Jack & Jill Politics

AFTERNOON THREAD IS UP

rkyrah: FRIDAY, JANUARY 30, 2009 -DAY 10- Of his FIRST 100 DAYS!:

1. Obama Seeks To Level Labor 'Playing Field' (President Signs Exec. Orders To Help Unions
)

WASHINGTON -- Before a group of labor leaders and many others, President Barack Obama announced a series of executive orders Friday that he said should "level the playing field" for unions in the struggles they have with management.

President Obama | First 100 Days

Obama used the occasion at the White House to also formally announce the White House's new Middle Class Task Force, which will focus on the problems of middle-class Americans, and installed Vice President Joe Biden as its chairman.

Quoting words Obama spoke in his inaugural address, Biden said, "A nation cannot prosper long when it favors only the prosperous."

On labor issues, Obama said that among other things, he was changing Bush administration policy in a way that will require companies doing contract work for the government to inform workers of their legal rights on the job.

Although his task force centers on the middle class, Obama said that "we're not forgetting the poor."

He said it's not just for "the people who are in the middle class, but those who aspire to be in the middle class."

He said his administration wants to make sure low-income people "get a piece" of the American pie "if they're willing to work for it."

Labor leaders were also on hand Thursday when Obama signed his first major piece of legislation, an equal-pay act that organized labor and women's groups championed.

Also on Friday, Obama called the economic slump a "continuing disaster" for America's families. He pointed to the latest dreary economic numbers -- showing that the economy shrank at a pace of 3.8 percent in the final three months of last year -- as more proof that quick action is warranted on an economic recovery plan.

He said he's pleased that the House has acted with the appropriate urgency in approving a plan this week. He also said he hopes to "strengthen it further in the Senate" -- where he's hoping to get some Republican votes.

No Republicans voted for the plan in the House.

Obama told a White House gathering that the government can't drag its feet or delay action much longer.

2. HIS SCHEDULE: Friday Jan. 30, 2009

All Times Eastern7:00 AM
8:00 AM
9:00 AM
9:15 AM

Presidential daily briefing
9:45 AM

POTUS receives economic daily briefing.
10:00 AM
10:15 AM

Obama meets with senior advisors.
10:45 AM

Obama and Biden deliver remarks on the Middle Class Working Families Taskforce.
11:00 AM
12:00 PM
1:00 PM
1:45 PM

Obama meets with senior enlisted officials of the U.S. armed forces.

Briefing by Robert Gibbs.

3. KY Governor: Obama people 'hit the ground running' on storm

Kentucky's governor is praising the Obama administration's prompt reaction to the fierce wintry weather that slammed his state.

"They really hit the ground running," said Steve Beshear, interviewed by CNN. "They're working very hard to get all the equipment and supplies here that we need."

Crews have been working to restore power and water service to hundreds of thousands of people. Beshear said that while he realizes "nothing moves fast enough," he said the federal assistance "has been a great help to us so far."

Beshear, a Democrat, explained that when the first wave of bad weather came through on Tuesday and Wednesday morning, officials realized that they needed additional help.

"I called the White House directly at that time. I had my other folks talking to FEMA, but I went straight to the top because we needed fast help," he said.

He said he spoke to the director of intergovernment relations and said she walked Kentucky's paperwork through. He said President Obama called him and told him he was announcing an emergency declaration for the state.

"I can't tell you how appreciative we were," the governor said. "He not only expressed his concern, but he obviously had the Kentuckians in his thoughts and prayers, and he communicated that to us."

Beshear noted that forecasters are warning of another storm front heading to the region early next week.

"If we do, we're putting out that word to the White House and FEMA right now, we're going to need even more help," he said.

4. President Barack Obama signs the executive order creating the Middle Class Task Force. White House photo by Joyce N. Boghosian [ ACTUALY, there are 4 "screens" on this slide show. This is #1.]

5. Obama's First Seven Days...Of Fashion (SLIDESHOW)

Dressing for your first week of work is much like dressing for the first week of school: it matters. While the new president remained formal during the day--he did, however, dare to remove his jacket in the Oval Office--he decreed weekends in the White House would be business casual, opting to wear slacks and a gray sweater over a white buttoned-down shirt when he showed up for work on Saturday.

