Elections HAVE Consequences: Time to Bring Repukes to Heel!

“So, let's get this straight: A Republican President is reelected in 2004 with 284 electoral votes and the pundits say he has the "political capital" to push an extreme right-wing mandate. A Democratic President gets reelected in 2012 with 303 electoral votes, and they're telling us he needs to "unite a divided country."


Nonsense.This election was a clear and unequivocal victory for the populist positions the president took on the campaign trail”. – Richard Eskow, www.Smirkingchimp.com blog
------

Listening to newly re-elected Prez Barack Obama a couple nights ago, one could forgive him for flighty, over-generous, fantasy rhetoric in the wake of his resounding electoral victory – which now lo0ks like it will conform with Nate Silver’s forecast of 332 electoral votes to 206 for Mittens. That is why we need to take with a grain of salt his oratory about “working with Mitt Romney” or any of the other Gooper Fiends who, if they’d won would have had THEIR way and all of us eating out of bird feeders and dumpsters. So, let’s drop the bipartisan bull shit one time. Those fuckers would not give one nanoscale crumb to us had they achieved the same result, and we owe them nothing!

While the rarefied rhetoric can be accepted – temporarily – it must not be the basis of any policy decisions, and certainly not in any pandering to the ‘pukes for any “Grand Bargain” of the odious form floated two years ago. With the Reptiles yielding maybe one fourth in revenues, with the other THREE-fourths in egregious spending cuts – including to Medicare and Social Security, i.e. the “entitlements” the ‘pukes have had a boner to cut since the year dot.

Boehner’s plea yesterday for “fiscal cliff compromise” based on yielding a wee bit of revenue in the form of closing some tax loopholes must therefore be spat upon, with large globs and laughed at – howler style. People in Ohio, Florida and elsewhere didn’t stand in line for eight hours – sometimes barely making it to the ballot casting – for the sake of bald appeasement and give away to these ass- suckers. No –they stood in those lines, wherever the lines were – despite the Repuke efforts to suppress votes- because they believed Obama’s campaign speeches were based on genuine populism - not cynical political manipulation which in the end would sacrifice the very self-interest the 60 odd million Obama supporters cast ballots for!

This is why – especially after the nasty lessons of the debt ceiling crisis of 2010, Obama must not give ONE inch to these turds! Let them sink or swim, or suck shit. That’s putting it as nicely as I can. (And, oh btw, I’m in a good mood today after seeing a hilarious video on one idiot Wingnut blogger’s website – which compensated for having to get dental work done!)

Let’s understand a few things here, which I hope Obama does: Boehner, McConnell and the rest of their Klan have nothing to stand on – no room to maneuver. THEY are the ones who most desperately want to avoid the so-called “fiscal cliff” because it will mean automatic repeal of all the tax cuts – including those for their millionaire beneficiaries. THEY are the ones that have the most to lose and are in the worst bargaining position, so it makes more sense to adopt Sen. Patty Murray’s “cliff diver” paradigm and go over!

If the asinine repukes don’t want that then let THEM cede the most – by which I mean at LEAST HALF in new revenues from pure marginal tax INCREASES, not just pissant loophole closings or “simplifications”. Then, Obama can reasonably consider a judicious spending cuts aspect. But…..let’s make this clear once and for all:  the ¼ tax hikes and ¾ spending cuts formula is now passé. That was last time and 'pukes passed on it. THIS time the formula changes to ½ spending cuts and ½ pure tax hikes and at the marginal rates (at least) of the Clinton years – when, btw, 20 million new jobs were created.

There can be NO other deal and if Whiny Boehner and his Tea party crew don’t like it let them all take a long long walk on short pier.

As for the sequestration coming on Jan. 2, and the fear instilled in McConnell, Boehner and the other boneheads because of the imminent $600 b in military cuts – TOUGH SHIT! They brought it on by the failure of their members on the Supercommittee to deal, or compromise with the Dems. Now they must live with the fiscal consequences, humble as they are (the $600b is actually spread over ten years and merely reduces the rate of growth for the Pentagon, not in any sense an absolute cut in funding!)

As for the “fiscal cliff” itself, as Ezra Klein of the WaPo noted, it’s more a fiscal “bump”. All this hysteria is merely fomented by the corporate blow dried bimbos and himbos to try to frighten the policy makers into taking precipitous action. Meanwhile, the Wall Street sharks are using DOW nosedives as blackmail to try to get favorable action, i.e. extending ALL Bush tax cuts.

