Jack & Jill Politics

Incompetence, malevolence, or both?
http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerkimball/2009/03/05...

The Immature White House - A must read!

Jay Cost is clearly not a political strategist and knows not what he speaks.

Obama is in the White House because he is a consumate politiician. He knows full well that political opponents who command the airwaves have to be neutralized and Obama is doing that very effectively.

Cost needs to sit down shut up and watch Obama continue to wage battle against the failed policies, ideologies and pontificating leadership of the past 8 years.

I do not think that engaging Rush is a winning strategy for the administration.

Already this sideshow is being equated to 'fiddling while Rome burns."
http://www.investors.com/editorial/cartoon.asp

The market is trending ever downward as Geithner is flying solo at Treasury with no clear plan in place for stabilizing the financial sector.

And what was promised to be the "smoothest transition ever" is stumbling.

The rebuttal that critics do not know what they are talking about and should sit down and shut up because they supported Bush is wearing thin as more and more supporters of Obama are scratching their heads and asking themselves "WTF'?

And Chanel Iman as Althea Gibson
http://www.dlisted.com/node/30979/images/glamou...

Come to think of it, this would've worked in the Black History section!

It's Alicia Keys as Michelle Obama.
http://www.dlisted.com/node/30979/images/glamou...

Paula Patton as Billie Holiday
http://www.dlisted.com/node/30979/images/glamou...

If a biopic was done of FLOTUS, I'd like to see Kimberly Elise as MichelleObama.

http://www.paff.org/home/files/pressroom/photos...

I'd like Sanaa Lathan, Nia Long or Kerry Washington

VERY niiiiiice.

i think someone else posted this earlier this week but not sure so . . .

Government Relations News
President Obama Includes Funding for Autism in his FY 2010 Budget Proposal

Washington, DC (February 26, 2009) - Today President Barack Obama unveiled a Fiscal Year 2010 budget proposal that includes $211 million for the Combating Autism Act (CAA). This is the first year since the passage of the CAA that direct funding for autism has been included in the President's budget proposal. Passed in 2006, the CAA authorized $920 million in federal funding over 5 years to fight autism through biomedical and environmental research, surveillance, awareness and early identification.

http://www.autismspeaks.org/government_affairs/...

rikyrah: Found this CHART:

Comparison of FIRST 100 DAYS with other presidents

President OBAMA is DOING VERY WELL!! :>) :>)

AFTERNOON THREAD IS UP!!!

Obama moves to overhaul federal contracting system, reversing Bush administration policy

Obama joined Republican Sen. John McCain, his presidential campaign rival, and other congressional figures to announce an executive memorandum that commits his administration to a new set of marching orders for awarding contracts. Obama said "the days of giving government contractors a blank check are over" and said changes could save up to $40 billion a year.


http://www.newsday.com/news/politics/wire/sns-a...

That article sheds a lot of light onto Bush's reason for being!

Ted Kennedy to receive knighthood

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7922703.stm

Author Of Bush Torture Memos Regrets Style, Not Content

In an interview yesterday with the Orange County Register, picked up by Jason Leopold at The Public Record, John Yoo says he doesn’t regret the substance of any of his memos written at the Office of Legal Counsel – you know, the ones that allowed the administration to conclude that waterboarding wasn’t torture, that the Bill of Rights did not apply to military actions inside the United States, and that it’s okay to suspend free speech in wartime.

No, he just regrets that he wasn’t a little more “polished”.

“These memos I wrote were not for public consumption,” said Yoo, who’s now a visiting professor at Chapman University School of Law in Orange County — I guess things got a little hot at Berkeley, where students are calling for his dismissal and prosecution. “They lack a certain polish, I think – would have been better to explain government policy rather than try to give unvarnished, straight-talk legal advice. I certainly would have done that differently.”

http://washingtonindependent.com/32307/yoo-regr...

rikyrah: MARCH 4, 2009 -DAY 44- Of His First 100 DAYS! :>) :>)

1. HIS SCHEDULE: Wednesday Mar. 4, 2009
All Times Eastern

Joe Biden attends Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s address to the joint session of Congress.

Biden hosts a reception for members of the International Association of Chiefs of Police. Attorney General Eric Holder is also in attendance.

Biden meets with former Secretaries of State James Baker and Warren Christopher.
8:00 AM
9:00 AM
9:30 AM

OMB Director Peter Orszag attends a full committee meeting on the FY2010 budget.

President Barack Obama receives his daily briefing. Biden is also in attendance.
10:00 AM

Obama delivers remarks at the White House.
10:45 AM

Obama receives his daily economic briefing. Biden is also in attendance.
11:00 AM
11:15 AM

Obama meets with senior advisers.
11:30 AM

Robert Gibbs holds his daily press briefing. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano are also in attendance.
12:00 PM
1:00 PM
2:00 PM
3:00 PM
4:00 PM
5:00 PM
6:00 PM
7:00 PM
7:30 PM

Barack and Michelle Obama host dinner with the Congressional Committee Chairs. Joe and Jill Biden are also in attendance.
8:00 PM

2. First ladies - Michelle meets Sarah Brown

While President Obama discussed the global economy with Prime Minister Gordon Brown Tuesday afternoon, Michelle ...

... Obama met separately with her British counterpart, Sarah Brown.

Her office declined to provide details, but released a photo.

3. Prime minister hits the Hill

PM Brown heads to the Hill today to deliver a speech the White House will be watching. The Guardian calls Brown’s speech

to Congress on reforming the banking system “possibly the most important of his political life” and says Obama will be paying attention “to see if Brown could act as a significant ally in the battle to persuade the international stockmarkets that European politicians have answers to the collapse of confidence.”
VP Biden will attend the address, where Brown will call on lawmakers to “seize the moment when the whole of the world wants to work with America.

[NOTE: His address was EXCELLENT!! He stated that England is DOING soma the SAME things as PRESIDENT OBAMA - - STIMULUS PACKAGE (to create JOBS), RESTRUCTURING BANKS & addressing ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS!! :>) :>)
I'll try 2 post it when available! :>)]

4. Britain to give Sen. Kennedy honorary knighthood



LONDON — He won't be allowed to call himself Sir Ted, but U.S. Sen. Edward Kennedy is being awarded an honorary knighthood from Britain.

The government said Wednesday the Massachusetts senator is being recognized for services to U.S.-U.K. relations and to Northern Ireland.

Prime Minister Gordon Brown will announce the honor Wednesday when he addresses a joint session of Congress in Washington. Knighthoods are bestowed by Queen Elizabeth II but recipients are selected by the government or an advisory committee.

Kennedy, scion of an Irish-American political dynasty, is known in Britain for his involvement in the long process that led to Northern Ireland's 1998 Good Friday peace accord.

The 77-year-old brother of the late President John F. Kennedy has served in the Senate since 1962. He is being treated for a brain tumor.

