Category Archives: Economy

Romney Won The 2nd Debate After All.

Posted on by

While most polls and political pundits gave the advantage to the President in the second debate, Mitt Romney did win on two accounts: Disrespect and Lies.

Despite having agreed to a long list of rules for the Town Hall Debate, which included an agreement that neither candidate directly address the other or venture into the other’s space, Mitt Romney literally got in the face of the President.  He also directed a barrage of questions at the President rather than go through the moderator.  The effect was to seem unnecessarily confrontive and even disrespectful of the President.

Romney may not respect President Obama, but he should at least be respectful of the office. Moreover, Romney’s bossy attitude demonstrated that he lacks the temperment to negotiate with world leaders.

As for the ability to stretch the truth and tell lies to support his arguments, Romney was, once again, the overwhelming winner.

He was not only caught telling a lie about the President’s address on Benghazi.  He lied about the number of women who lost jobs in the past 4 years.  He misstated his opposition to the Lilly Ledbetter Act.  He didn’t tell the truth about his position on contraception.  He lied about his recommendation to let Detroit go bankrupt and, therefore, fail.  He lied about his tax proposals.  He was wrong about the increase in healthcare insurance over the past two years.  He lied about his proposal to limit Pell Grants.  And he lied about the President’s energy policies, including the delay of the XL Pipeline.

In other words, Romney demonstrated that he is not qualified to be Commander-in-Chief.  But he definitely demonstrated that he is qualified to be Liar-in-Chief.

For more Romney-Ryan lies, read The Teapublican Book of Lies available at Amazon.com and other on-line bookstores.

“Fraudulent,” “Fantasy,” “Con Game,” “Mathematically Impossible.”

Posted on by

These are the words used to describe the Romney-Ryan budget plan by economists, The Washington Post, the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center and Bloomberg News.

Mitt says his plan will cut taxes for all Americans, increase defense spending and still cut the deficit.  And, get this; he claims that his plan will be “revenue neutral.” He says that the costs will be offset by the elimination of tax deductions.  Yet he steadfastly refuses to provide details.  The only cuts he’s mentioned are funding for Public Broadcasting and Planned Parenthood.

In fact, after more than a year of campaigning for the office of President of the United States, Mitt has not provided any numbers for his plan…until tonight.

During the second debate with President Obama, Mitt announced the number five…in reference to his 5-point plan for the economy.  But don’t expect Mitt to provide any details for that plan, especially with regard to his budget figures.

He either can’t, or won’t.

Romney can’t explain his budget plan.  Liein’ Ryan can’t explain it.  And one of the campaign’s top surrogates can’t explain it.  When Sen. Marco Rubio was asked by Lawrence O’Donnell to name the tax deductions that would be eliminated, he admitted he couldn’t name a single one.

Instead of offering details about his plan, all Mitt says is “trust me.”  Now, tell me, Mitt, why would we do that?  You say one thing today. Then a day or two later, you say something else.  You’ve had at least four answers to every question.  Indeed, you’ve had more positions than the Kama Sutra.

When it comes to your economic plan, Mitt, I’ll trust the opinions of President Obama, President Clinton, most independent media, and non-partisan economists.

How Should Democrats Respond?

Posted on by

If President Obama (cringe) loses this election and Democrats (gasp) lose the majority in the Senate, how should Democrats respond?  Should they use the filibuster as much as Teapublicans?  Should they follow the Teapublicans’ example and automatically oppose everything President (choke) Romney supports.

It would be fitting.  But Democrats are less wed to ideology than Teapublicans.  And they seem to care more about the nation’s future.  After all, how did Al Gore respond when the election was stolen from him in 2000?  He didn’t make media appearances criticizing President Bush.  Instead, he asked Democrats to let it go and pull together for the sake of the nation.  And how did Democrats respond when they discovered Bush took us to war in Iraq on false pretenses?  Most took the high road.

Senator Conrad’s admission on Fox News that he advised President Obama to not publicly support the Simpson-Bowles Committee’s debt-reduction plan for fear that Teapublicans would automatically oppose it should be eye-opening for anyone so insulated as to not have noticed the blind anti-Obama fervor of Teapublicans.  They have stonewalled virtually every initiative from the Obama administration from the start.  They have even denounced and voted against their own ideas as soon as President Obama appeared to endorse them.  Then they falsely accused the administration of not including them in negotiations.

