Mar 312013
 

I continue to improve and hope to return to full speed this week.

Jig Zone Puzzle:

Today’s took me 4:33 (average 5:08).  To do it, click here.  How did you do?

Short Takes:

From MoveOn: What If MoveOn.org Was A City?

31MovwOn

Kudos to MoveOn, a most valuable resource!

From NY Times: In the fight over the federal budget deficit, Social Security has so far been untouched. That may soon change.

In last year’s “fiscal cliff” debate, President Obama offered to reduce the annual cost-of-living adjustment, or COLA, for Social Security benefits, a spending cut favored by Republicans and scorned by Democrats. Republicans rejected the offer because Mr. Obama wanted tax increases in exchange, while Democrats said it would be too harmful. More recently, Senate Democrats did not include Social Security reforms in their budget and specifically rejected a COLA cut. The House Republican budget also steered clear of explicit cuts to Social Security, a move partly aimed at isolating Mr. Obama.

The question now is whether Mr. Obama will again propose to cut the COLA when he unveils his budget next week. We think he should not do so. The president might want to seem like he is willing to compromise by renewing his call for a COLA cut. But Republicans already spurned his offer and are unlikely to take him up on it now. They are more likely to paint him as a foe of Social Security, which would be reinforced by Democrats’ opposition to the cut.

Even if Mr. Obama avoided those pitfalls, a COLA cut is a bad idea, as we will explain in this editorial. It also is a distraction from the real problems of Social Security.

Click through for the rest of an excellent editorial. I agree that the COLA should be based on an intensive investigation in to what the actual changes in cost of living for seniors are. The article does not offer a projection, but I believe such an investigation would justify a COLA increase, not a cut. I disagree with one thing. The long term solution is to scrap the cap.

From Crooks and Liars: Exxon’s Pegasus Tar Sands Pipeline Ruptures in Central Arkansas

 

Once again, we have a demonstration of the environmental safety we can expect from moving especially toxic tar sands oil through a pipeline. We can expect the same if Keystone XL is approved, except on a much larger scale.

Cartoon:

31Cartoon

At the time, due to the immaturity of youth, I was fixated on Vietnam, so I failed to recognize the good thinks he did.

Share
Feb 162013
 

With the sequester looming, many progressives are concerned that Obama might  make a deal with Republicans that effect benefits people receive from earned entitlements, for which they have paid all their working lives.  The CPC (Congressional Progressive Caucus), joined by several other Democrats, are telling Obama to hold the line.

16ellison_schakowskyConcerned that a potential deal to defuse the looming sequestration cuts will include cuts to social safety-net programs, 107 House Democrats sent a letter to President Obama today calling on him to oppose any entitlement benefit reductions, including switching to the so-called chained CPI. It’s by far the largest number that have come out against the CPI cut, and it represents a majority of the Democratic Caucus in the lower chamber.

Republicans are demanding entitlement reform as part of a deal to avert the sequester, the planned spending cuts that will go into effect next month unless Congress acts. So far, neither Obama nor Senate Democrats have endorsed any cuts to the social safety-net programs, and the White House has specifically ruled out raising the Medicare eligibility age, but liberals fear Democratic leaders will give in on the chained CPI in order to win GOP support.

“I am concerned about it. We’ve got to remain vigilant; that’s why we wrote this letter,” Rep. Keith Ellison, the Chairman of the House Progressive Caucus, told Salon. Rep. Jan Schakowsky spearheaded the letter… [emphasis added]

Inserted from <Salon.com>

Chained CPI is a different method of calculating cost of living increases.  It supposes that, if there is a substitute for an item, whose price has increased, and if the substitute costs no more than that item used to cost, there is no increase in the cost of living.  Now lets try that on.  If my filet mignon increases in price, but I can get chuck steak for what I used to pay for filet mignon, my cost of living has not changed.  And if that chuck steak increases in price, but I can get beans for what I used to pay for chuck steak, my cost of living has not changed again.  And if my beans increase in price, but I can get dawg food for what I used to pay for beans, my cost of living still has not changed.  But the transition from filet mignon to dawg food is one hell of a change!  This shows that chained CPI can cause seniors’ standard of living to plummet, while maintaining the cost of living index.  That’s why chained CPI is not acceptable.