ENJOY!! :>)

THAT'S ALL FOR NOW! HAVE A GREAT DAY! :>)

Re: Kentucky - no muss, no fuss, just getting it done. Competence...what a concept.

MsKitty: LOL!! GOOD ONE!! COMPETENCE! :>)

My progressive and puma sites are having a hard time drumming the hate at the moment. They have to do deep research.

Lilytiger: So R U sayin' that they are searchin' for a "HATE STIMULUS PACKAGE?" :>) :>)

Good ta hear from ya!! :>) :>)

I hope Mike Duncan stays at the head of the RNC. Michael Steele would make things interesting.

I'd love steele to be RNC head -- the guy is a buffoon.

Don't know if this was already posted, but it needs to be heard again.

This is just sad: Army Suicides Still Rising

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/30/us/30suicide....

This is so tragic.....I want more assistance to go towards our men and women for their mental needs, more therapy, more transition assistance. Maybe if we weren't paying thug corporations like KBR $20 per face towel, there would be more money for that.

I knew I wasn't imagining that the networks were being pro-GOP on this stimulus "debate": http://thinkprogress.org/2009/01/28/cable-news-...

And the worse is that back stabbing white liberals like Rachel Maddow are working harder than Sean Hannity to undermine the President.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#28902483

Click on : Elephant in the room video
Click on: Perfect Storm

In what ways do you feel Rachel is trying to undermine PBO?

Energy and foreign policy cannot be seperated in thought or action anymore. Here is some work on gas pipelines in Europe and how it effect their security. A situation we do not often think about in America.
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2009/...

rikyrah: Rev. Jessie Jackson, Sr. on MSNBC: 12:25 pm EST

"Rainbow Push Educational Stimulus Plan": Need more grants and fewer loans.

Disappointed that the banks got 0-interest money and then turned around and made student loans at 6 -12% interest.

He was very SUPPORTIVE of PRESIDENT OBAMA. "He's doing a good job!"

When PUMAS cry: (my title :-))

WASHINGTON — Samantha Power, the Harvard University professor and Pulitzer Prize-winning author who earned notoriety for calling Hillary Rodham Clinton a "monster" while working to elect Barack Obama president, will take a senior foreign policy job at the White House, The Associated Press has learned.

Officials familiar with the decision say Obama has tapped Power to be senior director for multilateral affairs at the National Security Council, a job that will require close contact and potential travel with Clinton, who is now secretary of state. NSC staffers often accompany the secretary of state on foreign trips.

The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because Power's position, as well as that of other senior NSC positions, have not yet been announced. One official said the announcements would be made in the near future.

White House officials would not provide details of Power's new role.

Power was an early and ardent Obama supporter until the "monster" comment forced her off his campaign, but she was rehabilitated after the election when she made a gesture to apologize to Clinton and was included in the transition teams for both the State Department and the U.S. mission to the United Nations.

At the time, an official close to the transition said Power's "gesture to bury the hatchet" with Clinton had been well-received. Power and Clinton have met at least once since Clinton's confirmation last week when they both appeared at a State Department ceremony at which Obama announced the appointment of special envoys to South Asia and the Middle East.

Reporters at the event saw Power and Clinton chat briefly at the end, although the conversation was inaudible.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/30/samant...

Officials familiar with the decision say Obama has tapped Power to be senior director for multilateral affairs at the National Security Council, a job that will require close contact and potential travel with Clinton, who is now secretary of state. NSC staffers often accompany the secretary of state on foreign trips.

Oh, to be a fly on the wall!

Oh, Obama is cool, just cool. I love that she is back and where she is.

No kidding!

Anyone watching the Australian Open...

First of all go Williams Sisters, but I swear I cannot handle the commentators... WTFreak talking about them like they're animals.

Yes.

My Tennis Blog

Yes, big, giant, BLACK ,scary animals. These mofos are so intimidated by the Williams sisters. They don't look like the WHITE, fragile, yet skilled European players.

So when Serena an Venus win those big ass trophies, we know they won because they're scary huge animals that frighten the white players. Of course Serena and Venus aren't skilled, didn't practice, and weren't trained by whites, but by their father.

GTFOH.

I'm with Miranda; I mute the TV. GreenLady: "I'm Tha....rough!"

spirit: MUTE!! :>) :>)

Jmee: YES! I follow them very closely.

