Aug 30, 2008

DEBT is a TAX so where's the Tax Cut?

Every dollar spent by the federal government has to be gained from somewhere. If those dollars are borrowed from China to pay for oil or a war in the Middle East they are nothing less than TAXES deferred.

And those dollars carry interest which increases the TAX

Do Republicans actually think that debt isn't a TAX?

We cannot afford the fiscal irresponsibility of Republicans.
There is no FREE LUNCH - You cannot spend what you do not raise without incurring DEBT and INTEREST on that DEBT and that is what Republicans do well - they run up the DEBT and cost us dearly in interest.

Borrow and Spend vs Tax and Spend
Is there a difference?

Do Republican's actually believe if you buy on credit as opposed to paying for what you buy, that you haven't levied a tax on the American people?

When George W. Bush ran up an additional 6 Trillion dollars in debt he and his administration place a TAX on all of us. There is no way around that. IF you say you are delivering "TAX CUTS" to the very wealthy while you run up a huge debt on credit it's like you or I saying "We're not going to pay our bills with the cash in our box but we're going to run up the credit card bills instead and take out a second mortgage keeping our cash in the box under the bed."
The box seems happy because it is full
But the bills get bigger and the interest grows.

Seems like this is a simple thing to explain - and I cannot see why our Democratic candidates don't explain it just like that.

The BORROW AND SPEND Republicans have given us more and more debt

And that DEBT gives us huge INTEREST PAYMENTS that add to the TAX

The piper must be paid and giving huge tax breaks to wealthy Americans so they can afford TEN HOUSES now only defers that FUTURE TAX.

DEBT is a TAX - so there has been no TAX CUT under the Bush Administration. Next time your Republican friends prattle on about the great TAX CUTS they got from W you might want to point out the truth.

Aug 29, 2008

Lovely Downtown Wasilla, Alaska

“Is this a joke?” That seemed to be the question du jour when my phone started ringing off the hook at 6:45am here in Alaska. I mean, we’re sort of excited that our humble state has gotten some kind of national ‘nod’….but seriously? Sarah Palin for Vice President? Yes, she’s a popular governor. Her all time high approval rating hovered around 90% at one point. But bear in mind that the 90% approval rating came from one of the most conservative, and reddest-of-the-red states out there. And that approval rating came before a series of events that have lead many Alaskans to question the governor’s once pristine image.

There is no doubt in my mind that many Alaskans are feeling pretty excited about this. But we live in our own little bubble up here, and most of the attention we get is because of The Bridge to Nowhere, polar bears, the indictment of Ted Stevens, and the ongoing investigation and conviction of the string of legislators and oil executives who literally called themselves “The Corrupt Bastards Club”.

So seeing our governor out there in the national spotlight accepting the nomination for Vice Presidential candidate is just downright surreal. Just months ago, when rumors surfaced that she was on the long version of the short list, she was questioned if she’d be interested in the position. She said she couldn’t answer “until somebody answers for me what is it exactly that the VP does every day. I’m used to being very productive and working real hard in an administration. We want to make sure that that VP slot would be a fruitful type of position, especially for Alaskans and for the things that we’re trying to accomplish up here….”

There is no doubt that Palin has fierce territorial loyalties. When elected governor there was much concern because she came right out and said she would favor her own home town of Wasilla (where she was mayor) and its surrounding environs collectively known as “the Valley” while leading the state. And it’s obvious from her statement that Alaska was on her mind when accepting the VP nod (see my emphasis above).

So what is it that we’re “trying to accomplish up here”?

* Palin is currently in the middle of a controversial gas pipeline project in Alaska. She’s favored the ‘Trans Canada’ proposal that will run the pipeline through Canada, in effect shipping US jobs over the border. Many Alaskans, including former governors, have favored the “All Alaska Route”.
* She is also sueing the federal government over listing the polar bears as a threatened species. The science was even compelling enough to convince the Secretery of the Interior that the bears needed to be listed. But acknowlegement of this issue, and the potential disruption to development on Alaska’s oil-rich north slope spurred Palin to attempt to stop the listing.
* Does she want to open ANWR? Yes. Every politician in Alaska wants to open ANWR. It’s basically a requirement if you ever hope to get elected for anything. Even Mark Begich, the progressive Democrat running against the indicted Senator and Alaskan institution Ted Stevens, is pro-drilling. That’s the sea we swim in up here. There are a few anti-drilling folks, but you have to look hard to find them, and work hard to have them admit it.

Will all this wash with voters in the ‘Lower 48′? Time will tell.

