by Mark Silva
President Barack Obama, who will deliver his State of the Union address next week, and House Minority Leader John Boehner, delivering today a pre-buttal to that address, are torn over the implications of two far-reaching rulings handed down this week.
One is the Supreme Court's 5-4 decision to lift a century-old limit on corporate spending in political campaigns. The president, decrying the ruling as the opening of "floodgates" for special interests that will drown out the voices of the people, vows in his weekly address today to find a legislative way to remedy the situation. Boehner hailed the court's ruling as a recognition of the fundamental rights of free speech.
The other is the special election in Massachusetts that handed the Senate seat of the late and long-serving Edward M. Kennedy, a champion of health-care reform, to the Republican state senator, Scott Brown, who ran with a promise to block that reform in Washington. Brown, who will become the 41st vote in a Republican minority sufficient to block any action in the Senate, has declared Obama's health-plan dead on arrival. Boehner hails it as nothing short of a "rebellion'' that has brewed for months.
While Obama explains his reasons for objecting to the high court's ruling on corporate spending this week, Boehner suggests that it's time the Democrats focus on solutions to the biggest problem the nation faces, persisting unemployment.
"One of the reasons I ran for president was because I believed so strongly that the voices of everyday Americans, hardworking folks doing everything they can to stay afloat, just weren't being heard over the powerful voices of the special interests in Washington,'' Obama says in his weekly radio and Internet address today.
"We've been making steady progress. But this week, the United States Supreme Court handed a huge victory to the special interests and their lobbyists - and a powerful blow to our efforts to rein in corporate influence,' he says. "This ruling opens the floodgates for an unlimited amount of special interest money into our democracy.''
Vowing to work with Congress to find a way to correct the imbalance of power in elections resulting from the court's ruling, Obama says: "In this age of mass communications... the decks are too often stacked against ordinary Americans. And as long as I'm your president, I'll never stop fighting to make sure that the most powerful voice in Washington belongs to you.''
The peoples' voice rang loud and clear this week, Boehner maintains.
"My home state of Ohio has endured nine straight months of double-digit unemployment,'' says Boehner, from a state where unemployment has reaced 10.9 percent. "And for the better part of those nine months, Democrats in Washington have been focused on this government takeover of health care that working families just can't afford and want nothing to do with.
"This is what happens when government overreaches and stops listening to the people,'' he says. "Washington Democrats believe government knows best how to spend your hard-earned money. Democrats believe we're just one new tax, one more czar, and one giant bureaucracy away from solving all of your problems.
"For months now, a political rebellion has been brewing - one born from the American people's opposition to greater government control over our economy and their lives,'' the minority leader says,. "That rebellion propelled Republican Scott Brown to victory in this week's Massachusetts special election.
"President Obama and Democrat leaders in Washington now have a choice: work with Republicans to get our nation back on its feet, or double down on the job-killing policies that are making matters worse,'' he says, pointing to the president's address to a joint session of Congress on Wednesday. "At the State of the Union, we'll listen to what the president has to say. But make no mistake: if the powers that be in Washington keep turning their backs on the people, Republicans will continue to challenge the status quo and offer better solutions.''
See the president's address above, the Republican response below, and read the texts of both addresses below, here in the Swamp:
This is the text of the president's address:
"One of the reasons I ran for President was because I believed so strongly that the voices of everyday Americans, hardworking folks doing everything they can to stay afloat, just weren't being heard over the powerful voices of the special interests in Washington. And the result was a national agenda too often skewed in favor of those with the power to tilt the tables.
In my first year in office, we pushed back on that power by implementing historic reforms to get rid of the influence of those special interests. On my first day in office, we closed the revolving door between lobbying firms and the government so that no one in my administration would make decisions based on the interests of former or future employers. We barred gifts from federal lobbyists to executive branch officials. We imposed tough restrictions to prevent funds for our recovery from lining the pockets of the well-connected, instead of creating jobs for Americans. And for the first time in history, we have publicly disclosed the names of lobbyists and non-lobbyists alike who visit the White House every day, so that you know what's going on in the White House - the people's house.
We've been making steady progress. But this week, the United States Supreme Court handed a huge victory to the special interests and their lobbyists - and a powerful blow to our efforts to rein in corporate influence. This ruling strikes at our democracy itself. By a 5-4 vote, the Court overturned more than a century of law - including a bipartisan campaign finance law written by Senators John McCain and Russ Feingold that had barred corporations from using their financial clout to directly interfere with elections by running advertisements for or against candidates in the crucial closing weeks.
This ruling opens the floodgates for an unlimited amount of special interest money into our democracy. It gives the special interest lobbyists new leverage to spend millions on advertising to persuade elected officials to vote their way - or to punish those who don't. That means that any public servant who has the courage to stand up to the special interests and stand up for the American people can find himself or herself under assault come election time. Even foreign corporations may now get into the act.
I can't think of anything more devastating to the public interest. The last thing we need to do is hand more influence to the lobbyists in Washington, or more power to the special interests to tip the outcome of elections.
All of us, regardless of party, should be worried that it will be that much harder to get fair, common-sense financial reforms, or close unwarranted tax loopholes that reward corporations from sheltering their income or shipping American jobs off-shore.
It will make it more difficult to pass commonsense laws to promote energy independence because even foreign entities would be allowed to mix in our elections.
It would give the health insurance industry even more leverage to fend off reforms that would protect patients.
