Debt ceiling debate- arguing the same issue over and over but somehow expecting a different result

Although this overquoted phrase, attributed to Einstein, is classic cliché, the metaphor nevertheless meets the political moment when Republicans keep trying to fight the debt limit debate over and over and over but somehow expect a different result!

Republicans and Debt: Blackmailers Without a Cause

Opinion echo by columnist Paul Krugman published in The New York Times:

Stop me if you’ve heard this before: Two years after a Democratic president took office and pushed ambitious policies through Congress, Republicans have regained control of the House. They don’t have the votes required to repeal the president’s achievements, but a quirk of U.S. law — which requires that Congress vote a second time to authorize the borrowing that results from already enacted spending and tax legislation — seems to give them an opportunity to engage in blackmail, threatening to create a financial crisis unless their demands are met.

Actually, however, you haven’t heard this before. True, there are some parallels with the debt ceiling crisis of 2011. 

But there are also huge differences. Elite opinion has changed — the debt obsession that gripped Very Serious People in the media and beyond a dozen years ago has vanished. Democrats also seem made of sterner stuff, much more determined to resist extortion.

But the most important difference is that this time Republicans aren’t making coherent demands. It’s completely unclear what, if anything, they want in exchange for not blowing up the economy. At this point they’re blackmailers without a cause.

Some of the reporting I’ve seen on the debt standoff describes Republicans as unable to agree on which spending should be cut. This might give the impression that there are factions within the G.O.P. that have different priorities. But as far as I can tell, no influential players within the party are advocating anything that might make a significant dent in the budget deficit, let alone achieve the balanced budget Kevin McCarthy promised as part of the deal that made him speaker.

"...dangerous when a political party is willing to burn things down unless it gets its way..." Krugman.

As always, the fundamental fact about the budget is that the federal government is basically an insurance company with an army. 

Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and the military dominate spending, and it’s impossible to do much about deficits unless you either raise taxes — which is obviously not part of the G.O.P. playbook — or make major cuts to these programs.

In the past, Republicans did try to change safety net programs in ways that would in effect have amounted to major cuts. 

George W. Bush tried to privatize Social Security. Republicans almost made a deal with President Barack Obama that would have reduced Social Security cost of living adjustments and raised the age of Medicare eligibility. In 2017, Paul Ryan, speaker of the House at the time, declared that he had been “dreaming” of cutting Medicaid since his college days. (Maine Writer:  hypocritical Paul Ryan who grew up in a home where his mother benefited from Social Security widows benefits!)

But the G.O.P., perhaps remembering the political backlash after Donald Trump tried to dismantle Obamacare, has since become much more cautious. McCarthy has already declared that cuts to Social Security and Medicare are “off the table”; if his party ever gets around to making specific proposals, it will find out that Medicaid, which covers even more Americans than Medicare, is also extremely popular, even among Republicans.

Nor is political caution the only reason Republican leaders have become reluctant to attack the safety net. The G.O.P. base has also lost interest in spending cuts, turning its attention to culture wars. As my colleague Nate Cohn recently noted, in early 2021, far more Republicans reported having heard about a decision to stop publishing some of the Dr. Seuss books than about President Biden’s $1.9 trillion spending bill.

Inevitably, some Republicans are trying to make the budget a culture-war issue, claiming that large sums can be saved by eliminating “woke” spending. But what spending are they talking about? (Oh paaaalzeee! 😖)

I’ve been trying to find specific examples of federal outlays that conservatives consider woke*, bearing in mind that right-wing think tanks and politicians have a strong incentive to find big-ticket items that sound outrageous. The results of my search were, well, embarrassing. 

For example, the spending listed in a Heritage Foundation report thundering against “woke earmarks” totaled about $19 million — less than the federal government spends every two minutes.

So the bottom line on the debt crisis is that there is no bottom line: Republicans denounce excess spending, but can’t say what spending they want to cut. Even if Democrats were inclined to give in to extortion, which they aren’t, you can’t pay off a blackmailer who won’t make specific demands.

Unfortunately, the emptiness of Republican fiscal posturing is no guarantee that we’ll avoid a debt crisis. If anything, it may make a crisis more likely. MAGA may lack policy ideas, but it’s rich in nihilism; Republicans don’t know what policies they want, but they definitely want to see Biden fail.

