April 13, 2008

You are currently browsing the daily archive for April 13, 2008.

(Via Crooks and Liars.)

Just a couple of months ago, John McCain acknowledged, “The issue of economics is not something I’ve understood as well as I should.” For some reason, he’s been trying to prove this point ever since.

Yesterday, for example, McCain made a campaign stop at an investment firm in Westport, Conn., where a voter asked how McCain plans to balance the federal budget. (McCain has vowed, repeatedly, to eliminate the deficit by the end of his first term in office.)

“Basically, which is it?” the man asked Mr. McCain. “Straight talk: Do you want to raise taxes, cut entitlement spending, cut defense spending, or have a deficit?”

Mr. McCain did not explain how he plans to balance the budget, but spoke generally about hoping to stimulate the economy — and cited President Reagan.

“I don’t believe in a static economy,” Mr. McCain said. “I believe that when there’s stimulus for growth, when there’s opportunity, when people keep more of their money — and the government is the least efficient way to spend your money — that economies improve.”

“When Ronald Reagan came to office,” he said, noting that few in the audience were old enough to remember, “we had 10 percent unemployment, 20 percent interest rates, and 10 percent inflation, if I’ve got those numbers right. That was when Ronald Reagan came to office in 1980. And so what did we do? We didn’t raise taxes, and we didn’t cut entitlements. What we did was we cut taxes and we put in governmental reductions in regulations, stimulus to the economy….”

There’s so much wrong with this, it’s hard to know where to start.

First, citing Reagan as a model for deficit reduction is remarkably foolish. The deficit tripled under Reagan, and at the time, his deficits were the largest in American history. If he’s McCain’s standard for responsible budgeting, we’re in trouble.

Second, McCain hails Reagan’s example for not raising taxes, but this overlooks a key detail — Reagan did raise taxes, several times, to prevent his budget deficits from spiraling out of control and making the national debt even worse. Is McCain prepared to follow Reagan’s lead on this or not? (McCain did take a no-new-taxes pledge on national television a few weeks ago, though he has since said he may not have meant it.)

Third, McCain’s tax plan costs more than $2 trillion, on top of the $400 billion deficits he would inherit from Bush, and yet he still claims he will balance the budget in four years.

And fourth, McCain concluded, “I believe we can grow this economy, and reduce this deficit.” This is so utterly foolish, it’s hard to believe a serious presidential candidate would be willing to say it out loud.

In just the past couple of months, McCain has been confused about the relationship between taxes and revenues, confused about whether he thinks our current economy is strong or not, confused about why interest rates even exist, confused about his own no-new-taxes pledge, confused about his own Social Security policy, and confused about how he’d pay for yet another round of reckless tax cuts.

After a quarter-century in Congress, when it comes to the economy, the poor guy sounds like he has no idea what he’s talking about.

Maybe the senator could take a few weeks off, read a book or two, and get back to us?

Tags: ,

(Via The Huffington Post | Full News Feed.)

Surrogates to Sen. Barack Obama said on Saturday that while the Senator regrets the phrasing of his remarks, in which he said Pennsylvanians were bitter and “clinged” to guns, religion and anti-immigration sentiment because of economic frustrations, he would ultimately not apologize for them.

“He regrets the wording of the remarks and he was sorry for the offense that anybody took from them,” said Obama’s senior strategist, David Axelrod, “but I think the most important thing is that the essence of what he said is something he feels very strongly about. There is a real anger among many in the communities… they are tired of politicians who come around at election time and express their solicitude as part of a tactic and don’t follow through on it.”

The defense of Obama, who is under withering attacks that his comments - first reported by Huffington Post’s Off The Bus - were elitist, out of touch and condescending, did not end there. Other surrogates to the Senator insisted that Obama’s political opponents should be the ones offering regret for politicizing the issue.

“The only apologies that would be appropriate would be from the Sens. [Hillary] Clinton and [John] McCain’s campaigns who are trying to make an issue out of this,” said John Futterman, mayor of Bradick, Pennsylvania.