It would be justifiable for Democrats to turn the tables on a Teapublican administration.  But what would that accomplish?  More partisanship.  More acrimony.  And more hatred.

But it could be even more harmful to our nation to allow a Teapublican administration and Congress to dismantle Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, to attack Iran, to expand class warfare on the middle class and the poor, to trash our environment, to privatize schools, and to reward the Teapublican’s corporate masters.

Should that circumstance arise, Democrats will be faced with some very difficult decisions.

But we can avoid the problem.  Polls tell us that the majority of Americans support Democratic ideas.  Let’s make sure that all Democrats and liberal-leaning independents vote!

The Etch-A-Sketch Debate.

Posted on by

We should have seen it coming.  For months, Mitt Romney ran further and further to the right.  Then during last night’s debate with President Obama, Romney did an about face.  Living up to the Etch-A-Sketch strategy that Mitt’s campaign manager promised following the Teapublican primaries, he abandoned most of the right wing rhetoric and ideas he promoted in the primaries and promised to be a moderate healer, instead.

Defying arithmetic, he promised to increase spending for the military, cut taxes for everybody, cut healthcare costs while repealing Obamacare, increase spending for education and student loans, increase spending for Medicare and Medicaid, maintain Social Security and create 12 million jobs.

Whew!

And, of course, while doing all that, he promises to cut the deficit and the national debt – all without revealing a single detail or plan other than to say he would cut funding for PBS and Big Bird.

Disregarding the fact that there is no possible way to pay for his promises, has he forgotten that he’s living in the 21st century?  We have an endless number of video recordings which show him saying that he will privatize Social Security, voucherize Medicare, slash Medicaid spending, eliminate the Department of Education, cut taxes for the wealthy, cut taxes for businesses, eliminate tax deductions for the middle class, cut Pell grants for students and turn back the clock on healthcare.

About the only thing consistent with his statements in previous speeches and debates was the promise to increase defense spending even more than the Department of Defense has asked for.

Of course, political pundits have already concluded that Romney won the first debate.  If so, it was only because President Obama couldn’t tell who he was debating.  It wasn’t Mitt.  It was some guy who looks like Mitt but who was espousing a completely different platform from the plutocrat who won the Teapublican nomination.  That Mitt was decidedly anti-middle class, anti-woman, anti-health reform, anti-green energy, anti-small business, anti-entitlement, anti-education, anti-government, anti-environment, and pro-war.

It’s not easy debating someone who’s willing to lie about absolutely anything and everything to get elected.

Teapublican Obstinance Jeopardizing Economy Again.

Posted on by

Last Fall, Teapublican demands that Democrats make drastic cuts to the so-called “entitlement” programs led our still fragile economy to the very brink, resulting in the first ever downgrade of our credit rating.  While Democrats were willing to make cuts, Teapublicans steadfastly refused to consider revenue increases such as letting the Bush tax cuts expire for those who make more than $250,000 per year in adjusted gross income.

Now Teapublicans are at it again.

They refused to discuss the budget and debt ceiling until after the election, hoping that they would gain control of the White House or Senate so they could force through their own agenda.

In the meantime, the uncertainty is causing manufacturers and other large corporations to hold back on investments in production and hiring.  As a result, our economy is growing at a much smaller rate than it might otherwise.  And, if Teapublicans again push deficit discussion to the brink, they just might cause our economy to go over the cliff again.

Don’t believe me?  Read It’s Even Worse Than It Looks by Thomas E. Mann and Norman J. Ornstein.  It details the history of the dysfunction of our political system and places much of the blame on Newt Gingrich and the new breed of ideologues in the Teapublican caucus.  And before you think the authors are “wild-eyed” liberals, Mann is a senior fellow at The Brookings Institution and Ornstein is a resident scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute.

Obama’s America In 2016.

Posted on by

The shockumentary “2016” provides one man’s view of what America will be like in 2016 should President Obama be re-elected.  The future it portrays would be dim, indeed, IF this example of Teapublican propaganda were true.

But “2016” is based on a false premise…that President Obama is un-American.  That he’s a socialist out to destroy the very nation he has sworn to protect.