So far, the Biden administration’s strategy seems to be to flush Republicans out of hiding, force them to propose specific spending cuts, then watch them retreat in the face of an intense public backlash. There are also, I presume and hope, contingency plans to avoid crisis if this strategy fails.

But it’s hard not to be worried. It’s dangerous when a political party is willing to burn things down unless it gets its way; it’s even more dangerous when that party just wants to watch things burn.

*Woke:  The meaning of WOKE is aware of and actively attentive to important societal facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice).

Michelle Wolf the star of White House Correspondents Dinner

White House Correspondents’ Dinner: See Michelle Wolf’s Scathing Speech

Beautiful Michelle Wolf

“I know there’s a lot of people who want me to talk about Russia and Putin and collusion,” Wolf said during her address, “but I’m not gonna do that—because there’s a lot of liberal media here and I’ve never wanted to know what any of you look like when you orgasm.”

"Here we are at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner,” said comedian and Correspondents' Dinner host Michelle Wolf as she began her speech Saturday night. “Like a porn star says when she’s about to have sex with a Trump, let’s get this over with.”

For the second year in a row, Donald Trump opted to skip the annual gala. So to kick off the night, the White House Correspondents’ Association presented a video in which a cartoon version of the president—the same one who often stops by Stephen Colbert’s Late Show—spoke with various members of his cabinet about whether or not he would attend the event. (Colbert himself famously emceed the Correspondents' Dinner in 2006.)

Additionally, the clip also guest starred cartoon likenesses of journalists including Rachel Maddow.

Michelle Wolf took the stage—and pulled no punches. As the former Daily Show correspondent told a roomful of journalists and politicos, “I have no agenda. I’m not trying to get anything accomplished. So everybody that’s here from Congress, you should feel right at home.”

Naturally, Wolf didn’t let the commander in chief’s absence slide, either: “Of course Trump isn’t here. . . I would drag him here myself, but it turns out the president of the United States is the one pussy you’re not allowed to grab.”

Though Wolf has said that her upcoming Netflix series, The Break, won't be particularly political, the jokes she told Saturday were appropriately topical—some of them hitting, perhaps, a little too close to home, especially for those guests who work in Trump’s orbit.

Her barbs ranged from predictable to edgy, with swipes at politicians including Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan as well as journalists including Maddow and Sean Hannity.

Moreover, Wolf also addressed the #MeToo movement, aiming digs at Bill O’Reilly and Fox News especially. But a large amount of her time, as one might expect, was dedicated to lampooning the president.

“People call Trump names all the time—and look, I could call Trump a racist or a misogynist or xenophobic, or unstable, or incompetent, or impotent. But he’s heard all of those before and he doesn’t care,” Wolf said “So tonight, I’m gonna try to make fun of the president in a new way. In a way that I think will really get him. Mr. President: I don’t think you’re very rich. Like, I think you’re rich in Idaho, but in New York, you’re doing fine.”

She then engaged the room in a little game of “Donald Trump is so poor.” How poor is he? So poor that "he has to fly failed business class;” so poor that he “looked for foreign oil in Don Jr.’s hair,” and, in a joke that might fall into the "too soon" category, so poor that “Southwest used him as one of their engines.”

In the final joke, a harder hit: "Trump is so poor", Wolf said, that “he had to borrow money from the Russians, and now he’s compromised and susceptible to blackmail and possibly responsible for the collapse of the republic.”

“Trump is a racist, though,” Wolf continued. “He loves white nationalists, which is a weird term for a Nazi. Calling a Nazi a white nationalist is like calling a pedophile a kid friend. Or Harvey Weinstein a ladies’ man. Which isn’t fair—he also likes plants.”

Wolf also made an oblique reference to the upheaval that’s gripped the country over the past year, with a nod to the uptick in demonstrations: “People are saying America is more divided than ever, but I think no matter what you support politically, we can all agree that this is a great time for craft stores. Because of all the protests, poster board has been flying off the shelves faster than Robert Mueller can say, ‘You've been subpoenaed. And thanks to Trump, pink yarn sales are through the roof.”

“I know there’s a lot of people who want me to talk about Russia and Putin and collusion,” Wolf continued, “but I’m not gonna do that—because there’s a lot of liberal media here and I’ve never wanted to know what any of you look like when you orgasm. Except for you, Jake Tapper.”

