Pages

Sunday, December 18, 2011

Boehner: House Opposes Senate Payroll Tax Bill

SUNDAY SHOWS

Updated: December 18, 2011 | 1:56 p.m.
December 18, 2011 | 10:48 a.m.
Chet Susslin
House Speaker John Boehner
The Senate’s two-month payroll tax extension is dead on arrival in the House. House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, made that perfectly clear Sunday morning as he said that Congress will have to negotiate a deal closer to the House-passed one-year extension  before members leave for the holidays.
“Well, it’s pretty clear that I and our members oppose the Senate bill – it’s only for two months,” Boehner said on NBC’s Meet the Press. “If you talk to employers, they talk about the uncertainty. How can you do tax policy for two months?”
The remarks came a day after a conference call among House members in which even seasoned moderate Republicans joined the roster of tea party-inspired freshman in vehemently opposing the bill. Or, as one senior House GOP aide put it, "If you're a fan of the Senate bill, the situation is not good. That will never pass and almost no one in the conference wants it."
Unsurprisingly, Boehner’s comments don’t sit well with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. The two-month extension he negotiated last week with Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. – after Boehner left the talks mid-week, challenging the Senate to come up with a plan – sailed through the Senate 89 to 10 on Saturday.
By seeking to reopen the Senate compromise, Boehner is essentially trying to force Reid and Senate Democrats to negotiate twice.
“When we met last week, Speaker Boehner requested that Senator McConnell and I work out a compromise. Neither side got everything they wanted, but we forged a middle ground that passed the Senate by an overwhelming bipartisan majority," Reid said in a statement Sunday.
Reid's statement did not suggest any openness to a conference committee to iron out the two chambers' differences. McConnell, meanwhile, is publicly supporting Boehner's call for a conference committee.
"The House and Senate have both passed bipartisan bills to require the President to finally make a decision on the Keystone XL jobs, and to extend additional unemployment insurance, the temporary payroll tax cut and seniors’ access to medical care," McConnell spokesman Don Stewart said. "The House and the President both want a full-year extension. The best way to resolve the difference between the two-month extension and the full-year bill, and provide certainty for job creators, employees and the long-term unemployed, is through regular order, as the Speaker suggested."
The widespread House GOP loathing for the bill is driven by both legislative and political concerns.  
Republicans believe as a matter of policy that a two-month extension creates the very kind of economic uncertainty they have railed against for nearly three years; they have no interest in keeping taxpayers and Medicare-participating doctors on edge, wondering if the policy will be extended in two months.
House GOP members also know the bill wouldn’t play out well for them politically, House GOP sources said. They see themselves getting crushed by a short-term outcome now and continued finger-wagging later from President Obama on extending the payroll tax cut, which would allow Democrats to appear more aggressive on tax cuts than Republicans.
And it’s no secret the American Medical Association opposes the two-month "doc fix" to protect doctors from a scheduled 27 percent cut in reimbursements for Medicare beneficiaries – a scenario that would create intense lobbying pressure until February, something House Republicans want to avoid.
And while it is frequently asserted the House GOP problem is between Boehner and Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., a more insidious tug-of-war appears to be the culprit in this case. Boehner and McConnell – usually closely aligned, as in the case of the debt-ceiling debacle this summer – are apparently at odds over the end-of-year package. Boehner never signaled to McConnell in their private talks last week that he would accept the two-month deal being negotiated with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, aides said.
Boehner is now confronting a very real sense among rank-and-file House Republicans that McConnell either rolled Boehner or treated the House bill so dismissively in the end-game negotiations that the House GOP must rebel to assert its legislative power and preferences.
Rather than pass the Senate bill – which President Obama embraced Saturday – Congress should assemble a formal joint House-Senate conference to hash out a deal in regular order, Boehner said Sunday.
“We’ve got two weeks to get this done,” Boehner said. “Let’s do it the right way.”
Senate Democrats, however, emphasized that they cut their two-month agreement with McConnell with the understanding the Senate Republican leader was negotiating on Boehner's behalf. Speaking Friday, Boehner did not object to a two-month deal as long as it included Keystone language.
"Last week, Speaker Boehner sat in a meeting with Leader Reid and Leader McConnell and he gave Leader McConnell his proxy to negotiate a bipartisan compromise," Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said in a Sunday statement. "He made public comments promising to live by whatever agreement the Senate reached. He said, 'If the Senate acts, I’m committed to bringing the House back—we can do it within 24 hours—to deal with whatever the Senate does.' The Senate came to a deal, and now Speaker Boehner must keep his word."
"The Speaker needs to put the Senate's bipartisan compromise on the floor and let House Democrats and the remaining sane members of the House Republican caucus vote for it," Schumer said. "Otherwise, taxes will rise on the middle class, and the House Republicans alone will be to blame. If House Republicans let taxes go up on the middle class on January 1, it could very well cost them the majority in the House next year. And they will deserve it."
House Democrats were also quick to lambaste Boehner for his remarks.
“It is time for Speaker Boehner to demonstrate real leadership and bring [the Senate bill] up for a vote tomorrow,” said Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md in a statement. “We are witnessing a pattern of Speaker Boehner walking away from bipartisan compromises to kow-tow to his extreme tea party wing of his caucus.”
Going into any negotiations, House Republicans are determined not to forfeit what they see as a huge concession from Senate Democrats: the decision to drop the millionaire surtax as the means of financing the payroll tax cut extension. They don't want to give that up now after having remained unified and winning it, despite intense and at times unnerving political heat.
A senior House GOP aide familiar with the emerging strategy and ever-rising rank-and-file antipathy to the Senate bill summarized the situation:
"We have to get out of the cul-de-sac of the Senate only being able to produce the lowest common denominator and then trying to force a terrible product on the House," the aide said. "Our members are fed up with that and are ready to have a fight if that's what it takes to get a good product."
Boehner on Sunday suggested that compromise shouldn’t be difficult to reach, the record of this Congress notwithstanding.
“I think if you look at the House-passed bill, we did everything the president asked for,” Boehner said. “We paid for this, offset it with reasonable reductions in spending. Ninety percent of those reductions, frankly, the president agrees with.”
Asked if they could reach a compromise on the extension package by Christmas, the Speaker responded, “How about tomorrow?”
Daniel Friedman and Shane Goldmacher contributed.

