As the next Congressional fight over payroll tax extensions and unemployment benefits and pipelines gets set up in the next few weeks for either its final chapter or to be kicked down the road a bit farther, one or the other, you're going to hear a lot from our Republican friends about how much they value work and workers; most especially, they'll tell you, they value American jobs for American workers.
After all, they'll say, creating American jobs is the most important thing of all.
But if we were to look back over just the last few months, some would tell us, we could quickly find examples of how Republicans promote ideas that don't seem to value work or workers at all, much less American jobs.
Well as it turns out, "some" seem to be right; to illustrate one of those examples we'll look back a month or two or three to a time some Republicans might wish was long, long, ago, in a galaxy far, far away.
We gotta grow some jobs, and that's a fact, and we probably aren't going to be able to do it with big ol' jobs programs funded by the Federal Government, what with today's politics and all, and that means if this Administration wants to stay in the jobs game they're going to have to find some smaller and more creative ways to do it.
They are also going to have to come up with ideas that are pretty much "bulletproof", meaning that they are so hard to object to that even Allen West and Louie Gohmert will not want to be on record saying "no no no!"; alternatively, solutions that work around the legislative process entirely could represent the other form of "bulletproof-ery".
Well, I have one of those "maybe bulletproof" ideas for you today, and it has to do with how "Made in USA" the things are that our Government buys.
It was just a couple of nights ago that Keith Olbermann was challenging us, in one of his "Special Comments", to rise up in the streets and take back this country.
He pointed out that the only way those on the left were going to be able to fight against those who are looking to get all "Tea Party" is to be as angry and as organized and as aggressive as the Tea Party community, and if we're smart, we'll take him up on that challenge.
But if you really want to push "professional" Democrats to the left, most especially this President, and you want to do it in time to impact the '12 cycle, the only way to do it is to run a candidate in primary contests that either moves the conversation your way...or leaves you with a surprising new Candidate.
And right here, right now, we actually have a chance to do exactly that - and that's why, in today's discussion, I'm going to challenge Olbermann right back.
I have not been talking about the insanity around the debt ceiling and debt and deficit and the efforts of Republicans to drive us all off the cliff, but I am today – and I’m going to do it by allowing you to grab ahold of this problem and see for yourself just how unbelievably bad this manufactured crisis is going to be.
You will hear a lot of conversation about the consequences from others; today, however, you are going to get the chance to be both the President and the Secretary of the Treasury, and you will get to decide for yourself exactly what bills the Federal Government should and should not pay as the cash runs out if a deal is not made by the time borrowing authority runs out.
At that point you’ll be able to see what’s coming for yourself – and once you do, you won’t need me to tell you what ugly is going to look like.
<strong>(FNS - Washington, New Germany, April 17, 1947)</strong> America’s new Führer, Adolf Hitler, announced today that his official War History would in fact acknowledge that one of the biggest contributing factors to the defeat of the Allies was the insistence of the former United States of America on sticking to its Balanced Budget Amendment, which left them unable to fund the wartime conversion of the US economy for the benefit of the Alliance.
“All those ideas Mr. Roosevelt spoke of”, said Hitler, “Lend-Lease, modular shipbuilding, War Bonds, secret weapons…in the end, all of them were just words, since the Americans’ Congress was never willing to allow the country to fully fund its war effort.”
So I disappeared for a full week, right in the middle of what should have been a busy writing schedule, and I have to claim some "personal days" to cover the time we missed here at the blog - but it won't be time entirely wasted.
Instead, I'm going to jump into my own personal life for today's story, and I'm going to do it so that we can stimulate some thinking about where we really need to go to if we ever hope to make some sense out of the crazy way we deliver health care in this country.
Since this appears to be the weekend that a lot of decisions are either going to be made about the future of our "social safety net"...or they wont; we're entirely unsure...let's talk about how it actually works for a lot of us - and how it could work a lot better.
By now you have heard that President Obama has chosen to throw Social Security and the Medicare and Medicaid Programs over the side of his proverbial fishing boat as bait to see if he can get Republicans to give him another really lousy compromise, much as he did last December when he gave up billions upon billions of deficit reduction in order to help Republicans preserve tax cuts for billionaires.
And it looks like the President doesn't really lose if you or I get hurt here: in fact, it seems that, in his eyes, it's to his advantage to fight against his own base as he seeks to be "the adult in the room" in the runup to the '12 election.
So we're going to have to find a way to put The Fear on this guy - and I think I've got a plan to force this President to listen.
And it works like this: if this President ain't gonna be moved by our message...we do it by holding the rest of his Party hostage.
In a statement released just this morning, Lafayette Democrats(site , Facebook ) come out strong against the members of the State House who voted to kill HB 112 – The “Safe Schools/Anti-Bullying” effort.