Some of the night’s jokes filled the room with a palpable tension—like one in which Wolf noted Mike Pence’s anti-abortion stance. “He thinks abortion is murder,” Wolf said, “which, first of all, don’t knock it ‘til you try it—and when you do try it, really knock it. You know, you’ve got to get that baby out of there. And yeah, sure, you can groan all you want. I know a lot of you are very anti-abortion. You know, unless it’s the one you got for your secret mistress.”
“I had a lot of jokes about cabinet members,” Wolf said later, “but I had to scrap all of those because everybody has been fired.” Wolf did manage to squeeze in a dig at one cabinet member, however—albeit an outgoing one. After a joke in which Wolf said McConnell couldn’t make it to the dinner because “he’s finally getting his neck circumcised,” Wolf added, “Paul Ryan also couldn’t make it. Of course, he’s already been circumcised. Unfortunately, while they were down there, they also took his while they were down there, they also took his balls.”

On The Daily Show, Wolf has proven she’s got a deep well of Ivanka Trump material, so naturally she brought a few with her Saturday night. “She was supposed to be an advocate for women,” Wolf said of the first daughter, “but it turns out she’s about as helpful to women as an empty box of tampons. She’s done nothing to satisfy women—so, I guess, like father like daughter.”

“She does clean up nice. . . She’s the diaper genie of the administration,” Wolf added. “On the outside it looks sleek, but on the inside it’s full of shit.”

And as for Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who attended the dinner in Trump’s place? “I’m never really sure what to call Sarah Huckabee Sanders. You know? Is it Sarah Sanders, is it Sarah Huckabee Sanders, is it Auntie Huckabee Sanders? What’s ‘Uncle Tom,’ but for white women who disappoint other white women?”

In general, Wolf also urged the media to stop giving Kellyanne Conway a platform on their programs. “If you don’t give her a platform, she has nowhere to lie,” Wolf said. 

As always, there were plenty of digs at the media, including jokes about specific outlets—like CNN. “You guys love breaking news,” Wolf said. “And you did it. You broke it. Good work.” As for Fox News? “Fox News is here, so you know what that means, ladies. Cover your drinks.” Wolf also targeted Sean Hannity, who found himself in hot water after the revelation that he’s Michael Cohen’s third client. “People want me to make fun of Sean Hannity tonight, but I can’t do that. This dinner is for journalists,” she said. 

Joe Scarborough and Mika Brezinzki’s engagement, Wolf said, “is like when a #MeToo works out.”

And as for Megyn Kelly, whose tenure at NBC has been a bit of a let-down so far, Wolf said this: “Megyn Kelly got paid 23 million dollars by NBC and then NBC didn’t let Megyn go to the Winter Olympics. Why not? She’s so white and cold and expensive, she might as well be the Winter Olympics. And by the way, Megyn, Santa’s black. The weird old guy going through your chimney was Bill O’Reilly.”

One group Wolf refused to attack, however? Print media. After all, Wolf reasoned, “it’s illegal to attack an endangered species.” 

Still, as Wolf wrapped up her performance, she finished with one final scold for journalists: “You guys are obsessed with Trump,” she said, adding later, “I think what no one in this room wants to admit is that Trump has helped all of you. He couldn’t sell steaks, or vodka, or water, or college, or ties, or Eric—but he has helped you. He’s helped you so your papers and your books and your TV. You helped create this monster and now you’re profiting off of him. And if you’re gonna profit off of Trump, you should at least give him some money—because he doesn’t have any.”

And with that, Wolf left the stage. Because, as she put it, “like an immigrant who was brought here by his parents and didn’t do anything wrong, I’ve got to get the fuck out of here.”

Catholic Governor Christie becomes Pontius Pilate reenactor

Do the hypocritical right wing Christians recall the Biblical passage where Pontius Pilate condemns the innocent Jesus Christ to death? By giving in to the relentless crowds in Judaea, Pilate seeks to avoid personal responsibility for the death of Jesus.

Well, Governor Chris Christie, maybe you were in a New Testament, Biblical reenactment at the July 19, 2016 "Goop-vention" in Cleveland, when you called on the after dinner crowd to scream "guilty", like you were starring in a Cecil B. DeMille movie saga. 

Were you trying to become a modern day Pontius Pilate?

A good Roman Catholic would know better but you've obviously abandoned your moral compass for more nefarious ambitions, like gaining political notoriety.