Share
Feb 082013
 

Something must have been going on downtown yesterday, because there were helicopters low over my building for the early part of my sleep time, so I’m pretty pooped.  I’m current with replies and should be OK tomorrow.

Jig Zone Puzzle:

Today’s took me 4:45 (average 5:26).  To do it, click here.  How did you do?

Short Takes:

From MoveOn: BREAKING: MoveOn Makes A Bet That A Million Progressive Leaders Are Yet To Be Sparked

 

Kudos to MoveOn. They have done a spectacular job in the past and their future appears most promising.

From Think Progress: Rep. Raúl Labrador (R-ID), a key player in the ongoing House negotiations to advance comprehensive immigration reform, has come out against providing a pathway to citizenship for the nation’s 11 million undocumented immigrants, echoing a growing consensus among conservative members. The position is in stark contrast to the framework put forward by a bipartisan group of Senators and President Obama — which would allow the unauthorized to earn citizenship.

“The people that came here illegally knowingly – I don’t think they should have a path to citizenship,” Labrador said during an interview with NPR on Thursday morning. “If you knowingly violated our law, you violated our sovereignty, I think we should normalize your status but we should not give you a pathway to citizenship.”

The Republican intent here is crystal clear. They are willing to let undocumented workers stay, but only as long as they can be used as serf labor.

From Media Matters: On Fox News, Republican strategist Brad Blakeman denied the scientific consensus on manmade climate change, saying "For every one scientist that says there is, I’ll give you 10 scientists that said it’s not manmade":

But in fact, credible surveys have repeatedly found that the vast majority of climate scientists agree humans are changing the climate. For instance, a 2009 survey published by the American Geophysical Union found that 97 percent of those who specialize in climate science said human activity is contributing to rising global temperatures:

 

The Republican Reichsministry of propaganda, Faux Noise, deals with facts in a thoroughly Republican way. They make them up.

Cartoon:

8Cartoon

And Republicans want it back!

Share
Dec 212012
 

I’m feeling slightly better today, so I’m going to try to catch up on overdue housekeeping and see how I hold up.  I’m current with replies.  Hopefully this weekend.

Jig Zone Puzzle:

Today’s took me 4:26 (average 5:12).  To do it, click here.  How did you do?

Short Takes:

From MoveOn: When You Look At Gun Safety This Way, What We Aren’t Doing Sure Seems Ridiculous

21guns

This is exactly what I mean by reasonable regulations. Also, just as there are special licenses required to drive more dangerous commercial vehicles, there should be special licenses required to purchase more dangerous weapons.

From NY Times: Mr. Boehner had evident problems getting his caucus to support Plan B, and he took the plan off the table Thursday night; it would have modestly raised taxes on the really wealthy, the top 0.1 percent, and even that was too much for many Republicans. This means that any real deal with Mr. Obama would be met with mass G.O.P. defections; so any such deal would require overwhelming Democratic support, a fact that empowers progressives ready to bolt if they think the president is giving away too much.

As in 2011, then, the Republican crazies are doing Mr. Obama a favor, heading off any temptation he may have felt to give away the store in pursuit of bipartisan dreams.

And there’s a broader lesson here. This is no time for a Grand Bargain, because the Republican Party, as now constituted, is just not an entity with which the president can make a serious deal. If we’re going to get a grip on our nation’s problems — of which the budget deficit is a minor part — the power of the G.O.P.’s extremists, and their willingness to hold the economy hostage if they don’t get their way, needs to be broken. And somehow I don’t think that’s going to happen in the next few days.

Once again, I find myself in complete agreement with Paul Krugman. Rachel Maddow and Luke Russert reached a similar conclusion.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

From The Hill: A deficit-reduction deal that includes cost-of-living cuts for Social Security beneficiaries could cost Democrats the support of House liberals who might be needed to pass the bill, a number of lawmakers warned Thursday.

