Cutter: I'm Just Going to Make S%&t Up about Jobs
Stephanie Cutter, deputy campaign manager for Obama's reelection effort, seems more a character out of fiction than a real person. A high-octane spokesman, she is willing to say anything to win the 30-second sound byte cycle. She will lie, contradict herself and make up stats on the fly to get through any single cable news appearance. Its something real people, with a credibility gene, wouldn't do. Fortunately, she's a Democrat, so the media will never really hold her statements to account.
Earlier this week the Obama campaign announced the formation of “Rabbis For Obama," featuring over 600 rabbis from across the country and across all Jewish denominations dedicated to four more years of big government and anti-Israel policies.
It was the gaffe heard-round the political world. In an interview with a local St. Louis public affairs show aired Sunday, Senate candidate Rep. Todd Akin gave an absurd and, to many, offensive answer to the question of an abortion exemption for rape. While most anger was focused on the use of the word "legitimate" as a qualifier for rape, Akin's entire statement was disturbing. In the aftermath of the scandal, Akin defied all rational political thought or analysis and committed to staying in the race. According to a new poll, the Senate seat in Missouri has now swung decisively to the Democrats.
The Obama campaign, its surrogates, and its media allies are accusing Republican Vice Presidential candidate Paul Ryan of having tried to "redefine rape"--but it was President Barack Obama himself who redefined rape in January 2012, expanding the official federal definition to include male victims and different forms of non-consensual sex. The definition of "forcible" rape to which Ryan--and other legislators, including 11 Democrats--referred in a 2011 bill was in line with the federal definition of rape before Obama changed it. The claim that Ryan tried to "redefine rape" is therefore anachronistic, and provably false.
President Clinton believed abortion should be "safe, rare; and legal." But Clinton also believed in a work requirement in his welfare reform bill.
Wednesday, August 22, 2012
By John Stossel -
Before he was nationally known, Rep. Ryan visited me at ABC, and we went to lunch. He was terrific. He was a rare politician, one who actually cared about America's coming
But, as it turns out, that figure was too rosy! GM stock prices have been hovering around $20 lately – even though the market is at a recent high. This means the losses will be closer to $26 to $38 billion – and that’s not including the $15 billion in tax write offs that the administration illicitly handed GM during
But the depressing thing is that despite this taxpayer moolah, GM might be headed for yet another bankruptcy. That at least is the claim of Louis Woodhill’s provocative piece in Forbes. And the main reason, says Woodhill, is that GM makes crappy products. He notes:
For U.S. foreign policy to be both effective and reasonably consistent with American values, certain conditions have to be met.
But on other core questions of federal power — in areas where the president has much more discretion than he does over the budget — there isn't a dime's worth of difference between the two tickets. Among those questions: Can the president launch wars at will, subject American citizens to military detention and assassinate them via drone strike?
It's impossible to deny that there has been an ideological component to Ryan's career in Washington. He has been an articulate spokesman for the idea of smaller, less costly government, and he is perhaps Congress's best-known advocate of entitlement reform. There is no doubt that in his heart he prefers
But any effort to paint him as an inflexible ideologue runs up against his demonstrable tendency toward pragmatism.
Throughout his time in Washington, Ryan has been the classic "half a loaf" type of conservative. Time and again, he has shown that he is willing to compromise and take far less than he had originally sought, as long as he is moving incrementally in the direction he wants to go. You won't find Ryan on the short end of any 434-to-1 votes.
Any effort to paint him as an inflexible ideologue runs up against his demonstrable tendency toward pragmatism.Take, for example, the infamous "Ryan budget." Yes, it cuts spending and reforms Medicare — though not Social Security — but it was far from the most fiscally conservative budget offered by Republicans this year. Just compare Ryan's budget with the one proposed by Senator
In fact, Senators Jim DeMint (R., S.C.) and Pat Toomey (R., Pa.) also offered budget proposals that cut spending more than Ryan's budget did. Ryan was willing to push the envelope on spending cuts, but only as far as he could while still getting the votes of moderate as well as conservative Republicans. Yes, his budget is conservative, but it is hardly radical.
According to the National Journal, Ryan works with Democrats about as often as any Republican does. Most famously, he collaborated with liberal senator Ron Wyden (D., Ore.) to develop the latest iteration of his Medicare reform plan. In fact, the evolution of Ryan's
Ryan's first Medicare reform plan was fairly accurately described as a voucher program: Seniors would each receive a support payment roughly based on the current per-capita amount of Medicare spending. Wealthy seniors would receive somewhat less, poor and sicker seniors somewhat more. The Ryan-Wyden plan, on the other hand, abandons the voucher concept in favor of a pure premium-support model.
Ryan also gradually agreed to loosen his proposal's cap on overall Medicare spending. In his original plan, Medicare spending would not be allowed to grow any faster than the overall economy. In Ryan-Wyden, the cap is GDP growth plus a full percentage point. At the same time, the burden for exceeding growth caps has shifted from seniors themselves, who would have been required to pay more out of pocket under the original Roadmap for America's Future, to providers, who will have their reimbursements reduced under Ryan-Wyden.
