Why I'm a Democrat

 

Bravo

 

Amerikan Education

Education is important to some nations....I guess it's not that important to this one.

A Simple Thank You Would Suffice

Did you know that unemployment dropped below 6 percent for the first time since 2008?

It did?  Not propoganda....Fact!

This last snapshot of the job market before midterm elections marks the first time the unemployment rate has dropped below 6 percent since 2008. But the total share of Americans who have jobs has recovered only modestly unfortunately...

The economy created a robust 248,000 jobs in September and the official unemployment rate fell to 5.9 percent from 6.1 percent the month before, the Labor Department reported.

That’s welcome news for US workers, and in political terms, such signs of economic improvement tend to buoy the party that is control of the White House...The question is...Will it?

I was watching Bill Mahr recently and he said that people who tend to vote in these mid-term elections tend to be the angry and afraid voters....Voters who usually veer toward the right...

People who now have medical insurance...People who have been recently hired....et al....You should be the ones rushing to the polls to vote...If for nothing more than to say -"Thank You"....."Thank You President Obama..." But for some people....even the ones who have benefited...To say thank you might be a little too much.

And Why doesn't Fox News report this?   Because it's something positive...because they can't spin that in a way that is negative towards the President or the Democrats..
It's very simple..

But I digress...So despite a string of solid job reports in recent months, the state of the economy is, at best, providing modest support to Democrats in key races. Far from assuring that Democrats can retain their narrow control of the Senate, the improving job market is simply helping them to stay in the election game..That's a damn shame!

This fall...Really, Next Month- Republicans need a net gain of six Senate seats to take charge.

President Obama, seeking to help his party, is doing his best to capitalize on the job market’s improvement-

“When I took office, businesses were laying off 800,000 Americans a month. Today, our businesses are hiring 200,000 Americans a month,” President Obama said Thursday, in a speech at Northwestern University near Chicago.

A political challenge, however, is that the economy still isn’t nearly as strong as Americans would like – and the president’s popularity is also suffering from other factors – like handling of foreign policy – that have nothing to do with the economy.

Although unemployment has fallen sharply from its post-recession high of about 10 percent, the total share of Americans who have jobs has recovered only modestly – to 59 percent of adults, down from about 63 percent just before the recession.

Part of that reflects the demographics of the baby boom, as more Americans are hitting retirement age. But it also reflects an economy where many potential workers aren’t optimistic enough to even look for work. Those on the sidelines aren’t counted in the official unemployment rate.

Wage growth has also been disappointing, barely keeping pace with inflation.

The president acknowledged the challenge in his speech. He said it’s “indisputable that millions of Americans don’t yet feel enough of the benefits of a growing economy where it matters most – and that's in their own lives.”

And the positive tone of the September jobs report (many economists didn’t expect the unemployment rate to drop below 6 percent), doesn’t mean the economy is about to shift into high gear.

Members of the National Association for Business Economics, in a new survey, expect the annualized pace of economic growth to come in at 3 percent for the remainder of 2014 and 2.9 percent for 2015, after notching 3.1 percent last year.

All that hints at why it’s hard for Democrats to run as the party of economic recovery..Why it's hard for people to say "Thank you" with their votes...in all fairness.

That doesn’t mean gains in the job market are meaningless for the election, though. Democratic incumbents like Sen. Jeanne Shaheen in New Hampshire and Sen. Kay Hagan in North Carolina would probably be having a tougher time if it weren’t for lower-than-average unemployment (4.4 percent in New Hampshire as of August) or significant improvement (unemployment has fallen in North Carolina from 8.8 percent at the start of 2013 to 6.8 percent in August).

In both those states, the Democrats have an edge in recent polls.

The same dynamics also may be supporting Democrats who are behind in the polls – helping to keep their hopes alive in places like Arkansas, even though the political terrain favors Republicans.

But, as important as the economy is – it’s ranked by Americans at the top of their priority list – other themes, from national security to social issues, are also taking a high profile in tight races.

Republican Joni Ernst has taken the lead against Democrat Bruce Braley for Iowa’s open Senate seat, for example, even though unemployment there is just 4.5 percent and the seat has been held until now by Democrat Tom Harkin.

Something is definitely wrong with this picture!

Dear Congress Part II

The "I" Word

The "I" word was in the news yesterday...Actually I should say in the news.....That word is , drum roll please...Immigration....
President Barack Obama hailed the Senate's bipartisan immigration framework at a major speech on that topic this afternoon in Nevada, but threatened to send his own alternative legislation to Capitol Hill if Congress fails to act.