Unfortunately for Futterman, such apologies seem all but certain not to happen. Indeed, an hour before the Obama campaign convened its conference call, the Clinton camp held one of its own. In it, surrogates to the New York Democrat took repeated jabs at the “bitterness” remark, saying, on several occasions, that it made Obama out-of-touch and unelectable in small-town America.

“I found them to be condescending and disappointing,” said Clinton’s national campaign co-chair and Iowa Governor, Tom Vilsack. “They reflected in my view a flawed reading of people who live in small towns in Pennsylvania and other states… I found his remarks undercut his message of hope… What they want is not a pat on the head from a presidential candidate; what they want is a pat on the back.”

In addition to the call, the Clinton campaign peppered reporters throughout Saturday with video clips and written statements of surrogates (in Indiana, North Carolina and Pennsylvania - three upcoming primary states) criticizing Obama’s remarks. In a separate interview with Talking Points Memo, Geoffrey Garin, Clinton’s new chief strategist, said the comments could be “damaging” to Obama in a general election and would serve as fodder for Sen. Clinton to woo the support of superdelegates.

Even Obama and his supporters acknowledged that his words didn’t come off right.

“I don’t think I would have used the same words that he used. I don’t think that people are bitter, I do think people are angry,” said Rick Gray, mayor of Lancaster, Pennsylvania. “I think people are upset about the economic conditions of this county… They see executives getting large bonuses and they see themselves losing their pension and their health care. And there is a level of anger that is just seething there.”

Acknowledging a phrasing error seems to be one component of Obama’s hopes to stem the blowback from his remarks. In addition, his campaign, starting on Friday evening, has sought to call out Sen. Clinton as the one more out of touch with small town America: pointing both to revelations that she and her husband have made more than $100 million since leaving the White House, and the fact that her campaign (and not Obama’s) accepts donations from registered Washington lobbyists.

On Saturday, Clinton’s surrogates were asked whether the later issue concerned them in the same way manner that they were about Obama’s remarks. The answer, among all isx conference call attendees was a resounding: “No.”

Clinton, they retorted, had stronger roots and a greater understanding of small town issues — lobbyist money or individual income aside.

“I think it is difficult for a democratic candidates to be succeed in a general election if he misunderstand people who live in small towns,” said Vilsack. “We are going to have to have someone on the top of my ticket who understands [god and guns].”

Tags: , ,

gonzalez_testify.jpg(Via The Huffington Post | Full News Feed.)

The New York Times is reporting Sunday that former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is having a hard time finding a job at a law firm:

He has, through friends, put out inquiries, they said, and has not found any takers. What makes Mr. Gonzales’s case extraordinary is that former attorneys general, the government’s chief lawyer, are typically highly sought.

A longtime loyalist to George W. Bush dating to their years together in Texas, Mr. Gonzales was once widely viewed as a strong candidate to be the first Hispanic-American nominated one day to the Supreme Court. A graduate of Harvard Law School, he carried an impressive personal story as the child of poor Mexican immigrants.

Despite those credentials, he left office last August with a frayed reputation over his role in the dismissal of several federal prosecutors and the truthfulness of his testimony about a secret eavesdropping program. He has had no full-time job since his resignation, and his principal income has come from giving a handful of talks at colleges and before private business groups.

“Maybe the passage of time will provide some opportunity for him,” said one Washington lawyer who was aware of an inquiry to his firm from a Gonzales associate. “I wouldn’t say ‘rebuffed,’ ” said the lawyer, who asked his name not be used because the situation being described was uncomfortable for Mr. Gonzales. “I would say ‘not taken up.’ “

The greatest impediment to Mr. Gonzales’s being offered the kind of high-salary job being snagged these days by lesser Justice Department officials, many lawyers agree, is his performance during his last few months in office. In that period, he was openly criticized by lawmakers for being untruthful in his sworn testimony. His conduct is being investigated by the Office of the Inspector General of the Justice Department, which could recommend actions from exonerating him to recommending criminal charges. Friends set up a fund to help pay his legal bills.