Other Americans to receive honorary knighthoods include Microsoft chief Bill Gates, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani and filmmaker Steven Spielberg. Unlike British knights, they are not entitled to use the honorific "Sir" or "Dame" before their names.

[NOTE: What a GRACIOUS GESTURE! :>) Praying 4 Senator Kennedy.]

ADDING VIDEO: SIR EDWARD KENNEDY (according to Prime Minister Brown)

5. Crackdown on waste - - Aims to save $40B

Takeaway from President Obama’s morning announcement: The White House wants to look fiscally disciplined even as it runs ...

up an unprecedented deficit. The President sounded annoyed with the "chatter on cable" suggesting he hasn't trimmed expenses.

Obama: "I want to make sure everybody catches this...My budget reduces discretionary spending for non-defense programs, as a share of the economy, by 10 percent over the next decade."

6. MIDDLE CLASS TASK FORCE (web site) - - The Vice President of the United States

A STRONG MIDDLE CLASS = A STRONG AMERICA

7. U.S. President Barack Obama (L) makes remarks on his plan to reform the system of defense contracting as Senator John McCain (R-AZ) listens in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building in Washington, March 4, 2009.

[NOTE: HAH!! :>) mcancient is in the BACKGROUND!! HE LOST!! (BADLY) :>)]

8. Another SWAGGA PIC! :>) :>) :>)

THAT'S ALL FOR NOW!! ENJOY YOUR DAY! :>)

P.S. Pres. Obama Remarks on Budget Reform 3-4-09

Hey GreenLady, I've noticed that Mr. President is not an "early" person. Is that because he likes to see our first kids off to school or does he exercise with Michelle in the early hours? Either one, he must be really enjoying the new digs!
Another White House Par-tay! They love hob-nobbing and showing off Michelle's shoulders. I ain't mad at girlfriend though, reported today that her "arm numbers" I mean approval numbers are up. You go girl!

Myth: :>) :>)

Could B. BUT - - I'm thinkin' that he's doin' some PREPARATION WORK that isn't posted.

O.K. I gotta "bounce!" :>) C U'ALL L8R! :>) :>)

The Catholic church is in big trouble."Te Vatican is warning poeple not to value virtual friends over real humans.
The whole point of the church is to have a virtual friend!" from comment sections
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/...

Bernie Made-off is a sociopath: http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/200...

U.S. private sector bleeds jobs, services slump deepens - "The private sector cut 697,000 jobs versus 614,000 in January, according to an ADP Employer Services report that suggested hefty employment declines are on the way in the government's more comprehensive payrolls data on Friday ... "We are still sinking. There is no sign of a bottom." The service sector represents about 80 percent of U.S. economic activity."

This is just the beginning...

Is that for the entire month of January, or just the last 11 1/2 days? Because if memory serves, George W. Bush was still steering the ship until noon on January 20th.

If you're gonna spread blame, do it equally because you're not fooling anyone.

697,000 jobs lost in Feb. 614,000 lost in Jan. Another report is coming out Friday that will show even more job loses are coming...lots more!

The people who actually make this country work saw this coming when it looked like Obama could beat Hillary, and they started bailing then. More bailed when Obama beat McCain. The slower employers are just starting to bail, and bailing takes time. Gov't jobs will be the last to go, but I expect that to start happening a lot sooner than previously predicted.

Like I said, this is just the beginning...

So it was the entire month of January then. Thanks for answering my question.

I was so disappointed to open this thread and find over a third of the posts from the troll Conser1

very disappointing...

whiterosebuddy - cosigning. I surprised myself by thinking - ban him already. But that would squelch the freedom JJP brings to the blogs by allowing everyone to post their views. Including Conserv and Karmi.

So I satisfy myself by flagging them when the bullcrap level gets to high.

Don't you wonder about the mental state of peope life Conserv1 and Karmi? Exactly what kind of deep-seeded emptiness is there in their lives, that is SO vast, that they would actually enjoy posting on a site where they only serve as complete antagonists? What kind of personality flaw must one have to actually enjoy being assholes just for the sake of being one? What exactly didn't their parents do in order to spark such a need to actually BE disliked? Its almost as if they need attention, ANY attention, but don't have the necessary social skills to understand how to be liked, so they automatically assume that the only way to get attention is to be DISliked. Isn't that sad? That's so very very sad.

Things that make you go hmmmmmmm

RAOTFLMAO. Well said Miranda.

The Republican Party:

"We're for fiscal responsibility...since November 4, 2008."

I'm sorry, Rush:
Now you too can grovel like a Republican!

http://www.dccc.org/content/sorry

Roland Burris launches U.S. Senate reelection website.

It was created January 8, and last updated the day Burris was sworn in, January 15.

Delusional...

Delusional is being too kind.

I want a black senator, an asian senator, and more latinos because America is a melting pot but I will be damned if some self-serving pompous negro who has a "monument to me" makes it harder for our fellow people of color to rise to one of the most powerful branches in government because this fool is making us look bad.

Come 2010, I want Roland gone. I do not want to see anyone come to this man's defense.

You know both Hawaii's senators are asian right?

Amen

Co-sign

It hit me later, when I was reading an interview Mr. Limbaugh did last year for the London Telegraph at his radio studio in Florida, that he is to politics what Richard Pryor was to comedy – an entertainer on the edge who is willing go into the political unknown. "That Cracker's Crazy", a play on Pryor's famous comedy album "That Nigger's Crazy" leaped into my head. If you watch Limbaugh's facial expressions while he's speaking, you quickly see that he has the comedian's instinct for satirical irony, a distinction that some of his listening audience is not always so quick to recognize.

Rush Limbaugh is well on his way to becoming another in a long line of men, like George Wallace, Barry Goldwater, or Eugene McCarthy, who reach an apogee as a social change agent and then harden in place, their stances becoming more anachronistic by the day as the winds of change inevitably blow society in another direction until they turned into caricatures of their former selves.

Rush The Magic Ego

Some of the details of the new 75 billion govt. home refinance plan.

http://www.treas.gov/initiatives/eesa/homeowner...

More ignorance on Tax policy in MSM; hat tip eschaton http://mediamatters.org/countyfair/200903030013...

The Political Decline of the White Male?
http://www.theroot.com/views/political-decline-...

Anybody who makes references to Duran Duran and Bruce Campbell in their commentary is alright with me (LOL). Thanks for the link.

Will Conserv1 comment on this?

If it's about facts, he won't! He specializes in lies.

conservatism is fine, Conserv1 uses more talking poitns that he/she does not understand.

It's hilarious really.

Remember I am just the messenger here
Why Tavis is a Genius
What black intellectuals owe the rest of us.
http://www.theroot.com/views/why-tavis-genius

Okay, LMAO@ this:

Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL) issued the following statement: "I’m sorry Limbaugh called for harsh sentences for drug addicts while he was a drug addict. I’m also sorry that he’s bent on seeing America fail. And I’m sorry that Limbaugh is one sorry excuse for a human being.”