The president embraced of a statement of principles offered Monday by four Democratic and four Republican senators, which would strengthen border security and employment verification in exchange for a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants in the United States.
"The good news is that -- for the first time in many years -- Republicans and Democrats seem ready to tackle this problem together," President Obama said in his speech in Las Vegas, according to prepared excerpts.

 "And yesterday, a bipartisan group of senators announced their principles for comprehensive immigration reform, which are very much in line with the principles I've proposed and campaigned on for the last few years," the president also said. "At this moment, it looks like there's a genuine desire to get this done soon. And that's very encouraging." he said.

But in a speech in Nevada -- a Southwestern state that has experienced a boom in its Latino and or  Hispanic population --  President  Obama said he refused to allow comprehensive immigration reform "to get bogged down in an endless debate." (which knowing the Republicans...it most undoubtedly will.)


"It's important for us to realize that the foundation for bipartisan action is already in place," he said. If lawmakers fail to advance their own proposal, President Obama said he would send legislation to Congress based on his own principles "and insist that they vote on it right away."


He said at the top of his speech: "I'm here because the time has come for common-sense, comprehensive immigration reform."

  President Obama used Tuesday's speech in Nevada to outline many of those principles, which rest on four pillars: 1.Strengthening border security, 2.Cracking down on employers who hire undocumented workers, streamlining legal immigration and  3rd and may I say  most importantly -- offering undocumented workers an earned path to citizenship.

Those three pillars mostly resemble the bipartisan Senate framework unveiled on Monday by lawmakers, which has prompted hopes that Congress would finally be able to advance a comprehensive immigration reform law, a priority that eluded President Barack Obama during his first term, and President George W. Bush before him.

The primary sticking point in those fights has been the pathway to citizenship, which conservatives deride as "amnesty" for those who have broken the law. Already, some prominent conservatives have expressed their skepticism of the Senate framework for exactly that reason.

"Yes, they broke the rules,"  President Obama said of those undocumented immigrants. "They crossed the border illegally. Maybe they overstayed their visas. But these 11 million men and women are now here."

That is not going to go over well with conservatives and their supporters...and I can predict that they'll take that last statement he made and run with it..


Republicans in particular had been closely watching President Obama's actions for cues as to how the administration might handle immigration, and the emerging Senate deal.

Republican lawmakers have openly worried that President Obama might stake out stark positions and oppose some of the enforcement measures included in the Senate framework, namely the trigger that would only allow a pathway to citizenship once the border enforcement mechanisms had been verified.

 "There are a lot of ideas about how best to fix our broken immigration system," said Brendan Buck, a spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio. "Any solution should be a bipartisan one, and we hope the President is careful not to drag the debate to the left and ultimately disrupt the difficult work that is ahead in the House and Senate."

But Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, a kind of rock star to conservatives who's seen as eyeing a run for the GOP presidential nomination in 2016, has taken an active lead in selling this proposal to the right. Senator Rubio has appeared in conservative media to both discourage President Obama from opposing enforcement provisions, but also talk up the proposal as the best chance at compromise for Republicans.

"If, in fact, this bill does not have real triggers in there -- in essence, if there's not language in this bill that guarantees that nothing else happens unless these enforcement mechanisms are in place -- then I won't support it," Senator Rubio, a member of the bipartisan gang of eight, told conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh on Tuesday. "But the principles clearly call for that."

But the President generally spoke in broad terms, and did not draw any bright lines as it relates to the Senate proposal.

"I believe we are finally at a moment where comprehensive immigration reform is finally within our grasp," he said.

I would at least hope so...

Time For Tax Fairness

Once Again ,President Obama has called for "Tax Fairness" or for extending most tax cuts in households like yours and mine..And Once more,  The Republican/Tea Party opponents are gearing up to fight him on this.

Surprised? I'm not!

President Barack Obama urged Congress yesterday to extend expiring tax cuts for most American households, injecting the issue of tax fairness into the 2012 campaign.

President Obama, speaking early yesterday afternoon at the White House, again voiced support for allowing tax cuts for households earning over $250,000 per year to expire at the end of 2012, while also preserving existing rates for households earning less than that. Like I said...Households like you and I...The average workaday joe or jane.

“We don't need more top-down economics. We tried that theory ... we can't afford to go back to it,” The President said. “That's why I believe it's time for the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, including myself, to expire.”

But let's be for real now...This present Congress is likely to do anything but that, though. Republicans who control the House of Representatives quickly rejected President Obama's proposal as a tax hike, though the president sought to decouple the middle class tax cuts from the high-end breaks. No surprise there..This was almost a knee jerk reaction.