Governor Chris Christie claims to be a Roman Catholic, but maybe he's descended from the Roman governor Pontius Pilate

CHRIS CHRISTIE: HUMAN TUMULT MACHINE

(IMO- a Pontius Pilate impersonator......just sayin')

By Benjamin Wallace-Wells
CLEVELAND- Let’s do something fun,” Chris Christie said at the Republican National Convention last night (July 19th). 

The Governor of New Jersey had spent the past day in less expansive emotional states—defending Melania Trump’s plagiarized speech on the “Today” show, expressing his own disappointment that Mike Pence was the Republican Vice-Presidential pick—and he seemed due for some pleasure. 

Christie told the delegates that he, a famously truculent former federal prosecutor, would present an indictment against Hillary Clinton, and they would get to judge whether she was guilty or innocent.  (It appears to me that Governor Christie's speech was threatening and totally circumstantial...IOW, badly flawed.)

The crowd on the floor, gossipy and distracted (like in Judaea? Just sayin') when Paul Ryan spoke, a few minutes earlier, grew attentive. This was the case that Christie had been promising he would make against Clinton since early in his own Presidential campaign. “As a flawed evaluator of dictators,” (is there really such a word as "evaluator"?, just askin') 

Christie asked, suggesting that the former of Secretary of State had been too ready to reset relations with Russia, “is Hillary Clinton guilty or not guilty?” 

Analogous to Pontius Pilate, he asked for verdicts on Clinton’s competence (“as an inept negotiator”) and for being weak toward the Syrian regime (“as an awful judge of the character of a dictator-butcher in the Middle East”). The floor, following the California delegation’s lead, chanted, “Lock her up!” Christie said, “I’m getting there.”

If Christie was pursuing Clinton last night, he was also being pursued. Earlier in the day, Christie’s mentor and appointee David Samson, who was once the chairman of the Port Authority, had pleaded guilty to shaking down United Airlines to keep them from cancelling a direct flight that he took to his vacation home.  (So is this something like the time when Pontius Pilate was called back to Rome, where he was scolded for not managing political unrest and before he kowtowed by asking the mobs to judge Jesus? Just askin'.)

The case against Samson grew out of the investigation into the Christie administration’s vindictive George Washington Bridge lane closures, which presses on. Even during his political ascent, Christie was a creature of grievance and emotion, an open wound, a human tumult machine. When he gave the keynote speech at the 2012 Republican Convention, Christie got three-quarters of the way through a talk about himself (eighty paragraphs into the written version) before he said the name of the candidate, Mitt Romney. This time, Christie had expected to be named Donald Trump’s running mate and when he found out that he wouldn’t be, the Governor turned “livid,” Trump’s campaign manager, Paul Manafort, reportedly told friends.

Still, Christie appeared on the “Today” show yesterday, to insist, a little humiliatingly, that “ninety-three per cent” of Melania Trump’s speech had not been plagiarized. He was also asked how he felt about being passed over by Trump. The Governor said that he didn’t want to “sugarcoat it,” and that he was disappointed. 

“If you compete for something like I did, you’d like to be picked. I wasn’t. So you take a deep breath, and you go to bed, and you wake up the next morning and get on with your day,” he said. The general opinion was that Christie had debased himself and had gotten nothing for it. The more specific opinion, among the New Jersey delegation on the Convention floor, was that the emoting was all very Christie. “I almost think when he does something like that, he makes himself vulnerable to the public,” Maria DiGiovanni, the mayor of Hackettstown, said.

Christie’s defining characteristic as a politician is his relentlessness. He has conducted a hundred and thirty-five town halls across his state, promising help for local problems and haranguing public-school teachers. But he also has a special sensitivity to the complex character of his state: after Hurricane Sandy, Christie was the nostalgist of the boardwalks, but he also nominated the first Muslim judge to the New Jersey Superior Court, in 2011, and heatedly defended the man’s patriotism and qualifications against an angry Islamophobic wave of resistance. Christie’s persona—that Springsteen/“Sopranos” amalgam—has always seemed a touch on the nose, as if it he had sketched himself. On the “Today” show, yesterday, Christie dealt amiably with rumors that Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, had opposed putting Christie on the ticket. (In 2005, Christie, as the U.S. Attorney for New Jersey, sent Kushner’s father to prison.) “I understand that’s a sort of Shakespearean thing that people want to write about,” Christie said. And maybe it was.