The budget passed by the House this year was in some ways closer to Ryan's original Medicare proposal than to the Ryan-Wyden plan. But Ryan has clearly shown that he is willing to water down his ideas if doing so garners Democratic support.
The downside of Ryan's pragmatism is that each change has weakened his proposal. His original proposal would have reduced Medicare spending by far more than Ryan-Wyden. Given that even the most optimistic scenarios show Medicare running $38 trillion in the red, Ryan's retreat is not a step in the right direction.
Still, it might have been justified if Ryan's willingness to compromise had attracted substantial Democratic support. But, in the end, it was the Democrats who refused to budge. Senator Wyden was the only Democrat to join with Ryan, and even he later backed away from his support under pressure from his caucus.
Ryan's pragmatic streak has also led him to cast many votes that seem to contradict his reputation as a budget hawk. Ryan would no doubt say that he won important concessions in exchange for those votes — for instance, getting health savings accounts included in the Medicare prescription-drug bill — or that the alternatives were worse. But any way you look at it, those votes hardly make Ryan an inflexible budget cutter.
All of this means that Ryan is not really the government-slashing savior envisioned by some conservatives. It also means that he is not the ideological hard-liner portrayed by some liberals. He is, in fact, likely to disappoint his conservative backers on occasion. But he may also be able to work across party lines to really change the disastrous course we are now on.
Posted by Kevin Carson
Apparently he’s never read the Bible. The list of things in Leviticus that call for death by stoning would take out not only gays and lesbians, but most everybody else as well. Then there’s that wonderful stuff about dashing out the brains of Philistine babies and
Posted by Thomas L. Knapp
In reality, Zenawi, who ruled Ethiopia first as president and then as prime minister for more than 20 years, after leading the putatively Marxist-Leninist Tigrayan Peoples’ Liberation Front to victory over the previous regime, was a premier example of the modern managerial statist.
The economic and political fusions he orchestrated in Ethiopia — between state socialism and multinational corporations the one hand, pan-Africanism and US client statism on the other — are the
Posted by Kevin Carson
Meanwhile, the NSA is building a gargantuan data-crunching facility — the Utah
Civil libertarian reactions to this stuff consist mainly — and quite understandably — of horror at the newly augmented power of the automated police state. In terms of the state’s intent and its legal figleaves for justifying it, this is obviously yet another step in America’s slide into full-blown security state authoritarianism a la the movie “Brazil.”
ANKARA, Aug. 21 (Xinhua) -- At least nine people, including four children, were killed by a remote-controlled car bomb in southeastern Turkey, Turkish officials said Tuesday, while the banned Kurdish Workers' Party (PKK) denied responsibility for the blast.
A total of 68 people were injured in the blast near a police station in southeastern Turkish province of Gaziantep on Monday night, four of them in critical condition, Turkish Deputy Prime
Most of the others suffered slight injuries caused by shattered glass, said Atalay, adding that Monday's blast set several vehicles ablaze.
"The vehicle used in the attack was a stolen one. It was brought to the site of the blast by a
The first part of this article’s title is absurd, right? How could the head of the CIA, a man who sends drones to kill alleged terrorists and ends up killing not only terrorists, but also many innocent people, be a saint? Well, you probably don’t live in the Monterey area. I do. Leon Panetta is thought of as the local boy who made good. After President Obama decided to nominate Panetta for secretary of defense, the local newspaper, the Monterey County Herald, ran a pro-Panetta editorial making the case that he would be a fine secretary. Then, after Panetta’s participation in the successful plot to kill Osama
Militarized federal law enforcement just can’t cope with trendiness in recreational
The recent bloodless (referring to American blood — the most important to U.S. policymakers) overthrow of Moammar Gadhafi in Libya has been touted as a low-cost model for future U.S. military interventions. The recent Libyan election is said to have vindicated America’s “leadership from the rear” strategy — supporting indigenous armies on the ground and allied air forces with key items such as air-defense suppression, intelligence, and logistics. Yet U.S. military assistance to the rebellion in Libya is having unintended ill effects, much as have past U.S. interventions.
“Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ‘is determined to attack Iran before the US elections,’ Israel’s Channel 10 News claimed on Monday night, and Israel is now ‘closer than ever’ to a strike designed to thwart Iran’s nuclear drive… The report added that Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak believe Obama would have no choice but to give backing for an Israeli attack before the US presidential elections in November.”
Mexico 4, Brazil 2
This blog’s headline isn't a misprint, but a reference to the score in a longer-term competition: economic growth. In recent years Brazil has outplayed Mexico, growing at 6% or more as Mexico bumped along in the slow lane. But lately that has changed. Last year Mexico grew by 4% and Brazil by 2.7%. This year Mexico is expected to get close to 4% again, whereas some economists reckon that Brazil's rate could dip below 2%. A recent report by Nomura predicted that Mexico’s economy, currently half the size of Brazil’s, could end up the bigger of the two within the next decade.