Please Cut the Crap!

Right Wingers on NRO: 50 De-Stimulating Myths Disguised as "Fact"

One of the worst aspects of the "debate" over the economic stimulus package has to be the sophistry exhibited by the far right when discussing  the issue. One of the purest examples of the bullshit coming from the far right was in The National Review Online this morning, in the guise of an article entitled "50 De-Stimulating Facts: Chapter and Verse on a Bad Bill" by Stephen Spruiell & Kevin Williamson. In the article, the two wingnuts cite "facts" that are certainly not factual, but no more than opinion., and that is being kind, because they are the opposite of factual. This is not unusual, of course; right wingers are always posing their opinions as "fact," even though they're usually wrong. But what makes the current effort by the right wing to muddy the waters is the fact that the lives of millions of families who are struggling with the economy these same idiots screwed up, are hanging in the balance.

We literally don't have time for this kind of crap: We just don't.

Before I get into their list of items they don't like, let's get something else out of the way first. In the introduction to the piece, they make the following claim:

The idea that the government can spend the economy out of a recession is highly questionable...

This is right wing sophistry at its ballsiest, folks.

Stimulate THIS, Republicans!

Look, Democratic Senators; it is this simple. The current incarnation of the Republican Party will only play ball when they lose enough fights, and realize they have no choice but to either help craft legislation, or get the hell out of the way while you do.

The people want and need a stimulus package, and they will get one. The most Republicans might be able to do is to delay it a bit, but they can’t stop it, so stop acting as if they can. If moderate Republicans make decent proposals that make sense, and could help move the economy along, you’d be crazy not to consider it. But stop listening to the bullying tactics and the promises to “not vote” for the package. They lost the last election, and they seem poised to lose the next few elections, and it really doesn’t matter what they like and don’t like.

And don’t worry about a filibuster. If they do filibuster this, they will be sorry. See, the unemployment figures are about to come out, and they’ll be the highest we’ve seen in many decades; possibly even higher than they were in 1982; the last time supply-side economics pushed us over a cliff. And if Republicans delay or kill a stimulus package that might work, or even if they vote against a stimulus package that ends up working, they will be screwed, and they know it.

Bipartisanship With Petulant Children; Is it Possible?

Look, I'm all for President Obama seeking support from Republicans.  After all, he is the president of all of the people, and Republicans are people, too. But for Chrissakes; at what point does he get that the leadership representing the Republican Party in Congress -- especially the Senate -- is made up mostly of people whose election hasn't come around yet, so they haven't had the opportunity to be tossed out on their asses. Yet. Moreover, they have no concept of what "bipartisanship" actually means, so you have to teach it to them. To them, bipartisanship means, "you do what we want." They sound very much like the biggest kids in fifth grade, who have gotten to ninth grade, but don't seem to realize all of the other kids are now bigger. 

 

When you listen to these morons, I swear to you they're living in a goddamn echo chamber or something. They seem to be sealed off from the real world somehow; to them, 2006 and 2008 never even happened.  First, the idiot Republicans in the House voted as a bloc AGAINST a stimulus package designed to relieve the current economic mess that THEY caused in the first place. And what did they choose to bitch about? I mean, besides the pennies the bill was scheduled to toss at contraceptive programs.

 

The DEFICIT!

 

I kid you not! I almost fell out of my chair! Suddenly, John Boner (sp?), the House MINORITY Leader (I made the letters bigger so that he understands that's who he is now -- the MINORITY Leader), decided he finally gives a shit about the deficit, and perhaps we shouldn't add to it, because, well, it's pretty big. HIS PARTY is responsible for adding $10 trillion of the $11 trillion debt we find ourselves with, and they accumulated that debt at a time when they were declaring the economy was just humming along. Now, suddenly, after they tossed our tax money to their friends and supporters for the last eight years, they've decided we're borrowing too much, and we should really be a little more responsible with the people's money.

 

Bite me, Boner (sp?).

KBR Negligence Kills Soldiers; Bushies Covered it UP!

This is outrageous, folks!

From the Associated Press: Sailor electrocuted - Yahoo! News.

A third U.S. service member has been determined to have been electrocuted in a shower in Iraq, and Navy criminal investigators are investigating, The Associated Press has learned.

Navy Petty Officer 3rd Class David A. Cedergren, 25, of South St. Paul, Minn., died Sept. 11, 2004, while showering. His family was told he died of natural causes.