18 Million Cracks in the Glass Ceiling

It was obvious anyway, but became beat-you-over-the-head-with-a-two-by-four obvious when Palin referenced the ‘glass ceiling’ line, that this choice is a blatant pander to women. I would like to believe that women will actually feel insulted by this. Yes, it would have been historic if Hillary had gotten the nomination. It was historic that she made it as far as she did. Yes, it would be great to have a woman in the oval office, or in the VP slot if they are the right woman…a woman who got there with her own drive, grit, determination, intelligence, skill and merits. When you’re hand-picked by a man to win votes simply because you are a woman, that doesn’t count, and it doesn’t break any kind of ceiling. Would we have had a Stan Palin as our VP pick? No. So choosing a woman because you think her gender will get votes is insulting.

Governor “Squeakyclean”….or not.

Another focus of Palin’s introduction today was her reform image. Listen to John McCain and you’ll hear about a maverick reformer who took on big oil, took on corrupt Alaska politicians, and whose ethics are unquestioned.

Alaskans really want to like Sarah Palin. In a state where corruption is the rule, and the same faces keep recycling over and over and over again like a bad dream, a new face, with a promise of reform seemed like a breath of fresh air. Palin defeated incumbent governor Frank Murkowski (father of Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski who he appointed to his own Senate seat when he was elected governor) because he was such an obnoxious, bloviating, downright BAD politician. This staunchly republican state voted with relief, not having to cross over and vote Democratic, but still able to get Murkowski the hell out of office. In the general election Palin swept into office running against a former Democratic governor, Tony Knowles, who was capable but came with baggage. And he represented to Alaskans more of the same, tired old-style politics, and special interests that we have come to loathe.

So, if McCain had made his selection six months ago, the squeaky-clean governor meme would have made a little more sense. But, Sarah Palin is currently under an ethics investigation by the Alaska state legislature. The details of this investigation read like a trashy novel, and I suspect that the players will soon have newfound celebrity on the national stage. I’ll try to explain for all you non-Alaskans who suddenly have good reason to want to know more about Sarah Palin. For those of you not interested in trashy novels, feel free to skip ahead. Here it is…what we in Alaska call “TrooperGate”.

Sarah Palin’s sister Molly married a guy named Mike Wooten who is an Alaska State Trooper. Mike and Molly had a rocky marriage. When the marriage broke up, there was a bitter custody fight that is still ongoing. During the custody investigation, all sorts of things were brought up about Wooten including the fact that he had illegally shot a moose (yes folks this is Alaska), driven drunk, and used a taser (on the test setting, he reminds us) on his 11-year old stepson, who supposedly had asked to see what it felt like. While Wooten has turned out to be a less than stellar figure, the fact that Palin’s father accompanied him on the infamous moose hunt, and that many of the dozens of charges brought up by the Palin family happened long before they were ever reported smacked of desperate custody fight. Wooten’s story is that he was basically stalked by the family.

After all this, Wooten was investigated and disciplined on two counts and allowed to kept his position with the troopers. Enter Walt Monegan, Palin’s appointed new chief of the Department of Public Safety and head of the troopers. Monegan was beloved by the troopers, did a bang-up job with minimal funding and suddenly got axed. Palin was out of town and Monegan got “offered another job” (aka fired) with no explanation to Alaskans. Pressure was put on the governor to give details, because rumors started to swirl around the fact that the highly respected Monegan was fired because he refused to fire the aforementioned Mike Wooten. Palin vehemently denied ever talking to Monegan or pressuring Monegan in any way to fire Wooten, or that anyone on her staff did. Over the weeks it has come out that not only was pressure applied, there were literally dozens of conversations in which pressure was applied to fire him. Monegan has testified to this fact, spurring an ongoing investigation by the Alaska state legislature. But, before this investigation got underway, Palin sent the Alaska State Attorney General out to do some investigative work of his own so she could find out in advance what the real investigation was going to find. (No, I’m not making this up). The AG interviewed several people, unbeknownst to the actual appointed investigator or the Legislature! Palin’s investigation of herself uncovered a recorded phone call retained by the Alaska State Troopers from Frank Bailey, a Palin underling, putting pressure on a trooper about the Wooten non-firing. Todd Palin (governor’s husband) even talked to Monegan himself in Palin’s office while she was away. Bailey is now on paid administrative leave.