We don't need to give any more voice to the powerful interests that already drown out the voices of everyday Americans.
And we don't intend to. When this ruling came down, I instructed my administration to get to work immediately with members of Congress willing to fight for the American people to develop a forceful, bipartisan response to this decision. We have begun that work, and it will be a priority for us until we repair the damage that has been done.
A hundred years ago, one of the great Republican Presidents, Teddy Roosevelt, fought to limit special interest spending and influence over American political campaigns and warned of the impact of unbridled, corporate spending. His message rings as true as ever today, in this age of mass communications, when the decks are too often stacked against ordinary Americans. And as long as I'm your President, I'll never stop fighting to make sure that the most powerful voice in Washington belongs to you.''
This is the text of the Republican address:
"I'm House Republican Leader John Boehner.
"I'm speaking to you from the Capitol, where next week, President Obama will deliver his first State of the Union address.
"This is a fitting time to pause and take stock of where we are.
"Nearly a year ago, the president signed into law a trillion-dollar 'stimulus' with promises that jobs would be created 'immediately' and that unemployment would stay below eight percent.
"Since then, roughly three million Americans have lost their jobs while red ink and bailouts have piled up as far as the eye can see.
"My home state of Ohio has endured nine straight months of double-digit unemployment. And for the better part of those nine months, Democrats in Washington have been focused on this government takeover of health care that working families just can't afford and want nothing to do with.
"This is what happens when government overreaches and stops listening to the people. Washington Democrats believe government knows best how to spend your hard-earned money. Democrats believe we're just one new tax, one more czar, and one giant bureaucracy away from solving all of your problems.
"That's not the America that I know growing up with 11 brothers and sisters as the son of a bar owner. And as I travel the country, I meet a lot of people who feel the same way.
"For months now, a political rebellion has been brewing - one born from the American people's opposition to greater government control over our economy and their lives.
"That rebellion propelled Republican Scott Brown to victory in this week's Massachusetts special election.
"Scott's win in the bluest of blue states gives us new hope that common sense will prevail. That maybe now, the hard work and entrepreneurship of the American people will no longer be stifled by Washington Democrats' costly, job-killing agenda, an agenda Republicans have stood on principle and fought tooth and nail against.
"But we know better. We know that Washington Democrats will pull out all the stops to try and shove through this government takeover of health care, with its Medicare cuts and tax hikes. If there's a sweetheart deal that needs to be cut, Democrats will cut it. And if there's a vote that needs to be bought, they'll buy it.
"Haven't we had enough of government propped up on payoffs and pork-barrel spending? Haven't we had enough of the same-old, us-vs-them politics that uses yesterday's battles to distract us from today's problems? We're all in this together, and we need positive, forward-looking solutions to bring us together.
"So for families asking 'where are the jobs,' Republicans have offered common-sense solutions to help small businesses invest and hire new workers. We've also put forward a responsible budget blueprint that makes the tough spending choices that others just talk about.
"And on health care, Republicans have proposed the only bill that would lower premiums by up to 10 percent. And we do this by implementing some smart, common-sense reforms - whether it's letting families and businesses buy health insurance across state lines or ending the junk lawsuits that contribute to higher health care costs.
"And we get the job done without cutting Medicare or raising your taxes.
"These solutions aren't being devised behind closed doors with special interests having the final say. We're soliciting feedback on Facebook and Twitter. We're working with governors and mayors every day to develop the best ideas. All of the details are available at solutions.gop.gov.
"President Obama and Democrat leaders in Washington now have a choice: work with Republicans to get our nation back on its feet, or double down on the job-killing policies that are making matters worse.
"So at the State of the Union, we'll listen to what the President has to say. But make no mistake: if the powers that be in Washington keep turning their backs on the people, Republicans will continue to challenge the status quo and offer better solutions.
"Our fight for reform, for freedom, and for common sense is far from over.
"Thanks for listening."
Comments
PROMISES KEPT:
1. “Date Night.”
2. “Dog.”
PROMISES NOT KEPT:
1. Unemployment
2. Stimulus Job
3. Lobbying
4. Middle-class Taxes
5. Seniors’ Income Tax
6. Meeting with Dictators
7. “Card Check.”
8. Swine Flu
Read more here . . .
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/01/21/mallory-factor-obama-year-campaign-promises/
Posted by: Bobby Mobbie | January 23, 2010 9:34 AM
Nice Bobby, you post a bias news link after your own bias nonsense.
People with real common sense understand it will take several years to undo the mistakes of the previous administration.
Unfortunately, our short attention span world seems to think there really is an "easy button" (like those Staples ads) that can just fix the disastrous Bush policies.
I do believe Obama "oversold" what he could do, and perhaps tried to take on too many items at once. But all accounts show the stimulus is working. Jobs will start to come back about middle of this year (which would be about right compared with other recessions). Jobs kept declining until 11% under Reagan, and didn't turn around until almost 2 years into his administration.
You may recall, Reagan's approval ratings were just about the same his first year as Obama's. Clintons were even worse. But they both cruised to a second term. And Clinton, despite a complete reversal from Democrat to Republican majority in 1994.
Time will tell, but if history is an indicator, republicans shuldn't be measuring the White House curtains just yet.
Posted by: David J | January 23, 2010 10:02 AM
Lets hope the Court ruling will avoid dictatorship or socalism in Ameruca as free enterprize business can't survuve in a Dictatorship.