THAT is how you apologize Michael "BBQ" Steele.

Oh, and if you go to that link, you can see Michael Steele saying that his opinions don't matter.

Miranda

To my knowledge this is not mandatory DNA analysis taken at all current crime scene's. Where it is taken, the police often go back and examine cases where the MO is the same or close. If they have DNA evidence in old cases they will run it against the DNA database. they have convicted a number of people for old crimes this way.

In this case the man is convicted of a crime and wants to go in reverse. He wants the DNA database examined to prove he didn't do the crime. The case is being argued against doing it on expense grounds and legal maneuvering for on going cases.

it is simply a matter of what is good for the goose is good for the gander. If the Supreme Court says you are not entitled it should be legislated to do so. Yes, some people may have their convictions overturned because there was no DNA to match them to the case but usually the other evidence is good. For cases going forward it will stop the railroading of many innocent victims whom suffer from the public's desire for revenge and the politicians goal of doing "something"

I am sitting here trying to understand why there is even a question of should DNA testing be done to prove either guilt or innocence...its hard to believe that there are people who would allow a person to be put in prison or worse, executed - because they didn't want to pay for the testing or because of fear for their win/loss ratios or whatever completely unjustified reason they would use.

What the hell kind of justice system is that? I don't see how anyone could look at the faces of the men who have been released after spending over half their lives in prison for a crime they DID NOT COMMIT after DNA proved they were not the guilty party. Costs? That's the reason they want to throw out there? the Cost? I really can't wrap my head around that kind of callous attitude regarding human lives, even though I guess I should be used to it.

Precisely. That was my question to.

The DOJ for the Obama administration, however, is arguing the position Rob delineated.

What the hell does it matter if convictions are overturned due to DNA exoneration? The key is that it was the same with fingerprints, no? If another person's fingerprints were on the gun..then the person who was charged was typically found not guilty.

So, I do not get this double standard.

Most people do not even care what the situation is. Ask someone whom has been falsely imprisoned what kind of hell their life becomes. It doesn't matter that you settled w/ the police for a million dollars when he employment apllication says have you ever been arrested you go to the out pile.

Israel is determined to tell the US what it's interest are. US interest are not the same as Israel's. US foreign policy is made in Washington DC not Tel Aviv.
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2009/...

well when we have been giving them billions upon billions of dollars to do whatever theyve wanted to palestine (and palestine is not helping either) and the influence they have on american politics i dont blame them

More threats to US interests:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7919050.stm

As to anyone whom is afraid of being called an antisemite remember we are disagreeing w/ the actions of a state. A democratic state where within the rhetoric of disagreement is much sharper and higher. Read the English versions of Israel's papers:
http://www.jpost.com/
http://www.haaretz.com/
http://www.globes.co.il/serveen/globes/nodeView...
http://chareidi.shemayisrael.com/subscribe/subs...

Say it louder!!!

How stimulus will help your state
Obama administration economists estimate the stimulus bill will create or save 3.5 million jobs.
http://money.cnn.com/news/storysupplement/econo...

But measuring the numbers of jobs saved as a result of the economic recovery package promises to be an elusive task.


Stimulus: Now for the hard part
http://money.cnn.com/2009/02/17/news/economy/ob...

"It will be difficult to gauge the economic benefit of stimulus since we won't know ... how the economy would have performed without stimulus. Indeed I expect the economy to lose another 3 million jobs with stimulus but over 4 million without it," said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Economy.com, whose research was relied upon by lawmakers to make the case for the economic recovery package.

As for gauging how many jobs are created, economists say they will keep an eye on a number of measures.

Lakshman Achuthan, managing director the Economic Cycle Research Institute, said starting later this year he will look to what his group calls its Leading Employment Index as one gauge of stimulus effectiveness. The index is a composite of factors, including the number of initial jobless claims and hours in the average work week, as well as how many industries are adding jobs. As of January, the index was still falling, Achuthan said.

Another question Zandi said he will look at is to see whether job losses have begun to lessen by October or November.

"A key benchmark will be this fall. If stimulus is working as expected then monthly job losses should be closer to 250,000 per month, down from over 500,000 currently," Zandi said.

The ability to create or save jobs will depend in great part on business confidence. That's why, in addition to employment measures, Rich Yamarone, director of economic research at Argus Research, will keep an eye on small business confidence measures such as those put out by the National Federation of Independent Business.

Another sign of whether the rescue is working: Discretionary spending for activities like casino gambling and dining out, Yamarone said.

"When consumers start to feel better about their personal situation and employment prospects, they pick up the pace of spending - that usually extends to the discretionary items as well," Yamarone said.

Ultimately, even if every indicator of success for stimulus was tangible and could be measured with flawless precision, it will still be hard to issue a final verdict on whether the package has worked because its success is dependent on the success of other recovery efforts, such as the program for stemming foreclosures that Obama is expected to lay out on Wednesday.

"Stimulus by itself will not work well," Zandi said. "A financial stability plan and a foreclosure mitigation plan must also be implemented.

so basically your saying that if we get out of this skid we cant say the stimulus helped but lets say we get sunk lower you will say the stimulus hurt. o the hilarity of that argument. and i think the foreclosure plan is coming out today and the financial plan is coming out next week

No, I am not making that argument, but I am pointing to the 'out' that the Obama administration has given itself with the careful choice of the phrase 'create or save'.

If there is any economic recovery, there can be no doubt that the administration will be given all the credit. BUT, IF the unemployment rate remains high, Obama and his team will use the vague 'jobs saved' formula to convince the American people that the economy wouold have been worse without the plan. Oh, the hilarity of THAT argument.

Yes, we will have to keep a 'wait and see' attitude until all 3 components of Obama's plan are revealed in detail.

thats fair enough however id just like to make this point. The reagan administration inherited a mess from carter and it took 18 months before the recession under reagan ended. so i would ask for you to give this administration the same amount of time he had to deal with that mess.

Sure, but I reserve my right to remain skeptical.

I would be more optimistic if I felt that Obama had looked to Reagan's economic policies during that period rather than FDRs.

Obama needs to achieve a rather 'rosy scenario' for his plan to reduce the deficit to succeed.

ill have to disagree with you mainly because reagan cut taxes when taxes were high, you cant cut taxes after youve already cut them, and the current problem is more than just the american economy like it was under reagan and we now have more banks and larger banks than reagan had. what reagan did worked for that time period i wont discredit that but its a different time now.

Well the stimulus is both a recovery and stabilization plan.

Sigh

The Obama Economy - "...after five weeks in office, it's become clear that Mr. Obama's policies are slowing, if not stopping, what would otherwise be the normal process of economic recovery. The market has notably plunged since Mr. Obama introduced his budget last week, and that should be no surprise. The document was a declaration of hostility toward capitalists across the economy."

