Jack & Jill Politics

School districts have imposed all sorts of drastic cuts to save money during the down economy, canceling field trips and making parents pay for everything from tissues to sports transportation.

And some have now resorted to placing advertisements on school buses.

School districts say it's practically free money, and advertisers love the captive audience that school buses provide.

That's the problem, say opponents: Children are being forced to travel to school on moving media kiosks, and the tactic isn't much different than dressing teachers in sponsor-emblazoned uniforms.

“Parents who are concerned about commercial messages will have no choice,” said Josh Golin, associate director of Campaign for a Commercial Free Childhood. “Parents won't be given the option to send their kids on the ad-free bus.”

Could school bus ads save school budgets?

Things today in Philadelphia
JUST DO IT: Death Drug, featuring Miami Vice’s Tubbs!

Germany Backtracks on Europe Rescue for Greece

This house ocards is going to come down sooner than later

To add to your post: Sober Up

Few people realize that for the past fifty years the policy of the United States government has been to get rid of jobs. Beginning with the Marshall Plan after World War II …

[O]ur country keeps making it more expensive to produce. For fifty years, Congress has been piling on requirement after requirement for production: Social Security, health care, minimum wage, labor rights, labor safety, plant safety, plant closing notice, parental leave, clean air, clean water. A company can avoid all of these costs by offshoring to China …

It’s not just jobs. Investment, research, technology, development, production, the economy and corporate leadership are all outsourced.

Foreign Ownership of US Domestic Industries

Morning everyone!

Happy Friday!

I hear ya. Just like the mystery of organic or chemical-free foods prices skyrocketing. It seems most 'market' solutions for schools are just schemes.

good morning :)

Health Care Is a Game of Inches
Posted by Al Giordano – March 18, 2010 at 4:57 pm

This is it.

It all comes down to the next seventy-two hours, and who gets on the field and claws for every last inch.

The US House of Representatives will be in session this weekend to vote on Health Care Reform and every “whip count” on the tally shows it razor close.

The magic number is 216: That’s the number of votes that will be needed for the bill to pass (or, alternately, to kill it, if all members cast votes). The “yes” side claims 204 solid votes, the “no” side claims 210 (caveat emptor on both counts): In the middle, there are said to be 16 conservative Democrats being pushed and pulled from all sides.

But those “whip counts” can be deceiving because we now enter the hours where defections from both sides are already happening and likely to continue (plus, the predictable threats from Congressional critters seeking to exact eleventh hour concessions on other matters in exchange for their votes).

The President flew to Cleveland this week, turned US Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) from a “no” to a “yes,” and, with feeling, Kucinich then went on Democracy Now and pwned naysayer Ralph Nader (talk about a perfect foil) with his newfound support for the bill.

In these final hours, look for the media to ratchet up every rumor and morsel of distraction to make your heads spin; aimed in some cases at emboldening one side, or at demoralizing another, and in all cases on grabbing your attention.

Keep this in mind: NONE OF THAT MATTERS. The media doesn’t get a vote on this. Only members of Congress do. Health Care Reform is going to be decided in the trenches: district by district, member by member, phone call by phone call, and inch by inch.

President Obama has now cancelled his planned trip to Asia this weekend to quarterback these final minutes of the game. The AFL-CIO and the unions are on the field, blocking and running interference. 99 percent of the Netroots blogs are in the fight, led by the Daily Kos and with Nate Silver of 538 up in the coach’s booth with the binoculars. Organizing for America has the plays and instructions cued up and ready for everyone that wants to be on the field.

While the relevant players are calling, writing and faxing US House members, a good number of the kill-billies (on the right and the few stragglers that claim to be on the left) are in full freak-out mode. (Worrying about whether Rahm Emanuel is “vindicated” or not, and whether if he’s vindicated if that somehow vindicates their stalker-like obsession with Rahm; how lame is that?) We will deal with them handily after all is said and voted. How we deal with them will largely depend on whether Health Care Reform rises or falls this weekend.

Right now, and for the next 72 hours, the only thing that matters is the ground game: Which side generates more phone calls, faxes, visits, emails and other creative pressures on members of Congress.