Posted by: Inky | January 23, 2010 10:19 AM
And remember, yesterday was the 1-year anniversary of Obama's pledge to close Gitmo "within 1 year".
Another day, another Obama lie.
Posted by: Change in 2012 | January 23, 2010 10:21 AM
PROMISES NOT KEPT:
1. Unemployment- consider the facts that everyone outsourced to China, India, and other slave camps; plus a bank meltdown so massive that it rivals if not surpass the 1920's blackmarket; a housing market bubble. Honestly, we are lucky to be where we are. . .could of been worst! But gasoline dropping under $2.00 will help stimulate the economy more- because they have more to spend!
2. Stimulus Job- most of the checks are yet to be handed out. Likely in Spring. . .but, not sure why it is taking so long since most biddings are done. Must be that guy who has 30 years of service sleeping on a pile of papers- the paper isn't getting shuffle fast enough!
3. Lobbying- funny how you mention this because 5 of the judges on the Supreme Court are Republicans who just, last week, voted that corporations have the right to donate to campaign! Nice going! Turning us to not the "people's seat" but the "Corporate seat." Yet, the Right accuse Obama of taking over the Banks- yet they've announced record profit quarters; accused Obama of taking over the auto industry- yet Ford stock is doing well, except the low quality GM and Chrysler brand. accused Obama of taking over energy- yet oil is around $70- $80 bucks a barrel. If Obama is truely taking over America, they sure are free to make profits! I am rolling my eyes. . .whatever more fairty tale news is spewing.
4. Middle-class Taxes- Yeah, everyone got a modest 10 or 20 bucks extra in their pay check. It wasn't much but it was something. Again, repeating a broken record, I prefer if gasoline went down under $2.00. But that won't happen because Goldman Sach and the rest of the hedge funds are still manipulating the commodity market by buying massive oil reserves to keep the price high- which they never ever intended to refine in the first place.
5. Seniors’ Income Tax- What more do you want? You already got C.O.L.A. Most employee's never got a raise this year!
6. Meeting with Dictators- I know Chavez was kissing buttock. He was like a little boy in a Carnival.
7. “Card Check.” - How about start enforcing some laws first like border control- wich Obama provided tons of money this year and into the future. Honestly, you really think "Card Check" will stop illegals from picking fruits and vegetables? You are laughable! "Card Check" is nothing more than driver's licence- Anyone with pick pocketed information from ID theft and a good quality copier can duplicate that "Card Check." Last time I heard on the news, ID theft was over a billion dollar market! TYou should be more worried about your name not appearing on the ID Theft list!!!
8. Swine Flu- rolling my eyes again. . .have you never ever been to Walgreen? They offer Flu shots for like $20 bucks or less. . .go get one!
Read more here . . . - you mean the Inquirer? We all know Fox amounts to the Inquirer- that is why they are doing so well. Inquirer sells better than news at the local markets. . .people love gossips but real news is so boring because you need an IQ above 100 to understand the concept of facts versus ficctions.
Posted by: HmongRodneyKing | January 23, 2010 11:27 AM
Davey,
"But all accounts show the stimulus is working" - What was the unemployement rate supposed to be if the Stimulus was passed? What was the unemployment rate supposed to be if Stimulus wasn't passed? What is the unemployment rate?
http://michaelscomments.wordpress.com/2009/06/08/correction-to-the-may-unemployment-chart/
Posted by: Terry | January 23, 2010 11:36 AM
What the Hey! The supreme court ruling, overturning a centuries old law, comes from John Roberts and company, another of George Bushes poison pills he left this country to swallow. Now Rupert Murdoch will be able to put his own president in the white house and he isn't even a citizen! Send him back to Australia! As far as Slick Scotty Brown, he is just another Republican that has been on the public dowl since he was nineteen years old. Ask Slick Scotty who pays for his health care insurance? Does he pay taxes on his government pension? Now he wants to work on another pension while he collects the other, plus his salary from the government. I know John McCain gets his $58,000 dollar pension tax free, while I pay taxes on my pension and my social security! I say no more government pensions, if you want a pension pay over your lifetime in your own fund, don't expect the taxpayer to fund your retirement. Whether you are a policeman, fireman, school teacher, government worker, military or whatever, fund your own pension! PERIOD! whiteagle38
Posted by: Raymond L. Juneau | January 23, 2010 11:37 AM
Yo, President Narcissist Obimbo: Supreme Court ruling STRENGTHENS free speech.
I'm beginning to think Hugo Chavez had it right last spring when he said that Obama was further to the left than he and Castro.
Posted by: John D | January 23, 2010 11:40 AM
Hey Boehner: When you Republicans controlled the White House AND Congres from 2001 - 2006, why didn't you offer any health care reform proposals then? Maybe it's because you don't give a damn about the 40 million Americans without health insurance?
Posted by: BC | January 23, 2010 11:50 AM
Bobby,
Your post and link paint an incomplete, if not biased picture. Here's an actual complete picture of the promises made during the campaign and their progress.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/
Posted by: martin | January 23, 2010 12:00 PM
inky:
Lets hope the Court ruling will avoid dictatorship or socalism in Ameruca as free enterprize business can't survuve in a Dictatorship.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
here is some news:
free enterprise cannot survive the economy and job losses brought on by ( or buy ) our elected offficials who are owned by corporations and work to protect their profits.
