’ll have a big plan...today, not so much” “Reagan!” “Obama…socialist!<br />
<br />
YouTube question: <span style="color: red;">“Public schools suck! How can you fix them?”</span><br />
<br />
Johnson: “Balanced budget!” Department of Education bad!”<br />
<br />
Santorum: “Government bad!” “Parents good!”<br />
<br />
Gingrich: “Shrinkage good!” “Regulation bad!”<br />
<br />
Paul: “Government bad!” “Opt out!”<br />
<br />
Perry: “I agree!” “Romney bad!”<br />
<br />
Romney: “Fuck you Rick!” “Parents good!” “Teachers unions bad!”<br />
<br />
Bachmann: “Education bad!” “States good!”<br />
<br />
Cain: “Government bad!”<br />
<br />
Huntsman: “I have a lot of kids!” “I am reasonable and verbose!” “Localize!”<br />
<br />
CW: <span style="color: red;">“Keep your googley eyes on me!” “State or federal enforcement of immigration laws?”</span><br />
<br />
Bachmann: “Government bad!” “Obama bad… and mean for suing Arizona!” “Build a big fucking fence!” “Deprive Mexican kids of healthcare!” <br />
<br />
YouTube question: <span style="color: red;">“e-verify?”</span><br />
<br />
Gingrich: “Give it to credit card companies.” “100% government control of the border, and the official language, and the visa system.” Oh wait…does that contradict my earlier government bad remarks?” “Oh shit…. I’m spinning out of control!”<br />
<br />
CW: <span style="color: red;">“Mitt you criticized Handsome Rick.” “What’s your idea?”</span><br />
<br />
Romney: “I don’t understand what Rick is doing!” “Mexicans are going to school in Texas!” “WTF!”<br />
<br />
CW: <span style="color: red;">“Rick you are allowing illegals in!” “Why?”</span><br />
<br />
Perry: “My border is long!” “Texas!” “Texans!” “Mexicans!” “Viva La Raza!” “Only four die-senting votes!”<br />
<br />
CW: <span style="color: red;">“Santorum what’s your beef?”</span><br />
<br />
Santorum: “Rick, why am I paying for the Mexican kids to go to school?” “Perry bad!”<br />
<br />
Perry: “A 1,200 mile fence?” “Really?” “Boots on the ground!”<br />
<br />
Paul: “Regulation bad!” “Taxes bad!” “Data banks bad!”<br />
<br />
Stupid statistics from Shannon <br />
<br />
(commercial break) Infiniti…Chevron…citibank (downgraded)…Delta…FedEx…GE…Siemens<br />
<br />
BB:<span style="color: red;"> “Israel!” </span><br />
<br />
YouTube guy: <span style="color: red;">“UN …Palestinians…existential threats?”</span><br />
<br />
Romney: “Keep your friends close!” “Obama bad!” “Israel!” “Iran bad!”<br />
<br />
Cain: “Reagan!” “I’ve been to Israel!” “Don’t mess with me…I’m a BAD man!”<br />
<br />
BB: <span style="color: red;">“Pakistan is scary!” “How would you save us handsome Rick?”</span><br />
<br />
Perry: “Obama bad!” “I have little actual information, so I’ll blather on for 30 seconds sounding strong-ish.”<br />
<br />
BB: <span style="color: red;">“Iraq is still scary!”</span><br />
<br />
Santorum: “Listen to the generals!” “20…30 thousand troops…whatever.” “Victory!” “Pakistan is our friend!”<br />
<br />
Gingrich: “International assistance good!” “United Nations bad!” “Pakistan is scary!” “Be afraid!”<br />
<br />
BB: <span style="color: red;">“Cuba?”</span><br />
<br />
Johnson: “We’re broke!” “Balanced budget!”<br />
<br />
Bachmann: “Cuba is scary!” <br />
<br />
Huntsman: “Santorum bad!” “War bad!”<br />
<br />
Santorum: “America good!” “War good!” One hand tied behind our generals… or genitals?”<br />
<br />
Huntsman: “Whatever!”<br />
<br />
MK: <span style="color: red;">“Public schools and religion?”</span><br />
<br />
Bachmann: “Jefferson!” “I’m religious!” “God!”<br />
<br />
YouTube gay soldier: “Where do you come down on DADT?”<br />
<br />
Santorum: “No sex in the army!” “No gay privileges!”<br />
<br />
(tea-bagger cheering)<br />
<br />
MK: <span style="color: red;">“OK so what would you do Rick?”</span><br />
<br />
Santorum: “Reinstitute DADT.”<br />
<br />
MK: <span style="color: red;">“Congressman Paul, how dare you support abortion for rape victims and the morning after pill?”</span> (Sounds like a question but it’s not)<br />
<br />
Paul: “I respect life, not laws!”<br />
<br />
MK: <span style="color: red;">“Governor Perry, how are you unlike W?”</span><br />
<br />
Perry: “I love W!” “I’m different than W” “Government bad!”<br />
<br />
BB: <span style="color: red;">“Obamacare?” “Let’s get it on!”</span><br />
<br />
CW: <span style="color: red;">“Mr. Cain, you survived cancer. Obamacare would have killed you right?”</span><br />
<br />
Cain: “I was able to afford great care, because I’m a rich bi-ness-man!” “Fuck you poor people!”<br />
<br />
CW: <span style="color: red;">“Obamacare bad!”</span><br />
<br />
YouTube guy: <span style="color: red;">“Obamacare good!”</span><br />
<br />
Huntsman: “I have kids.” “Uncertainty in the marketplace, blah, blah, blah France…Utah…percetages…blah, blah, blah.<br />
<br />
CW: <span style="color: red;">“You criticized handsome Rick about the HPV vaccine. How dare you?”</span><br />
<br />
Bachmann: “HPV is not something for government to address!” “Merck bad!”<br />
<br />
Perry: “Life good!”<br />
<br />
CW: <span style="color: red;">“Texas is the most uninsured state in the country.” </span><br />
<br />
Perry: “Medicaid bad!” “Options good!” “Texas good!”<br />
<br />
Romney: “I will politely disagree with Handsome Rick and waffle for a minute on Romneycare.” “Obamacare bad!”<br />
<br />
Perry: “Which Mitt are we looking at here?” “Um, er, um, er”<br />
<br />
Romney: “Nice try!” “My book…good!” “Rick’s book…bad!”<br />
<br />
(commercial break) Infiniti…AFSCME.org…Chevron…CSX…Uloric…Aviva<br />
<br />
BB: <span style="color: red;">“Bloomberg is scared about the unemployed rising up” “Hope and change isn’t here!”</span><br />