As if this weren’t enough, Monegan’s appointed replacement Chuck Kopp, turns out to have been the center of his own little scandal. He received a letter of reprimand and was reassigned after sexual harrassment allegations by a former coworker who didn’t like all the unwanted kissing and hugging in the office. Was he vetted? Obviously not. When he was questioned about all this, his comment was that no one had asked him and he thought they all knew. Kopp, defiant, still claimed to have done nothing wrong and said to the press that there was no way he was stepping down from his new position. Twenty four hours later, he stepped down. Later it was uncovered that he received a $10,000 severance package for his two weeks on the job from Palin. Monegan got nothing.

After extensive news coverage about all this nasty behind-the-scenes scandal, which is definitely NOT squeaky clean, Palin’s approval ratings fell to 67%, still high, but a far cry from the 90% number that’s being thrown around so glibly by the Republicans today. Alaskans are quickly becoming disillusioned once again.

“Executive Experience”

Before her meteoric rise to political success as governor, just two short years ago Sarah Palin was the mayor of Wasilla. I had a good chuckle at’s claim that she had been the mayor of “Wasilla City”. It is not a city. Just Wasilla. Wasilla is the heart of the Alaska “Bible belt” and Sarah was raised amongst the tribe that believes creationism should be taught in our public schools, homosexuality is a sin, and life begins at conception. She’s a gun-toting, hang ‘em high conservative. Remember…this is where her approval ratings come from. There is no doubt that McCain again is making a strategic choice to appeal to a particular demographic - fundamentalist right-wing gun-owning Christians. And Republican bloggers are already gushing about how she has ‘more executive experience’ than Obama does! Above is a picture of lovely downtown Wasilla, for those of you unfamiliar with the area. Behind the Mug-Shot Saloon (the first bar I visited when I moved to Alaska long ago) is a little strip mall. There are street signs in Wasilla with bullet holes in them. Wasilla has a population of about 5500 people, and 1979 occupied housing units. This is where your potential Vice President was two short years ago. Can you imagine her negotiating a nuclear non-proliferation treaty? Discussing foreign policy? Understanding non-Alaskan issues? Frankly, I don’t even know if she’s ever been out of the country. She may ‘get’ Alaska, but there are only a half a million people here. Don’t get me wrong….I love Alaska with all my heart. I’m just saying.

I, and all Alaskans will be interested to see how this whole process unfolds. This is definitely a gamble for McCain, and in my humble opinion, a gift to Obama and to Joe Biden who just got thrown a big hunk of red meat for the vice presidential debate.

This is the wedge-issue, desperate ’Hail Sarah’ pass of the McCain campaign.

Now I’m off to get some Jiffy Pop.

Aug 26, 2008

Obama maintains an overall 7-8 point lead in the national trackers.

The required swing states are all falling into Obama's column
Fivethirtheight now gives McCain a mere 3.3% chance of wining
and predicts over 350 Electoral Votes for Obama with at least 52% of the popular vote.

Today's Polls, 10/26

While there are a few surprises here and there, once again the theme of today's polls is stability in the race for the White House.

John McCain narrowed his gap significantly in today's , drawing from 9.5 points behind to 5.3. As you probably know, I have a signifiacnt critique of Zogby's weighting mechanism, which assumes that the partisan identification breakdown will be roughly equal to 2004, when about the same number of Democrats and Republicans turned out for the election. Neverthless, McCain also improved slightly in the Research 2000, IBD/TIPP, and ABC/Post polls. On the other hand, Barack Obama gained a point in Hotline and the Gallup "Likely Voters II" model (though not Gallup's "traditional" likely voter model), and remains at his high-water mark in Rasmussen.

If the balance of today's national polls contain better news for McCain, the balance of the state polls show Obama continuing to perform very well in several swing states. Obama now has 15-point lead in New Hampshire according to the Boston Globe / UNH poll, which had generally contained good news for McCain earlier in this cycle. PPP puts Obama up by 9 in Virginia, while two new polls also show him with significant leads in Iowa.

Meanwhile, an Arizona poll for the Democratic strategy firm Project New West shows John McCain ahead by just 4 points there, and a couple of other polls showing a close race in McCain's home state are apparently on the way. In terms of our model, the principal effect of the Arizona polls is really on the Grand Canyon State, where our model remains skeptical of an Obama upset, but rather in terms of its neighbor New Mexico, where our it is now (even) more optimistic about Obama's chances.

Counteracting the Obama trend sightly are new polls in Wisconsin and Missouri, which show somewhat better numbers for McCain than other recent polls of those states. However, that is not enough to prevent McCain's win percentage from drifting downward to 3.3 percent.

Below are the Swing State polls (most recent in yellow highlights) and the news is not good for the McCain campaign for any of their scenarios.