In truth, given his history of accomplishment against long odds, no one represents the American Dream better than Barack Obama.  And despite Teapublican rhetoric (and the film’s premise), Obama’s policies are decidedly not un-American.  In fact, the reverse is true.  It is the continuation of Teapublican policies that threatens to undermine our democracy.

For 40 years, the GOP (Guardians Of Privilege) have weighted tax cuts to aide the wealthy and large, multi-national corporations.  They have engaged in union-busting and cut funds for the poor.  They have used those in the military to pursue their goals of international domination and they’ve abandoned them as soon as they were injured or retired.  In order to win election, they have vilified teachers, firefighters, our postal service, government employees and immigrants.  In order to maximize the profits of multi-nationals, the GOP has proposed to eliminate the agencies responsible for clean air, clean water and product safety.  GOP policies have even rewarded those who ship jobs overseas and who take advantage of offshore tax havens.

President Obama threatens to change all that.  He dares to propose tax fairness, higher standards for fuel efficiency, sustainable forms of energy, investment in infrastructure, improved education and incentives to bring jobs home to the US.

So every time you see an ad for “2016,” imagine how much better off we’ll be with President Obama in the White House than with Mitt the Twit and his 47 percent-hating plutocrats.

The Corporatization Of America.

Posted on by

Teapublicans are fond of calling President Obama a socialist, a communist or worse.  Of course, there is absolutely no evidence to substantiate their claims.

Most likely, the reason for their accusations is to distract voters from recognizing what’s really happening to their country.  Over the past 40 years, Teapublican policies have given virtually all of the political power to large, multi-national corporations as well as the very wealthy and the very powerful. They’ve accomplished this through the systematic use of propaganda.

Following more than a decade of acccusations that mainstream media was liberally-biased, they were able to repeal the Fairness Doctrine in 1987.  Within 20 years of the repeal, 91 percent of talk radio was conservative blather, giving them a large megaphone with which to peddle their ideas.

In the 1980s, Republican-appointed bureaucrats (along with a few Democrats) approved an unprecedented number of mergers and acquisitions in defiance of monopoly laws.  It was done under the guise of globalization; to better prepare American corporations to compete with European and Japanese businesses.  As part of this globalization, multi-national corporations were permitted (actually incentified) to ship manufacturing jobs overseas in order to cut labor costs and crush labor unions.

The Free Trade Act, intended to make it easier to export our products, instead made it even easier to export our jobs.  It also allowed our subsidized agri-businesses to dump cheap corn into Mexico and Central America, displacing tens of thousands of small farmers.

When Americans began to recognize the full impact of jobs being sent overseas, Teapublicans created straw dogs.  Prior to elections, they proposed so-called “values” legislation banning abortions, banning gay marriage, and denouncing so-called attacks on Christianity in order to distract voters.  They blamed our economic problems on immigrants, unions, “entitlements,” government employees, teachers and first responders to keep voters from focusing on the real issues.

Conservative Supreme Court justices ruled that money equals free speech, and that corporations should enjoy the same rights as individuals.  Of course, these rulings allow multi-nationals to spend as much as they want to elect officials who will be most favorable to their issues.

To keep President Obama from meddling with their grand corporate plan, Teapublican legislatures passed a variety of strict voter ID laws to disenfranchise many of those most likely to vote for Obama.  Now they’re crying “Class Warfare” and “Redistribution of Wealth!”

Will they continue to get away with this corporate takeover?  Or will the majority of Americans finally recognize what’s happening and take our country back?

Who’s Really Redistributing Wealth?

Posted on by

Following the “Mitt Happens” moment in which Romney was caught on video disparaging the 47 percent who pay no income taxes, Teapublicans have countered, claiming that President Obama and the Democrats are guilty of trying to “redistribute wealth.”

Apparently, they believe Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, VA benefits, GI Bill benefits, Unemployment Insurance and Food Stamps are evidence of “class warfare.”

Fact is, redistribution of wealth has occured since the beginning of graduated federal income taxes in 1862.  The idea was to ask the wealthy to pay a larger percentage of their income in taxes than those who are less fortunate.  Our tax code embraced the idea until the election of Ronald Reagan.