Last US soldiers leave Iraq, ending long military presence

Progressive think tank draws on government, nonpartisan sources for its statistics         





By Brad Knickerbocker Staff writer updated 12/17/2011 11:16:20 PM ET 

Reckoning the costs of war in Iraq will take years, especially the impact on US prestige and power in the world. Historians, political scientists, and economists will write doctoral dissertations on the subject, and some will devote careers to calculating and analyzing the data and each others’ conclusions — as continues to be the case with the Vietnam War. More world news from the Christian Science Monitor Analysts Matthew Duss and Peter Juul of the Center for American Progress have taken a first cut at calculating the costs of the American war in Iraq. The center is a progressive, nonprofit think tank and advocacy organization in Washington, founded in 2003 by former Clinton administration chief of staff John Podesta. The organization's inclinations are clearly left-of-center, but the figures in its “Iraq War Ledger” are taken from nonpartisan sources, including the Congressional Research Service, icasualties.org, the Defense Department, the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, the Centers for Disease Control, and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). 

Here are some of the main points:

Human costs 

Coalition deaths totaled 4,803, of which 4,484 (93 percent) were American.

The number of Americans wounded was 32,200. At least 463 non-Iraqi contractors were killed.

Iraqi civilian deaths are estimated to total between 103,674 and 113,265.
 The UNHCR says the war resulted in 1.24 million internally displaced persons and more than 1.6 million refugees.

 Financial costs 

The Congressional Research Service puts the dollar cost of Operation Iraqi Freedom at $806 billion.

 In their book “The Three Trillion Dollar War,” Joseph Stiglitz and Linda Bilmes estimate the projected total cost of veterans’ health care and disability payments to be between $422 billion and $717 billion. 


Veterans 

More than 2 million US service members have served in Iraq or Afghanistan (many in both wars). The total number of Iraq/Afghanistan veterans eligible for Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care is 1,250,663, half of whom (625,384) have used VA health care since 2002. The number of Iraq/Afghanistan veterans diagnosed with Post-traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) is at least 168,854 — more than a quarter of those who have used VA health care. The suicide rate for Iraq/Afghanistan veterans using VA health care in FY 2008 was 38 suicides per 100,000 veterans — more than three times the national suicide rate for the previous year.

 Iraq reconstruction 

Total funding: $182.27 billion.