McCain is losing in the states he has to win.

McCain has claimed that Pennsylvania is the key to his chances and claims he has a good chance to shift PA to Red. The polls are all Obama with a double digit lead.

Obama is winning in Colorado, Virginia, Iowa, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Mexico and Wisconsin. Any combination of all of the Kerry states plus Colorado, Iowa, and Virginia will carry the race for Obama and it seems that is almost certain at this point.

In addition Obama now leads in Florida and Ohio

As of today Obama also shows leads in Georgia, Indiana, Montana and North Dakota

Aug 22, 2008


Regardless of my personal feelings about the guy, James Carville proved to be a pretty savvy political operative during the campaigns of Bill Clinton and he hits a resonate note with me in his latest CNN piece of advice for Barack Obama

Maybe it's because I am a pissed off liberal/progressive but trying to set that aside I think it makes sense. Barack seems to come off like a detached intellectual who has this rather touchy feely message of "HOPE" and "CHANGE" in an environment where showing some toughness is necessary

There is no question that Obama has the superior chops on the economy but the McSame campaign is currently running an ad that is so absurd and just plain wrong it should really inspire outrage and anger.

This ad is so totally wrong and stupid it deserves anger and outrage in response. Obama will lower taxes on the folks who are suffering because of higher food and fuel costs - those in McSame's tax bracket feel no pain over these increased costs. It's McSame who is out of touch with Americans because he is the one with the 7,8, ... 11 houses and the $273,000 yearly housekeeping expense. Barack should show some anger and outrage on our behalf if not his own. Get mad for the average Americans who are being misled by the total bullshit represented by this ad. Get mad because this ad means McSame thinks American's are idiots who can't see through the utter banality of the lies this ad represents.

Carville lays out the Obama advantage on the Economy.
Quite simply, he needs to create a more compelling narrative on change, use history as a context for the economy, and get mad about something.

First and foremost, Obama must bring a narrative to his position as a change agent. You can't simply seek change for change's sake.

The argument must be made that this is an election with two choices: the change-seeking good guys or the status quo-clinging bad guys. The campaign needs to brand every negative attack by the Republicans as just another desperate attempt of the status quo clinging to power.[...]

McCain keeps trying to claim he's a "change Republican." I don't really know what that means, but Obama and his team must continue to highlight the "McSame" that he offers: more of the same failed Iraq policy, more of the same tax breaks for oil and drug companies, more of the same Swift-boat-style tactics, more of the same on education and healthcare. And he certainly offers more of the same failed Bush economic policy.
McSame has said
"Even if the economy is the, quote, number one issue, the real issue will remain America's security," [McCain] said. "If it's not the most important issue in the minds of many voters, America's security will remain the number one issue with me. And if they choose to say, 'Look, I do not need this guy because he's not as good on home loan mortgages,' or whatever it is, I understand that. I will accept that verdict. I am running because of the transcendent challenge of the twenty-first century, which is radical Islamic extremism, as you know."
That's why he has a liar and fool named Phil Gramm as his economic advisor. The same guy who calls us average Americans in danger of losing our modest single houses a nation of whiners. All of us can't make millions deregulating the mortgage industry and lobbying for the thieves who wrecked FannieMae and FreddieMac. Why shouldn't we be outraged and angry about the train wreck we've experienced with this Republican administration that made Gramm and his Republican buddies filthy rich at our expense?

Obama has an economic plan that will work for our near future but he also has the historical advantage of Democratic administrations that have done vastly better than the Republicans.
Use history as a guideline. He should start by reading "Unequal Democracy," by Princeton academic Larry Bartels. The non-partisan and non-political Bartels points out devastatingly after an exhaustive study of Democratic and Republican presidents that the Democrats built a better economy and a more just society.

The campaign needs to say that, since 1900, Democratic presidents have not only "won" but dominated on every economic front: GDP growth, employment, deficit and income equality. Need more? How about a better performing stock market and a more fiscally-responsible spending. [...] historically Democratic presidencies have produced better economies. And with the economy still in the forefront, it's a no-brainer for Obama to talk about the historical supremacy of economies under Democratic presidents.
Barack and the rest of us Democrats should be outraged that Republican's seem to get away with murder saying that the Democrats are bad for business and the economy. IT IS A HUGE LIE and the evidence is graphic
Republicans are fiscally irresponsible and anything but Conservative. Barack will lower taxes for all of us who have paid an unfair share while corporations and the ultra rich got all the breaks. We have been saddled with a huge debt while the oil companies and the super rich have made record profits and the gap between the ultra rich top 5% and the rest of us has grown.