Taking their corpo-fascism
objectives to the next level, they now celebrate this recent decision by bu$h apointees in the SCOTUS ruling.
This decision was hailed by the r-cons and the leader of the GOP, Rush Limbaugh and
condemned by freedom loving Americans who recognize this decision for what it is: a green light to buy even more politicans, thus guaranteeing the massive bailouts will continue and so it goes.
Americans need to take their government back while there is still a chance. Otherwise, each and everyone of us will have a pricetag stenciled on our foreheads, compliments of
Boehner and the rest of the
corpo-fascists who care only about profits.
Posted by: writerofwrongs | January 23, 2010 12:20 PM
How it must pain the Dems.' to unlock the back doors and finally allow the Republicans to offer concrete solutions to our nations problems such as tort reform, allowing insurance companies to sell across state lines, rescinding the obscene deals given by Barry to Big Pharma and the insurance companies last month, special exemption deals to the unions, bribes to Senators. I see now the Dems. want to keep Mr. Bush tax cuts in place to spur hiring for private sector jobs , instead of public sector, do nothing, union jobs. Surprise , surprise, the Dems. took 67 million from the banking industry last election cycle, the same group they now want to crucify. Change is coming, only it's not the change the kool-aid drinkers expected.
Posted by: Don B. | January 23, 2010 2:13 PM
"the Republicans to offer concrete solutions to our nations problems such as tort reform, allowing insurance companies to sell across state lines. . "
That's not a concrete solution. That's an "old rabbit hat trick" talk that never worked- Blue Cross already sell across state lines. They are already in Illinois , Wisconsin, and many other states. The problem is affordability. . .selling across state line isn't going to lower cost- you're getting insured by the same company! hahaha
Posted by: HmongRodneyKing | January 23, 2010 4:11 PM
The DNC Swamp is usually eager to highlight the Gallup Poll, but hasn't publicized Gallup's latest numbers on President Obama's approval ratings.
Because they've hit a new low--47%.
Posted by: Equal time | January 23, 2010 6:50 PM
HmongRodneyKing, HmongRodneyKing, HmongRodneyKing
You have taken it hook, line, and sinker. An "old rabbit hat trick" is about all your line about Blue Cross is a trick. Do a little fact checking. Blue Cross of ILL. can not sale in Wisconsin. They are not even allow to share info with each other. I had Blue Cross of CA and move over to Blue Cross of IL and you would not believe the BS I and they had to do to pay a clam. And from one state to the next the rules are not the same.
And if tort reform means so little why did the lawyers buy so many liberal Senates to stop it from going in to the bill? WHY HmongRodneyKing? Turn off the TV and do a little reading.
Posted by: Crooks_In_DC | January 23, 2010 7:50 PM
RodneyKing,
Unemployment going from 7% to 10% in the past year has nothing to with "jobs being shipped to China". Jobs were shipped to China the past 20 years and unemployment uneder both Bush and Clinton was under 5%.
2) Not sure why the Stimulus money hasn't been distributed yet, because it was part of Harry and Nancy's grand plan to hand the money out during a Congressional year.
3) The first amendment does apply to corporations and unions. Also, prior to this decision, why was it that only some corporations had these rights. Those coporations would be media corporations - such as the Tribune.
4) Gas was under $2.00 on the day BO took office - what happened?
6) Look what kissing everyone's butt has gotten - bumpkis. World leaders laugh at BO.
8) Pinhead - Card check would allow American employees to join a labor union in which a majority of those employees just sign authorization forms, stating they wish to be represented by the union. In other words, the privacy of a secret ballot is gone. This has nothing to do with illegal immigration.
On selling health insurance across state lines - it would open a lot more providers and also could do away with state mandates on what needs to be covered. In other words, offer consumers more choices. When the numbers of suppliers of a commodity is increased, prices decrease.
Please seek help on your financial investments.
Posted by: Terry | January 23, 2010 8:13 PM
* * * * *
Posted by: writerofwrongs | January 23, 2010 12:20 PM
.
It’s amazing how things get turned around by the Democrats (and some Republicans too). This time, we have a leftie who, like our president, declares the Supreme Court’s decision was a boon for corporate America, while simultaneously a bust for “freedom loving Americans …” In one breath, Democrats can turn a lie into the truth, black into white, night into day, and engage in the kind of fear mongering for which the Democrats accused only the Republicans of doing.
.
A ruling that certain behavior is protected by the First Amendment always means that someone is freer than before. Thus, the decision was no blow to the interests of freedom loving people. Freedom loving people want everyone to be as free as possible. The problem here isn’t that freedom has been damaged. The problem here is the fact that some people who claim to favor civil liberties don’t like freedom when it doesn’t fit their particular political agendum. Thus, calling the ruling a setback for freedom loving people is a hypocritical lie.
.
Another falsehood that needs to be corrected is the notion that the Court’s ruling allows politicians to be bought. The ruling left intact the prohibition against direct contributions by corporations to particular political candidates. It is also impermissible (still) to engage in advertising or advocacy for a particular candidate that is coordinated with that candidate’s campaign. (That is considered the same as a direct contribution.) Any campaigning or advocacy for a particular candidate would be illegal if found to be the “quid pro quo” for specific political action. The Court’s ruling simply allows corporations to engage in direct advocacy in favor of particular candidates for whatever reasons they may offer (independent of a politician’s campaign). Hence, the claim that the decision allows politicians to be bought is a lie.