Reagan’s flawed policy of “Trickle Down” economics greatly reduced tax rates for the rich while, at the same time, increasing taxes on the poor and the middle class.  Indeed, one of the largest tax increases in history was Reagan’s elimination of tax deductions for interest on loans: car loans, college loans, credit card loans, etc.  Now who do you think was harmed the most by that change?

Around the same time, Reagan eliminated the estate tax (aka the “death tax”) so the wealthy could pass their accumulated wealth to their children without penalty, and Teapublicans cut the capital gains tax rate paid on earnings from stocks and other investments.

More recently, the infamous Bush tax cuts were also weighted to benefit the wealthy.

But that’s only part of the redistribution of wealth upward.  During the past 40 years, multi-national corporations have been given a host of unfair competitive advantages over their smaller competitors.  Teapublican policies not only encouraged them to ship jobs overseas. They allowed multi-nationals to shelter income overseas in order to avoid paying taxes to the very government responsible for their success.

Meanwhile, small businesses and ordinary citizens have been asked to take up the slack.

The result of all this is the hollowing out of the middle class, the destruction of our domestic manufacturing base and the deterioration of our infrastructure.  It has led to higher unemployment, lower federal revenues, decaying cities, higher poverty and millions without access to basic healthcare.  Over the same time period, the wealthy have gotten even wealthier.

Class warfare, indeed!

Are We Better Off Than 4 Years Ago? Let Me Count The Ways.

Posted on by

What an utterly ridiculous question!  As a campaign technique, it may have worked in 1980 against Jimmy Carter and in 1984 against Walter Mondale.  But it’s completely absurd now.

At the end of the Bush administration, the US was losing 800,000 jobs a month.  Since President Obama took office, those losses have stopped and our economy has added private sector jobs for 29 straight months.

On December 31, 2008, the Dow Jones Industrial Average was 8,776, resulting in devastating losses for pension funds and Individual Retirement Accounts.  Today, the Dow has soared to more than 13,300.

When President Obama took office, General Motors and Chrysler were on the verge of bankruptcy, jeopardizing more than a million jobs. Now both automakers are thriving, and General Motors has reclaimed the title of world’s largest automaker.

Four years ago, we were immersed in two lengthy and costly wars.  Since then, President Obama has ended the war in Iraq, ordered the killing of Osama bin Laden, and placed an end date on the war in Afghanistan.

In 2008, healthcare costs were soaring out of control, sending many American families into bankruptcy and costing those who could not afford insurance their lives.  In 2010, President Obama signed the Affordable Care Act which has stemmed the rising cost of healthcare and given more than 30 million people access to health insurance.

I could go on.  But, seriously, do I really need to?

If you can’t see that our nation is a whole lot better off since the beginning of the Obama administration, you’ve been spending far too much time watching the Fox News Channel and listening to conservative hate radio.

Liein’ Ryan.

Posted on by

First, I must credit my friend, Mike Cosentino, for the title.  To my knowledge, he was the first to coin the description of the Teapublican Vice-Presidential candidate.  And Ryan has certainly lived up to the title ever since.  Indeed, his penchant for ignoring the truth was on full display at the Republican National Convention.

For example, Paul Ryan says that his budget plan will “save Medicare.” But in reality, it will leave the next generation of seniors at the mercy of greedy health insurance companies. Ryan says that his budget will cut the deficit. What he doesn’t tell you is that his plan will increase an already bloated defense budget and give large tax cuts to the wealthy while cutting healthcare and food stamps for the poor.

Ryan has lied so much and so often, he couldn’t even tell the truth about his only marathon time.

Prior to the convention, Ryan condemned Congressman Todd Akin’s remarks on “legitmate” rape as offensive. Yet Ryan co-sponsored a bill with Akin that would ban all abortions except for pregnancies that resulted from “forcible” rape.  In other words, you would be denied an abortion unless you could show that you had been bruised and beaten sufficiently in an attempt to fight off the attacker.

Moreover, Akin and Ryan co-sponsored a “personhood” bill that would give fetuses all of the rights and protections of the First Amendment thereby outlawing all abortions, even in vitro fertilization. And lest you think Aikin and Ryan are alone in their extreme beliefs, the GOP adopted a platform that would ban all abortions. No exceptions.

Of all the liars in the Republican Party, Paul Ryan is one of the most prolific. By himself, he could easily provide enough material to fill a second volume of the Teapublican Book of Lies.