Late last year, the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology changed the manner of Cedergren's death to "accidental," caused by electrocution and inflammation of the heart. The Naval Criminal Investigative Service has reopened an investigation into his death, Ed Buice, a NCIS spokesman, said Monday.

Cedergren's death is among 18 electrocution deaths — 16 U.S. service members and two military contractors — under review as part of a Department of Defense Inspector General inquiry. Improperly installed or maintained electrical devices have been blamed in some of the deaths, while accidental contact with power lines caused others.

THIS is how Dick Cheney's been getting rich? Letting his Halliburton contractor buddies get away with putting up defective facilities, and then covering up the deaths and injuries that result from it? And worse is lying to the families of the servicemen about how the death occurred?

Eighteen Americans -- 16 of them soldiers -- may have died because of KBR's negligence, and they're just raking in the billions and padding their bottom line. And the Bush Administration was apparently helping them cover it up!

What else have they lied about, folks? If we can spend trillions of dollars fixing the mess they've made of the economy, and trillions more fixing their messes in Iraq and Afghanistan, we have to dedicate a few billion dollars investigating these assholes, and finding out about everything they've lied about.

Gregg: Example of Obama Political Genius or...??

Okay, so President Obama is about to appoint Judd Gregg as Commerce Secretary. When this was first announced, many liberals were giddy at the prospect of getting a 60th Democratic vote in the Senate, despite the reality that there is no such thing as a "filibuster-proof majority" in a Senate with at least a half dozen Democrats who are practically Republicans. But Gregg whined, and stated that he wouldn't serve his country as Commerce Secretary if it meant it changed the make up of the Senate, thus putting party ahead of country, as Republicans are wont to do. So, Governor Lynch will be appointing a Republican to replace Gregg, thus denying Democrats the magical 60 seats so many think they need.

 

Judd Gregg seems like a bad fit with the Obama Administration, but Barack Obama has amazing instincts as a politician; I don't think anyone should question his political motives quite  yet. So, what is he doing, nominating so many Republicans to his administration?

 

Here's what I think he's doing.

 

The two most contentious issues Obama will deal with during his first year or two in office are the two occupations, In Iraq and Afghanistan, and the economy. And these are the issues on which the far right will most likely try to oppose him, and do so quite strongly.  Since public opinion will have a lot of influence  on these issues, and will either strengthen or weaken the opposition to things such as the stimulus.

 

So, what better way to blunt the Republicans' criticism of the measures Obama will have to take regarding the occupations and the economy, than to have Republicans in charge of both Commerce and Defense?  What can the wingnuts in Congress say? Can they claim "partisanship" when the leaders of both efforts are being undertaken by fellow Republicans, Gates and Gregg?

 

I may be off base here, but Obama seems to be demonstrating some incredible political agility here. He's knocking the wind out of the Republicans' sails, by walking the walk, and creating a truly bipartisan administration, and making Republicans who would oppose him on look like fools. How can they possibly oppose  him, and not look like fools, when members of their own party are actually implementing the laws the Democrats "make" them pass?

 

Of course, if Republicans were smart, they could use this as a  way to improve their standing with voters. When the stimulus package works -- and it will -- they can claim a measure of credit, since one of theirs -- Gregg -- helped make it work. When the two occupations  end, and the entire Middle east doesn't dissolve into pure chaos, one of theirs -- Gates --was a major player in that effort.

 

But right wing Republicans aren't smart, so Obama's the one who will benefit, when he looks like the bipartisan reformer, and they just look like petulant children.

 

I think I get this now…

It's Time to Change Our Energy Mindset; Green Will Bring in the Green

One of the key aspects of the current stimulus package that is exciting is its investment in new energy production, that is more attuned to the needs of the average person and the planet, than anything we've seen before. It reflects a new reality, and it's about time.

 

The way we've designed our lives has necessitated the use of energy to fuel every aspect of  them. We have to heat and cool our homes, we have to travel and move goods around the country and around the world, and we depend greatly on electrical energy these days, to the point that electrical energy must be plentiful and dependable.  In other words, most of the world has chosen not to live like the Amish. Whether or not that is a wise choice is a matter of debate, but we are what we are.