Our candidate needs to articulate our rage
And my last piece of advice to Obama and his team is to just get mad about something. Obama's campaign seems so intent on branding him as a "cool and calm" leader.

Voters want to see a sense of urgency and outrage in their president: Outrage over our dependence on foreign oil; our increased cost of living, health care and education; declining incomes; outrage over an endless war and an idiotic foreign policy; and our country's loss of prestige over the last 7½ years. To put it bluntly, Obama needs to get outraged over something other than "attacks on his patriotism."
Barack has shown that he can be cool and restrained in the face of outrageous behavior but can he summon up some righteous indignation and serious toughness on our behalf? We've been treated like crap by the Republican party of Bush =McSame for 8 long years and we have every right to be angry about the damage done to our country and our lives and our children's future. Barack Obama offered to fight this campaign on the high ground leaving the outrage in the box and debating the merits of his ideas in an atmosphere of mutual respect. John McSame has shown that he and his party are incapable of civil respect and rational honest debate. This isn't the way we wanted it. But now the situation is clear to everyone and it's time to take off the gloves and deck these lying scumbags with some serious punches thrown in righteous anger and contempt.

We need someone who will fight for us when all efforts at diplomatic reasoned honest debate have been ignored. That's what Mr. Carville thinks and he actually has to live with Mary Matalin without murdering her in her sleep. I'm not sure how he does it. Maybe she chains him to a bed in another room at night so his subconscious doesn't sleepwalk in a dream of destruction. As much as I hate to admit it I think he has a point.

This is one reason I love the idea of a Biden on the ticket because I think Biden is capable of delivering clear righteous blows that expose the total lack of integrity in Republican politics.

I'm mad as hell and I don't want Obama to take it anymore.
How about you?

Aug 19, 2008

← Is Barack Obama’s real name Barry Soetoro? No Quarter Blog says the Republican machine is about to unload on Obama nee Soetoro Huffington Post edits Barack Obama Hawaii vacation pic photo of Barry Checking out Bikini Clad Woman →
No Bad Photo Ops of Barack Obama in Hawaii Yet, Just Barry Checking out Bikini clad Women
August 13th, 2008 · No Comments

Barack Obama checking out woman in Hawaii.

Barack Obama checks out bikini clad woman while relaxing in Hawaii.
Picture via Yahoo Pics
Barack Obama is seated at the far right with hat and sunglasses.

Barack Obama cooly checks out bikini clad woman

Barack Obama cooly checks out another bikini clad woman in Hawaii. Obama is on vacation, preparing for the 2008 Democratic National Convention.

Ah Ha but the story doesn't end here - It seems that LIBERAL MEDIA is at it again in outrageous fashion

Huffington Post edits Barack Obama Hawaii vacation pic photo of Barry Checking out Bikini Clad Woman

Looks like the Huffington Post doesn’t want you to see the Messiah looking at women.


Michael Savage Warns of Cataclysmic Events That Will be Announced on His Website over the next six to fourteen days

Very strange, Michael Savage opened his Thursday radio show with the message that cataclysmic events will be announced on his website over the next six to fourteen days. I wonder what Michael Savage is up to:

Michael Savage:

“The phone number here is 1-800-449-8255. I would like to suggest that people throughout America who listen to this show on a regular basis
please put Michael Savage dot com into your browser and be sure to go there everyday to see the stories that I talk about on this show and also
to follow the developments of this program because in the next two weeks there are going to be shocking statements that I’m going to put up
on the website that may not appear on this radio show. You may not be able to hear it on your local station because I may not say it on your local station but things are going to happen in the next 7 to 14 days that will be somewhat cataclysmic.”

Picture via

This registration document, made available on Jan. 24, 2007, by the Fransiskus Assisi school in Jakarta, Indonesia, shows the registration of Barack Obama under the name Barry Soetoro into the Catholic school made by his step-father, Lolo Soetoro. The document lists Barry Soetoro as a Indonesian citizen, born on August 4, 1961 in Honolulu, and shows his Muslim step-father listed the boy’s religion as Islam.

But “Obama” told the Attorney Registration & Disciplinary Commission of the Supreme Court of the State of Illinois that he had never had another name:

Aug 17, 2008

Aug 14, 2008


When is a "conservative" not a Conservative?

Who can we trust with our money?
Seems to me that the Obama campaign could make some progress with older 65 and over voters with a clear and simple line of attack.

They cannot be trusted with your money.