Which brings us, once again, to this locker room speech from Al Pacino (remember the only other moment we posted this, Field Hands?): Life is a game of inches:

http://narcosphere.narconews.com/thefield/3864/…

from the Rude Pundit:

3/18/2010
Obama on Fox “News”(or Python Eats Kangaroo):

Yes, holy shit, that is a photo of a python engorging an entire kangaroo. And it more or less represents what happened when President Obama sat down for an interview with whiny-voiced Bret “Lump o' Flesh Face” Baier of Fox “news,” which is owned by noted Aussie-born tyrant Rupert Murdoch.

First off, let's just say that Baier interviewed a president like a president ought to be interviewed, with the news person as an aggressive antagonist and questioner, not taking what the president says at face value. Truly, honestly, Baier was at least in the ballpark of how, say, BBC journalists talk to their leaders. And however irritating Baier's interruptions were, Obama recognized, at the end, that this was the way it's supposed to go. “That's OK. That's your job,” Obama told him after Baier apologized for doing so.

Of course, any time a reporter from anywhere dared to question George W. Bush with the same persistence that Baier used with Obama, it was an outrage, like a midget had punched Bush in the nuts. Remember when Irish reporter Carol Coleman took apart Bush and the White House actually lodged a formal complaint with the Irish Embassy? Now, of course, it's totally okay to confront the president repeatedly, and the right will gleefully cheer it on, as if yelping, “Yeah, make him your bitch, Ailes.”

However, Baier's agenda was to get Barack Obama to talk about the “deem and pass” rule, not health care reform. The problem for Baier was that Obama didn't give a shit about how the bill is voted on, just that it's voted on. It wasn't that Obama wouldn't answer the question. He did. He just didn't give Baier the answers he wanted. As Baier tried to make health care legislation about how the rules of Congress are used, Obama offered, “Bret, I've got to say to you there are a lot more people who are concerned about the fact that they may be losing their house or going bankrupt because of health care.” Whatever hard-on Baier might have had was smacked into flaccidness.

It literally got to the point where Baier was just incoherently tossing out teabagger talking points. It was like Baier had a stroke as Roger Ailes screamed in his ear to attack harder. “Deem and pass Senate reconciliation and we don't know exactly what's in the fix bill,” he sputtered out. A moment later, all Baier could manage to say was “This is one-sixth of the U.S. economy, sir. One-sixth.” By the end, one wouldn't have been surprised if Baier had been curled up on the floor, shitting himself, bleeding out of his eyes, babbling and weeping, “Nebraska compromise…deem and pass…Medicare cuts…please make the hurting stop…Please don't let him swallow me whole…kill me first…”

Essentially, Baier, in doing the bidding of his tubby master, only wanted to talk around the bill. There was very little about what is actually in the bill. That was limited to trying to get Obama to decry every specific deal made for individual states. And while Obama did say that the Nebraska deal was idiotic, he didn't back down on all of them, like the funds for places hit by natural disasters, like Louisiana. This made Baier start shorting out, with Obama staring at his fizzing brain. Baier started just tossing out states, like Florida and “Connecticut, Montana? I mean, there are a lot of deals in here, Mr. President, that people have issues about.”

There was a sad air of desperation to Baier's approach, like he had been told in the Fox locker room that he'd be able to fuck Obama's face when he got the president alone in a room, but it turned out that not only would his cock find no mouth to plunge into, he'd get his balls twisted in the process. And then he'd get his bare ass spanked.

But, as Obama essentially said at the end, you can't blame a jerk-off for trying. The interview ended with Baier sadly shuffling down a hall in the White House, pants around his ankles, on his way to the exit.

http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/

been saying for awhile now, especially with regards to the Maddoff case, that there's a whole parcel of folks at the SEC that should be under arrest.

let's add Lehman as another reason.

Friday, March 19, 2010
Report: SEC and Fed received warnings about Lehman
by Chris in Paris on 3/19/2010 08:41:00 AM

Was anyone interested in the truth? Doesn't sound like it. Regulators sounded as complicit as the auditors so I hope there's something wrong with this report.

The findings raise questions over what federal regulators knew about Lehman’s accounting and when they knew it. In the account given by the Merrill officials, the SEC, the lead regulator, and the New York Federal Reserve were given warnings about Lehman’s balance sheet calculations as far back as March 2008.