 

One thing is not debatable, however. No matter how we as humans choose to live our lives, we still need the world around us in order to function. Therefore, we must balance our production and use f energy with the need for clean air, wholesome, nutritious food and a clean and plentiful supply of water. And as everything in nature works in harmony, we have to figure out a way to produce what we need, while disturbing as little of the natural world as possible. It doesn't matter if you "believe" in global warming or not, nor does it doesn't matter how many jobs, companies and countries are "dependent" on the extraction of fossil fuels for their economies. What I am talking about is the survival of the human race, and the planet as a whole.

 

Okay, that last part probably overstated things just a bit. We won't kill the planet; this planet is pretty resilient, and will probably survive whatever we can do to it. But the survival of the human species depends greatly upon the health of the planet. So, how do we reserve as many of the technological gains we have made in recent generations, and still preserve the natural worlld, so that we survive?

If we want to increase the chances of human survival, -- and we do -- and preserve the planet we love, then we have to change our approach to energy production. Production of energy must involve two concepts; first, we must stop using natural resources as if they belong to humans alone;. The world belongs to every plant and animal species here, as well. Therefore, we have to be more careful when extracting resources, and we must stop burning things to supply us with energy.

 

We must solve this energy crisis. But first, we have to recognize that there is a crisis. The fact is, we have been in an energy crisis since we first realized that we could burn oil and gas to make light. and run machinery. But the crisis has been most acute in the last 40 years, and it will not end until we create most of our energy naturally, without burning natural resources, and to make maximum use of every bit of energy we produce.They keys are natural energy production and conservation.

We Can't Fix the Economy Without Fixing Health Care

Here are a couple of questions to ponder…

If you’re an average American, you’re sitting in front of your computer reading this and simultaneously wondering if you’ll even have a job in a year or two. How does the prospect of health insurance premiums doubling by 2016 strike you?

And if you’re a business owner who’s now providing health insurance to his employees, how would you like to be paying double the current premiums by 2016?

I would also point out that this is a conservative estimate, made before the economy took a nosedive. Given some of the bills people are receiving in their mail these days, the problem may be more acute than we thought. On his program Wednesday, Ed Schultz told listeners that his health insurance had increased by  almost 20% over last year. At that rate, his insurance premiums would double by the time Obama's being inaugurated a second time.

A current report by the United States Public Interest Research Group estimates that, if something drastic isn’t done by the President and the current Congress, the cost of health insurance premiums will more than double betweeb 2006, when the average annual premium was $11,381, and 2016, when it estimates they will reach an estimated $24,281, even when adjusted for inflation.

Who the hell can afford that possibility, seriously?

How can a country that arguably has the best health care system in the world, and the best doctors in the world, be so absolutely boneheaded when it comes to financing the system? No one in their right mind would fund one industry using money from a competing industry, the mission of which is at absolute cross purposes with the industry needing the financing.

Think about it.

House Republican Steele Says the GOP is Perfect As-Is... GOP is Toast!

So, just how did someone like Michael Steele, who has no successful political experience -- he won one election as a governor's running mate, and has never won election on his own -- get to lead a party that most agree is on it's way down?

By being black, and declaring that nothing is wrong... 

You can't make this crap up.

The following is from a transcript of RNC Chairman Michael Steele on 'FOX News Sunday' with  Chris Wallace.

On immigration;

STEELE: The GOP's position is secure our borders first. Let us know and let us make sure the American people know that we've taken care of the important business of dealing with illegal immigration into this country. You cannot begin to address the concerns of the peop le who are already here unless and until you have made certain that no more are coming in behind them.

Believe it or not this was the first thing Steele mentioned. Immigration. The economy is falling apart, and Steele wants to talk about immigration. Ironically, the economy in the shitter is probably the one thing that will keep people from wanting to come here. (Well, unless they're invited by bankers, of course. See previous post.)

But here's the thing; the Republicans HAVE NOT dealt with illegal immigration in any significant way. They've had control of the government since 1981, and all they have done is give illegal immigrants amnesty over and over. The immigration departments are still overwhelmed with everything, and we're behind other countries when it comes to using advanced technology to track immigrants.

Here's a clue, folks. The biggest problem isn't brown people swimming the Rio Grande or climbing over a fence. It's people who come over legally and never leave.

Republicans: Party Before Country

Republican Senator Judd Gregg is a typical Republican, through and through, thinking of his party's power first, and the country second.

From Senator: Appointment wouldn't affect Senate makeup - Yahoo! News.

