Thursday, December 9, 2010

DADT Repeal Fails in Senate By Three Votes

Not quite a stake through the heart, though. But we can always hope.

Story here.

Democrats Think Obama Caved In To Republicans, Can't Trust Him

Democrats were already being critical of the regime back in July as we mentioned here because it seemed to some of them that the White House was already conceding that Democrats would lose control of the US House.

Now that the president User in Chief has flip-flopped one time too many, acquiescing on the 28%, 33% and 35% tax brackets for earners making $200,000 a year or more, passed under the Bush administration in 2001 and 2003, Democrats appear to be in revolt.

Disrespectful language is being used, according to this story.

Imagine that.

American Workers are Slaves, In Thrall to the Corporations

Joan Vennochi for The Boston Globe focuses an unflattering spotlight here on State Street Corp. whose profits are soaring as it fires personnel. The example is representative of the wider reality:

[W]hile wage and salary payments to workers declined by $121 billion or about 2 percent since the last quarter of 2008, pre-tax corporate profits rose sharply — up by $572 billion or 57 percent over the same time period.

Land of the free, home of the brave? We've got corporations right where they want us.


Wednesday, December 8, 2010

Final Uncalled House Race Update: NY-1 Remains a Democrat Hold

The Republican challenger has conceded to the Democrat incumbent. The story is here.

The net gain for Republicans in the US House in 2010 remains at 63, putting the Republicans in the majority with 242 seats to the Democrats 193.

No one foresaw such an eventuality two years ago when the Democrats decisively swept Republicans aside on Obama's coattails and acquired an overwhelming majority numbering 256 seats. That tide wasn't completely reversed in this election, but for a party deemed dead for all intents and purposes the comeback is a remarkable thumping, thanks in part to the activism of the Tea Party movement, which was created spontaneously out of thin air in February and March of 2009 in response to Democrat stimulus spending and mortgage modification programs.

The battle to stop and reverse Obama's programs designed to transform American culture and institutions has now been joined.

Beware Obamao's red guards.


Bob Sellers Joins The New American Nightmare

This is the American workplace, 2010. No loyalty, and a cavalier consideration for the life changing consequences of treating people and their livelihoods as mere pieces on a chess board.


Maybe if it were still a Christian nation people wouldn't treat each other this way as often.

Full story here.

On the Fourth Gospel

"The Fourth Gospel portrays a Jesus who is, simply, unparalleled."

-- Imam John

Tuesday, December 7, 2010

If You Want Fewer Poor People in America, Tax Them Already!

Here's Rush Limbaugh, with his whole brain tied behind his back, today:

"Nobody in this society is undertaxed, so why applaud an extension of tax rates? Where are the cuts?" -Rush

When nearly half the population pays no income taxes at all, you cannot say no one is undertaxed. All of them are undertaxed, by definition.

The poor have a responsibility to contribute to the general welfare no less than the rich do, so for them to pay no taxes means they are not doing their fair share, and are in no way equal to everyone who does pay taxes. They are AINOs, Americans in Name Only, who pay no taxes. Just ask Joe "It's Time to be Patriotic, Time to be Part of the Deal" Biden.

If there were any conservatives left in this country, they would be calling for taxes on the poor, to reduce their surplus population.

Wake up Rush, before conservatives start calling you a big fat idiot.

The Tax Elephant in the Room: The Poor Don't Pay Their Fair Share

Once again, the Republicans are about to blow it.

What's needed for the country right now, attempting to leave politics out of the discussion for a moment, is a tax system which is reasonably fair and predictable for the long haul. But what we've got, thanks to George W. Bush, is an unfair system which is deliberately gamed at the extremes, at the expense of the middle. And extending it for another two years just kicks that can of crap down the road.

Under it, nearly half of Americans, those at the low end, pay no federal income tax whatsoever, and millions of them actually get subsidies through the tax code in the form of a big fat "refund" check when they paid no taxes in the first place. These were expanded under Bush, and are defended as offsets of payroll taxes. Do the poor really need yet another offset, in the form of a temporary reduction in the payroll tax rate, especially considering that Social Security is an unfunded liability which is going broke fast?

Compared to the rates they replaced under Clinton, Bush's rates on everyone but the rich are projected to cost the treasury something like $3 trillion going forward, while only an additional $700 billion in tax loss expenditures are predicted to be forfeited from the well to do. Yet the Democrats characterize this as tax cuts for the rich. In point of fact, it's been massive tax cuts for everyone else, especially for the poorest, in the form of subsidies like the Earned Income Credit, the Child Tax Credit, and the creation of the lowest 10% bracket.