Since 1980 the National debt has increased by 10 Trillion Dollars
1.5 Trillion during the Democratic administration of Clinton/Gore vs 8.5 Trillion during the Republican Administrations of Reagan Bush and Bush
Clinton/Gore slowed the growth of debt to zero during their second term and had Al Gore taken the office to which he was elected it is reasonable to assume that he could have lowered the debt by refusing to give massive tax breaks to the corporations and the very wealthy. DO THE MATH and elect fiscally responsible Democrats who understand that a strong dollar and balanced budget puts the interests of the country above the personal financial gain of the very wealthy.

After several weeks of futility I have finally found an effective way to appeal to my parents and their friends and I have secured their votes for Barack Obama. This was amazingly simple and effective.

Democrats are known as the "Tax and Spend" liberals. You know those irresponsible big spenders who never saw an expensive big government program they did not like. Aren't the Republicans the Conservatives who cut taxes and pinch those pennies by reducing federal spending and the size of government? Isn't that what we've been told all our lives?

Then what is wrong with this picture?

If you're a Democrat trying to convince an older voter to support Democrats this fall there is nothing wrong with this picture. It has a profound effect on older voters who grew up knowing the effects of the great depression learning to make ends meet while never going into debt.

Do you know where the cost of carrying this obscene dept ranks in the Federal Budget?

It costs more to service the debt than the combined cost of every department and agency except Defense and Health and Human Services.

It's not that people are unaware that we have a rapidly increasing national debt - that is known on some level by most folks. It's just that the relative scope and size of that debt hasn't been imprinted on the consciousness of the electorate - neither has the relative culpability of the parties or the cost of debt service.

When older voters see these graphics they experience an epiphany. The graphic evidence is mind blowing because so many have been brainwashed or programmed to think that the Democrats are the big spenders and the Republicans are the fiscal conservatives. Most older voters hate and fear debt and the Republicans are the epitome of debt inducing big spenders.

If your older friends, parents, relatives, or church going acquaintances are anything like mine they will be shocked and amazed to see these graphs. My 90 year old father was so shocked he took a printed version to his Sertoma and Shriner's meetings this past week and really shook up a crowd of Republicans with this evidence.

Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush ran up more debt in 12 years than all of the previous Presidents combined. Bill Clinton and Al Gore flattened out that line in their second term and ended the growth in debt with the opportunity to reduce the debt and slash the cost until George W. "big spender" Bush out did both Reagan and his father by more than double in just over 7 years.

*WARNING - Make certain that older voters are sitting down before they view these graphs. Visual representation of the debt incurred by George W. Bush can cause dizziness and heart palpitations in some older fiscal conservatives.

Clinton and Gore actually shrunk the size of the federal government during their term but George W. Bush has created the third largest Department in the Federal Government with the massive, corrupt, and totally ineffective Gestapo of Homeland Security. DHS runs a second prison system at maximum inefficiency out spending the Department of InJustice that adds 1000 prisoners a month to the 2.3 million incarcerated Americans at a cost of $25,000 a year per prisoner. Homeland Security spend 1.5 million a year on personnel and maintenance plus 2.5 million on transportation, per diem and security to house 265 bin Laden drivers at Guantanamo for approx $40,000 each per year. I shudder to think what the cost of RENDITION and private midnight flights to torture chambers across the globe add to the bottom line.

Add to these outrageous costs the "savings" generated by Cheney's privatization of the quartermaster functions of the armed services with the fraud of Halliburtion/KBR and the cost of Blackwater and it's easy to see how W could actually run up a debt like this while electrocuting some of our brave fighting men and maiming thousands in under-armored HumVee's.
A Trillion here and a Trillion there and pretty soon it adds up to real money to turn American into a police state where nobody is safe from dog shooting laptop seizing storm troopers and SWAT teams. Reagan and Bush 1 took us from less than a trillion to 4.3 Trillion in 12 years. Clinton/Gore cut the rate of increase to only 1.4 Trillion in their 8 years and had flattened the curve from 1995 through 1998. W however is amazing. He has added over 5 trillion to the debt in less than 7 years with a Republican Congress while trashing the economy at the same time. It takes real talent to run up that kind of debt without inducing economic growth. Dick Cheney is a huge asset to W in his quest to break the national bank. He wrote the bill that privatized the quartermaster function of the armed services and then went on to preside over Halliburton proving that a private company could actually cost far more than a government run agency. Of course the government couldn't move their offices off shore to tax havens in the Caymans or run their operations from Dubai to avoid paying taxes on the profits from their no bid contracts. The devious genius of this rape and robbery of the national treasury while in office is astounding. No wonder he spends his life in an undisclosed location - deep underground in a fortified bunker filled with $68.00 cases of canned soda and $100 a bag laundry with electrified shower stalls.