<br />
Hunstman: “1. Taxes bad! 2. Regulations bad! 3. Natural gas good!”<br />
<br />
Cain: “999” “Government bad!” “Reagan!”<br />
<br />
Bachmann: “Obamacare bad!” <br />
<br />
Romney: “I can relate to middle America.” “America!”<br />
<br />
Perry: “Obamacare bad!” “Regulations bad!” “Taxes bad!”<br />
<br />
Paul: “Government bad!” “Taxes bad!” “Regulations bad!”<br />
<br />
Gingrich: “Years ago I loved Reagan!” “I still quote him today”<br />
<br />
Santorum: “Reagan!” “God!” “Freedom!” “Obama bad!”<br />
<br />
Johnson: Best line of the night “dogshit is shovel ready!” “Taxes bad!”<br />
<br />
(commercial break) RoomsToGo…SCANA…RoomsToGo<br />
<br />
YouTube guy: <span style="color: red;">“Pick your favorite running mate from this band of crazies”</span><br />
<br />
Johnson: “Ron Paul”<br />
<br />
Santorum: “Newt”<br />
<br />
Gingrich: “As usual, I won’t answer your question.”<br />
<br />
Paul: “It’s too early for me to fuck up my chances”<br />
<br />
Perry: “Cain and Newt’s love child.”<br />
<br />
Romney: “Waffle…blah, blah…Obama bad!” “I disagree with everyone here.”<br />
<br />
Bachmann: “Constitution good!” “Obama bad!” <br />
<br />
Cain: “Romney…or maybe Newt”<br />
<br />
Huntsman: “Cain for stupid reasons” “I still don’t have a joke writer”Steve Flynnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09330866407110887057noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5971802992695065742.post-73256672875298014602011-09-22T11:03:00.000-04:002011-09-22T11:03:06.546-04:00The success of the Auto Industry "bail out"E.J. Dionne has a pragmatic view of policies that actually work and why we should support good ideas to bolster the American (a.k.a. the world) economy. <br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/gm-is-back-thanks-to-uncle-sam/2011/09/21/gIQACpT4lK_story.html?hpid=z2">http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/gm-is-back-thanks-to-uncle-sam/2011/09/21/gIQACpT4lK_story.html?hpid=z2</a>Steve Flynnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09330866407110887057noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5971802992695065742.post-89862790809467377382011-09-12T23:18:00.003-04:002011-09-13T14:13:49.785-04:00The CNN Tea Party Republican Crazyfest 2011Romney, Perry, Bachmann, Santorum, Cain, Gingrich, Paul, Huntsman.....who else? Palin? Jeb Bush? Bueller? Bueller?<br />
<br />
Should we give a shit? Yes, if we want to prevent one of these fools from occupying the White House in 2012.<br />
<br />
I'm watching this and summarizing the debate points, so that you don't have to. You can thank me later.<br />
<br />
And they enter as if it's a UFC cage match, to a booming theme and enthusiastic hoopin' and a-hollerin', followed by a very disturbing rendition of the national anthem. Who the hell was that? <br />
<br />
The set looks like the Jeopardy Tournament of Champions. Let's get ready to rumble and see who moves to the right or god-forbid the left of handsome Rick.<br />
<br />
OK Wolf let's go to questions...<br />
<br />
Tea Party activist #1: <span style="color: #cc0000;">How do we get Social Security security?</span><br />
<br />
Bachmann: "...Obama stole $500 Billion out of Medicare to pay for Obamacare..." Yow!<br />
<br />
Ponzi-scheme Perry: "Slam dunk guaranteed, Social Security will be there" Now that's the way to defend a ponzi scheme Rick. "Oh yeah, and Obama lied."<br />
<br />
Romney: Going on the Perry attack, quoting from his book. Romney says his book is better. Nah Nah Nah Nah Nah Nah!<br />
<br />
Perry: "It's not appropriate to do what we did in the past."<br />
<br />
Perry-Romney-Romney-Perry zing pow bam boom.<br />
<br />
Paul: "It's broke" "End the wars and other nonsense"<br />
<br />
Cain: "Galveston Oh Galveston"<br />
<br />
Huntsman: "Can't we all just get along?"<br />
<br />
Gingrich: "I don't like your question so I'll just make up my own point" "Obama scares old people" "Don't let the president lie to you!"<br />
<br />
Santorum: "I don't want to choose between Mitt and Rick" "Pick me I'm brave!"<br />
<br />
Tea Party question #2: <span style="color: #cc0000;">"How do we balance the budget and cut spending?"</span><br />
<br />
Gingrich: The guy with the old ideas says "Modernize the government" "Government Bad!" "Government Crooks"<br />
<br />
Santorum: "I'm still brave!" "Don't throw grandma off the cliff!"<br />
<br />
Perry: "Texas cut all the useful jobs, otherwise known as waste and fraud."<br />
<br />
Romney: "I've got some plans, but you won't understand them because you're too bored to pay attention to me"<br />
<br />
Paul: "I've got facts that no one else agrees with." "Get rid of the Department's of Education and Energy."<br />
<br />
Bachmann: "The government buys people too much stuff and pays the shipping costs" ...but ..."we need to own stuff"<br />
<br />
<commercial -="" break="" brought="" by="" c="" letter="" the="" to="" you="">[commercial break] (brought to you by the letter C)...Clean Coal...Cadillac...Clean Coal...Citracal...CNN...Cindy Crawford...Cheney<br />
<br />
Are they going to talk about jobs after the break? I bet they are!<br />
<br />
Tea Party question #3: <span style="color: #cc0000;">"What's your economic plan?"</span><br />
<br />
Huntsman: "It's a great American tragedy" "I'm much too reasonable to be taken seriously!" He said "wean"!<br />
<br />
Perry: "Obama created zero jobs!" "Taxes and deregulation stimulate the risk-takers" "Government bad!"<br />
<br />
Bachmann: "Stop giving Obama money, he stole enough already." 'Government bad!"<br />
<br />