Those at the high end, people making in excess of about $106,000, get a huge payroll tax break of their own. They pay zero in payroll taxes above that ceiling at the same time that they pay the vast majority of federal income taxes with a top rate around 35%.

People who've lived a little remember when the poorest among us had one income tax rate, 15%, and the richest another, 28%. What makes those rates in principle unfair now?

Under them today's poorer Americans might actually pay some taxes for a change. And don't they have a responsibility to do so? Didn't Joe Biden tell us paying taxes was the patriotic thing to do? Back in the day the Senator's son got the deferment while the white trash got his ass shot off in Vietnam. Now the "deferment" goes to both the poor and the rich.

Wealthier Americans would see a decline in the rate of the federal tax they paid, that is true. But a broad-based single higher rate on income could be paired with an increase on the payroll tax cap. Why should people who make millions pay no Social Security tax on that income? Social Security is a regressive tax because it taxes the poor end the most and not the rich end. By distributing its pain on everyone equally maybe we would actually have an incentive going forward to put that boondoggle on a more solid footing once and for all, along with the rest of government.

To which end, Republicans should not compromise with the devil. If he won't bow and extend the Bush tax rates, and only the rates, permanently, then Republicans should let them expire. At least the rich will pay a little more, and the rest of us a lot more, and especially the poor. And Obama will get the blame.

On Insanity

"You know you are insane if you've listened to Glenn Beck for fifteen minutes and you're not embarrassed yet."

-- Imam John

Monday, December 6, 2010

Caroline Baum Says "There Isn't Anything Government Can Do" For Housing

It's right here:

Owners’ equity in household real estate, or the value of assets minus liabilities, fell from a peak of $13.1 trillion in 2005 to a low of $5.9 trillion in the first quarter of 2009, according to the Fed’s Flow of Funds report. That’s a whopping 55 percent decline in four years. By the second quarter of 2010, owners’ equity had climbed back to $7 trillion.

Even with the 87 percent rebound in the Wilshire 5000 Total Market Index from the March 2009 lows, household net worth is still below its 2007 peak.

Housing, which along with manufacturing has traditionally led the economy out of recession, won’t be pulling its weight this time -- even with historically low mortgage rates. And there isn’t anything the government can do except let prices fall so the market can clear, something it’s been unwilling to do.

Aside from the fact that the rebound in equities would directly benefit fewer than half of US households, what's this about government impotence? Government can do plenty.

If the fascists over at the Federal Reserve can loan a bunch of fascist bankers and fascist industries $9 trillion from 2008 to 2010 at nearly zero percent interest, surely it can come up with $6.1 trillion for homeowners to close the gap in lost equity in household real estate.

Oh, but I forget! Most homeowners aren't fascists like the oligarchy!

My bad.

Love the makeover, though, Caroline. You look mahvelous.

Sunday, December 5, 2010

George Will Notices That Sarah Palin Will Never Be A Ronald Reagan

What took you so long, George? This was all pretty clear already in January, here and here.

“After the 2008 campaign she had two things she had to do: she had to go home to Alaska and study, and she had to govern Alaska well,” Will told “This Week” anchor Christiane Amanpour. “Instead she quit halfway through her first term and shows up in the audience of ‘Dancing with the Stars’ and other distinctly non-presidential venues.”

More at this link.


Global Warming? Better Luck Next Year. Britain 2010 The Coolest Since 1996.

As reported here by The UK Daily Mail:

[A] remarkable climbdown that has huge implications . . . for debate over climate change as a whole[:] for the past 15 years, global warming has stopped.

$9 Trillion in Fed Bailouts Saved the Elites, But $50 Billion for Unemployed Will Bankrupt Us?

Here's an excerpt from "The Con of the Century," by someone worth reading who gets it:

[U]nemployment insurance will cost roughly $4 billion per month and most of this money will go back into the economy. Congress is stalling on this yet the media is completely silent on the $9 trillion in Federal Reserve loans? This should be the headline story over and over until people realize how big the bailout was (and how this false dichotomy is being used as propaganda in the media as if $4 billion a month is going to bankrupt the system). The banking elites just want to shift the blame to “poor” people while ignoring the elephant in the room which are the trillions of dollars in Fed loans.

Friday, December 3, 2010

Man Gets 13 Years Instead of Castration

Is there no justice in this world? Polanski didn't even get jail.

The story is here.

Another Reason Not to Use Your Credit Card: The Feds Track You Without a Warrant

As reported here at wired.com:

Federal law enforcement agencies have been tracking Americans in real-time using credit cards, loyalty cards and travel reservations without getting a court order, a new document released under a government sunshine request shows.

Look for rfid chips in the currency next.

Tyrannies Desire to Know Everything You Say and Do: Feds Violate FISA

From The Washington Post:

The federal government has repeatedly violated legal limits governing the surveillance of US citizens, according to previously secret internal documents obtained through a court battle by the American Civil Liberties Union.