New Jersey Republican officials are a prosperous and pragmatic clan, and by now they have generally made their peace with Donald Trump, as Christie has. “If you want to be a delegate from New Jersey, you really need to be a Trump delegate,” Henry Kuhl, who was attending his eleventh convention, pointed out. The main feeling among New Jersey’s fifty-one delegates was that Christie and Trump shared certain attributes: plainspokenness, an executive talent, perhaps an allergy to ideology. “It’s not my particular style, but he’s effective,” a delegate named Mary O’Brien said of Trump. Next to her, a delegate named John Traier said that he was disappointed that the national Republican platform was so starkly opposed to gay and lesbian rights, but added that he was pleased that the New Jersey delegation had supported equality. 

“Baby steps,” Traier said. 

On the broader matter of Trump he was serene. “Every so often the Party goes through a metamorphosis,” he said.

Up on the stage, Christie was completing one of his own. 

During his Presidential campaign, Christie had subdued his talk of American immigrant diversity in favor of a skepticism about Syrian refugees, and now he shed the sentiment and the lugubriousness, the parts of his character that least matched Trump’s. 

Some act of interior whittling had taken place. On Monday, when the mood in the Convention was dark and nationalistic, Christie had been said to be polishing his speech; by Tuesday it was full of the prosecutor’s blacks and whites, the high moral tone of a man eyed by a grand jury himself. “In Libya and Nigeria—guilty,” Christie said of Clinton. “In China and Syria—guilty. In Iran and Russia and Cuba—guilty.” Christie had maneuvered into place. Already Trump has said that Christie will lead his Presidential transition team. The talk among the New Jersey delegation was that he’d also make a fine attorney general.

Oh really? An AG? Well, he'd also make a good re-enactor the next time a traveling acting group is looking for a Pontius Pilate impersonator.

Republicans Are Falling and They Can't Get Up

I'd love to see a television ad with House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, Congressman Paul Ryan, Speaker of the House John Boehner, right wingers Senator Ted Cruz and others of their extremely conservative genre wearing a "can't get up" emergency telephone necklace. They're certainly a group in need of emergency assistance.

The problem is, these right wingers and their followers are simply incapable of coming up with new political ideas. They need the kind of idea assistance that can raise them out of the vortex of negativity in which they swirl.

Here are a few ideas these fallen and can't get up ideologues might look to for help:

1.  Save Social Security as an earned pension benefit for people who qualify.  Don't even mention any idea of cutting Social Security. Instead, tell Americans how they can look forward to being assured of receiving this benefit.

2.  Restore COLA (cost of living) increases in retried military pension. These veterans gave over 20 years of their youth to protect our nation, especially during the extended war on terror. They earned their retirement and deserve the full benefit they were promised. Don't say "thank you for your service" and then cut benefits.

3.  Protect the right of all people to have access to quality, affordable and accessible health care through a Medicare for All program. Medicare is already in place for those who qualify.  It's not free. Medicare should be extended to all people who earn this benefit, rather than limited to those 65 years old, or otherwise qualify as a result of a disability, black lung or kidney disease.

4.  Control military spending by cutting the duplication in the armed services. For example, every branch of the military has it's own air force. In another example, the US Navy has "SEALS" but the army has Special Forces. In some cases, both of these elite programs do the same thing. Non-profit agencies have long ago figured out how to prevent duplication of services. Our US Military is long overdue in implementing the same efficiencies.

5.  Reduce the US budget by removing American military bases in foreign countries like Japan and Germany. These bases are relics of World War II.  It's time to leave.

6.  Stay away, far-far away, from women's health issues especially contraception. Be particularly averse to any reference, whatsoever, to the word "rape". Instead, when someone asks about about using extreme intervention to prevent pregnancy resulting from rape, the response should be memorized "rape is a crime, it's assault". That's it, say no more.

7.  Recommend a national amendment to the US Constitution to make it illegal to close the government for any reason.

8.  Pass President Obama's Jobs Bill.  

9.  Support extending unemployment benefits for the long term unemployed. Shame on Congressman Cantor for preventing this extension. Has Congressman Cantor ever been in a position when being unemployed created economic stress in his life?  He should have humanistic social conscience about this important human condition issue.