Sorry! This we cannot afford, if debt-deficit gurus like David Walker, Ernest Bowles, Alan Simpson and others are to be taken at their word. Yes, on average, the typical American Middle class family earning $60,000 will see a net increase of $2,200 in their bills to the IRS. But this is a small sacrifice to make compared to seeing their future Medicare cut in half, with premiums raised 100% or more and Social Security sliced by using a new COLA formula – with seniors losing up to $900 a year, every ten years. This would be catastrophic given that up to 55% of seniors are already living on only $21,000 a year and this is mostly coming from Social Security.

As for the Right’s warmongers, they also will be doing a full court press for Obama to attack Iran, prodded on by bellicose Israelis, but this he cannot do. For one, it will truly wreck the economy (unlike the mythical “fiscal cliff”) sending oil prices up over $250 a barrel. For another, the Russians will not sit back passively and watch as their investments go up in smoke and flames. To give in to the warmonger punks would therefore be the most colossal stupid thing ever done.

Once more the election delivered at least massive political capital to Obama. He needs to have the cojones to use it, not squander it by pussyfooting around with his sworn enemies, trying to make nicey-nice.

Sorry to burst your bubble, Mr. Obama, but we ARE divided by Red and Blue states! (One reason that secession of the 'Reds" may be the only sane and ultimate solution.) The sooner you acknowledge that fact and accept it,  the sooner you will be the proud PARTISAN you ought to have been in your first term, and pave the way for being a genuine leader…..as opposed to a Wuss.

"Super Committee" Follies Coming to an End

The sober news coming out of D.C. right now is that the much touted "Joint Deficit Reduction Committee", aka the "super committee", will end up with a big fat nothing to show for its efforts. They would have to finish a deal tomorrow in time for a final vote, because the laws governing its operation demand a 48-hour time interval between said vote and the deadline of Nov. 23rd. This ain't gonna happen, at least not in any valid way that's not based on smoke and mirrors gimmicks.

This means that there will be automatic cuts enacted in 2013, with $600 b for military-defense cuts (at least on paper, though I understand they will have leeway to cut other items in the budget and call it "defense", such as border patrol and immigration, Homeland Security and even Veterans' health care) and another $600b for social spending or what are quaintly called "discretionaries".

Leaving all the bullshit aside, this means the real work of congress remains, which is to establish whether funding continues for several key proposals, or is sliced. Among the items up for addressing: whether or not to adjust the AMT or "alternative minimum tax" levels, else the middle class will be clobbered with a new tax hit originally intended for the wealthy; deciding on whether or not to cut Medicare physicians' pay by 30% ; deciding whether to continue the 2% payroll tax deductions for another year, and deciding whether to extend 99 weeks of unemployment benefits for 3.5 million laid off workers.

If ALL were to be allowed, then we'd see an annual increase of $300b to the budget which is already under fierce scrutiny by Tea Bagger austerity fetishists, and the credit rating agencies and bond markets. But I would argue all need not and should not be allowed.

The ones that merit approval, and the reasons are as follows:

i) Extension of Unemployment Benefits:

Reason: Next to food stamps, this is the most stimulative device to pump up a moribund economy. The reason is people will spend the money right away, for mortgage payments, gas, groceries, school tuition...whatever. It is the ideal fillip in a low aggregate demand environment. Yet the Repuke House is almost certain to kill it or disallow it, unless the Dems cave again like they did last year on the Bush tax cuts. This would set up a near Hobson's political choice: extending the unemployment benefits for a year at a cost of nearly $75 b, or extend all the Bush tax cuts at a cost of $3.7 trillion over ten years.

Unfortunately, if such a Satanic deal is offered, the Dems and Obama have no choice but to eschew the 99 weeks extension this time. In the immortal words of Spock: "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few...". Translation: national fiscal stability (affecting over 200 million people) achieved by finally killing the Zombie Bush tax cuts trumps any deal that would disallow it and immediately affects only 3.5 million (or maybe 20 million by higher money circulation).

ii) Adjusting the AMT:

This has been done pro forma the past decade or more and it would be a tragedy of stupendous dimensions if not done again. Adjusting the AMT basically means raising the ceiling at which it is triggered. Recall the AMT is a parallel tax system that kicks in beyond a certain threshold (about $59,000 adjusted gross income last year) . If it kicks in, you have to trash your usual tax deductions etc, and use the higher tax options dictated by the AMT. To see if it's caught you, you need to download form 6251 from the IRS site, http://www.irs.gov/

Since its inception in the 1960s, the AMT or 'Alternative Minimum Tax' has never been inflation adjusted, so will trap as many as fifty million more middle class people by 2012 if not adjusted to a higher ceiling. Only 5% of the AMT comes out of the hides of those earning more than $1 million a year, or those part of the 1%.