Lafayette Democrats Disappointed in Acadiana House Delegation
Lafayette, LA - At its first meeting since the vote, Lafayette Democrats expressed their disappointment that State House members voting to first strip, then to kill an Anti-Bullying bill that would have dramatically improved the lives of children throughout this state.
The committee issued this statement:
“HB 112 aimed to address the growing problems in Louisiana schools and throughout the country of children being incessantly bullied to the point where they are contemplating — and sometimes succeeding — in committing suicide.
“Kids who are perceived to be gay, whether they are or not, are being bullied at an alarming rate. This targeting often causes feelings of isolation and shame which can prevent them from reaching out to parents and teachers. And it is not only bullying aimed at kids perceived to be gay — children with actual or perceived mental or physical disabilities are also being targeted. Administrators and teachers can often overlook these situations as just normal “taunting” but in fact it is causing long term harm to many children.
“Testimony presented at the hearings on this bill clearly showed that enumerating the characteristics and forms of bullying is essential if the goal is to protect all children. States and localities with such enumerations of unacceptable behaviors have lower rates of bullying and its consequences, including suicide rates.
“No one in the Acadiana Delegation supported HB 112 when it was considered by the full House. First the bill was amended to take out the types of bullying and every member of the Acadiana Delegation voted for this amendment virtually killing the bill. The bill later was stripped further via amendment and then ultimately failed to pass.
“It is a sad day in our state and in Acadiana when we can’t come together and protect children — yes, even children who may be gay.
“Lafayette Democrats call on the legislature and especially the Democratic members to pass a fully inclusive bill in next year’s session. Until that time, we call on our school systems to insure that ALL children are able to attend school free from harassment, intimidation and persecution for any reason including actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity or expression and mental or physical disabilities.”
Especially interestingly to note – the “For more information Links” they provide in the article – they link to articles written by our good Friend Lamar over at www.CenLamar.com and a back and forth exchange on Facebook that was covered by The Independent in Lafayette.
Should also be noted that the Lafayette Democrats were also mentioned in last Night’s Rachel Maddow show with relation to David Vitter… Check that out here. So are Democrats growing a spine here??
On May 19, 2011, the Louisiana House of Representatives struck down HB 112 by Austin Badon (D-New Orleans). Badon's "Anti-bullying" bill would have made it easier for Louisiana schools to deal with bullying and harassment in schools and help children and families affected by said bullying.
The bill was struck down however, because the GOP, the party of "family vaules," decided that it promoted "alternative lifestyles."
The bill would have protected victims of bullying based on not only sexual orientation but "race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, gender, gender identity or expression, physical characteristic, political persuasion, mental disability, or physical disability."
Sadly, Democrats caved and voted to strip this language from the bill.Even after this move, the GOP still voted to strike the bill down.
The GOP should be ashamed of themselves. As well as the Democrats who voted to strip the language.
Regardless of your feelings on gay rights, these are CHILDREN. Bullying has no place in our schools and those who say that "bullying is not a problem" (Louisiana Family Forum) are way out of touch.
I pray that none of the legislators who opposed this bill ever have to deal with their own children being bullied. Maybe only then, however, will they see why this is such an important issue and such an epic failure on the part of the Louisiana legislature.
We are continuing a recent theme here today in which two of my favorite topics are going to converge: Social Security and in-your-face political activism.
I have been encouraging folks to take advantage of the recent Congressional recess to have a few words with your CongressCritter about the proposed Death Of Medicare and all the proposed cuts to Social Security...and you have, as we'll discuss...and now we have an opportunity to do something on a national scale, just as we did a few weeks ago in support of Social Security.
This time, we're going to concentrate on fighting the idea that retirement ages should go up before we become eligible for Social Security and Medicare (and elements of Medicaid, as well), and that Americans should just keep right on working until the age of 67 or so-which isn't going to be any big problem...really...trust us.
Now that just makes no sense, and to help make the point we have a really cool video that you can pass around to all your friends-and your enemies, for that matter, since they'll also have to worry about what happens to them if they should ever make it to old age.
There are lots of big tough words coming out of our friends in the Tea Party these days, especially when it comes to the permissible functions of the Federal Government.
"If it's not specifically enumerated in the Constitution," they say, "It must be a function of the States-and the 10th Amendment says so!"
None are tougher in their language than those living in the States located below the old Mason-Dixon line-and by an amazing coincidence, just this weekend pretty much all of those States got a bit of a "gut check" in the form of dozens of tornados that slammed into the area.
So we're going to put the Tea Party philosophy to the test today, and see just what exactly the Federal Government should-and should not-be doing to fulfill the Tea Party vision and to help those folks who were hit by this particular natural disaster.