SCOTUS, K. Harris, Jeb and W really stuck it to us when they combined to deny Al Gore the office to which he was duly elected. Many folks have no true idea what that means in the historical fiscal sense. But now it seems I've stumbled upon a way to reach my parents and their older friends and I'm passing it along to you interested to know if you will find it useful as I did.

Bill Clinton and Al Gore did a very good job of informing the nation about the high cost of debt and the benefit to all of reducing that debt and strengthening the dollar. A stronger dollar would lower the cost of imported oil for instance. But that case is not being made effectively at this time and it could be key to swinging older more conservative voters who are staunch supporters of fiscal responsibility. The Obama camp should not cede the high ground on balancing the budget given the record of recent history.

I don't know how the Obama campaign can make use of this graphic data with the older voters who seem to be leaning toward McCain. The programming of the Rightwing meme-machine has them thinking that "Tax and Spend" is the Democrat disease. Older fiscal conservatives think spending without the income to pay for it is irresponsible. They understand the cost of carrying debt and most refused to do that in their personal finances. They reject the idea of it in public financing as well. It's an old fashioned idea that resonates with older voters.

All I can say is that I'm amazed how well it worked with my elder parents and their circle of conservative friends here in East Tennessee. I have the feeling that most older voters are only vaguely aware of the recent history of the national debt and the impact it has on the budget. When they saw this graphic information it had a surprisingly strong impact. McCain=Bush=Hoover and an impending fiscal disaster of epic "great depression" proportions. These older voters started life with depression fresh in their minds. They don't want anything to do with it a second time and the possibility is all too real. See if this will work for you as well as it did for me.

It is quite simple and clear for responsible senior citizens. Debts must be paid and the cost of carrying debt is unacceptable. That makes the Republicans unacceptable. Debt is not an abstract thing to survivors of the great depression.

Chinese Commu-capitalists took over control of the USA without firing a single shot. W and his neocon friends made it possible by allowing them to beat us at our own game. No need to bomb us when all they had to do was own us. How strange it is to realize that we may end up nationalizing everything the Chinese own on our soil. W took us from being the strongest most powerful nation on earth to our current status as greatest debtors in the world in 8 short years. It seems that proud older voters of the greatest generation may be vulnerable to the fiscal responsibility line of approach from the Democrats.

Aug 13, 2008

LIMBAUGH: Well, it's -- I mean, at some point, at some point, you gotta exhibit maturity and restraint. You know, and I do that constantly. But -- well, I don't -- look, let me see if I can run you through this and get you to think what I'm thinking without my actually saying it. That might be a pretty big talent if I could do that -- make you think what I'm going to say without my having to say it, therefore if anybody gets in trouble for saying it, you say it.

We know -- we've been told that Elizabeth Edwards is smarter than John Edwards. That's part of the puff pieces on them that we've seen. Ergo, if Elizabeth Edwards is smarter than John Edwards, is it likely that she thinks she knows better than he does what his speeches ought to contain and what kind of things he ought to be doing strategy-wise in the campaign? If she is smarter than he is, could it have been her decision to keep going with the campaign? In other words, could it be that she doesn't shut up? Now, that's as far as I'm going to go.

Well, you're -- Snerdley says he's missing something. If you're missing it, you're going to have to provide it. What are you missing? Mm-hmm, mm-hmm.

I can't close the loop on it. I can't close the loop on it. I'm on -- you know, I'm in a little quicksand already today talking about how the chicks are giving us boring pictures of the female athletes from the Olympics. Because I know -- you -- the diversity crowd's going to be upset. They're going to -- "Ooh, do you mean the Olympics are just so you guys can ogle wom--" Yes, because we do not care to watch 'em compete. But back to Elizabeth and the Breck Girl.

I'm sorry, my friends, I just -- I can't. It just seems to me that Edwards might be attracted to a woman whose mouth did something other than talk.


LIMBAUGH: OK, we're back. Ladies and gentleman, my theory that I just explained to you about why -- you know, what could have John Edwards' motivations been to have the affair with Rielle Hunter, given his wife is smarter than he is and probably nagging him a lot about doing this, and he found somebody that did something with her mouth other than talk. I think I can back this up from her.

We have a sound bite. This is February 2007. She was on the tabloid show Extra. And this is what she said. Listen very carefully.