Cain: "We're on life support" "Government bad!" "999" "999" "I'm black and I'm bold and I annunciate"<br />
<br />
Romney: "Texas is great!" "It's a smartphone world" "It's a hard-knock life" I'm gonna sing now because I can see I'm boring you" "I need more rhymes to go with my seven points." "I'm still talking" "Texas is great!" "I'm gonna turn around now."<br />
<br />
Perry: "Tort Reform!"<br />
<br />
Paul: "I live in Texas and Perry raised my taxes." "End the war in Iraq!"<br />
<br />
Perry: "All my tax cuts live in Texas!"<br />
<br />
Gingrich: "I'm smarter than you and my history is better than yours" "Reagan!"<br />
<br />
Cain: "I'm a worker and so were my parents"<br />
<br />
Huntsman: "We need more workers!" "I'm being reasonable and serious again" "My joke writer is out sick." "Seriously, I have not one single witty retort."<br />
<br />
Tea Party question #4: <span style="color: #cc0000;">"What is your position on the Federal Reserve?"</span><br />
<br />
Santorum: "Charter, charter, charter." "Barack Obama isn't good enough to be a disaster" "No taxes on made in America"<br />
<br />
Cain: "How much is a dollar worth?" "Can we exchange our money in Canada?"<br />
<br />
Bachmann: "I'm still against saving the American economy!" "Down with Ben Bernanke"<br />
<br />
Perry: "It's almost treason... that's almost a fact!" <br />
<br />
Romney: "Captain Obvious rides again!" "Let me ask myself a question"<br />
<br />
Tea Party question #5: <span style="color: #cc0000;">"For every dollar I earn, how much do I deserve to keep?"</span><br />
<br />
Huntsman: "Reasonableness in percentages... 8, 14, 21 whatever?" "Debt cancer will eat you!"<br />
<br />
Gingrich: "GE bad!" Green loopholes bad!" "The Obama Depression bad!"<br />
<br />
Tea Party question #6: <span style="color: #cc0000;">"Would anyone support the fair tax?"</span><br />
<br />
Romney: "Blah, blah, blah" "Taxes bad!"<br />
<br />
Tea Party question #7: <span style="color: #cc0000;">"Executive Orders... yay or nay?"</span><br />
<br />
Paul: "Gross abuse!" <br />
<br />
Perry: "I made a mistake with HPV immunization!" "Executive Orders are good... to eliminate Obamacare"<br />
<br />
Bachmann: "Rick Perry is hurting little girls!" "Obama is aborting little babies"<br />
<br />
Perry: "I wanted to stop a cancer, a virus... whatever you want to call it"<br />
<br />
Bachmann: "Rick Perry gave political favor to Merck" "Save the little girls!"<br />
<br />
Perry: "I didn't need their $5K" "It takes millions to bribe me"<br />
<br />
Santorum: "I am not a doctor but I stayed at a Holiday Inn" "Save the little girls"<br />
<br />
Tea Party question #8: <span style="color: #cc0000;">"How would you reduce the cost of healthcare?"</span><br />
<br />
Cain: "Obamacare bad!" "999" "Did I mention that I ran the National Restaurant Association?"<br />
<br />
Romney: "I agree with everyone except Rick" "Obamacare bad!"<br />
<br />
Perry: "Obamacare bad!" "Romneycare bad!" <br />
<br />
Romney: "Obama raised taxes and cut Medicare" "I'm not sure how this answers the question, blah, blah, blah"<br />
<br />
Paul: "Freedom is about choosing to suffer... if you don't buy insurance"<br />
<br />
Tea Party crowd [chanting]: "Let him die!" "Let him die!"<br />
<br />
Bachmann: "Obamacare bad!" "2012 is the threshold of socialism." "Obama wrote bad checks" "I should be committed!"<br />
<br />
<commercial break="">[commercial break] Cadillac...Natural gas "we're safe"...Shatner!...FedEx...Wolf with a teaser about the next segment...Exxon Mobil...CNN...Xfinity...Toyota of Newnan!...CNN<br />
<br />
Tea Party question #9: <span style="color: #cc0000;">"What would you do to remove illegal immigrants from the US?"</span><br />
<br />
Santorum: "I'm not like Rick Perry" "I'm from immigrant parents"<br />
<br />
Perry: "Government bad!" "We need federal government help"<br />
<br />
Twitter question?: <span style="color: #cc0000;">"Other than speaking Bloombito, what are the candidates doing to attract Latinos?"</span><br />
<br />
Santorum: "Rick put illegals into Texas schools" "Rick bad!" "I am not a salad!"<br />
<br />
Perry: "Mexicans can go to school in Texas"<br />
<br />
Bachmann: "Don't help the Mexicans!" "Learn American history, like me!"<br />
<br />
Perry: "Don't hate me because I'm courting the latino vote!"<br />
<br />
Huntsman: "Rick is treasonous!"<br />
<br />
Romney: "Latinos are Republicans!"<br />
<br />
Perry: "Quit picking on me everybody!" "I want the latino vote just like all y'all"<br />
<br />
Huntsman: "Romney bad!" "Reasonable and honest, that's me!"<br />
<br />
Tea Party question #10: <span style="color: #cc0000;">"US coal, oil gas, uranium good!...No?" </span><br />
<br />
Cain: "EPA bad!" "Regulation bad!"<br />
<br />
Twitter question: <span style="color: #cc0000;">"Do you plan to decrease defense spending, or do you believe..."</span> no reason to continue <spoiler alert=""> Ron Paul will be the only one to say decrease.<br />
<br />
Gingrich: "Be afraid!" "The terrorists are coming!" "It's all very frightening!"<br />
<br />
Paul: "Cut spending" "End the wars!"<br />
<br />
Santorum: "Ron Paul bad!" <br />
<br />
Tea Party question #11: <span style="color: #cc0000;">"As the next president, what will you do to protect Afghan women and children from the radicals?"</span><br />
<br />
Huntsman: "End the war!" "Reagan!" "We're not shiny enough!"<br />
<br />
Perry: "End the war....um...soon?" "That country, what was the name of that country again?"<br />
<br />
<commercial break="">[commercial break] Clean Coal...CNN...Clean Coal...Edward Jones...UPS...Capella University...AFLAC...<br />
<br />