10.  Create a strategy to close in the growing income disparity between the elite rich and the growing number of poor and lower middle class people.  

Republicans should stand up before the American people and explain what ideas they have about sustaining the human condition while building a future for our children.

Instead, Republican have fallen and they can't get up. Nevertheless, in spite of their political clumsiness, Republicans are pulling many others down with them. It's like they have chronic right wing political disease that somehow became contagious.  

Republicans need rehabilitation therapy to figure out how to get up before their right wing illness becomes a pandemic.

Curing this pervasive right wing vortex of regressive politics is to vote all of them out of office.  

Americans have a chance to recall all Republicans in the 2014 elections. We have an election chance to say, once and for all, "Republicans, you have fallen and you can't get up".  It's time to find a rehabilitation center where you can sequester yourselves until you're discharged.   

The New Yorker: The House of Pain - Will Eric Cantor Cure Republicans?

It's a tired idiom but, nonetheless, true that people of similar taste congregate in groups. "Birds of a feather flock together". So, what does one expect to hear from Congressman Paul Ryan when asked about his Republican conservative colleague, Congressman Eric Cantor?
"He's a fantastic Majority Leader," Paul Ryan, the chairman of the House Budget Committee and a close friend, said.  

Ryan Lizza writes in the March 4th, The New Yorker about how Congressman Cantor is among the young faces in the Republican party who must design a winning political strategy to overcome the 2012 election setbacks.  "Eric keeps the trains running on time very efficiently," said Ryan; "...we need to do a better job of broadening our appeal and showing that we have real ideas and solutions that make people's lives better," Ryan said.

It's impossible to understand how Ryan and Cantor, who are political bookends, can do a better job of showing how they have ideas and solutions to make people's lives better, when they don't.

Here's my analysis about their "stupid" ideas (I just love Governor Jindal, for coming up with the use of that appropriate word):

1.  Cantor and Ryan aren't economists; they're politicians.  They believe cutting people's taxes makes everybody's lives better, without any proof whatsoever that this is true.  In fact, in countries like Singapore or Japan, the quality of life is excellent and people living there pay plenty of taxes.

2.  Cantor and Ryan are financially well off.  Their salaries alone are about $175,000 each, a year, paid by US tax payers.  Nevertheless, they believe in means testing Social Security for the rest of us, who worked very hard to earn our retirement, while receiving far less then their annual pay.  Every financial adviser I know includes the earned Social Security benefit in our retirement analysis.  Middle class people simply can't retire without knowing how much we're entitled to receive from our Social Security.  Means testing this benefit isn't fair to those of us who expect our benefit and it doesn't help future retirees, who currently pay into the program, to feel secure about retirement.  Means testing Social Security will likely delay many people from retiring, unless, of course, they're like Ryan and Cantor, who earn $175,000 annually. 

3.  Cantor and Ryan like each other's ideas. They apparently tell themselves how wonderful they are, but aren't open to compromise with people who disagree with them.  How can they "broaden their appeal", when they completely close down on opportunities to reach across the political aisle?  Their ideas are supported by right wing Tea-Party conservatives. Many of these activists live in denial about their immigrant origins, while they fight immigration reform. They largely believe government is the problem rather than the solution to America's problems, but they want border security, Medicare, highways to drive on and access to public tours of the White House.  Cantor and Ryan, and their flocks, can't broaden their Republican appeal, when they constantly bite the hand of government, that feeds them.

Eric Cantor's leadership role in the House should give him the opportunity to show statesmanship. Instead, his leadership contributes to the line-up of sour faced Congressional Republicans.  Although Cantor's leadership is painfully partisan, he won't let go of this dour personal affect, his entrenched right wing ideology or his flock of "think alike" friends.  

It's doubtful Cantor and Ryan can cure their Republican feather friends' pain. It's like trying to cure roosters from crowing.  Right wing Republicans are suffering from the pains of election losses, ideological and regional divisions, as Lizza describes.  

Obviously, however, Cantor and Ryan share an exclusive mutual admiration society; but, they have no right to inflict their brand of political pain on others, especially when their positions are loosing ground with immigrants and middle class people.

Hopefully, American voters will end the Cantor and Ryan political pain symposium and vote them, and their right wing colleagues, out of office in 2014.  