But the liberal Democrats stopped just short of saying they’d vote against a deal that included a move to the so-called chained consumer-price-index (CPI), a concession President Obama offered to Republicans this week.

"It is conceivable that you could have a package that is so attractive in so many other ways that you might swallow it. But here’s the problem: There are going to have to be compromises [by liberals] in other areas," Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) told reporters at the Capitol. "And what we’re saying is this one, for many of us, is a deal-breaker — or close to a deal-breaker — by itself."

Since Boehner is unable to deliver his own party on a plan that is completely unacceptable, there is no chance that he can do so on a reasonable plan. To get any plan through, Obama is going to have to have progressive support. Keep up the pressure on Obama, the Senate and the House.

Cartoon:

21Cartoon

Share
Dec 182012
 

I’m still down.  I’m current with replies.  Tomorrow I hope.

Jig Zone Puzzle:

Today’s took me 5:04 (average 5:42).  To do it, click here.  How did you do?

Fantasy Football Report:

Here is the playoff bracket from our fantasy football league, Lefty Blog Friends.

18Fantasy

The underdogs (but not the progressive ones), won both games.  I hope that trend does not continue.

Short Takes:

From NY Times: So we have found real reason to find hope in the determination to effect change that followed the murders of 20 children and seven adults in Newtown, Conn., last Friday. President Obama said it unequivocally on Sunday — the enormity of controlling the culture of guns and the epidemic of gun violence “can’t be an excuse for inaction.”

Yes, Mr. Obama has said that before, after two previous mass killings during his tenure, and did nothing. The hurdles are just as big as they were before, but there are signs that people are willing to rethink their views.

Senators Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Mark Warner of Virginia, Democrats with “A” ratings from the National Rifle Association, have both said it is time to talk about restrictions on gun sales and ownership. Joe Scarborough, the former Republican congressman and now morning host on MSNBC, said Monday that the Newtown killings had changed his mind about gun control.

This incident is so horrific that the NRA has been mute, too fearful to go to CT and hold a pro-gun rally, like they did after Columbine and Aurora. This is the best time there has been to act, because only the vilest Republicans will not be afraid to oppose reasonable firearms regulation now.

From MSNBC: The Great Gun Divide

 

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

I agree that there need be nothing to threaten the legitimate rights of gun enthusiasts who use them for legitimate purposes. As a former hunter, I can assure you that an assault weapon and an automatic pistol with a 30 round clip make for lousy hunting weapons.

From US News: Pursuing an archaic legal theory that punctuated pre-Civil War disputes between the federal government and states, South Carolina state Rep. Bill Chumley last week pre-filed a bill for the upcoming legislative session that would criminalize implementation of President Barack Obama’s 2010 healthcare reform law.

If his bill becomes law, any state official caught enforcing the healthcare law would be guilty of a misdemeanor and "must be fined not more than one thousand dollars or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."

Federal officials caught enforcing the law, however, would be given stiffer punishment under the proposal.

Any federal employee or contractor enforcing the law "is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, must be fined not more than five thousand dollars, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both," the bill proposes.

Nullification and InsaniTEA are still alive and well in SC.

Cartoon:

18Cartoon

A shame for past Democrats.  A plan for present Republicans.

Share
Nov 172012
 

We have made it to another weekend, and I hope that you are enjoying yours.  I’m current with replies.  Tomorrow is a holy day in the Church of the Ellipsoid Orb.  My Broncos are meditating with the Chargers is the afternoon, so I shall strive to finish in the morning.

Jig Zone Puzzle:

Today’s took me 3:28 (average 4:29).  To do it, click here.  How did you do?

Short Takes:

From MoveOn: This 83 Seconds Is To Remind President Obama What We Just Voted For

 

Tell your Senators and Reps why they are in office, too!

From PR Watch: Wisconsin’s effort to open the state to predatory lenders using American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) legislation has paid dividends for the ALEC legislators behind it.