.
Another falsehood to debunk is the notion that allowing more corporate advocacy for a particular candidate is going to ruin democracy. This argument requires one to assume that the voting public is so dull minded and incapable of independent thought that people will be persuaded to vote a particular way by the volume of advocacy, rather than its quality. If that is the case, and the federal law provided the only “thin blue line” between democracy and corporate driven anarchy, then we have been in deep, deep trouble for some time already. Democracy requires intelligent and discriminating voters. It is our duty as voters to digest the information disseminated and determine its truth and justice (or its lack of it). If we don’t have voters that do so, we are without democracy now. If we have those voters, then the source of the advocacy shouldn’t matter as long as people do their duty. That’s especially true since corporations (i.e. those with media outlets among their corporate assets) have been exempt from the federal law against direct advocacy all along. And you know that corporate owned media outlets engage in direct advocacy all the time. (Do Fox News and MSNBC ring a bell?)
.
However, I will take back everything I just wrote if writerofwrongs will admit that Barack Obama was elected by a dull minded voting public that was seduced by his media blitz rather than the quality of the information in his ads, or Barack Obama as a candidate.
.
One more thing: I don’t know what planet writerofwrongs lives on, but on Earth free enterprise ceases to be free when it is subject to as much government control as Democrats wish to impose upon it.
Posted by: John W. | January 23, 2010 11:52 PM
RodneyKing, sorry one more comment at you and the Dems that complain, and rightfully so about outsourcing. Your man, Obama picked the GUY responsible for NAFTA Rahm Emmanuel for White House Chief of Staff. It was his first pick. You know how you pick sides for basketball? Your most trusted guy, you pick first. So, where do you THINK Obama stands with oursourcing??? HMMMM?
And by the way you other hero, Clinton, signed the bill. I voted for Perot.
Bush I was and is a RINO. Bush II pretty much was also.
When we get some REAL conservatives in office, you'll know.
Posted by: Free to Watch Whatever I Want | January 24, 2010 12:43 AM
Every American should know the truth
No one should miss this video:
http://xrl.us/bf29mb
Look to the end ( 10 min.)
Posted by: Robert Bernier | January 24, 2010 1:14 AM
the rest of the country is finding out we in illinois already knew. that chicago/ illinois politics doesn't help people, it only helps the politicians stay in office.
Posted by: roger | January 24, 2010 1:53 AM
Now special interests have bought off the supreme court, too. What a scam. These conservative, activist, ideological judges are just throwing out the constitution in favor of their corporate cronies. Ddin't George W Bush once say "Small business is the back bone of America", yet this ruling will put the big corps in a position to monopolize. And the "small businesses" will be buried under the large corps assault of cash to congress.
God bless Teddy Roosevelt. Which party do you think he'd be with today?
His words ring just as true now as they did 100 years ago. This is what we need now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bull_Moose_Party
Posted by: David J | January 24, 2010 7:43 AM
"You have taken it hook, line, and sinker. An "old rabbit hat trick" is about all your line about Blue Cross is a trick. Do a little fact checking. Blue Cross of ILL. can not sale in Wisconsin. They are not even allow to share info with each other. I had Blue Cross of CA and move over to Blue Cross of IL and you would not believe the BS I and they had to do to pay a clam. And from one state to the next the rules are not the same.
And if tort reform means so little why did the lawyers buy so many liberal Senates to stop it from going in to the bill? WHY HmongRodneyKing? Turn off the TV and do a little reading."
Posted by: Crooks_In_DC
Yes, some catfish are known to grow so big they take the bait, hook, and fishing pole. Problably, because they are so big they are not afraid of people. Having said that, selling Health Insurance across state lines is a convenience; but, it is not a solution to lowering the cost of healthcare. It is not the solution to insuring 30-40 million Americans. Tell me how selling Health Insurance across state line is going to insure 30-40 milllion Americans when they can't even afford it? So you see? It is smoke and mirror. I can't wait until people start questioning the politicians on how portable health care is going to lower their cost or cover their current insurance bills. They would have the look of a deer in a headlight!
Posted by: HmongRodneyKing | January 24, 2010 10:22 AM
Let's look at the help and ideas offered by the republicans
1. economy=nothing
2.Health care= Death panels
3.Terror=more terror
How's the view from the cheap seats? While Americans are surely worried, they surely want ideas. NO doesn't cut it.
Posted by: bill r. | January 24, 2010 10:23 AM
Terry,
"Unemployment going from 7% to 10% in the past year has nothing to with jobs being shipped to China. Jobs were shipped to China the past 20 years and unemployment uneder both Bush and Clinton was under 5%."
Yes, you are correct. We have been shipping jobs to China in the past 20 years. But you are assuming outsourcing is linear. It's problably more of an exponential graph. My wild guess is problably over 5 million jobs were outsourced to India, China, and the rest of the world. The only way to know is to have an actual copy from the Federal. . .to see an estimated job loss due to outsourcing. I'm not against outsourcing. . .we just need new policies to create jobs to replace the old ones.
"The first amendment does apply to corporations and unions. Also, prior to this decision, why was it that only some corporations had these rights. Those coporations would be media corporations - such as the Tribune."