Wolf: <span style="color: #cc0000;">"What would you bring to the White House?"</span><br />
<br />
Santorum: "I have a lot of kids"<br />
<br />
Gingrich: "I'd add ballet"<br />
<br />
Paul: "Austrian economics"<br />
<br />
Perry: "My beautiful wife" "I'm getting laiiiid toniiiiight!"<br />
<br />
Romney: "...because we've made a lot of mistakes...Winston Churchill's bust"...WTF!<br />
<br />
Bachmann: "Historical documents (that I need to study)"<br />
<br />
Cain: "Jokes"<br />
<br />
Huntsman: "My Harley...if my wife will let me"<br />
<br />
<span style="color: #674ea7;">Final Tally on talking opportunities:</span><br />
<br />
Perry - 20<br />
Romney - 11<br />
Bachmann - 9<br />
Santorum - 8<br />
Huntsman - 8<br />
Cain - 7<br />
Paul - 7<br />
Gingrich - 6<br />
<br />
Hmmm? Perry got a lot of time, and a lot of attention from the rest of the field. <br />
<br />
...and the winner is President Obama!Steve Flynnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09330866407110887057noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5971802992695065742.post-48470391066930847022011-08-24T12:10:00.001-04:002011-08-24T12:11:28.992-04:00Something vs. NothingBill in Portand, Maine provides a clear contrast between the do-nothing-but-kvetch Boehner Congress and the got-a-lot-done Pelosi Congress. <br />
<div><a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/08/24/1009758/-Cheers-and-Jeers:-Wednesday">Cheers and Jeers: Wednesday</a></div><br />
<div></div>Taking the country back has not worked out so well for the country. We need to take the country back from those that took it back, and that now seek to take it back even further. OK enough with the taking back nonsense. Liberal policies and political agendas clearly benefit the country in a significantly greater way than conservative policies and agendas...period <br />
<br />
Steve Flynnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09330866407110887057noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5971802992695065742.post-27689110502826253202011-08-23T12:21:00.000-04:002011-08-23T12:21:19.666-04:00Eric Cantor does not like the EPA<a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/08/23/1009622/-Eric-Cantor-does-not-like-the-EPA">Eric Cantor does not like the EPA</a>
<br />Steve Flynnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09330866407110887057noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5971802992695065742.post-77909160355025389782011-05-11T23:19:00.000-04:002011-05-13T16:39:51.682-04:00An Exchange with Congressman Lynn WestmorelandI routinely communicate my support, or opposition, of positions espoused by my elected representatives. Following is an exchange with Congressman Lynn Westmoreland, representing Georgia's 3rd District. <br />
<br />
Spoiler alert: Westmoreland reveals himself to be a sycophantic douchebag! <br />
<br />
First this piece from Westmoreland's April 17, 2011 newsletter:<br />
<br />
<strong>House Passes Budget Cutting $6.2 Trillion in Federal Spending</strong><br />
<br />
The House of Representatives today passed a budget for the 2012 fiscal year, which will run from October 1, 2011 through September 30, 2012. The legislation will cut $6.2 trillion in spending from President Obama’s budget proposal over the next ten years and reduces deficits by $4.4 trillion. It puts the nation on a path to actually paying off our more than $14 trillion in debt and drops federal spending to below 20 percent of the gross domestic product. <br />
<br />
I am proud to have joined a group of my colleagues in the House and passed Congressman Ryan’s plan for 2012 and beyond. This budget truly puts us on the ‘Path to Prosperity.’ Not only does it dramatically curb federal spending, but it also encourages economic development, works towards ensuring programs like Medicare will be available to future generations, and does not irresponsibly raise taxes on American families and small businesses.<br />
<br />
I know there have been some irresponsible public figures who have been using scare tactics and out-and-out lies to put fear and doubt in Americans about the impact of this budget, especially with regards to the changes to Medicare. So I would like to set a few things straight. First, this legislation does not create a voucher system for Medicare. What it does is allow individuals to pick a plan, just like federal employees and Members of Congress do now, and the government will pay for the plan rather than directly paying the doctor. We are not trying to end Medicare; we are trying to save it for the next generation. Without reform, Medicare spending will eclipse all other federal spending in the next decade and completely bankrupt our budget. This solution allows us to keep Medicare without dragging down our entire economy. Second, if you are age 55 or over, these changes will not affect you at all. Both your Medicare and your Social Security will remain exactly the same as it is now. So any comments made in the press about this budget ‘killing seniors’ or ‘ending Medicare’ are completely false.<br />
<br />
I also know that there are those out there who feel these cuts are ‘extreme.’ However, the mess we have gotten ourselves into over the last few years is also extreme. Our national debt tops more than $14 trillion, almost equivalent to our entire economy. If we continue down President Obama’s path of ‘spend now, pay later,’ we would see the national debt double over the next ten years. This mentality is simply no longer sustainable and we must make some very serious changes to the way we operate here in Washington if we want to pass on a better country to our children and grandchildren.<br />