If your view of politics is filtered by a lens marked "Progressive" or "Liberal", there's a pretty good chance that you've been gnashing your teeth and pulling your hair in frustration over the "give away the store, then negotiate" approach professional Democrats have used when facing the challenges from the Tea Party last year, and all that's come after.
Over and over and over people like me have written stories wondering why Democrats, starting with this President, don't get out in a very public way and slam Republican policies, over and over and over-especially when most Americans hate the things Republicans seem to love to support.
Turning over Government to the highest bidder?
Not so popular.
Going back to a heathcare system run by, for, and of the insurance industry?
Again, not so much.
Jacking up taxes and healthcare costs for you and me in order to provide another trillion in tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires?
So unpopular pollsters hardly believe it.
But there is another way, and today's story is in two parts: we're going to talk about how hard it is to get Democrats, as a group, to get loud and get aggressive-and then we're going to talk about Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer, who is out there showing any reluctant Democrat just exactly how you can "grow the brand".
There's been a great deal of concern around here about the effort to prepare the US military for the full repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT), and I've had a few words of my own regarding how long the process might take.
There was a hearing before the House Armed Services Committee last Thursday that had all four Services represented; with one exception these were the same Service Chiefs that were testifying last December when the bill to set the repeal process in motion was still a piece of prospective legislation.
At that time there was concern that the "combat arms" of the Marines and the Army were going to be impacted in a negative way by the transition to "open service"; the Commandant of the Marine Corps and the Army's Chief of Staff were the most outspoken in confirming that such concerns exist within the Pentagon as well.
We now have more information to report-including the increasing desperation of some of our Republican friends-and if you ask me, I think things might be better than we thought.
So it's been about three weeks since we last had this conversation, but once again we have to take action to try to keep Social Security from being the victim of "deficit fever".
I know that doesn't make a lot of sense, considering the disconnect between Social Security and the deficit-but once again it's "Continuing Resolution" time on Capitol Hill, where some use the threat of an impending shutdown of the Federal Government to extract concessions from the other side...and some on the other side try to make points with the voters by out-conceding their opponents.
So Tuesday and Wednesday of next week, there's a national push on to get voters to call their Senators and remind them to vote for an Amendment that is a big ol' "I'm not willing to cut Social Security just because other people philosophically want to cut Government any way they can" kind of reassurance to the voters, and I'm here to encourage you, once again, to make a couple phone calls and do some pushing of your own.
I've also been storing up a couple somewhat facetious random thoughts which will be the "garnish" for today's dish; you'll see them pop up as we go along.
In our efforts to form a more perfect Union we look to the Constitution for guidance for how we might shape the form and function of Government; many who seek to interpret that document try to do so by following what they believe is The Original Intent Of The Founders.
Some among us have managed to turn their certainty into something that approaches a reverential calling, and you need look no further than the Supreme Court to find such notables as Cardinals Samuel Alito and Antonin Scalia providing "liturgical foundation" to the adherents of the point of view that the Constitution is like The Bible: that it's somehow immutable, set in stone, and, if we would only listen to the right experts, easily interpreted.
But what if that absolutist point of view is absolutely wrong?
What if the Original Intent Of The Founders, that summer in Philadelphia...was simply to get something passed out of the Constitutional Convention, and the only way that could happen was to leave a lot of the really tough decisions to the future?
What if The Real Original Intent...was that we work it out for ourselves as we go along?
According to well-placed Democratic sources, Caroline Fayard is seriously contemplating a run for Governor of the state of Louisiana.
This information clashes with reports, some first-hand, of Fayard indicating she would run for Secretary of State this fall. However, new rumors are eminating not only from inside Louisiana, but also from around the Beltway. Washington DC Democrats, potentially including DGA officials, have been shopping the race to consultants and operatives inside of DC. National Democrats are eager to have a self-funding candidate with positive political momentum to take on Jindal, denying him a cakewalk election and springboard to either a VP ticket or 2014 Senate run at Mary Landrieu.
According to speculation and chatter among insiders, Fayard has been vacillating between running for Secretary of State and Governor since her defeat last fall in the special election for Lieutenant Governor. Her strong showing, coupled with the complete lack of well-positioned Democrats prepared for or willing to enter major statewide races, leaves this fall's choice completely up to Fayard. Considering the Democratic Party's meager present condition, and desperation for statewide candidates, Fayard's epic fundraising capability and freshness make her the biggest fish in a shallow Democratic pond.
However, Jindal has barely garnered a whiff of any potential challengers and statewide Democratic leaders have already begun to acknowledge that they lack a consensus candidate, or any candidate at all for that matter.