CO-SIGN on the "jealous slanderers - - -er -ummm 'commentators'.

Seem as IFF "other" players have a "soft touch", or "finess" a drop shot, or have "excellent serving skills", etc.

OTOH: The Williams sisters are VERY ATHLETIC and/or AGGRESSIVE, etc.

'SCA- USE me! Aren't all players ATHLETES!? - hence ATHLETIC?

The same descriptors were used for gymnast - Dominique Dawes! Very athletic! Very dominant presence!

OTOH: Dominique Mocheaneau(sp) had a "lovely body position", a "beautiful toe point", "excellent body control", etc, etc,

These are the times when I would like to aim a "very soft, fuzzy slipper" at the TV! :>)

BEST WISHES to SISTA SERENA against Ms. SAFIN! :>)

Oh! Both Sisters are in the doubles 2! GO WILLIAMS!!

TENNIS VOLLEY ENJOY! :>) :>)

Seriously When homeboy said "Watch they way she grits her teeth and attacks (regarding Serena) I was like What The.....?

Then had the nerve to say that when they come to the net "you get scared you don't know what to do". Ugh!

Like Miranda said it is best to watch with the volume off. Thanks for the Link GL

Jmee: YEP!! :>) ***shakin' my head***

My pleasure! :>) :>)

Its best to watch with the sound off. I can't stand the commentating when the Williams sisters play.

Miranda: GOOD POINT!!

And she scores!! GO SERENA!! :>)

JJP parents, what's your take on this?

Octuplets' mother already has twins, four other children

I'm just questioning a whole lot of things, like why would you need fertility treatments when it's obvious that fertility is not an issue; and what doctors thought it was a good idea to implant 8 embryos, which would risk the health of the mother and children? But I'm looking at this from the POV of a woman with no kids, so maybe it's just me.

MsKitty: CNN is doing a segment on the story NOW - - 3:11pm EST.

Thanks. Not near a TV so I'll see if the video turns up at their website.

MsKitty: O.K. I'm sure that there will B "updates" ALLLLLLLLLL day! :>)

I'm with you on this. The doctors must have been drunk when the made the decision to implant 8 embryos. That's just crazy.

I'm coming from a Pro-choice stance; and Pro-choice doesn't mean anti -life.

The woman has the right to choose how she will reproduce. It's her body, she chooses. A woman also bears the responsibility for her choices.

That's all from me.

MsKitty: Whyyyyyyyyyyyyy?? What was errybody THINKING?? [Mother/father/doctors.]

I'm just askin. . . . . .

P.S. God Bless the children.

The irresponsibility angers me to no end. She's not married and lives with her parents and 6 kids. How selfish of her to go anywhere NEAR a fertility specialist. How the heck are her parents supposed to prepare for their old age and their providing for her and 14 children??? Even if he was in the picture, how would the father begin to provide for 8 children?

I would not be surprised to learn that she's emotionally disturbed and is using the kids to get attention.

I am married, hubby and I have good jobs (today, at least) and parenting is hard as fvck for us. It is nothing to joke about. Going to a fertility specialist and you already have six children makes a joke out of parenthood.

The father is around...he's a contractor in Iraq.

The grandfather is some kind of Iraqi security officer--the family name is Suleman. I think I mentioned below that he has gone directly to Iraq to try to raise more money for the children's upkeep.

They're going to need to rob a bank for all this.

I completely agree. Parenthood is NOT easy and should not be taken as some sort of game or a way to seek attention.

She probably thinks she's going to get a reality TV deal out of the mess.

I don't watch any of those reality shows with multiples. It is okay for adults to put themselves on camera twenty four seven but to use the kids, I just don't like it.

I think chiid actors are different since their very lives are not what is being exploited.

She's an Iraqi. Her father has gone back to Iraq to make more money to afford all those kids. I would like to see the mother and the father, though.

I knew when I saw the scarf/headdress that this family must be Muslim.

I don't know. Have they lost so many relatives over there that they have to have fourteen children?

I am not a parent yet but I think I can give my 2 cents. To me the mother is extremely irresponsible. How can she feed all those kids!?

And the doctors who implanted the eight embryos are irresponsible and unethical.