Former and current Fed officials say even in the competitive world of Wall Street, it is un­usual for rival bankers to relay such concerns to the Fed.

The former Merrill officials said they contacted the regulators after Lehman released an estimate of its liquidity position in the first quarter of 2008.

http://www.americablog.com/2010/03/report-sec-a…

Democrats discover the benefits of taking a stand on health reform

By Eugene Robinson
Friday, March 19, 2010

If health-care reform finally staggers across the finish line, it will be because President Obama and congressional Democrats recognized — at long last — the truth that has been staring them in the face for more than a year: They'll be better off politically if they just try their best to do the right thing.

No matter what the Democrats attempt or how they go about it, Republicans are going to complain, obstruct and attack. That's the inescapable lesson from this whole exercise, and it's hard to fathom why it took so long to sink in. The Democrats looked ridiculous, sitting around the campfire and singing “Kumbaya” while the opposition was out in the forest whittling spears and arrows.

As if to prove my point, some Republicans are already talking about trying to repeal the reform bill even though it hasn't been passed. This hardly seems in the spirit of bipartisanship — which the GOP, with cynical but skillful rhetoric, has elevated into some kind of saintly virtue.

You have to admire the GOP's chutzpah. George W. Bush governed like a steamroller as he enacted his radical initiatives — massive tax cuts, a huge shift in the balance between privacy and security, an unprecedented “big government” takeover of education policy, an expensive and unfunded Medicare prescription drug program.

But the moment the Republicans were out of power, they discovered a moral imperative for the majority party to do everything in a bipartisan fashion. Democrats, mindful of polls showing that party affiliation has dramatically weakened over the past generation, were all too happy to oblige. In their first big legislative exercise — the $862 billion stimulus bill — the new president and the new Congress bent over backward to incorporate Republican ideas such as tax cuts. But of course, no good deed goes unpunished: More than a year later, the GOP is still attacking the stimulus as if it had been crafted by Chairman Mao.

On health care, the Republicans interpreted bipartisanship as meaning that the whole thing had to be done their way, which basically would have meant no health-care reform at all. Once again, Democrats bent over backward. From the beginning, the White House decided not to push for truly universal health care — the party's long-held goal — but instead to settle for something less.

There are reasonable arguments for the measured, moderate approach that President Obama took — health care does represent nearly one-sixth of the economy, and maybe a deep recession isn't the time for a radical restructuring that could have a real, long-term impact on soaring costs. But even the middle-of-the-road reform package that passed the House got diluted in the Senate. It's worth passing because it enshrines the principle that health care ought to be universal, but it's no revolution.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ar…

Devastating Video: Fox 'News' Interviews Two Presidents Hotlist
by MeMeMeMeMe [Subscribe]
Digg this! Share this on Twitter – Devastating Video: Fox 'News' Interviews Two PresidentsTweet this submit to reddit Share This
Thu Mar 18, 2010 at 09:16:37 PM PDT

Fox “News” anchor Bret Baier's contentious interview with President Obama yesterday has become very popular on the right , mostly because Baier interrupted President Obama in mid-sentence a total of 16 times in under 20 minutes, thus making his interrupt frequency nearly once-per-minute, almost tying Bill O'Reilly for rudeness.

Of course, what his conservative fans don't get around to mentioning is that Mr. Baier has previously interviewed one other president, and he was considerably more polite the first time around. In fact, one might almost use the word “deferential” to describe it. And if one were slightly less charitable than that, one might even describe it as “Two-bit hack under orders from Roger Ailes administers slobbery oral sex”.

* MeMeMeMeMe's diary :: ::
*

Observe the moist towelettes that Baier flung at President Bush:

Baier’s tenacity, however, seems reserved only for Democratic presidents. His interviews with President Bush were far friendlier, with questions like, “What are you reading now?” and “Do you believe that there hasn’t been a terrorist attack on U.S. soil in more than seven years because of the policies your administration has implemented?”

Whoa, rein it in there, Murrow! James Lipton called, and he feels you're being a tad obsequious.