The founding fathers only gave the Supreme Court the power to "interpret laws" because they were under the suppression of King George. Of course, you've already known this, but for the benefit of the average Joe's. Anyway, they wanted to make sure the three branches balance each other. Which means, Congress could easily pass more laws to limit campaign finance. Afterall, Corporations are just made up of Average Joe's who wants the healthcare, energy, banking, and transportation industries to take over their lives. Tell them how much they should pay for electricity. Tell them how much they should pay for going to the doctor. Tell them how much fees they have to pay. Because the average Joe is just too dumb to figure out how much they should pay. . .
"Gas was under $2.00 on the day BO took office - what happened?"
Did you not read my post? The hedge funds manipulated the commodities to $80 a barrel. It is not illegal to manipulate commodities- not that I am aware of anyway. That is why Obama can't do anything. The only thing he can do is tax the hedge funds so that they are less likely to manipulate the commodities. Afterall, if you were a hedge fund, would you risk profits plust tax on top of it? Less likely. Will the law pass? Problably not- 59 Democrats aren't enough because they aren't willing to take on the Republicans in a filibuster. They lack spines. We all know from history, filibusters can be broken. . .it's call "get out the mattress." But, Democrats will never go into filibuster fights;again, no backbones. I would love to see it. The public will be totally amuse- it'll be like Wrestling Maniac with Hulk Hogan in there! Body Slam!
"Look what kissing everyone's butt has gotten - bumpkis. World leaders laugh at BO."
Please...the world's positive view on America jumped from like 30% to 60%, the day Obama took office. What you are referring to are just a few world leaders who are jealeous of his popularity. Which is understandable. . .since sibling rivalries occurs naturally in nature. Yeah, that other eagle chick did fall off the clift. . oops!
"On selling health insurance across state lines - it would open a lot more providers and also could do away with state mandates on what needs to be covered. In other words, offer consumers more choices. When the numbers of suppliers of a commodity is increased, prices decrease."
Yes, you are correct. In Chapter 1 of Economic 101, more suppiers means price decrease. But, in Chapter 2 of Economic 101, the shoe stores were going out of business because there were simply too many shoe stores in the town. Many had to sell below their cost. So, they form a shoe guilt. The purpose of the shoe guilt is to stabilize the price of shoes so that they will survive. They dictate how much the variances could be charge from one store to antoher. Hence, the concept of OPEC. Your theories do hold true, I'm just afraid the Health Industries have already formed a guilt. Since, Blue Cross is about $450 a month. Aetna is about $500 a month. Cigna is around 475 a month. Yeah, there is already plenty of health insurance companies that offer coverage. The problem is that the savings are so small, the 30-40 millions of Americans still can't afford it.
"Please seek help on your financial investments."
I did a few years ago. I saw a Merril Lynch Advisor. He told me to invest in this great fund called: "Homes and Real Estate." I laughed and never came back. Indeed a bird in one's hand is worth two in the brushes. hahaha. . .but thanks for you concerns.
Posted by: HmongRodneyKing | January 24, 2010 10:58 AM
"RodneyKing, sorry one more comment at you and the Dems that complain, and rightfully so about outsourcing. Your man, Obama picked the GUY responsible for NAFTA Rahm Emmanuel for White House Chief of Staff. It was his first pick. You know how you pick sides for basketball? Your most trusted guy, you pick first. So, where do you THINK Obama stands with oursourcing??? HMMMM?
And by the way you other hero, Clinton, signed the bill. I voted for Perot.
Bush I was and is a RINO. Bush II pretty much was also.
When we get some REAL conservatives in office, you'll know.
Posted by: Free to Watch Whatever I Want
"
Outsourcing is an over-rated issue. As long as the new jobs replace the old jobs, then we are fine. It's call "balance." The problem is you need to balance it. If not enough jobs are created in America, you need to slow down the outsourcing to try to balance the net. Simple math- hard for the politicians.
Posted by: HmongRodneyKing | January 24, 2010 11:02 AM
So Ozero, who raised $700 million dollars, mostly from corporate and special interests to buy his way into the White House (McCain only had $80 million to work with) is complaining about these same "Fat Cats" and corporate interests having free speech rights (like they should), all the while spouting about an "unfair advantage" that the corporations have. This clown needs to look in the mirror.......
Posted by: Dave | January 24, 2010 11:17 AM
BillyR,
The GOP proposed tax cuts back in March instead of a large gov't Stimulus program.
Health care proposals - open state markets to increase number of providers and thus decrease costs, tort reform to lower cost to the providers, expanding HSAs, eliminate pre-existing conditions as a reason for dropping coverage.
Fight terrorist as enemy combatents and not as the neighborhood thug who just robbed the 7-11. Common sense screening and not searching 80 year old grandmothers. Giving the TSA the flexibility to perform their tasks and not restrict their job thru union rules.
Rodney King,
Regarding outsourcing "But you are assuming outsourcing is linear. It's problably more of an exponential graph" Not sure what you mean outsourcing is linear - as compared to what variable?
"Congress could easily pass more laws to limit campaign finance" And if those laws, like the ones that were passed that led to this recent SC decision, are unconstitutional, the SC will step in again. Restricting freedom is not an option.
"Because the average Joe is just too dumb to figure out how much they should pay. . ." - Thank you gov't run education.
Hedge funds have not manipulated the price of oil in the past year. The price of oil has increased as a result of the decrease in the value of the dollar. The dollar has decreased in valus becuase many currency traders believe inflation is just around the corner as BO and the dems spend like drunken sailors (apologies to drunken sailors).