Republican Sen. Judd Gregg has told colleagues that if he becomes commerce secretary, his replacement would affiliate with the GOP, denying Democrats' total dominance, his party leader said Sunday.

That would require an agreement involving President Barack Obama, who would appoint Gregg to his Cabinet, and New Hampshire Democratic Gov. John Lynch, who would name Gregg's successor to the Senate. Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky suggested such an arrangement was in the works.

"Sen. Gregg has assured me that if this were to happen, if it were to happen, it would not change the makeup of the Senate," McConnell said on "Face the Nation" on CBS. "In other words, whoever is appointed to replace him would caucus with Senate Republicans, so I think it would have no impact on the balance of power in the Senate."

There are a lot of questions that come to mind immediately, of course.

First of all, what kind of person is asked to serve his country as Secretary of Commerce, and puts his political party's power ahead of that service? I mean, look at what he's saying. Essentially, he would only serve the country, as long as his party's power in the Senate wouldn't be negatively affected.

Good thing Democrats don't feel that way, right? I mean, Janet Napolitano, the current Secretary of Homeland Security, didn't refuse the position, even though her appointment left a right wing idiot in charge of the state of Arizona.

When you are called to serve your country, you serve your country, unless you feel that you can't do the job for some reason. There is no excuse whatsoever for this.

But I would also note that the Republicans are putting a lot of stock in the filibuster as a weapon. It seems to me that they intend to use if liberally, to stop anything they don't like. Isn't it strange that when they were in charge, they were willing to kill the filibuster, and now that they're no longer in charge, the filibuster is their best friend?

They're into power, and they're into kicking the legs out from under Democrats. They have no principle, as a party, and they truly do not care about average Americans.

At what point to real Republican voters -- those who care about the country -- finally get rid of this kind of leadership?

Just asking..

Banks Take US Tax Dollars, Use it to Hire Foreigners

Why do bankers hate America?

Check this out. Apparently, while they were heading for meltdown, and as they were laying off thousands of American workers and then demanding taxpayers bail them out, major US banks were apparently trolling for foreigners to fill high-paying jobs. What gives with this?

This is from the Associated Press Investigation: Banks sought foreign workers. Major U.S. banks sought government permission to bring thousands of foreign workers into the country for high-paying jobs even as the system was melting down last year and Americans were getting laid off, according to an Associated Press review of visa applications.

The dozen banks now receiving the biggest rescue packages, totaling more than $150 billion, requested visas for more than 21,800 foreign workers over the past six years for positions that included senior vice presidents, corporate lawyers, junior investment analysts and human resources specialists. The average annual salary for those jobs was $90,721, nearly twice the median income for all American households.

As the economic collapse worsened last year — with huge numbers of bank employees laid off — the numbers of visas sought by the dozen banks in AP's analysis increased by nearly one-third, from 3,258 in the 2007 budget year to 4,163 in fiscal 2008.

I have to admit, I didn't get this. I have been wracking my brain, trying to figure out why these banks would go to foreigners to fill positions that could easily be filled with recently laid-off Americans.

If they're looking for "cheap labor," then perhaps they would do well to just offer Americans the lower wage, and see who takes it. Ya think?

For their part, Republican Charles Grassley and Democrat Dick Durbin are equally pissed, and working on a bill that would force companies getting bailout money to consider American workers first.

Gee, thanks.

Grassley should look at himself if he wants to locate a culprit here. For a generation, his Republican Party has been facilitating the move of manufacturing and jobs overseas, and even paying companies to do it. When you call the warranty center of your local American company, and you speak to a perfectly nice person living in Mumbai, isn't that basically the same thing? Apparently, it's perfectly okay to hire foreigners to do jobs from other countries, but to come here and do them is suddenly wrong.

Oh, please cut the crap, Grassley!

Yeah, what the banks are doing is wrong. But it's only slightly more wrong than hiring foreigners in other countries to do jobs that people here are perfectly capable of doing. The only reason our workers are forced to "compete" with China is because the government, led by Republicans, has done nothing to protect them. We could make stuff to sell here. We can make cars that people want to buy, and we can make spatulas that sell for $1.50, instead of a dollar. It can be done, and done successfully.

The Republicans have raped our economy for years, and now, all of a sudden, one Republican senator is incensed, because a handful of $90K a year bank jobs are being given to "furr'ners."

Guess what, Senator; we've been bitching about the same thing for years; what made ya change your mind all of a sudden?

Hypocrisy, they name is Republican.