The market is not the economy.Wall street is nothing more than Vegas in New York.

Talk to me when the DOW drops below 6000...

Generally speaking, the stock market will reflect the economic conditions of an economy. If an economy is growing then output will be increasing and most firms should be experiencing increased profitability. This higher profit makes the company shares more attractive - they can give bigger dividends to shareholders.

If the economy is forecast to enter into a recession, then stock markets will generally fall. This is because a recession means lower profits, less dividends and even the prospect of firms going bankrupt, which would be disastrous for shareholders.

However, in a recession, stock markets can sometimes increase, why is this? Often this is because stock markets are forward looking. The stock market has probablyh already priced in the effect of the recession and now the stock market is anticipitating a recovery. For example, stock markets in 2007 and 2008 performed badly in anticipation of a US recession.

And looking further int the future, they are now reacting with no confidence in the administration.

As further details of a foreclosure mitigation plan and a financial stability plan are revealed, the market will also respond.

Well said, and great points! The DOW charts says it all. It has lost 6000 points since May '08. It dropped as Obama moved ahead of Hillary, and hasn't stopped dropping since it looked like Obama would beat McCain. I can see the DOW getting to 4000 this year...

You fraud!

Stop cutting and pasting from CNBC / CNN money without sourcing.

Not cutting and pasting, just a basic knowledge of the stock market.

Hope you learned something.

You.Got.Busted.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

rotflmao!

Gotcha!

LOL...YOU ARE SO BUSTED!!!

http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/economics/rel...
Relationship Between Stock Market and Economy
May 30th, 2008 | economics -

You are fucking busted you poser.

You see there is this tool, it is called "the google..."

Piepiepie.

Give it up. We supposedly know nothing about the market or economics. hehehe
I recall busting my old school (literally--Princeton pals who were in charge at rating firms/agencies for tlooked like payola. They came with the same ol' bull babble about how no one understood economics, the market. And of course this mythical Adam Smith invisible hand stuff. Well, well...

zzzzzzz

Karmi

You know damn well that is bullsh%t! Will you stop it already?

flagged for posting when you know it is bogus.

That's the WSJ. I take anything they have to say about Obama with a grain of salt. Obama is concentrating on creating JOBS, not making investors feel good about themselves, and I guess investors are used to having their feelings being considered above all others.

The whole "let the market sort it out" crap is what got us into this mess.

First, Obama cannot create jobs.

In fact, Obama is planning on letting the private sector create 95% of the new jobs.

Sencondly, as most important (even Obama said this!) CONFIDENCE IS KEY!

What business man in going to feel confident enough NOW to expand his business and hire more employees? Banks are not lending even to the most credit worthy businesses. Consumers are not spending, so where is the demand for new goods and services?

OK, M.C. Steal Moe Bling "get jiggy" with your sematics.

Fed has a 200B consumer / small business credit vehicle that just opened.

go read.

The market did not get us into this mess. A deliberate policy of no regulation for some Wall Street Activities(CDS and the Commodity Modernization Act of 2000) and nonfeasance(i.e., the deliberate non enforcement of regulations) on the part of the Bush Administration since 2001 in the financial regulatory area.

the market is nothing more than human actors in the economy. We regulate ourselves because history has told us we will act w/ nothing but naked self interest if allowed to so. When we withdraw the restraint shit like this happens.

True but you have to admit that investors are acting like spoiled children.

You seem to think that it is childish to lament the loss of over 3 TRILLION dollars of personal wealth.

College and retirement funds that individuals worked hard to save and invest so that the would not be dependent on the government for assistance have vanished. Families caring for elderly parents have seen nest eggs set aside for their care disappear.

Would you prefer to have all individuals competing for a government bailout?

See my reply below. These idiots at Wall Street are now trying to hide behind charities, non-profits and college endowments for their foolishness. These entities are victims of the Wall Srteet greed. You guys should be ashamed of yourselves.

Do not feed this Troll. it is a verbal skunk. The stench remains on you for days. This stench will drive you mad.
Troll has ticket for Trifling Train and goes elsewhere when not fed.

The "spoiled children" investors include the Harvard endowment fund, public employee retirement funds (other than federal govt), the about to retire baby boomers, private sector company retirement funds, charities, scholarship funds, etc... . Investors are not "spoiled children", they are just scared shitless about their futures.

When I am talking about investors I am talking about Wall Street, ie., the Kramers, financiers and the like. I am not talking about the employment retirement funds, charities, etc. The former with the help of regulators not doing their jobs caused this mess while the latter are its victims. We should not lump these two groups into one because it is highly inaccurate.

The problem is that you cannot separate those groups, They are interconnected. You cannot see one group 'punished' as you seem to desire, without it effecting even the smallest investor.

The problem is that you cannot separate those groups

Really? Because the Madoff investors seriously beg to differ. They are victims, Madoff and his crew are NOT.

You are full of shit.

Yes you can.

Explain how.

By looking at their actions. That's how.

Do not feed the Troll. You know its here by berbal stench. When fed it omits verbal more which will drive you mad. Troll has ticket for Trifling Train. It will board if not fed.

well unfortunately that is what happens when you allow an unqualified intellectually uncurious person to run the country.

I'd say that was the market working in the "Ayn Rand" style --- no regulation.
Conservatives believed markets could regulate themselves.

I think that it is inaccurate to characterize this argument in terms of all or nothing. No regulation got us into this mess vs. strict regulation and more government interevntion will get us out.

Clearly, the bailouts of AIG and the automakers have not been able to stop the failure of these businesses.

The true debate right now is what is the proper role of government in the economy and the private sector. Clearly responsible government regulation helps to protect the public interest but excessive regulation can hinder or harm our businesses and our economy.

The financial crisis had led to a growing cynicism about business and the administration has seized upon and IMO, exploited it to enact an agenda that will increase the size and scope of the federal government and centralize power in Washington.

Americans who are economically stressed are looking to the government for unprecedented levels of support to bring us out of our collective and individual hardship.

I feel this is a mistake. I have more faith in freedom and in individuals, in their ability to succeed, in their desire to overcome obstacles and achieve their goals than I do in the power of the government to assure equality of opportunity.

This is what I see to be the main difference between conservatism and liberalism.

Conservative columnist George Will defines modern liberalism in this way:

"Liberalism's goal of achieving greater equality of condition leads to a larger scope for interventionist government to circumscribe the market's role in allocating wealth and opportunity. Liberalism increasingly seeks to deliver equality in the form of equal dependence of more and more people for more and more things on government."

Dude. Using a conservative hack to define Liberalism is just about as disingenous as you can get. Beyond that, George Will consistently makes up evidence in his columns to support his opinion.