Tags:

gore_pointing.jpg(Via Open Left - Front Page.)

From the Scotsman via Poblano comes the news that Jimmy Carter and Al Gore are communicating with each other about pressuring Hillary Clinton out of the presidential race. I don't know much about the publication but, as Poblano points out, they did have the story about Samantha Power calling Clinton a “monster.” According to the story, Carter and Gore are concerned about the negative effects the ongoing campaign will have on the Dems chances in November.

Not having McCain squarely in the crosshairs is a downside to the continuing campaign but there are upsides, such as the recent improvement Obama and Clinton are seeing in polling versus McCain in PA.

Tags: , , ,

(Via Newsvine - ObamaVine - Seeds.)

“I was loyal,” Richardson said during an extended conversation over breakfast this week at the governor’s mansion in Santa Fe. “But I don’t think that loyalty is transferable to his wife. . . . You don’t transfer loyalty to a dynasty.”

Tags: , , ,

(Via Newsvine - ObamaVine - Seeds.)

Since 2001, Clinton has backed pacts with Jordan, Chile, Singapore, Australia, Morocco and Oman that were opposed by numerous labor, farming and environmental groups concerned that the deals contained insufficient safeguards for American workers and consumers.

Tags: , ,

(Via MyDD.)

Major debate going on in the Labor movement, here’s one view…

By now you may feel like you’ve heard quite enough of the back-and-forth between SEIU and the CNA over union representation of nurses and healthcare workers in Ohio. You may have also heard that the dispute runs deep and wide and goes back years and across state lines into Nevada, California, Texas and several others, and that the encounters have become more extreme.

And perhaps you’re wondering–why should I care?

If this were just about CNA and SEIU, or even just about a dispute at an isolated hospital in one state, you could move on. The thing is, these struggles are not taking place in a vacuum–and what becomes of them has far-reaching impact that touches us all. At a time when the economy is bad and getting worse, and the number of workers represented by a union in this country is an anemic 12%, labor unions face a choice…and workers everywhere face the consequences.

Unions can fight for turf within the ever-shrinking pool of unionized workers, or we can get back on the offensive by reaching out to help more workers join unions to strengthen the hand of more working families.

SEIU has been at the forefront of unions doing exactly this since 1996. And the results speak for themselves.  Since 1996, more than 1 million new members have united to join SEIU.  Today SEIU represents 1.9 million workers. These new members range from child care workers to city employees in nonunion right to work states like Texas and Arizona to, significantly, hospital workers.

By contrast, CNA, harking back to old-school craft unionism, has pursued an elitist agenda that not only excludes hospital workers who aren’t registered nurses, it prevents registered nurses who want to join a union other than CNA from doing so simply because it’s not the CNA.

Six days before union elections at nine hospitals in Ohio–one with unprecedented ground rules that resulted from three-plus years of hard work by hospital workers, their community allies, and SEIU to hammer out fair election guidelines with the state’s largest health care system–CNA dropped into the state. CAN organizers ran a fiercely anti-union campaign encouraging workers to “vote no.” Their tactics so poisoned the environment that the elections were cancelled. I won’t go into detail here–it’s all detailed in this timeline: http://www.shameoncna.com/include/timeli ne.asp.

By disrupting this process, CNA sent an unmistakable message to the hospital industry: if a hospital agrees to a fair organizing process, it will be subjected to outlandish accusations of “company unionism” and “backroom deals.”

The CNA’s actions in Ohio represent a major setback in the labor movement’s efforts to raise the standard of employer conduct in organizing campaigns. And it’s not the first time CAN has used such divisive tactics to poach members from an existing union or otherwise divide workers who are in the process of forming a union. It’s happening in California, Nevada, Texas, and elsewhere.

But why might it matter to you? It should if you (you being a working person, a progressive, a consumer in the American economy, or all 3) because this approach undermines the future of the labor movement. At this time of historic inequality and utter insecurity in the American economy, workers need more than ever the strength in community that comes from being organized at work.