<br />
My response follows:<br />
<br />
Congressman Westmoreland,<br />
<br />
Your April 17, 2011 update outlines your thoughts on the Ryan proposal, and the House passage of the 2012 budget. <br />
<br />
There may indeed be steeper cuts in this budget proposal, but these appear to be at the expense of the old, the sick and the poor. I am shocked and disheartened to read of your pride and participation in this endeavor.<br />
<br />
According to the CBO, the Ryan plan does not achieve any measurable surplus until 2040. If this plan becomes law, the spending levels for health care will be reduced far below historic levels relative to GDP. This sounds like it might be a good thing, but it’s not, as it comes along with these negative trade-offs:<br />
<ul><li>Increasing the age of Medicare eligibility</li>
<li>Essentially privatizing Medicare</li>
<li>Establishing Medical Savings Accounts for the poor. (Where are these people expected to come up with $7,800/yr.?)</li>
<li>Excluding acute care. (What!)</li>
<li>State programs will differ. (Who can predict the issues surrounding this?).</li>
<li>Repeals to the Affordable Care Act will increase federal costs</li>
<li>Repealing tax credits for small business employers offering health care. (Why?)</li>
<li>Reinstating the donut hole</li>
</ul>There are claims of revenue growth with no specificity. Raising taxes is not irresponsible. What is irresponsible is continuing the Bush tax cuts, primarily benefiting the wealthiest Americans and shifting the cost burdens of health care to the old and sick. There seems to be a significant lack of basic morality in the Republican positions on fiscal matters. <br />
<br />
Despite your reassurances, it appears that you are indeed in support of ending Medicare as we know it.<br />
<br />
The deficit path started with implementation of the Bush tax cuts. That was the “spend “now and pay later” moment. Roll back the tax cuts and we won’t need the Ryan plan. The scary deficit scenario is based on taxes being too low, not just spending being too high. It also assumes that discretionary spending will match the rate of growth of GDP, but a large part of the projected deficit comes from the revenue side of the equation, not just the spending side. <br />
<br />
Ryan is selectively using CBO analysis and ignoring other pertinent opinions. Such as: <br />
<ul><li>Medicare beneficiaries bearing a much larger share of their health care costs than they would under the current program,</li>
<li>Payments to doctors shrinking dramatically</li>
<li>States having to pay substantially more for Medicaid and spending for programs other than Social Security</li>
<li>Health programs would be reduced far below historical levels relative to GDP. </li>
<li>Repeal of the health care law would lead to an increase in the deficit (Ryan does not explain the logic of this!)</li>
</ul>The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis claims the Ryan budget would result in a gusher of jobs. We should be wary when politicians rely on analyses from outside partisan groups, rather than respected government auditors.<br />
<br />
The Heritage budget analysis model comes up with some numbers that seem rather strange — in fact, so strange that Ryan does not even claim them in his presentation. <br />
<br />
For instance, the Heritage analysis claims that the unemployment rate would hit 2.8 percent in 2021, which is a rate that has never been achieved. The claim must have been even too much for Ryan, since his budget document only mentions a 4 percent unemployment rate in 2015 — which itself would be a neat trick. <br />
<br />
In closing, the Ryan budget plan relies on dubious assertions, questionable assumptions and fishy figures. The ideas may be bold, but the budget presentation falls short of his claim that he is getting rid of budget gimmicks.<br />
<br />
<div> </div><br />
<div>Sincerely,</div><div> </div><br />
<div>Me</div><div> </div><div>Lo and behold I received a response. Granted it is a form letter, failing to sufficiently address ANY of my specific complaints, but it is a response.</div><div> </div><div>May 6, 2011 </div><div> </div><div>Dear Friend,</div><div> </div><div>Thank you for contacting me regarding H.Con.Res. 34, the fiscal year (FY) 2012 budget proposed by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, also known as "The Path to Prosperity". I sincerely appreciate the benefit of hearing your views. </div><div> </div><div>As you probably know, on April 15, 2011 the House of Representatives passed H.Con.Res. 34, which establishes the budget for the United States Government for FY 2012 (October 1, 2011 through September 30, 2012) and sets appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2013 through 2021. Not only does this bill dramatically curb federal spending, but it also encourages economic development, does not irresponsibly raise taxes on American families and small businesses, works towards ensuring programs like Medicare will be available to future generations, and increases America's energy resources. </div><div> </div><div>I know many people are opposed to the cuts to specific programs included in this bill; that is understandable. There was a recent poll released that showed that while a majority of Americans were in favor of cuts to federal spending in theory, they were opposed to cuts in projects, programs, or entitlements that would affect them. Unfortunately that mentality is simply no longer sustainable. Congress has to make some very serious changes in the way Washington operates in order to begin digging out from under our debt, and pass on a better country to our children and grandchildren. I truly believe we can reverse the destructive path we are currently on and save our country for future generations; but this will not be easy, and will not be overnight. However, as long as we are all willing to tighten our belts and continue to fight to reign in federal spending, then we will be successful.