Fayard's entry would cause an immediate sensation and draw serious national attention to an otherwise forgettable steamroll of a Jindal reelection campaign. It can't be said enough: as a candidate, and as a storyline, Caroline Fayard is very attractive. Nationally, Democrats are hunting for young, bankable political stars, and Fayard has the money, juice, presentation and, yes, looks to be just that. A potential governor's race between Fayard and Jindal would immediately take to the national political stage, vaulting Fayard onto the political pages of every major publication. Appearances on Meet the Press and major Sunday shows wouldn't be far behind. And the National Democratic Party could not find a better sign of renewal than a competitive race in a southern gubernatorial race against a former GOP rising star.
Yes, it would be hard to see her winning no matter what she says or does in a race against Jindal. Given the strongly Republican lean that the State has taken in recent years, the numbers just might not be there. But it can be assured that Jindal would need every one of those 9 million dollars to beat Fayard. With the right message, Jindal is vulnerable and Fayard might represent the breakthrough-type of messenger to sell it. Furthermore, Fayard would renew the Democratic message in Louisiana, easily breaking free from bad memories of the past. She embodies the promise of a young generation of Louisianians returning home to push their birth-state forward. Her lack of connections with in-state Democrats, including the ghosts of Blanco and Edwards, would be advantageous in this environment. An endorsement from Bill Clinton wouldn't hurt. Winning the future, indeed.
We still don't know what Caroline will do, but as Democrats, we must hope that she is courageous enough to take Jindal on. Without another serious candidate waiting in the wings, the Democratic Party might face the ultimate embarrassment: failing to field a candidate at all. Conversely, with Fayard, Democrats might just have a chance to pull off an upset with a candidate we can all get excited about.
News is suddenly moving so fast that it's becoming hard for me to keep up; that's why we're not finishing the story today that we just began Tuesday. You know, the one about Titan Cement suing two North Carolina residents who appear to be doing nothing more than speaking the truth.
Unfortunately, other important news has forced itself to the front of the line, and it's going to demand that we break schedule, whether we like it or not.
That's why today we're going to be talking about Wisconsin, and how workers there are fighting back against the State's Republican legislators and Governor, who seem to have gone out of their way this past three weeks to govern without the consent of the governed.
It's kind of chilly today in Wisconsin...but I can assure you, things are heating up fast-and it ain't because of spring.
So it's Day 3 of my fake campaign for Congress, and we've run into our first obstacle
The Fake Campaign, as you may recall, is fake headed for Wisconsin, to show solidarity, and we've fake hitched a ride on a delivery truck headed for Rush Limbaugh's Florida broadcasting studios-but we fake found ourselves caught up in the all-too-real Giant Grip Of Winter that has seized the Midwest over the past week.
We're back on the road now, but we were stuck for darn near a half-day there at Wall...and if you know anything about South Dakota, you know there are really only two things to do in the City of Wall: you can shuffle back and forth between Gold Diggers and the Badlands Bar, partaking of numerous intoxicating liquors along the way...or you can head on into Wall Drug (the same one that's on all those bumper stickers and signs) and partake of the finest display of Giant Jackalopia on the planet.
The Campaign, naturally, chose Jackalopia-and that's why today's Manifesto is all about the fake impromptu 5-cent-coffee-fueled Social Security Town Hall that we held in the Wall Drug Mall for several hours while we waited for I-90 to reopen.
We have been talking a lot about Social Security these past few weeks, even to the point where I've missed out on talking about things that I also wanted to bring to the table, particularly the effort to reform Senate rules.
We'll make up for that today with a conversation that bears upon both of those issues, and a lot of others besides, by getting back to one of the fundamentals in a very real way...and today's fundamental involves the question of whether it's a good idea to keep pushing for what you want, even if it seems pointless at the time.
To put it another way: when it comes to this Administration and this Congress and trying to influence policy...if Elvis has already left the building, what's the point?
There have been many unlikely things that have happened this past month or so: some of them appearing as legislation, some of them appearing in the form of Republicans who set new records for running away from the words they used to get elected-and some of them appearing in the markets, where, believe it or not, many Europeans finds themselves wishing for our economic situation right about now.
There are even improbable sports stories: our frequently hapless Seattle Seahawks, the only team to ever make the NFL Playoffs with a losing record, are today preparing to knock the Chicago Bears out of their bid to play in the Super Bowl, having crushed the defending holders of the Lombardi Trophy just last week before the 12th Man in Seattle.
But as improbable as all that is, the one thing I never thought I would see is Barack Obama getting into a political argument with himself over Social Security-and then losing the argument.
Even more improbably, it looks like there's just about a week left for him to come to a decision...and it looks like you're going to have to help him make up his mind.
-placed Democratic sources, Caroline Fayard is seriously contemplating a run for Governor of the state of Louisiana.