In the healthcare sector alone, there are nine million workers out there who don’t have a union. As boomers age, our healthcare needs grow, and the industry’s identity crisis drags on, healthcare workers united in unions have a crucial role to play.

The same is true for the other industries that employ hundreds of millions of American workers–88% of whom don’t have a voice on the job.

But our ability as workers, progressives, and consumers to sit at the big kids’ table depends on our ability to grow and our ability to work together. On a national scale, we’re living the reality of what happens when a smaller and smaller percentage of workers stand together: corporations get to have a bigger and bigger say in the way things work and who gets what.

But at SEIU, we’re living the reality of what happens when workers–with tremendous courage and at great odds–stand together for the interests of all working people: lives, neighborhoods, cities, and whole industries are transformed for the better.

Experience has taught us the hard lesson that circling the wagons simply doesn’t work. And our progressive sensibilities–our concern for the common good–confirm it.

This struggle matters because it’s not just about CNA or SEIU, or Rose Ann DeMoro or Andy Stern. It’s about the future direction and vitality of the American labor movement–a movement that has the ability to blaze a path to an economy and a society that works for everyone–not just the lucky 12%…or 11…or 10…or 9%…

Tags: , , ,

obama_crowd.jpg(Via LA Times.)

Facing an outcry from Hillary Rodham Clinton and John McCain, Barack Obama expressed regret Saturday for saying that small-town Americans embittered by job losses cling to religion, guns and hostility toward immigrants to explain their frustrations.

Obama’s move underscored the political damage wrought by his remark last weekend at a San Francisco fundraiser. Clinton, his rival for the Democratic presidential nomination, made it the focus of her campaign Saturday.

Trying to drive a wedge between Obama and working-class Democrats in states with upcoming primaries, Clinton’s campaign also deployed an army of surrogates to echo her condemnation of the Illinois senator. Among them were the mayors of Scranton, Bethlehem and several other cities in Pennsylvania, where the Democratic contest is nine days away.

Campaigning in Indiana, Clinton said she “was taken aback by the demeaning remarks Sen. Obama made about people in small-town America.”

“Sen. Obama’s remarks are elitist and they are out of touch,” she told a crowd in Indianapolis.

Full story here.

Tags: , , , ,

carter_smiling.jpg(Via Yahoo! News.)

Former President Carter said he feels “quite at ease” about meeting Hamas militants over the objections of Washington because the Palestinian group is essential to a future peace with Israel.

Carter, interviewed Saturday for ABC News’ “This Week,” airing Sunday, also said he would oppose a U.S. Olympic boycott and hopes all countries will join in the Beijing games.

He spoke from Katmandu, Nepal, where his team of observers from the Carter Center monitored an election that appeared likely to transform rule by royal dynasty into a democracy with former Maoist rebels in a strong position, judging by incomplete returns.

Several State Department officials, including the secretary, Condoleezza Rice, criticized Carter’s plans to talk in Syria this week with exiled Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal in the first public contact in two years between a prominent American figure and the group. Carter said he had not heard the objections directly, although a State Department spokesman said earlier that a senior official from the department had called the former president.

“President Carter is a private citizen. We respect his views,” Stephen Hadley, President Bush’s national security adviser, said Sunday on ABC.

“The position of the government is that Hamas is a terrorist organization and we don’t negotiate with terrorists. We think that’s a very important principle to maintain,” Hadley said. “The State Department made clear we think it’s not useful for people to be running to Hamas at this point and having meetings.”

Carter demurred.

“I feel quite at ease in doing this,” he said. “I think there’s no doubt in anyone’s mind that, if Israel is ever going to find peace with justice concerning the relationship with their next-door neighbors, the Palestinians, that Hamas will have to be included in the process.”

Although he said the meeting would not be a negotiation, he outlined distinct goals.

Full story here.

Tags: ,

« Older entries