Now observe a side-by-side comparison of Baier hectoring President Obama from start to finish, while tossing gossamer softballs at George Bush:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/3/19/847692/…

Major Catholic Newspaper Endorses Bill, Challenges Bishops Hotlist
by itskevin [Subscribe]
Digg this! Share this on Twitter – Major Catholic Newspaper Endorses Bill, Challenges BishopsTweet this submit to reddit Share This
Thu Mar 18, 2010 at 08:33:11 PM PDT

This time, the National Catholic Reporter. While acknowledging imperfections in the bill, the editors of The Reporter urge passage of the health care reform bill in fairly emphatic terms:

The choice Congress faces is between the status quo and change — and the current bill is a profoundly preferable step in the direction of positive change. The legislation will lower costs, not only for individuals and small businesses currently burdened by rising premiums, but for the Medicare and Medicaid programs, which threaten to strangle the federal budget. It will extend health care coverage to 30 million Americans who currently lack it. Finally, a society that covers most of its citizens will be a society more likely to eventually cover everyone — our immigrant brothers and sisters included.

The editorial is very, very good – and a little juicy. I'd encourage you to read it in its entirety.

UPDATE AT BOTTOM – Additional endorsement from Commonweal Magazine.

* itskevin's diary :: ::
*

The developments over the past week in support of the bill from the Catholic Church have been nothing short of astonishing, reflecting a real rift between the church's moral and/or power centers.

The bishops declared their opposition to the bill early, mostly due to its abortion provisions. Congressman Bart Stupak (D-MI) agreed, and threatened to kill the legislation – with a nebulous bloc of other Democratic legislators – if the abortion provisions weren't changed. Incidentally, since the Republican party is forcing Democrats to go the reconciliation route in the Senate, the abortion language cannot be changed. Reconciliation requires that provisions be primarily budget-related.

But then things got really interesting. Over the weekend, a group representing U.S. Catholic hospitals, led by Sister Carol Keehan, declared its enthusiastic support:

As I watched our president present his plan to pass the health reform legislation, it was clear this is an historic opportunity to make great improvements in the lives of so many Americans. Is it perfect? No. Does it cover everyone? No. But is it a major first step? Yes.

The insurance reforms will make the lives of millions more secure, and their coverage more affordable. The reforms will eventually make affordable health insurance available to 31 million of the 47 million Americans currently without coverage.

Then, a group representing 59,000 Catholic nuns joined in the chorus of support:

The health care bill that has been passed by the Senate and that will be voted on by the House will expand coverage to over 30 million uninsured Americans. While it is an imperfect measure, it is a crucial next step in realizing health care for all. It will invest in preventative care. It will bar insurers from denying coverage based on pre-existing conditions. It will make crucial investments in community health centers that largely serve poor women and children.

Especially significant is that all three groups have broken with the bishops in recognizing that the bill does not change current law when it comes to federal funding of abortion.

The Reporter makes the case in no uncertain terms, and takes the bishops to task for their role in ginning up the controversy.

The bishops have to be clear that some of their talking points might lead honest observers to question their competence — or worse. In the past week or so, much has been made of the bill's provision of $7 billion dollars to community health centers. The National Right to Life Committee chimed in that this money could go to pay for abortions at clinics run by Planned Parenthood. Back to Logic 101: All Planned Parenthood clinics may be clinics, but not all health care clinics are Planned Parenthood clinics. The community health centers in question do not, never have, and have no intention of performing abortions, and they are prohibited by statute from doing so. This is a red herring and it was profoundly disappointing to see the USCCB Web site give credence to it.

Bottom line: The current legislation is not “pro-abortion,” and there is no, repeat no, federal funding of abortion in the bill.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/3/18/847682/…

But, as Obama essentially said at the end, you can't blame a jerk-off for trying. The interview ended with Baier sadly shuffling down a hall in the White House, pants around his ankles, on his way to the exit.

BWA HA HA HA HA

Get him Rude pundit! Get that little whiny air-head mofo and smack him repeatedly across the face! The disrespectful little beyotch!

Mar
Loved or Feared?

by mistermix

In yesterday’s open thread headlined by Pelosi’s picture, there were a few comments about her lack of popularity amongst non-political types. I’ve had the same experience as those commenters: a couple of friends who vote Democratic, but don’t care much about politics, really dislike Nancy Pelosi.