What the ACLU got was heavily redacted. Read about it here.

Assume no communication whatsoever is exempt from eavesdropping. I know I don't.

So to all my regular readers over at 216.81.81.84 in the Department of Homeland Security in Woodbridge, VA, hello! And a big shout out to you over at Customs and Border Protection at 63.167.255.154! Also to the DHS in Springfield, VA, at 216.81.81.83, greetings! And you over at United States Army Information Systems Command Headquarters at 141.116.212.32 in Alexandria, VA, thanks for visiting!

I would be remiss if I left out the FBI. Hello over there in Clarksburg, WV! Nice of you at the Criminal Justice Information Systems office at 153.31.113.26 to stop by! And also those of you in Bridgeport, WV, at 153.31.113.21. I appreciate your interest, ever so much!

What will you all do, when the power goes out?

Thursday, December 2, 2010

Is Ron Paul the Republicans' Dennis Kucinich?

He was one of just three Republicans in the US House to vote with the Democrats today to send a bill to the Senate which extends the Bush tax cuts only to those making less than $250,000/$200,000.

Can't wait to hear from Dennis Ron the chapter and verse from the US Constitution which allowed him to vote Yea on a tax increase for only "wealthy" Americans.

TheHill.com reports here the independent Democrats who voted against Pelosi's class-warfare tax increase bill on the "rich":

Here are the Democrats who voted against the bill (nine of whom lost their reelection bids):

Rep. Brian Baird (Wash.)
Rep. Dan Boren (Okla.)
Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper (Pa.)
Rep. Artur Davis (Ala.)
Rep. Lloyd Doggett (Texas)
Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (S.D.) 
Rep. Ron Klein (Fla.)
Rep. Jim Matheson (Utah)
Rep. Mike McIntyre (N.C.)
Rep. Mike McMahon (N.Y.)
Rep. Jerry McNerney (Calif.)
Rep. Walt Minnick (Idaho)
Rep. Gwen Moore (Wis.)
Rep. Jim Moran (Va.) 
Rep. Collin Peterson (Minn.)
Rep. Earl Pomeroy (N.D.) 
Rep. Bobby Scott (Va.)
Rep. Gene Taylor (Miss.)
Rep. Mike Thompson (Calif.)
Rep. Pete Visclosky (Ind.)

Among the brave above who were re-elected to return next year I count Dan Boren, Lloyd Doggett, Jim Matheson, Mike McIntyre, Jerry McNerney, Gwen Moore, Jim Moran, Collin Peterson, Bobby Scott, Mike Thompson, and Pete Visclosky. 

Why couldn't the three Republicans have been more like these eleven Democrats and voted No?

Libertarians are nuts.

Come On, Come On, Come On, Do The Mussolini With Me!

Here's Why Your Government Stalled on the FOIA for Two Years

Because the American taxpayer has bailed out the whole world, that's why. We're now the biggest suckers in history.

And the following information wouldn't have been released either, except for the Dodd-Frank legislation:

Citigroup ($2.2 trillion)

Merrill Lynch ($2.1 trillion)

Morgan Stanley ($2 trillion)

Bear Stearns ($960 billion)

Bank of America ($887 billion)

Goldman Sachs ($615 billion)

JPMorgan Chase ($178 billion)

Wells Fargo ($154 billion)

Swiss bank UBS ($165 billion)

Deutsche Bank ($97 billion)

Royal Bank of Scotland ($92 billion)

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mack ($1.25 trillion)

General Electric ($16 billion)

Harley-Davidson Inc. ($2.3 billion)

Caterpillar Inc. dealers ($733 million)

The story from yahoo.com is totally irresponsible for saying the Fed didn't take part in an appeal to the Supreme Court with a group of commercial banks seeking to prevent the disclosure of the names of institutions receiving emergency loans in 2008. Hell, the Fed appealed all the way up the line until it came time to appeal to the Supreme Court or comply with two (2! II! Zwei!) orders from lower courts to disclose the information. And we still don't have that.

Has anyone painted a clearer picture of the bankruptcy of our largest institutions and industries?

Only a fool would keep his money in a bank now.

Hell, only a fool would keep money.

Stupid Shit I Read at Washington's Blog



Since there's only 300 million of us, I guess when this is prefaced by "polls show that" it means that 1) nearly everybody got asked, and 2) the country is considerably bigger than we realized.

As for 1), no one polled me. And last time I checked, the people voted for Bush rather conclusively in 2004.

As for 2), they must be hiding all that extra population in the extra 7 states of the union candidate Obama claimed to have visited in 2008.

What a wack job.