She came to Kaiser Permanente ALREADY preggers. They gave her a choice of keeping them or aborting some of them. She refused. Her family insisted that this would be a "painful" thing.

Seems to me that there might be some kind of underground fertility ring going on. Because fertility drugs plus in vitro fertilization is not about nickels and dimes.

Yes, better to have aborted them and 'decrease the surplus population.'

It's her body, her life, her choice. It may not be your choice, but who are you to judge?

It would have been better if the doctors had abided by standard medical ethics rather then decidicing that it's acceptable for women to start delivering liters of babies like four legged animals.

Look Fool it's fine and well to comment like the second sentence but to comment by suggesting a genocidal triage is showing why I said racism and hatred are part of what constitutes "Conservatism" in this country. Nor is the first statement a liberal one which you also claim to be.
Check yourself

I was quoting the charatcer Ebenezer Scrooge, from Charles Dickens. I did not attribute it to liberals but I am sure that there are liberals who would have preferred she have an abortion. They are entitled to their opinions.

Live and let live is what I say.

"Yes, better to have aborted them and 'decrease the surplus population'."

Yeah, you say that now until she needs welfare, WIC, and food stamps for all those kids. Conservatives trip me the fuck out with that shit. Nobody said any damn thing about her getting an abortion.

"It's her body, her life, her choice. It may not be your choice, but who are you to judge?"

That's what I say about women who chose to have an abortion or not. It's their choice not ours and we can't judge.

How do you know my views about welfare, WIC and food stamps?

It is easy to generalize and stereotype people but I hope you will for your opinion of me based on my comments her and not on a mispleaced preconceived notion of me.

It's not a preconceived notion of you, I'm basing my opinion on what you said above. Let's review:

"Yes, better to have aborted them and 'decrease the surplus population'."

From this response I can see that this is what you think of people to the left of your beliefs on the matter of abortion. No one said anything about her getting an abortion, so why did you bring it up unless you were trying to be one of those "conservatives" who like to say shit like, "Liberals are BABY-KILLERS!!!!!!!" And then turn around and call women who do make the choice to have the children welfare queens because they are not as well off financially as others adn may need financial assistance. Am I looking too far into this comment? Maybe. But that still doesn't dismiss the nastiness in that comment and what I felt about your viewpoint as I read it.

"It's her body, her life, her choice. It may not be your choice, but who are you to judge?"

I agree.

Go ahead and say it, Carolinagirl!

I am sure there are many who would advocate for abortion in this instance. To claim otherwise is to be disingenuous. What are the alternatives to having the babies.? A full abortion. Selective abortion or deliver all the babies. If one questions this woman's judgement or deems it irresponsible they are making a judgement that IMO does not support her choice. So then, if logic follows, they surely may support some alternative.

I did not get hysterical and call anyone a baby-killer here. I was simply quoting a line from Dickens' A Christmas Carol which came to mind when I thought about what one as cynical and cold-hearted as Scrooge might say. I was attributing t to no one in particular, although I am sure there is someone out there who would echo that statement.

As for your comment about welfare queens...you are pulling that out of thin air and attributing it to me, and that is unfair.

It is what it is. The babie are born. God bless them.

Why is abortion the only alternative? How about not getting pregnant or using fertility drugs in the first place? To assume that abortion would be the choice in this instance is being disingenuous. Birth control, condoms, some sort of contraceptive until the individual is has a stable enough environment to raise kids in, would be the alternative. Not going to the doctor to get fertility treatments when you already have 6 kids to begin with and are living with your parents.

You act like she just up and got pregnant and just happened to be having octuplets. She made the decision to have all those embryos implanted in her and she has to live with it. However to assume that the other alternative to having all of these children is by aborting them is just stupid.

Also, if you are quoting A Christmas Carol, you should note it as such. Why did you write that quote in the first place? What was its purpose? There had to be a reason you put it there or you would have never typed it.

As far as my comment about welfare queens, I stand by it and I meant it. I pulled it out of the same thin air as your Dickens quote.

I agree the babies are here and hopefully they grow up to be healthy adults. God bless them indeed.

Go Carolinagirl!

Look Fool
Yesterday was I won't say what I am about because I am so concerned about the stimulus bill sniff cry.
Today you come w/ genocidal triage and say no one know what my views are yet will not state them.
That is Troll behavior

Live and let live. No one should judge her.