</div><div> </div><div>The legislation cuts $6.2 trillion in government spending over the next decade compared to the President's budget, and $5.8 trillion relative to the current-policy baseline. In addition, it eliminates hundreds of duplicative programs, reflects the ban on earmarks, and curbs corporate welfare, bringing non-security discretionary spending to below FY2008 levels. Overall the bill brings government spending to below 20 percent of the economy, a sharp contrast to the President's budget, in which spending never falls below 23 percent of GDP over the next decade. It does this by locking in savings with enforceable spending caps and budget process reforms, addressing not only what Washington spends, but also how tax dollars are spent.</div><div> </div><div>With regards to our national debt and deficit, the Path to Prosperity reduces deficits by $4.4 trillion, compared to the President's budget over the next decade, and surpasses the President's low benchmark of sustainability – which his own budget fails to meet – by reaching primary budget balance in 2015 (where revenues = spending – interest payments). It also achieves a budget surplus by FY2040 and shows growing surpluses in the following decade.</div><div> </div><div>Another important aspect of this legislation is the fact that it addresses taxes and our tax structure itself. It calls for a simpler, less burdensome tax code for households and small businesses, and lowers tax rates for individuals, families (brings the top rate from 35 to 25 percent), and businesses (lowers the corporate tax rate from 35 percent, which is the highest in the industrialized world, to a more competitive 25 percent). The bill keeps taxes low so the economy can grow by eliminating roughly $800 billion in tax increases imposed by the President's health care law (the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; Public Law No. 111-148) and prevents the $1.5 trillion tax increase called for in the President's FY2012 budget. Just as important, it ends the taxpayer bailouts of failed financial institutions, reforms Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and stops Washington from picking the winners and losers across sectors of the economy.</div><div> </div><div>In addition, the budget plan creates nearly 1 million new private-sector jobs in 2012 and results in 2.5 million additional private sector jobs in the last year of the decade. This is done, in part, by consolidating the complex maze of dozens of overlapping job-training programs into more accessible, accountable career scholarships aimed at empowering American workers to compete in the global economy. These provisions will yield $1.1 trillion in higher wages and an average $1,000 per year in higher income for each family, spur economic growth, and increase real GDP by $1.5 trillion over the decade. </div><div> </div><div>One of the biggest ways the Path to Prosperity helps to get our overwhelming debt under control is by improving Medicare and Medicaid, not by terminating them, as some have argued. First, the Path to Prosperity does not create a voucher system for Medicare, but allows individuals to pick a health care plan, just like federal employees and Members of Congress do now. Payments from the government will go directly to the insurance plan selected by the Medicare beneficiary. This will not end Medicare as we know it; instead it will save it for the generations to come. Without reform, Medicare spending will eclipse all other federal spending in the next decade and completely bankrupt our budget. This solution allows us to keep Medicare without dragging down our entire economy. Second, and most importantly, these changes will not affect anyone age 55 or over, at all. Both Medicare and Social Security will remain exactly the same as they are now for those individuals, and information to the contrary is absolutely untrue. Medicaid is improved by ending its onerous, one-size-fits-all approach, and converting the federal share of Medicaid spending into a block grant that gives states the flexibility to tailor their Medicaid programs to the specific needs of their residents.</div><div> </div><div>On the energy front, the bill increases America's energy resources by removing barriers to safe, responsible energy exploration, and unlocks American energy production to help lower costs, create jobs, and reduce dependence on foreign fossil fuels.</div><div> </div><div>Overall this budget plan is just that, a plan. And like everyone else I don't agree with absolutely everything in the Ryan Budget, however, of the five varying budgets we voted on (Democrat Budget, Congressional Progressive Caucus Budget, Republican Study Committee Caucus Budget, Congressional Black Caucus Budget, and the Paul Ryan (Republican) Budget), I felt the Ryan Budget, The Path to Prosperity, was the best choice available to guide us through the end of this economic downturn, right the economy, and get us out of debt. We don't have a revenue problem in this country, we have a spending problem. Maintaining the status quo on government spending and on entitlement programs like Medicare and Medicaid is simply not sustainable. Hard choices had to be made when we were working on this budget, but in the end I voted in favor of this bill since it represents a realistic approach to solving our nation's fiscal crisis. Is it a magic bullet which will fix all our problems overnight? No. But we did not get into this situation overnight, so it's going to take time to get us back to where we need to be, where we should be. </div><div> </div><div>Again, I would like to thank you for contacting me regarding the FY2012 federal budget. Hearing the views of all Georgians gives me the opportunity to better understand how important issues could impact the people of Georgia and the future interests of the nation. In that regard, your input is most helpful. </div><br />