HUNTER [audio clip]: The whole experience was life-altering for me. One of the great things about John Edwards is that he's so open and willing to try new things and do things in new ways.

LIMBAUGH: "Open to new things." Folks, it is what it is. You get mad at me for bringing the truth to you, but it is what it is.

Aug 4, 2008


Today I received yet another viral McSame E-mail from an old high school friend - it is included after the jump - and it got me to thinking after my reply. (also included)

It got me to thinking about the large number of anti-Obama emails I receive through my brother - who does not reply and stays on the list. I've seen at least a dozen in the past month.

Why don't we see viral emails from the left? Are we incapable of a retort or is something deeper at work?

I think Democrats and liberal/progressives are reticent to pass on lies by email. I believe we recoil at the idea of negative smear campaigns. I wonder if we are wired differently and I'm not unhappy about that possibility.

Maybe I'm just out of the loop of anti-McSame viral email. I do live in Republican Knoxville,TN. where people get killed for being Liberal so I may not be privy to some campaign by liberals who send attacks on McCain by email.

On the one hand I applaud Obama's desire to stay positive and talk about the problems we face and solutions to those problems. On the other I see the points of those who think we need to see Obama attack McCain like he is being attacked.

But it's part of why I am proud to be a liberal/progressive Democrat even when we lose doing things the right way. I just wonder why some of you who think Obama should go on the attack aren't composing attack email against McSame and send them out. Or do you? Here's an email address to send them
revolver44 at comcast dot net.

Here's the email
America, does not need this leader......
Obama Explains National Anthem Stance -

Hot on the heels of his explanation for why he no longer wears a flag pin, presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama was forced to explain why he doesn't follow protocol when the National Anthem is played.

According to the United States Code, Title 36, Chapter 10, Sec. 171, During rendition of the national anthem when the flag is displayed, all present except those in uniform are expected to stand at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart.

'As I've said about the flag pin, I don't want to be perceived as taking sides,' Obama said. 'There are a lot of people in the world to whom the American flag is a symbol of oppression. And the anthem itself conveys a war-like message. You know, the bombs bursting in air and all. It should be swapped for something less parochial and less bellicose. I like the song 'I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing.' If that were our anthem, then I might salute it.'

and this was my reply
Karen and friends,

It's pretty amazing that people who want to see John McCain elected to continue 4 more years of the same economic and foreign policy that put us in the shape we currently "enjoy" have to lie - baldfaced outright lie - by sending on email like this.

I realize it's difficult to come up with any reason to vote for John McCain. And I realize he has based his campaign on smears and lies. But it seems you would have something better to do than email an outright lie - a quote that never happened - to indicate your support for the party that has given us endless war, an unbelievable debt, and serious problems for homeowners and those who have trouble paying for healthcare not to mention the plunging stock market and hideous balance of trade.

The Republican Party has controlled both houses of Congress for 14 of the past 16 years and the Presidency for the past 8 and everything that is happening now is laid at their feet as a result of their policies. So it's clear if you're a Republican all you can do to keep your party in power is to lie about the Democrat. That may be important to you if you're employed by the defense or oil industries or if you are among the 5% richest Americans. We have seen the greatest redistribution of wealth in the history of the country from the hands of middle class to the elite.

These are serious times that require serious changes to the way things have been operated for the past 8 years.
8 years ago we enjoyed a balanced budget and people of all economic situations below the richest 5% were doing far better than they are today. Now we have record profits by Bush and Cheney oil buddies and the weapons manufactureres and folks like Halliburton/KBR and Blackwater but most middle class and lower income Americans are living on the edge squeezed like never before.

So get serious Karen and stop sending me this crap. That quote never happened and it's not about what's important to people who are in trouble after 8 years of the worst presidency in history. I don't care who you support - have the decency to send something that gives us hope that there will be a change from what we've seen destroyed by the Bush/Cheney administration. This kind of viral crap from Freepers who think people will believe any crap they post should be beneath you.

Let me know if John comes up with anything to beat Obama's plans for converting us from a dependency on fossil fuels or how he's going to end the insanity that cause us to waste a trillion dollars in Iraq on a war based on lies and I will be glad to see it. But if this is the best you've got then keep it to yourself.

Barack Obama is already restoring some hope in the rest of the world that America will return to it's senses. Our friends overseas have no problem seeing hope in his candidacy. Attacking him as Un-American is about as low as anybody can go and I mean that sincerely

This stuff is garbage and you should be ashamed to pass it on. It demeans our democracy and insults our intelligence.