2.) Free markets (which aren't "free" in a strict sense anywhere) were the domain of a Randite (Greenspan) and the same in the SEC -- these guys were smart guys -- they just did NOT believe in regulation, and thus did NOT enforce regulation on the books AND gutted regulation.

AIG debacle is not just a problem of AIG it is all the counter-parties. It's the EXTERNALITIES involved in letting AIG fail, AIG failing would push all the people who held derivative positions against AIG to also fail.

That's the problem with libertarian influence on business thoery-- it's too difficult to rely on the "morality" of individuals to reduce externalitalities -- the incentives are rarely aligned with the firms they represent. Thus, an individual will behave rationalionaly in their interest against the interest of their firm.

Clearly you don't have much understanding of what you are talking about.

I'm not going to waste my time responding to the rest of your foolishness.

I'm sorry, but I do not see George Will as a hack.

Do you disagree with his assertion that liberalism is more concerned with providing equal opportunity than it is with individual freedom?

I understand the reason why AIG is 'too big too fail" but I question the ability of the government to stop its failure.

Again, I am not advocating 'no regulation' but IMO Obama's agenda is overreaching.

George Will is the definition of a partisan Hack, someone who writes from a specific position in a non-scholarly fashion for a specific ideology.

I absolutely disagree about his self-serving drivel.

Pumping money into AIG is not about AIG. It is about saving the entire market from the risk of being on the right side of a contract; yet, losing money b/c the other party went under. If you don't understand how that could provide systemic market failure -- jeez I'd stop writing about economic issues.

EVERY SINGLE RATIONAL ECONOMIC OBSERVER agrees about ensuring these banking institutions don't "fail." You understand bank receivership is the role of the FDIC right? jeebus you are wasting my time.

Obama has NOT even proposed banking regulation yet. Further, Glass-stegall and before that ensuring S&Ls could not invest beyond restricted securities worked extremely well from 1930s -- 1980s. It took 8 years for S&Ls to fail and 8 years for Mega-banks to fail.

You are living in a fantasy world, not based in emphirical evidence.

I'm wasting my time go read up, you are trying to make this an ideological issue , when MOST economists, lawyers, enforcement agencies agree your AYN RAND perscriptions failed.

Look, EVERY SINGLE RATIONAL ECONOMIC OBSERVER agrees that the toxic assets held by AIG and disseminated throughout the financial sector need to be dealt with. Whether we set up a situation similar to the Resolution Trust or some sort of 'bad bank' these bad assets need to be dealt with.

To date, that has not been done, and until something is, the government is throwing money at the problem, NOT solving it.

Dude, you are CONFUSING AIG with the MEGA BANKS.

AIG is already nationalized (the U.S. has 80% ownership), they are busy under-winding AIG's assets right now.

The "bad bank" is already going on by creating TERMS for PUBLIC and PRIVATE investment vehicles of capital managed by private directors.

The idea is to transition in a way that does not destroy what little public equity is left in these banks... since you are a supposed conservative I would think you'd be in favor of both, and bother to read the latest in the WSJ.

but, you are coming off like an obstructionist who is going to oppose all WH plans regardless of ideology.

(the WH solution is more "conservative" than what you are proposing).

LOL hilarious.

Do not feed this Troll. It is a verbal skunk. The stench remains on you for days. This stench will drive you mad.
Troll has ticket for Trifling Train and goes elsewhere when not fed.

RobM:

I keep using - - THIS!! :>) :>)

Somehow it's NOT quite workin'! :>)

The market DID get us into this mess, with a huge helping hand from the deregulation of the Bush Administration. If people had more restraint, perhaps we wouldn't be in this situation, and now they are all so "concerned" that Obama is actually trying to fix things by doing something other than bowing to their feet. In fact, I was watching an interview with Peter Orszag where the anchors were claiming Wall St. is upset because the regulations are coming.

And your last couple of sentences are confusing. So it's not the market's fault, it's the people who are in the market? That doesn't make sense. The argument for Obama haters/opposition is "let the market sort it out," but the market's inability to "sort it out" is what got us into this mess. They had their period of no-regulation, and it seems like you agree there needs to be regulations.

You can not feed this troll.

are you calling me a troll?

He's talking about Conserv1

Conserv1 is the troll.

You are not a Troll. You are suffering from its verbal stench which disorients you from your goal. Please post this warning.

Do not feed this Troll. it is a verbal skunk. The stench remains on you for days. This stench will drive you mad.
Troll has ticket for Trifling Train and goes elsewhere when not fed

RobM is calling Coserv1 a troll.

It's fun really, b/c the person has talking poins that are easily smacked the fuck down.

No. This is unture, Wall Street will adapt to the rules of the game, once they know what the rules are. It is the UNCERTAINTY about the rules that are driving the market down.

With the stimulus plan in place, and the details of the mortgage plan coming out today, the pieces of the puzzle are falling into place. The markets are taking the details of the 'stimulus' plan into account an reacting negatively to the plan, as well as other events. Soon (?) we will hear the details of the plan to stabilize the financial sector, the market will digest it and try to anticipate the outcome.

"Wall Street will adapt to the rules of the game, once they know what the rules are."

-The new rule is:

Instead of looking for the government to bail you out, you mofo's need to pay the government back.

Co-sign

I'm not understanding where all of the uncertainty is coming from. What exactly are they looking for? I think the administration has been pretty open about what the stimulus is supposed to do and how it's supposed to work. You think the market is acting like this because it's afraid of regulations that probably won't even be rolled out for a long time?

To me the stimulus appears to be doing exactly what the administration said it would do at this point, and that's create jobs.

Yes, the market is reacting to the lack of a plan.

The stimulus is only one part of the 3 parts Obama is proposing.

The most important component, which is stabilizing the financial sector, has yet to be revealed.

Third, If the stimulus has created one new job, I have yet to hear about it.

Please read:


Shovels hit the ground' on stimulus project, Obama says

* Story Highlights
* New highway resurfacing project in Maryland is expected to support 60 jobs
* President Obama: Highway spending will create or save 150,000 jobs by end of 2010
* Another 200 construction projects to be launched in next few weeks
* Investing in roads will save lives, Obama says

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/03/stimulus...



(CNN) -- President Obama said Tuesday that the country already is "seeing shovels hit the ground" on the first infrastructure repair project funded through the Transportation Department's share of the $787 billion stimulus bill.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said, "The work begins today in Montgomery County, Maryland, where a work crew is starting on a project to resurface Maryland State Highway 650 -- a very busy road that has not been fully repaired in 17 years."

The resurfacing contract is going to a Pennsylvania-based family-owned company, American Infrastructure, LaHood said.

He said the project will support 60 jobs. "And that's how we're going to get the country back on its feet," LaHood added.

Mark Compton, director of government affairs for American Infrastructure, said his company received $2.1 million in federal funds, by way of the Maryland State Highway Administration.