If you look at past Speakers, this isn’t really surprising. The ones who made a lot of headlines, like Tip O’Neill and Newt Gingrich, weren’t that great. Tip was in a similar position as Pelosi (Democrats controlled both Houses and the Presidency), but Democrats dropped the ball on his watch. With all the press he gets, it’s easy to forget that Newt was deposed by his own party after 4 years.

Unlike Tip and Newt, the man widely considered to be the best Speaker in history, Sam Rayburn, “preferred working quietly in the background to being in the public spotlight.” His successor, John McCormack, shepherded landmark civil rights legislation, as well as Medicare, through the House, yet LBJ gets all the credit for those accomplishments. And let’s not forget Carl Albert, because everyone else has.

Pelosi is unpopular because the talents needed to be a good speaker just don’t sell soap. She’s ferociously on-message, which makes her public statements look wooden and over-rehearsed. The tale of her upbringing as daughter of a machine mayor is short on human interest, but long on the arm-twisting and favor-trading a good Speaker needs to master.

In short: she’s intense, focused, ruthless and competent. Those qualities won’t get her a movie of the week or a permanent spot on Meet the Press, but they might just get the most important piece of legislation in the last 40 years through the House.

http://www.balloon-juice.com/2010/03/19/loved-o…

MSNBC:

Eliot Engel will be voting YES on the healthcare bill

State of the health care debate: Talk radio attacks an 11-year old

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/03/18/90669/sta…

WASHINGTON — Conservative talk show hosts and columnists have ridiculed an 11-year-old Washington state boy's account of his mother's death as a “sob story” exploited by the White House and congressional Democrats like a “kiddie shield” to defend their health care legislation.

Marcelas Owens, whose mother got sick, lost her job, lost her health insurance and died, said Thursday he's taking the attacks from Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Michelle Malkin in stride.

Adults attacking an 11 year old child?.. And calling his Mom's death a sob story? How low can these people go? These people are animals!

Israel “Can you hear me now”

Obama blocks delivery of bunker-busters to Israel

WASHINGTON — The United States has diverted a shipment of bunker-busters designated for Israel.

Officials said the U.S. military was ordered to divert a shipment of smart bunker-buster bombs from Israel to a military base in Diego Garcia. They said the shipment of 387 smart munitions had been slated to join pre-positioned U.S. military equipment in Israel Air Force bases.
“This was a political decision,” an official said.

In 2008, the United States approved an Israeli request for bunker-busters capable of destroying underground facilities, including Iranian nuclear weapons sites. Officials said delivery of the weapons was held up by the administration of President Barack Obama.

Since taking office, Obama has refused to approve any major Israeli requests for U.S. weapons platforms or advanced systems. Officials said this included proposed Israeli procurement of AH-64D Apache attack helicopters, refueling systems, advanced munitions and data on a stealth variant of the F-15E.

“All signs indicate that this will continue in 2010,” a congressional source familiar with the Israeli military requests said. “This is really an embargo, but nobody talks about it publicly.”

Under the plan, the U.S. military was to have stored 195 BLU-110 and 192 BLU-117 munitions in unspecified air force bases in Israel. The U.S. military uses four Israeli bases for the storage of about $400 million worth of pre-positioned equipment meant for use by either Washington or Jerusalem in any regional war.

In January 2010, the administration agreed to an Israeli request to double the amount of U.S. military stockpiles to $800 million. Officials said the bunker-busters as well as Patriot missile interceptors were included in the agreement.

The decision to divert the BLU munitions was taken amid the crisis between Israel and the United States over planned construction of Jewish homes in Jerusalem. The administration, including Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, has warned that Washington could reduce military aid to Israel because of its construction policy.

In 2007, after its war in Lebanon, Israel requested 2,000 BLU-109 live bombs from the United States. The 2,000-pound bomb, produced by Boeing and coupled with a laser guidance kit, was designed to penetrate concrete bunkers and other underground hardened sites.