And no one should judge women who must rely on social services to feed and clothe their kids. Surely you agree.

How do you know anybody's views on abortion as it relates to that story?

I didn't say she should have an abortion but I just question her judgment.

No you did not say it, but what are her alternatives?

The abortion issue was brought up by another poster and was not directed at your comment.

My comment was towards Conserv1

What would her alternative have been? Her choice.

I pray for the health and future well-being of those babies, that they may know love, receive the blessings of good health and good fortune.

Her alternative could have been to have her tubes tied instead of getting fertility treatments in the first place after already having 6 kids which included 2 yr-old twins. But like carolinagirl said, you're all for it as long as you think she's helping to "build the base".....now if you get wind of her photo and she doesn't meet that expectation and you find out she is applying for government assistance, we'll see how fast your tune changes.

Again, you know nothing of my views. You only assume to know me based on the prejuides you carry about anyone who calls themselves conservative.

Yes she could have had her tubes tied. But that is for no one to decide but her.

Well I hope the same thing. Now that she made her choice, we just have to help her. What else can we do.

rikyrah: He speaketh! :>) MSNBC - - 11:00 amEST

1. We need to act with urgency. Task Force on Middle Class Working Families - - headed by VP Joe Biden.

2. Must reverse policies regarding labor unions. Need strong labor unions.

3. 3 Executive orders.

4. VP Biden speaking: Quoted Mr. President: "A nation cannot prosper long IF it only favors the prosperous." :>) :>)

Single goal: To raise the standards of the middle class which will raise the level of the poor and will be good for the rich.

NEW WEB-SITE: A Strong Middle Class.gov: It will be Interactive & informational.

5. PRESIDENT OBAMA is signing the 3 bills. LEADERSHIP!! :>)

Temporary, targeted and timely.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/30/opinion/30bro...

David Brooks? Please, what has he wrote that turned out to be right.Conservatives have no clue, no ideas and no hope.

All you can do is attack the messenger, not the argument.

You give no reasons as to why we should support this behemoth of spending bill.

This is the lamest of rebuttals.

If you read the article, you would find that Brooks is echoing the ideas and advice of one of Obama's top economic advisors, Larry Summers.

.You give no reasons as to why we should support this behemoth of spending bill.

Because republicans didnt propose it.For me thats a good enough reason to support it.Guess what you lost now sit down while we fix your mess.

The messenger has no argument.How can you argue with someone who has been wrong all the time?Like I said you have no ideas, no clue and no hope.

Why do conservatives hate America? They really want everything to fail and people to suffer and lives to be destroyed...why is that? Why?

What?!

I want our government to act in our best interest. I want them to spend our money responsibly. I want them to help individuals in need to have acess to the tools that will help them become responsible, indpendent, productive members of society. Simply because we may differ on how best to achieve peace and prosperity for all does not mean I and other conservatives hate our country.

I am talking about simply trimming down the stimulus bill to provide measures that will actually help us out of this mess, as proposed by a top Obama advisor, and you extrapolate from that arument that I hate my country.

Get a grip.

Hit dog.

Larry Summers, Obama's economic advisor is the messenger, Brooks is just agreeing with a top Obama advisor.

Who has no clue?

Can Israel Last?
http://www.lewrockwell.com/reed/reed154.html

"That's what the stimulus bill was about—not knowing what time it is, not knowing the old pork-barrel, group-greasing ways are over, done, embarrassing. When you create a bill like that, it doesn't mean you're a pro, it doesn't mean you're a tough, no-nonsense pol. It means you're a slob.

That's how the Democratic establishment in the House looks, not like people who are responding to a crisis, or even like people who are ignoring a crisis, but people who are using a crisis. Our hopeful, compelling new president shouldn't have gone with this bill. He made news this week by going to the House to meet with Republicans. He could have made history by listening to them."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123326587231330...

Why should he listen to the same people who supported policies that got us in this mess.

Do you not believe that the vast majority of people who voted for Obama want to 'change the way we do business in Washington'?

Does this bill represent a change in the 'way we do business in Washington'? No.

Why do you think that the popularity of this bill is tanking among independents and moderates?

A top Obama economic advisor, Larry Summers advised that the bill should be timely, targeted and temporary.

Obama and Congress would be well served if they took this advice.