The money will be used to repave and add safety features to a stretch of the highway.

Compton said the cash infusion is the "catalyst" to create 60 jobs, including bringing back some laid-off employees.

The deregulation was proposed by Clinton's flunky Rubin and passed into law before Bush came into office.

Agree about Clinton, but problems were known as far back as 2005 and Bush did nothing. If Clinton were to get the same information, he would have done something about it. That is the difference between Bush and Clinton.

Okay, so blame Clinton AND Bush. If Bush wanted regulation, he had 8 years to get it through, 6 of which the Republicans had control of the Congress as well.

:o)

Exactly, along with the massive AIG bailout -- which is really a bailout for all the investment bank counter-parties
goldman, merril, jp morgan, morgan stanley etc...

We can run around in circles all day pointing fingers at one side or the other. The question is, will this plan work, and the truth is NO ONE KNOWS.

Conservatives, like myself, who are skeptical of big government intervention in all sectors of our economy and the effects of massive deficit spending on economic stimulation are leery.

Not only the economy, take responsibility for Bush sublimating the constitution itself with these newly released OLC memos.

NO, even cpac agrees -- everyone blames Bush.
Take responsibility for Bush I, II and Reagan's massive deficit spending or STFU.

That's ideology with no emperichal evidence, that's not only foolish in any discipline (save religion) in this case it's neo-Hooverism.

No empirical evidence?

How does opposing school choice assure a better quality of education when that opposition allows failing schools to remain funded and poor teachers to remain employed?

How does opposing nuclear power production and domestic drilling provide us with inexpensive and abundant supplies of energy?

Bush was not a fiscal conservative, and contrary to the revisionist history promoted by the Dems regarding Reagan, in 1981, Reagan forced through Congress not only his famed, historic tax cuts, but also a package of budget cuts close to 5% of the federal budget -- equivalent to roughly $150 billion today. In constant dollars, nondefense discretionary spending declined by 14.4% from 1981 to 1982, and by 16.8% from 1981 to 1983. Moreover, in constant dollars, this nondefense discretionary spending never returned to its 1981 level for the rest of Reagan's two terms. By 1988, this spending was still down 14.4% from its 1981 level in constant dollars.

Even with the Reagan defense buildup, which helped win the Cold War, total federal spending declined to 21.2% of GDP in 1989 from 23.5% of GDP in 1983. That's a real reduction of 10% in the size of government relative to the economy.

Obama's stimulus plan is the greatest increase in government spending in the history of the planet.

Meanwhile, the Fed is furiously reinflating, sowing more havoc down the line.

Obama is still promising future increases in tax rates by letting the Bush tax cuts lapse, because for ideological reasons he thinks even current rates are too low.

And instead of deregulating for more energy production, he is still promising massive increases in regulatory barriers -- through global warming cap-and-trade legislation -- to increased production from proven energy sources to serve an extreme environmentalist ideology that will in fact be a tax on every American consumer.

1.) It's not "school choice" when budgeting vouchers decreasing the school district's overall budget.

I'm all for funded vouchers outside of the existing school budget.

"School Choice" is a talking point strawman to the elmination of public schools -- another massively successful liberal project.

2.) Reagan, Bush I and Bush II could have proposed new nuclear plants they did not.
That's a strawman, as the U.S. is massively behind in the technology, the plants are very expensive, and how do we protect the EXISTING plants from the "terrorists?"

3.) Domestic drilling? all for it... that's NOT the choke point -- it is oil refineries -- given the "free market" the oligopoly of oil companies have zero economic interest in building more refinires ---

I'm catching a trend on your talking points -- LOL.

4.) what was the net? Reagan also incr. taxes... MASSIVE incr. in debt.

5.) The late 70s OIL SHOCK did USSR in along with Gorbachev (the first college educated P.M of USSR). Go read a cold war book.

Beyond that Massive military spending is NOT CONSERVATIVE!

6.) Absolutely the Recovery Plan is massive investment. with support from both conservative and liberal economists.

7.) The Fed under Bush appointed Bernake IS NOT CONTROLLED by the WH.
It's a seperate organization that is NOT under control of any branch of government -- this is macro econ 101 -- more proof you don't know WTF you are talking about you are just spouting talking points.

8.) Emperichally the "bush tax cuts" were UNFUNDED, via your own neo-classical economics that should have told people not to count on the tax cuts being permanent.

9.) More deregulation? again basic economics CAP and TRADE provides an accounting for the public good -- the environment again basic economics. Again, even a neo-classical economist would agree pollution is a negative-externality that has to be made "neutral" to the public.

The TJMS is clowning Michael "BBQ" Steele. LOL. They said he gets invited to BBQ's and asks what to bring and the host tells him "just bring yourself." LOL!

Then Tom tried to call him the leader of the Republican Party and J & Sybil said "No he's not" LOL

Poor guy, I think the RNC will be getting rid of him soon

The Morning Ho's were clowning Steele too.

Here's the video. LOL

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/04/michae...

Who are the Morning Ho's?

"Morning Joe" on MSNBC

That's what I thought, but I figured I'd get verification. LOL.

They're on the "sure, Obama's only been there for like 6 weeks, but now this is all his fault!" kick today, so I didn't watch.

One of my fav. lines from the TJMS this morning is "Steele will have ot change his last name to aluminum" lol

LMAO!!!!! I didn't hear that line! Soooo funny.

Huggie Lowdown also said Michael Steele looked like Chuck E Cheese. LOL

Last week he called Burris Kazoo from the Flintstones and then the Brown Hornet.

I almost crashed the car.

That April 1 date is looking better and better. :-)

And that Steele is the Bama of the week. LOL

LOL @ "Morning Ho's" - I haven't heard that one before.

did you hear Tavis Smiley trying to say Barack started talking about Accountability because of him? that mufucka really thinks hes something special.

LMAO...Tavis truly is a legend in his own mind.

Tavis is a LOOSER of his own kind.

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

You mean Tavis "I'm Relevent; it says so in my book!" Smiley?

We have a faculty reception w/him at Georgetown this evening. We were told not to get too controversial w/our questions. You heard me. This is supposed to be a university. Of course, the other prima donna, ME Dyson, will likely lovey dovey up to him and the gab fest will begin.
I plan on asking him a simple question. Wish me luck

LOL. Tavis seems a lot like M.C. Steal Moe Bling these days...

He doesn't quite understand his role.

Admiral: LOL! :>) GOOD ONE!! :>)

Thank you, ma'am.

Tavis often lets his ego get in the way of facts.

I get the feeling Obama really doesn't like Tavis, and isn't going to give the fucker an interview ever.

And, he shouldn't. There are plenty of Black journalists that would appreciate the interview with the President AND who haven't disrespected the First Lady. WHEN the President is finished with that list of Black journalists, then MAYBE Tavis can get an interview - in 2015.