 President Obama urged lawmakers to act now to extend most of the expiring tax cuts, and have a second debate – likely to be decided in November’s election – on the tax cuts for the wealthiest.

"My opponent will fight to keep them in place; I will fight to end them,” President Obama said in reference to Mitt Romney, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee.

All of the tax cuts, which were first proposed by President George W. Bush, were set to expire at the end of 2010. After having initially resisted their extension,President  Obama relented and agreed to a two-year extension of the Bush tax cuts for all income brackets – a compromise that allowed the administration to advance some of its legislative priorities through that year’s lame-duck Congress.

At the time of that extension, President Obama said he would refuse to again agree to any extension of the high-end tax cuts. The announcement is rife with election year significance.

The Republican/Tea Party crowd  have raised the specter of a tax increase that would spring into effect if the Bush tax cuts were allowed to expire at the end of this calendar year. Of course , this is fiction....but it is no surprise that a lot of people in the middle and working class believe this fiction... Thus here in lies the true genius of the Republican party...They are experts at convincing some people to vote against their own class interests.

Though President Obama's proposal would preserve existing tax rates for all but the wealthiest American households, Republicans still derided it as a massive tax hike -- especially on small business owners whose revenues are treated as personal income.

"President Obama’s response to even more bad economic news is a massive tax increase," said Mitt Romney campaign spokeswoman Andrea Saul. "The president's latest bad idea is to raise taxes on families, job creators, and small businesses. Almost half a million fewer Americans are working today than the day Barack Obama took office, and we've just come through the worst job creation quarter in two years." She said.

In response to that charge, President Obama said: "This isn't about taxing job creators; this is about helping job creators."

The Republicans accused The President of looking to divert attention from last Friday's jobs numbers, which showed the economy added 80,000 jobs in June, a figure that fell somewhat below estimates.

Taxes have often been an effective political cudgel for the GOP to wield against Democrats in election years.President Obama's announcement on Monday was ostensibly intended to defuse the looming tax fight at the end of this year, though it's unlikely that any legislation makes it to the president's desk before Election Day.

The President's proposal, rather, doubles down on what Democrats view as a politically advantageous demand that the wealthy contribute a higher share of taxes, a sentiment that generally polls well. Nonetheless, Americans slightly favored Republicans on the issue of taxes in the June NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll. Thirty-four percent of respondents said they favor the GOP's approach to taxes, versus 32 percent who said that of Democrats. This is exactly what I mean when I say that they convince people , some people that is..To vote against their own class interests.


II-

Republicans on Capitol Hill have been eager to highlight, though, differences between Democratic lawmakers and the president on this very issue. Democratic leaders in the House and Senate have called on preserving tax rates for all households earning less than $1 million per year, a higher threshold than President Obama's. This alternative proposal was born of politics, since it opens the door to Democrats' charge that the GOP wishes to preserve tax breaks -- literally -- for millionaires.
.
The president's push to extend the Bush tax cuts for households earning less than $250,000 per year is also meant to set up a contrast with Romney, whose proposal to cut marginal income tax rates by 20 percent in each bracket composes the cornerstone of his tax reform plan.

"Unlike President Obama, Governor Romney understands that the last thing we need to do in this economy is raise taxes on anyone. He has a plan to permanently lower marginal rates, help middle-class Americans save and invest, and jumpstart economic growth and job creation," said Saul, the former Massachusetts governor's spokeswoman.

Mitt Romney has also called for cutting the corporate tax rate to 25 percent and maintaining friendly tax rates on investment income. The presumptive Republican nominee has said that he would pay for the price tag of these cuts with an overarching tax reform package that would eliminate some loopholes and deductions.

But! He has  refused to specify what those changes might be, or how they would affect the nation's tax ledger. He told CBS last month that he would "go through that process with Congress" to determine which deductions and exemptions he would eliminate.

Nice way to pivot away from the central issue....Isn't that what they do when cornered with a difficult question or rather one that they left out??? Hmmmmmm! Trying to be objective here, but finding it extremely difficult!

Mitt Romney and the republicans have additionally weathered pressure from the Obama campaign to release more of his own tax records amid scrutiny of his overseas holdings.

 Mr.Romney released his returns from 2010, which showed he paid an effective tax rate of about 14 percent (because much of his income came from investments). Mr. Romney filed for an extension on his 2011 taxes, and his campaign said it would release them to the public when they're available, no later than October.  One month from Election time...Hmmmmm, Good timing!