Meanwhile, The Brookings-Urban Institute prepared a study that showed that in 2010 some 97% of families with 2 children and whose income is between $75,000 and $100,000 were forced off the regular tax system and onto the AMT system.

But beware! The Repukes may also well try to use this as a chip to get what they want, i.e. in extending the Bush tax cuts.

iii) Nix on any Medicare Physicians' cuts!

This ought to really be a no -brainer. I mean, it's difficult enough as it is for many older folks to find Medicare physicians, that is, the family practice drs. By cutting physicians' Medicare compensation another 30% it will be almost impossible for any new beneficiaries to secure the service of first line doctors.

In other words, they will be left with a hollow benefit.

NO - to the payroll tax 2% cuts for any longer!

On the other hand, the one approval we can do without - and which ought to allowed to expire - is the 2% payroll tax cut. While it's touted as a way to stimulate the economy it is too small for most workers to notice in their paychecks, and hence they are more likely to save it than spend it.

Meanwhile, it is actually eating away at Social Security receipts, you know the monies which pay for current beneficiaries and will have to cover the Boomers. Worse, the GAO has already said that S.S. will be unsustainable even in the short term if this defunding continues along with many more people taking Social Security disability insurance.

What all this means is that if these dire trends continue, the funding of Social Security will have to depend upon congressional appropriations - and we know and have seen how that's worked out.

Let us hope that our congress critters do the right thing in the next few weeks, and we don't have to be subjected to another loud verse of 'Send in the Clowns!'.

As for the super committee, anyone with a grain of sense would know it couldn't succeed when one side- the GOP six- was dug in on no revenue increases, having signed a 'no taxes' pledge compliments of Grover Norquist, i.e.

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2011/11/wacko-who-has-washingtons-balls-in.html

Let's hope that in the new year more fiscal resposibility prevails than we have recently seen, but I wouldn't hold my breath!

The Wrong Solution to Budget Woes!

A hungry Haitian child after being given only a baked mud pie to eat. Her plight will increase as will that of another 1.5 million Haitians if the U.S. cuts foreign aid in order to protect its bloated military budget!


As stark misery and humanitarian crises spread across the globe, one would like to believe the planet's most powerful nation would step up to to the challenge. Right now, the proportion of the U.S. budget allocated to foreign aid, inluding health assistance, food, and medicines, is barely 1%. Now, the news is that in the midst of the national austerity hysteria, the country plans to retrench foreign aid spending in order to "save money".

One is led to ask what harebrained morons conceived of this disgusting and inhumane solution to the deficits? Yet the news coming out of the Beltway is that as lawmakers scramble to trim the swelling national debt both the Repuke -controlled House and the Dem-controlled Senate have proposed slashing financing for the State Department and its related aid agencies (which spending accounts for less than 1 cent of every dollar) while ignoring the monstrously bloated military which accounts for 58 cents of every dollar). And this at a time when desperate humanitarian crises, such as still in Haiti (see photo of starving Haitian child) are increasing.

In Haiti, for example, more than 650,000 stll remain homeless after the massive earthquake that stuck almost 2 years ago. Kids there have returned to having to make do with eating warmed mud pies that their beleagured moms "season" with some leftover salt or sugar. Others still contract cholera from the river waters. And what is the U.S. plan of action? To further cut spending there to increase the misery index while the miltary industrial complex grows fat off our taxpayers.

Mewanwhile, in Africa, the cuts will ensure less financial support not only for food stuffs (especially now as famine rages in Somalia and the Sudan) as well as medicine for the continent's millions of AIDs sufferers, and assistance in birth control - to contain Africa's exploding population.

Are the austerity mavens proposing such cuts even remotely aware of the monstrous harm they will inflict, while they allow our arms manufacturers to continue to gorge - even as we now spend more than the next 25 nations combined? Are they aware that it is precisely foreign aid, food and medicines, as well as education (say provided by the Peace Corps) which is the best antidote to terrorism?

And that the tactic of cutting foreign aid is penny -wise and pound foolish, because what will be saved with this cynical move will have to be paid for ten thousand times over in combating new terrorists, including pirates, and othe groups springing up in every place from Somalia, to Sudan, to Yemen to Pakistan?

Before this proposed budget idiocy, the rational of "smart power" had been the norm, by which diplomacy and development had been emphasized over U.S. military power. But now with the reversal of this counterforce for good and decrease in foreign aid, it appears the military will actually have cause to feed off the taxpayer trough - since doubtless there'll be hundreds of brush fire wars and terror strikes accompanying the loss of needed aid. After all, new millions of hungry people will not go quietly into that good night. They will strike back, and furiously.