He did an interview with Tavis before he ran, I don't think he'd bother with Tavis as President though after what he did last year at the State of the Black Union.

word? Tavis is shameful man... he needs to try to contain his ego given his moderate skills.

I hope not! Tavis is an attention seeker. Give him nothing.

No, Justice58! I have to disagree! I think Obama would neutralize Tavis Smiley's babbling by sitting down with him. Remember when Fox News had that ridiculous "Obama Clock" that attracted so much attention until Obama actually showed up on the network and held his own? I'd like to see Tavis say all this stuff directly to O, and watch him squirm a bit. "You know we're going to hold you accountable Mr. President, yuck yuck yuck...."in love"...aw, I'm just kidding...wow, I can't believe you're here!" LOL.

The point is good BUT...it'll never happen, know why?

Cause Tavis did something way worse in Barack's mind than diss him...he dissed MICHELLE!!

Who Obama offered to send in his place and when Tavis showed his ass about that...Obama wrote him off in perpetuity.

Say what you want about me, Obama has said, but don't mess with my wife!

Tavis can fuggggetaboutit!!

I'm glad you haven't forgotten about it either. THAT, to me IS Tavis' ultimate sin, and the one that broke the Black folks' back of the TJMS show. Remember, we were ' eh' about Obama. We have never, as a community, had any middle of the road feelings about The First Lady. When he disrespected her, folks went ' Hell to the naw' and showed Tavis the door.

good point, good point... I have a short memory today...

Yeah, that was shameful as well especially given Michelle's level of achievement.

Point Taken!

I agree with your initial assessment.

Give Tavis nothing. Who cares. Let him run the clock.

Eh, I don't think Tavis has as big of an audience as FAUX News, Obama can continue to ignore him. Obama can, and does, call the TJMS if he has something to say to Black Folk. :o)

agreed. Whatever audience Tavis has Obama can reach directly.

I am not sure if the repubs realize it or not but they set themselves up with this one. If they get rid of Steele it will only ensure that the republican party gets NO minority support. Everybody is watching how the Repubs handle this situation. The repubs recognize that in order to win elections they have to reach outside their base and to other groups.

If they dump Steele this will only confirm that unless you accept the fact that you are only allowed to serve food at the Republican table and not sit down to partake of the meal -- the message is clear that there is no room for minorities in the republican party.

Al Sharpton was saying that this morning. That the way the Republicans aren't sticking up for Steele in this situtation demonstrates how they would treat African Americans as a whole when it comes to the issues we face.

The Republicans are ridiculing Steele.

while conveniently forgetting that they are ALL Rush Limpballs "butt boys".

really? How timely. Will go searching for that video. Would love to hear his assessment.

It was on the TJMS, maybe you can catch it on the replay (on now) at blackamericaweb.com or check in a few hours, and they might have it up on the "if you missed it" section.

thanks for the link. It isn't there now so I will check back later.

Nah, in fairness Rush is the leader all Republicans -- black, white, asian, jewish, christian bow at his feet.

Not just Steele.

this isn't about Rush Piepiepie.

This is about the Republican party and their lack of support for someone they chose to elect.

Rush to me is a great storyline but he is not relevant.

91 / 168 people voted for Steele -- that's it. Steele is busy over-stepping his bounds and got pimp-slapped by someone with actual influence in the party. Steele is not a popularly elected official with his own base.

Mike Duncan got smacked about just like Steele and blamed for the 2008 losses by Rs.

Piepiepie: LOL!! :>)

YEP! on the 91 VOTES! :>)

Annnnnd, as I've stated B 4, THEY R probably in HIDING and HOPIN' nobody tells their NAMES!! :>) :>)

The MAN-O'_STEELE is probably ***lookin' around*** goin' WHERE MY PEEPS??? :>) :>)

I understand all that. But they elected him.

They elected him because they wanted to show minorities/blacks how open the Republican party is to all groups. Didn't matter if Steele was qualified or not. (Kinda like the Clinton/Palin decision).

Well they made their bed and now folks like me are curious to see how they are going to handle this. Their actions will only confirm what most folks already know and what DL Hughley said the other day regarding Republicans and their "outreach" to minorities.

Why should they give Steele more of a shot than any white dude making the same mistakes?

I think that's where we differ. The RNC chose the "shiny object," and now they have to deal with it.

I believe you are missing my point. I get that and I agree with you. If you look at my posts on Steele - you would know I agree with you.

However, the reason they elected Steele was to say they were open to other groups. How they handle this is important and the perception will reflect that the Republican party is the party of Joe the Plumber and "Real America" only.

NO, I'm not missing your point.

They should treat Steele like anyone else and get rid of his ass, if he doesn't get results. If they let Steele be uneffective it will be worse.

Most employees get at least 90 days probation. How long has he been in his position Piepiepie?

I don't care for Steele but it will take more than the 30+ days for Steele to do anything substantial especially without the support of any of the folks that elected him to the position.

Anyway - let us agree to disagree on this point. I am sure that the way they boot him out will play a role in whether the Republican party sees any increase in votes from minorities.

Republicans Deserting Steele
"Not Good" ... "Erratic" ... "No Discipline" ...
FBI Investigating Steele's 2006 Campaign Expenditures
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/politics/

Agree the perception of of how Steele is being handled will matter to moderates, independents and POC.

Sure it is. You can see, NOT one republican will say Rush is wrong. They will dance around the issue of condemning Rush better than Michael Jackson.

I heard that this morning, too. And I thought Sharpton raised a good point. We should watch and learn when it comes to how the Republicans are treating Steele - I liked what he said about Steele being the "Trojan Horse" with Limbaugh inside...

How can limpy treat Steele any worse than the folks at JJP?

We did not elect Steele to his position and 99.9% of us are not Republicans so . . . your point is what exactly?

They don't care about Steele.
Rush Limbaugh is the leader of the GOP.
YEEE, HAWWW!
Hillbilly heroin for everybody!

LOL .... He really shot himself in the foot... Everyone now has an excuse to say he is not the leader, just a flunky...

DL Hugley should send Steele a fruit basket.

DL did set it up when he called Rush the leader of the republican party. It has been down hill for Michael Steele since then.

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/26184891/vp/29506...
Steele shuckin and jivin LOL...

You know what is really hillarious about Rush @ CPAC...

He was like a third-rate dictator giving a 20 minute talk that lasted 2 hrs -- of ranting and raving -- while his devoted followers gave standing ovations when prompted for fear of being reported on.

Is anyone else here familiar with the blog, Color Online? Their mission is “the promotion, empowerment, and political awakening of young women” through literature by women and people of color.

I've written a post about it to help spread the word. They are collecting books for a library for young women in the Detroit area and other good works, so I hope you'll check it out: Bookmark This: Color Online

great resource claudia_m. just sent out an email to about 60 youth involved in our learn2teachteach2learn program and all the volunteer staff and community organization staff telling them about this. thanks so much. . .