Government is what you make of it. Size doesn't determine its effectiveness, people and policies make it so. For eight years we had tax cuts for the wealthy and the results have been crap. For eight years we had incompetents running the government and again the results have been crap. Conservatives really need to reflect on the last eight years. Pat sloganeering is not the way to go.

Republicans also support a payroll tax cut which, for the same amount as the proposed 'stimulus' bill, would allow families making less than $100,000 to keep as much as $1500 from being taken out of their paychecks.

Most of the proposed stimulus spending pays for food stamps, extended unemployment benefits, more Medicaid, and infastructure projects that will only benefit a limited number of Americans. A payroll tax cut would benefit every working family in America.


Payroll taxes are paid by virtually every working American and so cutting them would provide an immediate raise to just about everybody with a job.

Payroll taxes are also paid by businesses and they are specifically a tax on employment. If the major goal of any stimulus is to save or create jobs, than what better way to accomplish that than lowering what it costs businesses to hire or maintain workers?

Better yet, the effects of a payroll tax cut would be immediate.

That was part of Obama's campaign promise, which Hillary was against.

I'm not for payroll tax cuts but they are already in the bill.

Not that I can find.

http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/stimulus/20...

Do your homework:
"The centerpiece tax cut calls for a $500 break for single workers and $1,000 for couples, including those who don't earn enough to owe federal income taxes."
source here
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090128/ap_on_go_co...

Agree.

Listening to the people who screwed up the country is not changing Washington. Its empty "bipartisanship:" passing bills because both sides are in agreement, not because it contained the best ideas from both parties. The GOP is stuck on stupid. If they want their ideas to be included they need to come up with some. "Tax cuts tax cuts!" Is just as ignorant as "Drill, baby, drill!" was.

My way or the highway, heh?

It's a gamble since Obama promised to bring a new tone to Washinton. He promised to take the best ideas from both parties. He projected himself to be moderate and pragmatic, yet his party is proceeding with 'business as usual.'

Here's an idea. Split the bill. Part I pure stimulus that will take effect immediately.

After we are on our way to recovery, implement Part II, long-term investment spending.

People will be able to see results more quickly and the process will be much more transparent.

really im thinking repubs are trying to reclaim their names as the small govt party after bush was everything but. my sentiments is that they will stick to tax cuts on economic front and they are going to bend in areas of health care education reform energy independence. if they keep saying no to everything just to make a point that they are conservatives again they will lose again in the midterm elections.

That is part of it; the GOP is getting back to their roots. Don't expect much bending anywhere. The tone has already been set, and we're not the ones who set it.

The only way we lose seats in the midterm is if this "stimulus" works. If it doesn't, we may not regain the majority, but we'll pick up seats.

Hell, if it bombs, I could probably run and win.

CRICKETS<<<<>>>

"the tone has already been set, and we're not the ones who set it"..................

BWA HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! That must be some REALLY good stuff....LOL

That shit came over on da boat. lol!

It had too! They don't grow THAT here in the states! LOL

Hey, you won. You will trump us on that.

no, no...what is this "tone" that you speak of? Who set this "tone" again?? LOL

President Obama: 'I won.'

Nancy Pelosi: "We won the election. We wrote the bill."

John Kerry: Ignore Republicans if they'll vote no anyway

WE WON. STFU. SCREW YOU.

Are just a few comments I have recieved in response to my comments about trimming th bill of pork.

Ahhh. Hopenchange.

Not exactly what I expected.

Oohhhh...so the "tone" was set recently?? Not 8 years ago?? Ohhh - must be a "conservative" thing to pick and choose like that.

You will lose seats.Face it, your party will be a regional party based in the south and the mormon belt of Utah, Idaho and maybe Montana.

If it helps, yes.

If it hurts, no.

Really, it's that simple.

No its not D.
Republicans came out very hard against help for Big Three period. Much of it came out the Deep South where most of the new plants from overseas companies are located. Those plants are now furloughing workers because very few cars are being sold.
Those workers are not so stupid as to divorce the interest of the car companies from them working. They will see and be shown that Republicans voted against help for them, i.e. a way to put people back to work so they can afford to buy a car.