We now see the first impacts of protecting the over-engorged military from needed spending cuts of the order of $350b a year, and we will see more as the domestic "super committee" sits down to weigh military spending cuts against domestic ones. Let us hope at least some in that committee have the foresight, gumption, principles and power to force the military to cut its over-bloated budgets rather than endorse further cutting from American citizens struggling amidst high unemployment, heavy debt loads, falling home prices and high food and gas prices.

It's long past time to cut the damned military budget and make that the first strike against the Wall Street- fed militarization of capital that infects the planet.

Can We Get This Donkey a Balls and Spine Transplant?

Columnist Eugene Robinson of The Washington Post put it best in his column this morning: this debt deal was a major defeat for all progressives. But, he added, the next round is soon upon us (next month) and if the Dem side stands tough and is prepared to fight they might actually prevail, as opposed to caving again!

Don't hold your breath!

Somehow, "fight" doesn't appear to be any more in the Democratic Party lexicon than in their DNA. They appear to be congenitally predisposed to pusillanimous surrender, appeasement, Stockholm syndrome and persistently snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

Even now, Wussie Dem Senate "leader" Harry Reid is mouthing platitudes to the press that he "really wants" to have on the Dem side of the super congress people who are "flexible" and "willing to consider entitlement cuts". (Though he did say that the repukes' refusal to include revenues makes the last difficult for him. Oh pity poor widdo Harry!)

For people who maybe have been living in caves, the "super congress" or super "committee" is the unaccountable group of 12 congress critters: 6 from each side, who will determine the next round of cuts (some $1.8 trillion) before Thanksgiving. If they can't come to any agreement, then automatic cuts will be effected to defense and Medicare. Though the Re-Pugs, as is their wont, managed to craft the "defense" cuts to their side to be one third inclusive of: foreign aid, Homeland Security and other ancillary props not really part of defense proper.)

What Harry is dithering about then, is appointing people to HIS side who are "flexible".

Well, sorry Harry, but you are already negotiating a prescription for FAILURE!

YOU really need to read Sun Tzu's The Art of War, to the effect that a "battle is generally won before it begins". What he meant is that before the opposing forces even face off, all the preparations that majorly assure victory for one side and defeat for the other, have essentially been made. In the latter case, they are almost always deficient compared to the preparations of the winners!


The Reeps and Mitch McConnell have made it abundantly clear that they intend to "stick with the program". Their hostage taking terrorism worked so well last time they will do it again next month, and hence ALL of their side will be strong, Teepee-oriented spending cutters. NO one for raising revenues!

This means that to even preserve a semblance of balance, Reid must appoint Dem hard liners on his side, else we will be faced with perpetual wuss (or blue dog, junkyard mutt) Dems aligning with Reeps on every vote to target only social spending and never defense. This despite defense now is the most bloated budget there is, sucking up 58 cents of every federal dollar spent. The U.S. now spends more on defense than all the other nations of the planet combined! What, are we going to start invading them all?

Thus, Reid doesn't have the freaking luxury of "flexibility", and if he thinks he does, he's not only the worst wussie to lead the Senate (worse than Tom Daschle, another appeaser), but a dumbass wuss besides. The reason is simple: the ONLY leverage the forlorn donkeys are left with (since they're so inept at bargaining) is defense cuts. If that leverage is ceded, then everything is lost and the Reeps win 99% of what they want again! This we cannot tolerate. Indeed, we won't. All hell will break loose if Reid appoints anyone to that committee of 6 who's not a diehard, hell bent progressive!

In that sense, let me show Harry Reid who exactly needs to be on his committee, from the House and Senate:

House Dems (3):

1) Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (Missouri)

2) Rep. Dennis Kucinich (Ohio)

3) Rep. Diana DeGette(Colorado)


Senate Dems (3):

1) Sen. Bernie Sanders (Vermont)

2) Sen. Barbara Boxer (California)

3) Sen. Chuck Schumer (New York)


There is some latitude in the choices, provided those of similar political tilt and temperament replace those listed. (For example, Sen. Diane Feinstein can replace Sen. Boxer, if need be).

But we don't want to see Warner from Virginia, Tester from Montana, Liebermann from Connecticut or Max Baucus!

Those are deal breakers, Harry!

As for the Dems' and their contribution mongering, begging for money donations, they can go suck salt or pound sand until I see some evidence of balls and spine. I will NOT give money to appeasing wussies.

Maybe after you losers win the next round, in Sept., with revenue hikes and especially massive defense cuts, we'll see about further campaign contributions!