  

Sequestration - a Big Word Means "National Economic Emergency"

"The American people have worked too hard for too long, rebuilding from one crisis to see their elected officials cause another." President Barack Obama State of the Union February 12, 2013

What is "sequestration"? Well, having looked it up, the best way to explain it is in plainly dire words.  Apparently, the use of sequestration is like radical surgery to stop the spread of a lethal disease.  In fact, it's so serious that the prospect of sequestration has thus come to seem so catastrophic that Congress has so far been unwilling to allow it to happen.  What it means is that  a plethora of budget cuts will automatically happen just because no one has the political will to act responsibly to stop them.  Everyone agrees about the consequences of allowing the March 1, sequestration to happen.  It's called "recession", ie job losses and stock market consequences. 

Therefore, I have a dire suggestion equal to the urgency of a Congress unable to respond to sequestration.  My recommendation is for President Obama to declare a national economic emergency and simply block the sequestration from moving forward.

Meanwhile, Americans must finish the job begun with the 2012 election. In 2014, voters must eliminate all Republicans from power by voting them out of office.  This means Republican Eric Cantor, Republican Paul Ryan, Republican Kevin McCarthy must be voted out of office along with Republican John Boehner.  Moreover, Democrats must take control of the House of the Representative and retain a majority in the US Senate.  Polishing off of the 2012 election, where the Democrats out voted Republicans, depends on the momentum continuing into the mid term election.

Obviously, Americans can't wait until the mid term election to rid ourselves of right wing extremism. Therefore, in the meantime, President Obama must respond to the urgency of sequestration by declaring a national economic emergency.  

He simply can't let it happen and American voters will support his efforts to take urgent action.  

Paul Ryan- ".. honored to tell Oliver Twist there's no more soup left"

Poverty is on the rise and the canyon growing between those who have access to wealth and the rest of humanity is evident in Middle East social upheaval.  

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-10-21/middle-east-leaders-address-unemployment-in-arab-spring-wake.html

"Middle Eastern politicians and business leaders.. confront the problems of persistent unemployment and slow economic growth... amidst...regional unrest."

Yet, American conservative political candidates, somehow, don't see themselves creating problems, when they preach about cuts to middle class safety net programs.  

There's no evidence of socially conservative policies being successful in solving economic problems.  In fact, in my rudimentary research, I can't find a precedent in history where social austerity led to economic or political stability. Nonetheless,  economic upheaval and social instability created several world class writers like Charles Dickens, Leo Tolstoy and Pearl Buck.

Those who put their political capital behind conservative politicians like Congressman Paul Ryan and Congressman Eric Cantor ignore the historic danger of social austerity.  Let's take a short on-line walk through some modern history:

1789-1799: French Revolution  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution

"... the royal court at Versailles was seen as being isolated from, and indifferent to, the hardships of the lower classes." 

1911- China http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xinhai_Revolution

The revolution arose mainly in response to the decline of the Qing state, which...proved.. ineffective in..efforts to modernize China and confront new challenges presented by foreign powers, and was exacerbated by ethnic resentment against the ruling Manchu minority.http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/greed-and-debt-the-true-story-of-mitt-romney-and-bain-capital-20120829#ixzz26dI1lhCF 

1917- The Russian Revolution:  "...owing to a lack of food in response to the disruption of agriculture. Food became a considerable problem in Russia, but the cause..did not lie in any failure of the harvest, which had not been significantly altered.... The indirect reason was that the government, in order to finance...war, was.. printing millions of rouble notes, and by 1917, inflation..made prices increase...The peasantry were consequently faced with the higher cost of purchases, but made no corresponding gain in the sale of their own produce, since this was largely taken by the middlemen on whom they depended. As a result they tended to hoard..grain and to revert to subsistence farming. Thus..cities were constantly short of food. At the same time rising prices led to demands for higher wages in the factories...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Revolution 

"Greed" is today's equivalent to the above turbulent historic situations, a summary of all the conservative policies reduced to one word. Republicans want taxes cut for their rich friends but expect government to be paid for by the middle class. 

A magnificent report about how Romney used greed to build his business resume is told in, "The True Story of Mitt Romney and Bain Capital- How the GOP presidential candidate and his private equity firm staged an epic wealth grab, destroyed jobs – and stuck others with the bill"..