<div> </div><br />
<div>Sincerely,</div><br />
<div> </div><br />
<div>Lynn A Westmoreland</div><br />
<div>Member of Congress</div><br />
<div> </div><br />
<div>I just thought you should know. You can thank me later. </div><br />
<div> </div><br />
<div> </div><br />
<div> </div>Steve Flynnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09330866407110887057noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5971802992695065742.post-68670265019985995492011-03-19T14:36:00.000-04:002011-03-19T14:36:18.747-04:00Because the "money-grubbing teachers" are under attack<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxsOVK4syxU&feature=player_embedded"><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/RxsOVK4syxU" title="YouTube video player" width="480"></iframe></a>Steve Flynnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09330866407110887057noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5971802992695065742.post-81068045026587839342011-03-07T21:23:00.000-05:002011-03-07T21:23:39.690-05:00Big Pharma ... Big Woop!The <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/07/business/07drug.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper">NYT reported today</a> that Pfizer is about to "lose" a $10 billion a year revenue stream, when the patent on Lipitor expires later this year. Making $10 billion a year for more than a decade should be enough to protect the financial security of ANY company. Calling this a loss is truly ridiculous. Perhaps reducing bonuses and shareholder dividends during the high times would have left Pfizer with enough cash to reinvest in itself.<br />
<br />
This is a "problem" and a loss for Wall St. expectations of double-digit growth year after year. To avoid this terrible problem of not making $10 billion dollars this year and maybe next year, shareholders should be willing to expect lower returns for longer-term stability, but what the fuck am I saying. The Street needs to bleed the pig dry and then move on to another bubble victim.<br />
<br />
The mere idea that we are to be sympathetic to the woes of the likes of AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmith-Kline, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Eli Lilly and Merck is a hard pill to swallow. It's particularly challenging when some of these same companies have recently released drugs with nasty side effects.<br />
<br />
In 2009 Pfizer paid the largest criminal fine in US History as part of a $2.3 billion settlement regarding off-label drug use. Some pharma companies have made spectacular profits from off-label sales of drugs that have been approved for only limited use. Off-label may mean that the drug is developed for oral use, but is being marketed as an injectable.<br />
<br />
The regulatory environment in Europe has become more difficult for pharma companies to make huge profits as governments have regulated the prices of drugs more than in the US. As Europe starts to become more restrictive for big Pharma profiteers thay have turned their attention to less restrictive markets in Brazil, China and India. Look for injuries and lawsuits in those markets to be be handled with cash settlement and little press coverage.<br />
<br />
The irony of this "big problem" for big Pharma is that it has caused stock values to dip and speculators to buy into the notion of yet another bubble. <br />
<br />
"Welcome my son, welcome to the machine."Steve Flynnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09330866407110887057noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5971802992695065742.post-41476104256552321052011-03-06T16:05:00.000-05:002011-03-06T16:05:51.856-05:00Southern Democrats listen up!As Monica Potts pointed out in <a href="http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=poverty_programs_embattled_in_the_south">American Prospect</a>, the new Republican legislatures in the South are already looking for ways to dramatically reduce spending on social programs and welfare. A majority of the region's attorneys general have joined Florida's lawsuit to overturn the Affordable Care Act, and it's unlikely that any of them will implement its provisions, such as the requirement to create state-level insurance exchanges, with enthusiasm, potentially leaving many families worse off than before. In our backyard, just days after taking office, Georgia AG Sam Olens <a href="http://healthreformreport.com/2011/01/georgias-attorney-general-joins-lawsuit-against-health-reform-law.php">joined the lawsuit</a> opposing the ACA.<br />
<br />