In May of 2011, Rep. Robin Vos, the ALEC State Chair in Wisconsin and head of the powerful Joint Finance Committee, rolled a provision into the 2011-2012 budget bill resembling ALEC model legislation and that legalized auto title loans. Democrats voted against the provision, but it ultimately passed the Republican-led Finance Committee and state legislature.

Officials with Georgia-based title loan company LoanMax then gave over $24,000 in campaign contributions to Republican Assembly candidates, the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel’s Dan Bice reported this week.

I have no doubt that Scott Walker, Fartfuhrer of Fitzwalkerstan, heartily approved.

From TPM: Several prominent election lawyers on a panel here Friday predicted that the Supreme Court would ultimately strike down a part of the Voting Rights Act that requires states with a history of racial discrimination to have their election laws precleared [sic] by federal authorities.

If correct, and I think they are, the reason will be that the fascist five are working hard to help Republicans steal elections, by disenfranchising legitimate voters.

Cartoon:

17Cartoon

Share
Nov 132012
 

The only good thing about last week’s election is the outcome.  Voters waited in long lines for several hours, and Teabaggers harassed voters at the polls, mostly in Democratic leaning areas.  Republicans did their best to to disenfranchise poor, young and minority voters.  Arizona even sent official notification that the election was on Wednesday, but only to Latinos, and still has not decided several races, because they held up over 500,000 ballots.  Such abuses must never be allowed to happen again.  We need a Federal Voters’ Bill of Rights.

13voterBillOfRights…It is time for the nation to pass a tough federal Voters Bill of Rights. There is a lot of attention — for good reason — to high-profile causes like campaign finance reform and putting an end to partisan gerrymandering. But as last week’s election showed, there is an urgent need to focus more on the simple mechanics of running elections.

The long lines are a good place to start, and some members of Congress realize it. Rep. Elijah Cummings of Maryland, the senior Democratic member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, told the congressional newspaper The Hill that “we need to address this problem,” and compared this year’s voting to “elections in a third-world country.”

A Voters’ Bill of Rights could impose federal standards on the states that would drive down waiting times. It could require states to have lengthy early voting periods in all federal elections. And it could set out minimum standards for how many voting machines a state must have for every thousand voters assigned to a polling place.

A Voters’ Bill of Rights could also make it a federal crime to deceive potential voters about the time, place, or manner of an election. This is something the Deceptive Practices and Voter Intimidation Prevention Act, a bill sponsored by New York Senator Chuck Schumer, calls for. There would be fewer robo-calls telling people the wrong day for the election and fewer fliers misrepresenting voter ID requirements if people felt they might go to jail for their deceptions.

A federal Voters’ Bill of Rights could also do an end-run around state laws that make it unnecessarily expensive or difficult to get an ID that will be accepted at the polls. The law could establish a federal voter ID, available easily and for free, that states would be required to accept in federal elections. A Voters’ Bill of Rights could also regulate how states purge voters from their rolls. At least since Florida’s infamous 2000 voting roll purge, states have been wrongly removing eligible voters from the rolls.

A key reason that elections are run so badly is that in most states political partisans are in charge. This was a key problem with the 2000 election meltdown in Florida. Katherine Harris, Florida’s Secretary of State, both served as co-chair of George W. Bush’s election campaign and made the election rules. This year, Ohio’s Secretary of State, Jon Husted, made decisions — from trying to limit early voting hours to trying to make it harder to cast provision ballots — that critics saw as driven by political partisanship.

A federal Voters’ Bill of Rights could press the states to put non-partisan managers in charge of elections. There is a good model for this in the Government Accountability Board, which runs Wisconsin elections. Members of the board are selected in ways designed to minimize political partisanship and they are expected to put fair elections ahead of politics… [emphasis added]

Inserted from <Time>

I have very little to add, except that I consider campaign spending reform and the elimination of partisan gerrymandering equally important.  I look forward to seeing legislation introduced for a Federal Voters’ Bill of Rights.  If Republicans block it, the political cost for doing so will be overwhelming, because that only reason to oppose such a measure is the intent to abuse power to steal elections.

Share