People keep thinking 1994 but they forget 1934. In 1934, the Republicans were acting the same way you see right now. The depression was still going strong, but the Democrats gained more seats. The reason is that the people saw that FDR was at least trying to solve the problem. Moreover, FDR was extremely popular. FDR was also effective in framing the Republicans as obstructionists. Obama has been smart in saying that it will get worse before it gets better. The American people are realistic of the fact that it will take a while. Moreover, the demographics are different from what was in 1994. I am not saying that we won't see a 1994 redux but that we need to keep in mind that the 1934 scenario is possible as well.

Why do the Dems want to party like its 1929?

This bill clearly includes so much spending that is not stimulus. If they trimmed it and added some incentives for Republicans to get on board, they could pass the bill, have popular support among the electorate and political cover to boot.

Yet their attiude is the same as what we find here. WE WON, Sit down and be quiet.

I think Dems are overreaching and misreading the mood of the public right now. With TARP looking to cost close to 2 TRILLION, do voters really want to support more spending that is more pork than stimulus?

With respect to Tarp, I completely agree with you about that. Most liberals are not happy about this. But I am glad that Obama is taking these executives to task.

Just words. They still get the money.

Congress IMO is behaving no better than the Wall Street Execs Obama is chastizing yet you all seem to be fine with their raiding our Treasury.

Screw you! I don't want to party like it's 1929. If we didn't do deregulation in the first place, we would not be in the situation that we are in. The reason why FDR had regulation put in place is because depressions were a common thing. There was one in the 1870s, and 1890s and others. Such cyclical changes led to destabilization. Another reason why he did what did is because businesses didn't know how to govern themselves accordingly. All this that we are going through could have been avoided.

Touchy Touchy.

In the 1932 campaign, Franklin Roosevelt attacked Hoover for his big-government policies, decrying Hoover’s presidency as “the greatest spending administration in peacetime in all of history.”
Yet, once elected, Roosevelt not only maintained Hoover’s programs, he used them as a foundation for his titanic New Deal expenditures. He even expanded Hoover’s failed housing program and launched the now-infamous mortgage giant Fannie Mae. And even in the face of a staggering 25 percent unemployment, FDR held fast to the big-government philosophy — jobs programs, handouts, tax hikes — and, as a result, presided over a decade of economic misery.
FDR’s own treasury secretary, Henry Morgenthau, had to admit as much in 1939: “We are spending more than we have ever spent before, and it does not work. … We have never made good on our promises. I say after eight years of this administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started. And an enormous debt to boot!”

But look how FDR had governed. Campaigning and governing are two different things. FDR modernized the government.

For the better? Social Security is a ticking time bomb. Fannie Mae has already expolded.

I know FDR is a hero to many but I am not as impressed.

Social Security is more secured than what is portrayed. Fannie Mae's demise had more to do with people wanting to destroy it for ideological reasons.

What?!

Please provide facts to back up these assertions.

Fannie Mae is a corrupt institution that relaxed lending standards to cook the books and provide millions in bonuses for CEOs.

I recognize-and I'd like to think the GOP leadership does as well-that this could completely backfire.

What is going to come down to is how long the electorate is willing to give, and-if it does get worse-how soon and how fast.

Would dividing the bill, as has been suggested by some Dem advisors, into immediate, pure stimulus spending and then long-term investment spending prove to be a winning strategy for this Administration?

Why do Dems insist on throwing everything but the kitchen sink into this bill and ytrying to ram it through Congress?

So you're telling me that when the Republicans were in power, they always worked towards a compromise with the dems as well???

Ah no they did not. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, it's Dems ramming legislation down Conservatives throats.

Let's please not make it seem like what the Dems are doing is something that you guys would never do?

If as you and D are expecting (some might say hoping) and Republicans regain power. Let's see how compromising you guys feel.

It's just sounds like fake cyclical outrage to me.

Look, the central theme of this election was 'changing the tone' and 'changing the way we do business' in Washington.

Obama was elected inlarge part because of this theme and the onus is on him and his party to facilitate that tone.

Proclaiming 'I won' in response to Republican ideas, and engaging in a public fued with Rush Limbaugh, does not exactly bode well for a new era of post-partisanship.

Pelosi freezing GOP leaders out of negotiations, crowing, 'We won. We wrote the bill." Ditto.