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/greed-and-debt-the-true-story-of-mitt-romney-and-bain-capital-20120829#ixzz26j1kz2L5

When fiscal conservatives recoil at the mention of words like "deficit" and "entitlement", they don't think, out of the box or historically, about alternatives to our social responsibility to care for the middle class, especially, the poor.  Rather than overuse the buzz word "deficit" these conservatives should superimpose the concept of revenue sharing; rather than marginalize people who rely on "entitlements" they should look at how particular programs improve our nation's economy and quality of life for all our citizens.  

Vice-Presidential candidate Paul Ryan is an example of social conservative hypocrisy. He supports cutting programs for the middle class while benefiting from a healthy salary, health care and retirement paid for by middle class tax payers.  

Yet, Congressman Ryan acts and sounds like he's "..honored to tell Oliver Twist there's no more soup left..." the classic scene in the Dickens famous novel, paraphrased by Taibbi in "Rolling Stone".

My point is: Socially conservative politicians create world class novelists who expose budget hawks like Congressman Paul Ryan as regressive zealots. 

Ryan and right wing colleagues collect salaries from tax payers while paying for their ambitions with cuts on middle class and poverty safety net programs.

Thankfully, the Romney-Ryan-Regressive political campaign is currently collapsing under its incompetence.  Although there's no good news to bolster any politician these days, we can't let regressive politicians like Ryan set the social agenda, especially when we need as much economic help and support as possible. 

Let's give Paul Ryan a first edition 1838, "Oliver Twist", as a relic of his failed message to push an irresponsible social agenda without calling for revenue sharing.

Memorial Day and Paul Ryan's Republican Budget

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/gop-showing-small-shifts-on-taxes/2012/05/25/gJQAQ5I0pU_story.html?hpid=z1&wpisrc=nl_pmpolitics

America's Memorial Day is important and fundamentally means tax payers get what we pay for when we fund our US military with tax money.  


Today's Washington Post story indicates there may be hope for Republicans who might finally "get" his connection.


Yet, budget austerity, supported by right wing extremists like Congressman Paul Ryan and Tea Party colleagues, risks funding the quality of health, welfare and retirement programs for the brave military people who secure his own pay check. 


Worthwhile expenses to protect our nation's freedom and safety aren't isolated to the cost of funding an excellent military. There's associated financial and ethical responsibilities to care for the quality of lives for veterans who have contributed their youth to ensuring our National Security. 


Military men and women enter service at a young age and thereby contribute their youth to protecting our National Security. They deserve more than tributes, flag waving and medals. They also deserve well earned benefits.


Our nation's young men and women volunteer to serve in foreign conflicts, they respond to national emergencies like the "war on terrorism" and provide humanitarian assistance during natural disasters like Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans or the cluster tornado outbreaks in Joplin, Missouri.


But, if Congressman Ryan and his budget hacking colleagues have their way, the veterans benefits assured to today's military will be cut.  If Grover Norquist's anti-tax pledge survives, the GOP will continue to cut tax funded programs like health services veterans receive through the Veteran's Administration and Medicare.


Budget hackers in Congress should cut their own salaries and staff expenses before reducing any veterans benefits.


Except, there's a win-win solution called "income" from tax revenues. This seems like a "no-brainer" solution to funding the federal budget. (In my opinion, those who don't support raising the income part of the budget may, indeed, need to find a brain.) 


Increasing income is especially doable when raising the percentage of taxes paid by the rich and super wealthy only takes one majority vote by the US Congress.


Congressman Paul Ryan and the selfish tax hawk Grover Norquist should volunteer to serve for 3 months in the US military - they can even have junior officer status.  Ryan deserves to be a Navy Ensign for three months.  Norquist should be a Marine Second Lieutenant.


After Ryan and Norquist serve in the military, they can evaluate how their austerity measures impact the quality of life for Veterans. After the 3 months voluntary service, these two prominent individuals can assume they have the credibility to ask Americans to cut services to Veterans, without first looking to raise sensible revenues by asking the rich, like both of them, to pay more of their fair share.


Ryan and Norquist likely respond, like most Americans, with pride, when we stand for the tribute to Veterans and the performance of the Star Spangled Banner national anthem.  Both of them might need a historical reminder that the anthem was written during the War of 1812, when we defended our freedom, a second time, against Great Britain.  


Surely, Ryan and Norquist know and believe that "Freedom is not Free".