The world view may have got better, but was has that got us? When BO was getting his Nobel in Oslo, the Russia's test fired a missle over Norway. We have benefitted in no way from this increased popularity.
As for Chapter 2 in your econ book, try that the market place will find an equilibrium on the optimal number of providers. The reason you have your "guilts" (do you mean guilds?) is because the barriers to entry are high due in part to the cost of regulatuions.
Posted by: Terry | January 24, 2010 12:37 PM
Outsourcing is an over-rated issue. As long as the new jobs replace the old jobs, then we are fine. It's call "balance." The problem is you need to balance it. If not enough jobs are created in America, you need to slow down the outsourcing to try to balance the net. Simple math- hard for the politicians.
Posted by: HmongRodneyKing | January 24, 2010 11:02 AM
First YOU SAY that "everyone outsourced to China, India, and other slave camps." When I point it out to you that your liberal politicians are the ones that favor outsourcing you comeback with "outsourcing is an overrated problem." TOO FUNNY.
We have a real unemployment rate of about 15-16%. I don't think that the fact that Liberals like Clinton and Obama are in favor of outsourcing is going to be lost on people that have permantly lost careers due to having them sent to China and India with the blessings of the Democrats.
Posted by: Free to Watch What I Want | January 24, 2010 11:55 PM
1. Graph- Year Versus Job loss due to outsourcing.
2. SC will step in again? True but, you forget that they are appointed. It doesn't mean they will never retire or die. They will eventualy be replaced- otherwise, if the same SC back in 1890's was sitting in 1954. Civil laws would have never have passed. The SC has always intepreted "seperate but equal" cases in favor of the whites (not to bring race into this argument, it was just the best example I could think of) until the "Brown vs. Board of Education, Topeka Case. And that was more than 60 years after Plessy vs. Ferguson in 1896- which interprets that racial segregation is fair! Secondly, Congress can certainly pass more laws related to it without infringing upon the Corporation's right to the First Admendment. For example, if Corporation have the rights of the First Admenment, then I suggest Congress pass a law stating that if you are going to advertise on TV, Radio, or on other form of medias, make sure you print your name on it. Instead of "Citizens for Candidate A." It better be: This ad was paid for by company A- 90%, Mr. John doe 5%, Mrs. Jane Doe 5%. Afterall, editors and columnists have to put their names on what they write. Otherwise, they'll just be putting words into people's mouth? Heck, otherwise, you can pay anyone to to say anything.
3. "Hedge funds have not manipulated the price of oil in the past year. The price of oil has increased as a result of the decrease in the value of the dollar. "
So, oil was at $40.00 a barrel about a year ago. The value of the dollar decreased about 25%. 25% x $40= $10. $40.00 + decrease value of dollar ($10)= $50.00. You are still $30 dollars off. . .due to oil speculation.
4. As for Chapter 2 in your econ book, try that the market place will find an equilibrium on the optimal number of providers. The reason you have your "guilts" (do you mean guilds?) is because the barriers to entry are high due in part to the cost of regulatuions.
Guilds- typo on my part. Execellent! You prove my point- which means Healthcare would never be afforadable because once it hits equilibrium, the average family will still have to pay $400 bucks a month. The 30 -40 millions of Americans living on $19K a year will never be able to afford it without having to choose between healthcare or paying for their meals. The issue with healthcare has always been affordability and coverage. It has nothing to do with portable health insurance- it's just a convenience. Yet, you assume the cost will go down so drastically that suddenly it is affordable...just not plain true.
Posted by: HmongRodneyKing | January 25, 2010 12:52 AM
HmongRodneyKing there is a Frontline program on PBS about Wal-Mart you should watch. Wal-Mart alone is accountable for outsourcing tens of millions of jobs and the closing of thousands of factories across North America. That is why I will not shop at Wal-Mart anymore. They have put more people out of work than they now employ. One of their biggest office complexes is in China. And if you want to know why we no longer manufacture TVs in America look at Wal-Mart. Or how they destroyed Rubbermaid. They destroy jobs here and they destroy whole communities in China.
The cost of oil on the international market is determined by demand. The fall in demand over the last 18 months is due to the worldwide recession. Mark my words once China and India ramp-up again the cost of oil will shoot back up.
Selling insurance across state lines is only one of many things that needs to be done for healthcare reform. I pointed that out in my first post along with tort reform and so many others that I did not even mention. I asked my doctor a few weeks ago how many MRIs are within 5 miles of his office and he said 12. We do not need 12 MRIs within 5 miles of his office, that's another part of healthcare reform. One of the reasons he gave me for there being so many was all of the lawsuits. He explained to me how it works and it is scary. How do we ensure that 12 million that cannot get insurance, to be honest I do not know other than we kick in together. But the number you quote as being uninsured is propaganda. Remove the illegal aliens, the people who have access to insurance but choose not to get it, and the people who can afford to pay as they go and then you get the real number. They also count people who switch insurance policies like myself even though I have insurance through my wife's company but because I switched this year I am counted as uninsured.
And I am not foolish enough to say racism does not still exist in America. But how the liberals play the race card is disgusting and has grown old. Just like the boy that cried wolf one too many times that is what the liberals had become when it comes to race relations. But have traveled around the world I can say we are one of the better countries when it comes to racism.