I am an independent with a conservative outlook. I have voted for almost as many Dems and Republicans in my lifetime. I want the government, no matter who is in charge, to act responsibly, with moderation and pragmatism.

This bill and the way it has been promoted and introduced is none of the above.

That would probably work, and work well. And would probably get support from the GOP as well.

To answer your second...'cause they can.

There will be another bill concerning infrastructure and transportation. This may relate to the infrastructure bank that they will be setting up.

But how likely will the voters be to support it if they pass this huge bill. 2 Trillion for TARP, 1 Trillion for who knows exaclty what, and then another infrastructure bill?!

Seems the less prudent path.

I don't know if it's imprudent just possibly not feasible. We shall see.

Myself I think the bill doesn't go far enough.To much tax cuts and not enough for infrastructure and a energy policy that weans us from oil.That said Its better than doing nothing.

Infrasturcture projects and a move away from oil dependence are clearly worth pursuing...but as long term investments, not stimulus. These proposals will take at least 2 years to bring jobs to people.

We need a bill that helps families and small businesses now. Then, as the economy recovers, the public will be more will and able to see the value in long-term investments like those you suggest.

Your thinking is fraudulent. Any economic activity "stimulates" the economy. Long or short is both sides of the coin. The purpose of short term is to stabilize and put the fire out. Long term is to rebuild or provide opportunity.

Think of road repair/ widening(I think because of the energy situation building new ones is counter productive). The short term is the actual repair job it puts some people to work. In the long run it provides an opportunity to move more goods or business'. i.e. economic activity that is long term stimulus.

You and D's points are as my kids say FAIL

I am advocating dividing the bill and trimming the pork. Not scrapping long-term investment for infrastructure. Pure, immediate, stimulus first, followed by long-term investment.

Partisan Now, Bipartisan Later
The logic behind Republican opposition to Obama's stimulus package.
http://www.slate.com/id/2210082/

As people loss their jobs and industry at home falters there is a natural tendency to want every dollar, yen, yuan, euro to be spent at home; every job to filled by the locals. The reality is it can rarely happen anymore. This tendency when extended to its logical conclusion is called protectionism. In the first wave of the Great Worldwide Depression protectionism made the situtation worse. We have to guard against it .
Two examples of how protectionism is rearing its ugly head:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ar...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/articl...

Agree

The definition of a "two-tiered justice system"
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/01/...

Who has the good hair: Looking at the way black hair is disciplined to create black woman as the ultimate anti-woman by whiteness.

I can't address the 'black woman as the ultimate anti-woman by whiteness' deal, but I relax my hair because I am extremely-tender headed. I had permed my hair for so long that I forgot how hard it is to do with my hair when it's natural. For me, it's more about minimizing pain when I comb my hair.

Good morning all!

Racialicious has an interesting post on African American Transgender History using back issues of Ebony, Jet and Hue which is starting to get online on google. The post has great pictures.

http://www.racialicious.com/2009/01/29/african-...

Great read. I have some of the old Ebony and Jet Magazines and can remember how forward the aritcles were on addressing our Blackness. It makes you wonder how stunted and exclusive some of the writings in the magazines have become on embracing all of who we are. I absolutely loved the pictures.

Monia from Transgriot wrote that She has some really interesting posts on African American GLBT history on her blog. I love the way she is always promoting black women.

I posted on you site, but apparently it did not stick. Does inserting links cancel the post?

Anyhooo, I got a big beautiful Afro , so I've got GOOD HAIR. I think Rock's daughter Lola gave im a great gift in the question. Why don't Ihave good hair. It will give him a chance to look at his own mindset when it comes to Black women's hair. Does he prefer long, straight, and silky? It'll be interesting to see his documentary.

I've included 2 links on 2 of my favorite books about BLACK hair.

Tenderheaded

http://www.amazon.com/Tenderheaded-Comb-Bending...

HairStory

http://www.amazon.com/Hair-Story-Untangling-Roo...

The comment system allows links....I'll check and see if for some reason your comment got stuck in the spam que. Thanks for reading though I appreciate it. I have both the books you listed and they are definitely worth the read.

Thanks for posting blogs that require me to think. I look at things in a totally new light. I appreciate the education!

I've never been on TransGriot, but I will bookmark. Her womanistmusings- I have to say genuinely appreciate your contributions! Have an amazing day!

Thanks much and you too