Israeli ambassador to the United States, Michael Oren, was quoted as saying that his country faced its biggest crisis with the United States since 1975. A pro-Israel lobbyist said Oren was referring to the current U.S. embargo, which echoed a decision taken 35 years ago by then-President Gerald Ford after Israel's refusal to withdraw from Egypt's Sinai Peninsula. Oren has since denied the remark

http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtri…0217_03_…

Rejection of HCR should have been the first hint of the type of people we were dealing with. The type of personalities willing to do the bidding of insurance companies are capable of anything.

The former Merrill officials said they contacted the regulators

Here's another bonus story not getting much play:

The U.S. government was handing out millions of dollars to bank regulators, rewarding “superior” work even as an avalanche of risky mortgages helped create the meltdown.

Virginia consumer-protection officials have warned the wife of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas that her advocacy group is improperly soliciting contributions in the state.

In a letter to Virginia Thomas on Thursday, the state Office of Consumer Affairs directed Liberty Central Inc. to the Virginia law that requires groups to register with the office or request an exemption before seeking donations for a charitable purpose.

Liberty Central is a Virginia-based group soliciting contributions online and is not registered or exempt, said Michael Wright, the manager of regulatory programs at the Office of Consumer Affairs, a branch of the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. Under state law, political advocacy is considered a charitable purpose.

“They should be filed with us,” he said.

Thomas is the president and chief executive of Liberty Central, a nonprofit group hoping to mobilize conservatives online.

The group, which is aiming to appeal to small-government “tea party” activists, was incorporated in Delaware in January and is registered with the Virginia State Corporation Commission.

Thomas has said the group intends to seek donations from individuals and corporations. It also plans to issue score cards for members of Congress and be involved in the November election, although Thomas has not specified how.

Liberty Central national coordinator Sue Hamblen said Thursday she was not aware of the registration issue and would be looking into it.

Soliciting donations for a charitable purpose without registering with the Office of Consumers Affairs could result in fines of up to $5,000 for each violation, the letter said.

Wright said it was not unusual for a group to be unaware of the Virginia law.

“Our policy is to assist them to come in compliance with the law,” he said.

Virginia warns wife of Justice Clarence Thomas her group is violating law

Well, it kinda worked…

Now, we can fix this in a way that is sensible, that is centrist. I have rejected a whole bunch of provisions that the left wanted that are — you know, they were very adamant about because I thought it would be too disruptive to the system.

…and from now on, they'll no longer call you a commie socialist, LOL.

Errytime I see the name Bret Baier, I wanna smack him for that trifling interview…

http://www.gifbin.com/bin/op47g6op698op.gif

This is so disturbing. This is trending with children, the elderly, and the sick literally being dropped from state budgets across the country.

Finally someone gets Obama in the media. This is the President I voted for and understood Obama to be. A man in it for the long haul he stated numerous times in Audacity of Hope that politics was not a sport, he does not engage in sound bites, he talks policy with all the intricacies and complexities they entail. This frustrates the media and they try to 'Baier' him. But in the end, Obama holds true to his long term strategy and does not engage their tactics nor allow them to derail his long term perspective on domestic and foreign policy. Brownstein is so right:

“President Obama's 2008 campaign assertion that Ronald Reagan “changed the trajectory of America” more than Richard Nixon or Bill Clinton did.

“The health care struggle suggests that Obama views changing that trajectory as the ultimate measure of a presidency's success. His aim is to establish a long-term political direction — one centered on a more activist government that shapes and polices the market to strengthen the foundation for sustainable, broadly-shared growth. Everything else — the legislative tactics, even most individual policies — is negotiable. He wants to chart the course for the supertanker, not to steer it around each wave or decide which crates are loaded into its hull.”

“Obama's core health care goals have been to establish the principle that Americans are entitled to insurance and to build a framework for controlling costs by incentivizing providers to work more efficiently. He has been unwavering about that destination but flexible and eclectic in his route.”

http://www.nationaljournal.com/njmagazine/polit…

IT'S A NEW DAY!! YES WE CAN!!

WE ARE THE CHANGE WE HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR.

THANK YOU PRESIDENT OBAMA for stepping up and having the courage and conviction to lead the American people in their quest for health care, education and equitable foreign policy without endless wars.

You are the right man at the right time. Keep on doin it!!

They know now:

You don't wear down…you wear THEM down.

Go head with your bad self!!