Right here in Illinois our unemployment is reaching historical levels and now stands at 11.1%. What I do not understand is how the mainstream media is not reporting the real unemployment rates that are now approaching 20%. And how males are unemployed at a rate of over 30% and even worse Blacks and Hispanic males and over 40%. I have been unemployed coming up on a year now I do believe I am no longer counted as unemployed.
We have a number of problems in America right now. One of those problems are how people have turned against each other over a political point. It is time we stopped the name calling and educate ourselves on what is really happening and the root cause of the problem. Do you know that two of Pres. Obama's closest financial advisors once went before Congress and said that credit swaps should not be regulated and if they are regulated in would hurt the market. And these same two men also knew about the first bank that failed because of credit swaps back in the late 1990s. There is a program from Frontline on PBS that lays it all out for everybody to see. I will not give Bush a pass on this one he could have done something but, like Clinton he chose not to. And I imagine that Obama would not have done anything if he was not forced to. But some of the taxes Obama wants to put on banking services will only end up costing the consumer more money. Instead they should tax the outrageous bonuses that are handed out. Bonuses are fine if they are given in a reasonable amount. If a person brings in a billion in profit a $10 million bonus is a bit too big one or two would seem more fit. But they are giving people that bring in that kind of money 10 million or more so after the first 2 million slap a 99% tax on anything over that. They must also rein in the extraordinary salaries paid to some executives. Less than 50 years ago you would never heard of a CEO making 200 million a year that is disgusting. There used to be a tax bracket that stopped this and I know liberals do not want to hear this but it was Kennedy that did away with it. In the following presidents continued this time to reverse this. At one time CEOs look at growing their companies here but once the taxes were removed from their pay it no longer made sense to put the money into growth at home it was cheaper to move the jobs overseas. How do you thank Japan, Germany, South Korea, and Taiwan were able to grow like they did. China and India have looked at this history and are trying and it would seem repeating it.
Posted by: Crooks_In_DC | January 25, 2010 2:38 PM
Rodney King,
1) So its an exponential graph over time? That proves what? How does time effect outsourcing? All your graph does is draw a pretty picture.
2) SCs change and so do Congress's and presidents. If the dems passed a law taking away coporations, unions, and other organizations right to political speech, the next conservative Congress and President that understand the first amendment could pass a law overturning it. Why is it you are afraid of free speech?
3) You complain about me using a linear correlation and then you use a single-variable and linera analysis of the correlation between the price of oil and the dollar.
http://seekingalpha.com/instablog/538667-armcharles/43017-oil-and-the-dollar-2008-vs-2009
4) You need a re-write of Chapter 2. Do you know what that equilibrium is $400/bucks? I can tell you that with more suppliers, there will be a lower prices.
Can you show me the link where there are 30 - 40 million people living on $19K per year? Make sure it includes demographic data on age.
Allow people to buy across state lines and skip their state mandates and their costs will drop dramatically.
http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2009/10/21/to_cut_your_health_insurance_costs_move_97463.html
Posted by: Terry | January 25, 2010 7:56 PM
1. Pretty graph that says millions of jobs lost due to outsourcing. Therefore millions of new jobs must be created to replace it. A pretty graph to tell you the impact. But, who cares. . .the politicians aren't listening to you or me. They have to take care of #1 first!
2. I'm not afraid of free speech. I said Corporation should have the right to free speech. But, if they are going to advertise something, they should put their names on it. The NRA does ads. They are not afraid to put their names on the ad. Why is that Corporates do not want to have their name on the ads when they clearly fund it? Is it because they want to mislead the public about who is behind the ad? If you make the baby..admit to it. . .so we'll know who to charge the child support to.
3. And this have been audited by who? Anyone can put up a pretty graph. If this is true, then the price of corn should go up too. The price of everything should go up too...yet only oil goes up. Right...right...the oil reserves are filled to the brim!
4. That $400 a month is a personfication telling you, it aint' gonna matter. There is no drastic difference. You and I are beating a dead horse. I disagree that the price will be so low that it is suddenly affordable. There are ways to control the price regardless of how many health companies are out there. Opec is an example of that. They regulate output to control the price of oil. Which means Mr. Chavez can't charge $20 buck a barrel or sell tons of oil on the market. You always forget that a free market can be control through monopoly! Yet, you are unable to give me a real number, just in link to your idealogy. I want to know how much? Will the Health Industry really lower the price? Or do they just keep the profits?
Posted by: HmongRodneyKing | January 26, 2010 9:24 PM
Rodney King,
1) & 2) No quibbles.
3) I didn't realize economic analysis had to pass an audit. Do you want to hire PWC or KPMG? The article below says there is link between falling dollar and rising corn prices. Oil is filled to the brim due to weak demand for the physical commodity due to the recession.
http://www.tkfutures.com/Corn_Futures_Corn_Options.htm
4) OPEC controls the prices of oil by controlling the supply. Do you want the gov't controlling the supply of health care providers? Also, OPEC is trying to raise prices while the gov't wants to drive down prices. Until you see how open the markets are made, No economist can tell you what the price will be.
Posted by: Terry | January 26, 2010 11:07 PM
According to the study, the most important tool for small businesses to succeed in 2010 is search engine marketing, while email marketing, public relations and social media cited as crucial for success. 23.8% of all small businesses reported that search engine marketing was the tool most needed for their business to succeed in 2010.
www.onlineuniversalwork.com
Posted by: kiramatalishah | February 5, 2010 5:26 AM