"The next president, in the next four years -- somebody's going to have to tackle comprehensive tax reform. And they're going to have to deal with sheltering income, like it appears Mitt Romney is doing in Bermuda, in the Caymans, in Switzerland," senior Obama campaign adviser Robert Gibbs said Monday on NBC's "TODAY" show. "I think the American people deserve to know what tax breaks and what sheltering each of these candidates is taking advantage of."


Yeah..I think so too!

Not So Secret Services!

You know what?...If this wasn't so outrageous...and if this was any other time...I'd swear someone made this story up...As you probably know...Several Secret Service agents and some military attaches who were supposed to be guarding the President of the United States are accused of bringing prostitutes back to their rooms this past weekend..in Colombia..Incredible!!

I couldn't have made this story up....Well actually, I could have..but in this case...I didn't..The Colombian prostitute who triggered the scandal that has rocked the Secret Service got angry with two agents who refused to pay her full price for servicing the two of them, leading to a financial dispute over between $40 and $60, according to a government source who has been briefed on the investigation.

Forty Dollars?? Sixty Dollars?? When I was a young man, I've blown that much buying drinks and pizza on South Street...So Not only are these guys derelect in duty...but they're cheap!!

Two agents from the service's elite Counter Assault Team, in Cartagena, Colombia, in advance of President Barack Obama's arrival for the Summit of the Americas over the weekend, had procured the women's services at a local strip club called the Pley Club on the evening of April 11. All the Secret Service agents and officers implicated in the scandal are believed to have gone to the club that evening and brought back women, a U.S. official told NBC News.

The controversy arose after one of the women went back to a hotel room with two agents. The woman wanted to be paid for serving both agents, the source who has been briefed on the probe told NBC News. Instead, the agents would only agree to split her price, prompting the woman to complain to local police who were stationed in the lobby of the Caribe Hotel, the source said.

The police then went up to the agents' room and began banging on the door, which the agents at first refused to open, the source said. There are conflicting reports over how the payment dispute was resolved. But two government sources told NBC News the police contacted the U.S. Embassy over the dispute and Embassy officials then arrived at the scene.

All those with booked rooms at the hotel had to pay a fee of $25 for bringing any guests to their rooms -- and the guests were required to leave some form of identification at the front desk. A quick scan of the hotel register by a U.S. Embassy official established that 11 Secret Service agents had brought back women to their rooms that evening. When Embassy officials notified Secret Service Director Mark Sullivan, he immediately ordered all the agents to fly home, the sources said.

The Secret Service members -- including agents and uniformed officers -- were stripped of their security clearances on Monday.

Included in that group were two high-level Secret Service supervisors, three counter assault officers whose job is to repel attacks and three sniper-team members, who take to rooftops to secure areas where the president might visit, NBC News reported.

U.S. officials have described the agents' conduct as a potential security breach especially because all the agents involved had access to the president's day-by-day, minute-by-minute schedule. But one official familiar with the security arrangements said that there were no specific security threats during the president's trip. Although agents upon arrival were briefed about current activities by leftist FARC guerrillas and local drug cartels, they were told neither had made any specific threats to the president. Thank God for that!

The only specific security concern mentioned was that agents and officers were told to bar a left-wing journalist from events at the summit and were given a flier with the journalist's photograph to keep him out, the law enforcement source said.

The Secret Service sent agents to Colombia to interview the prostitutes who hooked up Americans to figure out if the women are under age, involved with terrorism or trafficking in illegal drugs, a lawmaker told NBC News' Luke Russert on Tuesday.


They have all their IDs and are conducting an extensive background check to make sure they aren't affiliated with any narcotrafficking or terrorist group or that they could be minors,” Homeland Security chairman Rep. Peter King told Russert. “So far there is no security breach."

King, who was briefed on the Colombia investigation by Sullivan, confirmed that there were 11 agents and 11 women.

"The investigation could take a while simply because of the amount of women involved,” King said. “Some are saying they were prostitutes and others say they weren't."

U.S. military officials told NBC News on Tuesday that 10 American servicemen also were under investigation. According to the officials that includes five Army soldiers, two Navy sailors, two Marines and one Air Force airman.

One military official says it appears that at least two of the service members were found with prostitutes in their hotel rooms, the same el Caribe where the Secret Service detail stayed.

It's not clear whether any of the military members were in any way connected to the allegations involving members of the Secret Service at a Cartagena strip club. It's also not yet clear whether any of the 10 will face criminal charges.House and Senate lawmakers are also looking into the allegations.

They ought to face criminal charges...You know why?? They're the SECRET SERVICE!..The operative word being SECRET!!! None of this stuff is supposed to ever get out....James Bond is in his retirement home laughing his butt off!