No problem, zackboston! Do you have a link for your own program so we can learn more about that too?

Well we are a little all over the place, but you can download an info guide at the tech center website:
www.tech-center-enlightentcity.tv.

or there is a general entry with some links for photos on our pilot wiki here:
http://l2ttl2.wordpress.com/2008/08/09/learn-2-...

or there is a pretty good article here from last summer's south end news:
http://www.mysouthend.com/index.php?ch=news&sc=...

thanks for asking! we reached over 600 youth last summer and got them making their own inventions with emerging science and technology!

The Next $1 Trillion Bailout? Public Pension Funds
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109...

Great link - the pension plans all have rosy income projections that none can actually meet. Many of the public pension plans are modeled on UAW type contracts - 30 years and out, pension payments indexed to inflation, lifetime health benefits, etc.. . Per the article - the stock market decline has caused the retirement funds to loose upto 25% of their total value (much like Harvard's endowment). And by law the taxpayers are on the hook to insure all public pensions. Some smaller local govt. s that I am aware of have eliminated pension plans in favor of partially employee self funded pensions to try and reduce public liablity.

They can put that in the second stimulus.

Yep, Plouffe is ON message.

If more Obama supporters just stick to the message we can stuff theseGOP jerks in a box and let them suffocate. We will need a 16 wheeler for the party leader.

One last thing... the Obama WH / DNC is "post-partisan" but not weak -- as shown they are busy going on offense to marginalize the GOP and GOP leaders further

"It's the economy, stupid."

The 2010 elections will be a referendum on the 'stimulus plan.'

And a referendum on the "No, No- Republicans"

Just keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better. Whatever floats your boat! But the truth is the American people have faith in President Obama & the Democratic Party to fix what Bush #ucked up. Check out the President's approval rating. Woo Hoo!

Till republicans get over their infatuation with ignorance you will continue to lose.The people believe that Democrats have their economic interest at heart and they know it will take time to fix what republicans broke.

Eh, possibly -- my guess is it will be a mixed bag regionally.

Foreclosures are really a regional thing so some areas are going to stablize on that front faster than others.

Also, the stimulus is already going to show positive affects per most non-ideologue economists.

Your boy Bobby Jindal is already showing himself a hypocrite:

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal brought most of his Cabinet here Monday afternoon to offer moral and tangible support to a group of 500 desperate Pilgrim's Pride contract growers and employees whose livelihoods are at risk following the company's decision to idle its northeastern Louisiana and southern Arkansas operations.

...

Jindal said that the state would apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance from the federal government, which would expand unemployment benefits to employees and provide benefits to growers who aren't eligible for unemployment benefits. The state was recently granted Trade Adjustment Assistance for International Paper workers who lost their jobs when IP closed its Bastrop paper mill late last year.

http://thenewsstar.com/article/20090303/NEWS01/...

Literary Obama has a new post that may be of interest to JJP folks:

About That Barnes & Noble Book Display...

We know the photo is real. There is no question that someone took the photo -- the issue comes in when I personally question who put the book with the monkey on the cover within the display because I don't think it was Barnes and Noble. Maybe the person taking the photo did it to start something. . . . This issue brings the same feeling as when the woman carved the backward B in her face and said a black Obama supporter did it.

That is how I feel about it.

perhaps the person taking the photo set up the shot ((?))

I agree, Val. It's good to see that smart folks are asking critical questions about this latest "outrage."

M.C. Steal Moe Bling is a fool. I seriously believe he though RNC chairman was running an organization where he would have some ability to do what HE wanted..


Steele, who has been traveling aggressively since taking the job, says the vacancies at the top of his organization are by design. He said he’s re-examining the whole structure with an eye to streamlining it and will have most of his team in place by the end of March, after he begins implementing reports from transition teams that are planning the party’s own first 100 days.

“I know some folks in Washington feel that they’re kind of on the outside of this — that they don’t have the day-to-day blow by blow of what I’m doing,” he said. “And that’s exactly how I like it. I want to be about the business of putting in place a good infrastructure that will enable me to go out and build a better brand, stronger brand, for the GOP. And I won’t get there by tattle-telling every day what I’m doing.”

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/19588...

President Obama met with the Congressional Black Caucus last week sounds like it went well.

Also, am I the only one that thinks 24 hour news channels need to go, or at least be restricted to only talking about politics for an hour? It just seems they don't really do much to really educate people or advance the dialogue on issues. Lately CNBC has been particularly annoying. They talk isht about the White House, then when the White House responds, they whine about the White House responding. Then the "pundits" get on TV and ask why Gibbs keeps talking about them, and they fail to mention that their "journalistic" colleagues are the ones that keep ASKING Gibbs about it, and I'm quite sure they'd be complaining if Gibbs decided not to answer the questions.

All that shit is really inside baseball -- average people dont really care.

However, the WH is cutting down enemies like a Grim Reaper in a field of Rye..

first read / msnbc
"*** Backflips for Rush: Rush Limbaugh might not be the “voice and intellectual force” behind the Republican Party, as Rahm Emanuel asserted on Sunday. But this has become increasingly true: When Limbaugh says jump, Republican officials quickly respond, “How high?” First, Georgia Rep. Phil Gingrey (R) criticized Limbaugh back in January, but then immediately called into to apologize after receiving a slew of complaints from Rush listeners. "I regret and apologize for the fact that my comments have offended and upset my fellow conservatives,” Gingrey told Limbaugh. Now, after RNC chair Michael Steele told CNN over the weekend that Limbaugh is an entertainer who can be “ugly” and “incendiary” -- and after Limbaugh gladly returned the fire -- the chairman called Limbaugh to smooth things over. “My intent was not to go after Rush,” Steele told Politico. “I have enormous respect for Rush Limbaugh. I was maybe a little bit inarticulate… There was no attempt on my part to diminish his voice or his leadership.” Of course, there is now an open invitation for some ambitious Republican to become the first to have the guts to stand up to Rush."

No Rs can get on TV without being met by a Razor -- do you like Rush Limpbrain?

They are trying to claim Rush isn't in charge, but all of the facts suggest otherwise. . .

as far as Cramer/Santelli go, I have problems taking people who don't seem to have "indoor" voices seriously.

Cramer is an idiot, I'm sure his democratic friends are calling him and telling him to shut the fuck up... this is a guy who CRIED ON AIR when Eliot Spitzer resigned after spending 80K USD on whores.

Cramer told people to go out and buy Bear Sterns before it went bankrupt along with AIG.

Santelli too -- they both are fucking cheerleaders not analysts.

Its a coordinated effort by the corporate media to stop President Obama's plans for helping the 95% of us.If you think its bad now wait for the health care debate.