There's not much point in trying to persuade Democratic political strategists to care about the South. There is apathy in the party about turning back the red tide. But to undo the damage they are about to inflict on us, the party needs to invest in the grass roots of Georgia and surrounding states. The strategy might never again pay off on the map of the Electoral College, but in a decade or two, it might just result in a little more power and a better life for those who need it most.Steve Flynnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09330866407110887057noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5971802992695065742.post-19145044769370924092011-03-02T22:23:00.000-05:002011-03-02T22:23:20.924-05:00Georgia Legislator Attempts AZ 1070 ReduxMy local paper printed <a href="http://www.thecitizen.com/articles/03-02-2011/ramsey%E2%80%99s-tough-immigration-bill-passes-out-committee">this</a> piece of shit spin piece, about a "tough" immigration bill. Tough in the sense of tough to swallow perhaps.<br />
<br />
The bill in question is HB 87 "Illegal Immigration Reform and Enforcement Act of 2011" and can be found at <a href="http://www1.legis.ga.gov/legis/2011_12/fulltext/hb87.htm">http://www1.legis.ga.gov/legis/2011_12/fulltext/hb87.htm</a>.<br />
<br />
A fair assessment of HB 87 would include some discussion of the costs associated with imprisoning those found guilty of “aggravated identity fraud”, for up to 15 years.<br />
<br />
It would be reasonable for the paper to mention that this bill contains the exact same provisions as the Arizona law that the Federal Court recently struck down. The Arizona court struck down their ill-conceived law as it would have resulted in violations of the 4th Amendment right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. Georgia should not be spending millions of taxpayer dollars to attempt to defend this indefensible proposition.<br />
<br />
Here's an excerpt:<br />
<blockquote>17-5-100<br />
<br />
(b) During any stop of a criminal suspect by a law enforcement officer, where the officer has probable cause to believe that such suspect has committed a criminal offense, including any traffic offense, if, during the lawful detention of such suspect, the officer develops reasonable suspicion to also suspect that such person is an illegal alien, then the officer shall, when reasonably practicable, make an attempt to determine the immigration status of such suspect.</blockquote>Is there such a thing as reasonable suspicion in this context?<br />
<br />
As proposed, HB 87 will make criminals of many otherwise law abiding Georgians trying to make a living. The bill makes it a criminal offense to encourage an illegal immigrant to enter the state. It also allows almost any citizen to bring a lawsuit against any business, local or State government agency or official by just accusing them of violating immigration law. Further, HB 87 burdens every employer doing business in Georgia with using the Department of Homeland Security’s E-Verify system.<br />
<br />
Agriculture, poultry, and manufacturing, several of the largest industries in the state, will be hit hard by the legislation. They’ll find themselves with an increased cost of labor and compliance, or they will simply shut down operations due to overly burdensome regulations. <br />
<br />
This job-killing bill, stripping Georgians of constitutional protections should never be enacted. It is short-sighted and fundamentally wrong.Steve Flynnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09330866407110887057noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5971802992695065742.post-29494379867464070562011-03-02T09:45:00.000-05:002011-03-02T09:45:31.264-05:00A unionized public employee, a member of the Tea Party and a Big Corp CEO are sitting at a table. In the middle of the table there is a plate with a dozen cookies on it. The CEO reaches across and takes 11 cookies, looks at the tea partier and says, "Look out for that union guy, he wants a piece of your cookie."Steve Flynnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09330866407110887057noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5971802992695065742.post-35266700589708584462011-03-02T09:31:00.000-05:002011-03-02T09:31:52.245-05:00The "do nothing useful" 112th Congress - featuring John BoehnerIn recent sessions of Congress, the first several bill numbers have been reserved by the leadership for priority bills. In the 112th Confress, bills H.R. 1 through H.R. 10 are top priorities of the majority leadership. So what are the priorities? Is job creation at the top? Nope!<br />
<br />
The House is preparing to take up H.R. 4, "the Small Business Paperwork Mandate Elimination Act of 2011." Sounds reasonable right? What it actually is, in other words...is an attempt to repeal the 1099 reporting provisions of the Affordable Care Act. Which the House already voted to completely repeal.<br />
<br />
H.R. 1, turned out to be a full-year omnibus appropriations bill with $100 billion in cuts, and Republican attacks on Planned Parenthood. No jobs here, maybe next time.<br />
<br />
H.R. 2 was the repeal of the Affordable Care Act, and if enacted would result in lost jobs. Nice!<br />
<br />
H.R. 3 hasn't made it to the floor yet, but focuses on... job creation... Hello?, Bueller? Bueller? No it's an attack on abortion rights. Well done lads.<br />
<br />
H.R. 5, is a medical malpractice tort reform bill. This is a big, big talking point which will have little financial impact. Oh yeah, and no jobs will be created.<br />
<br />
They haven't decided yet what H.R. 6 will be. Don't hold your breath for job creation.<br />
<br />
Where are the jobs, Mr. Boehner?<br />
<br />
Apparently America has told him to bring three attacks on health care, and two on abortion. If we lose some jobs, "so be it"<br />
<br />
The White House and Nancy Pelosi should be hammering the shit out of this. The American people could use a big dose of the truth. <br />
<br />
John Boehner = empty suit.Steve Flynnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09330866407110887057noreply@blogger.com0