 Iraqi government funds (including Coalition Provisional Authority funding): $107.41 billion.

 International funds: $13.03 billion.

 US funds (2003-2011): $61.83 billion.

As a basis for comparison, the US after World War II spent $34.3 billion in Germany and $17.6 billion in Japan on post-war reconstruction. (All figures in 2011 dollars.)

 The cost of war is more than numbers, of course. Losing a family member or a lifetime of disability are incalculable.

 “The end of former Iraq President Saddam Hussein’s brutal regime represents a considerable global good, and a nascent democratic Iraqi republic partnered with the United States could potentially yield benefits in the future,” Duss and Juul of the Center for American Progress write. “But when weighing those possible benefits against the costs of the Iraq intervention, there is simply no conceivable calculus by which Operation Iraqi Freedom can be judged to have been a successful or worthwhile policy.”

 That’s a political and historical judgment that no doubt will be debated for years.

 

Saturday, December 17, 2011

Republican /Candidates Court Jewish GOP Organization



 Jon Huntsman spoke at the Republican Jewish Coalition candidates forum. In his remarks he said all options should be on the table including military action to prevent Iran from making nuclear weapons, He also spoke in favor of term limits for members of Congress and that the "revolving door" of former members becoming lobbyist should end. After his speech he answered questions from audience members.

Republican Candidates Court Jewish GOP Organization



 Rick Santorum spoke at the Republican Jewish Coalition candidates forum. He criticized President Obama's policies toward Iran and Syria and said he would prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon if elected president. After his speech he answered questions from audience members.

Republican /Candidates Court Jewish GOP Organization


I can only put one video per entry, otherwise for some reason more than that they all revert to the last video.


Wednesday, December 7, 2011
The Republican Jewish Coalition held a forum today with six of the Republican Presidential candidates. Coalition members heard first from former Senator Rick Santorum, former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman and former Massachusetts in their morning session.
 In the afternoon session the speakres were former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Texas Governor Rick Perry, and Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann.  The event is taking place at the Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center in Washington, DC.
Texas Congressman Ron Paul was not invited to participate in this forum by the GOP Jewish Coalition because 'he's just so far outside of the mainstream of the Republican party and this organization,” said RJC Executive Director Matthew Brooks. According to the Boston Globe, Rep. Ron Paul was not invited to attend because of his position on Israel. 


The room was packed for this event, with a standing-room-only crowd of attendees and representatives of over 100 different media outlets, including CNN, C-SPAN, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, international news networks from Israel, Germany, Japan, Denmark, and Holland, and web and print media top names such as the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Politico, Boston Globe, Commentary, PJMedia, Huffington Post, Los Angeles Time, and The Weekly Standard, as well as top Jewish outlets.

GOP presidential forum -Afternoon Session


Rick Perry spoke at the Republican Jewish Coalition candidates forum. He focused on U.S. foreign policy, criticizing the Obama administration for its Middle East policy and border security weaknesses. After his speech he answered questions from audience members.

Republican Candidates Court Jewish GOP Organization


I can only put one video per entry, otherwise for some reason more than that they all revert to the last video.


Wednesday, December 7, 2011
The Republican Jewish Coalition held a forum today with six of the Republican Presidential candidates. Coalition members heard first from former Senator Rick Santorum, former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman and former Massachusetts in their morning session.
 In the afternoon session the speakres were former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Texas Governor Rick Perry, and Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann.  The event is taking place at the Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center in Washington, DC.
Texas Congressman Ron Paul was not invited to participate in this forum by the GOP Jewish Coalition because 'he's just so far outside of the mainstream of the Republican party and this organization,” said RJC Executive Director Matthew Brooks. According to the Boston Globe, Rep. Ron Paul was not invited to attend because of his position on Israel. 




The room was packed for this event, with a standing-room-only crowd of attendees and representatives of over 100 different media outlets, including CNN, C-SPAN, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, international news networks from Israel, Germany, Japan, Denmark, and Holland, and web and print media top names such as the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Politico, Boston Globe, Commentary, PJMedia, Huffington Post, Los Angeles Time, and The Weekly Standard, as well as top Jewish outlets.


GOP presidential forum - Morning Session



Mitt Romney spoke at the Republican Jewish Coalition candidates forum. He criticized President Obama for adopting a foreign policy of appeasement, saying "This president appears more generous to our enemies than he is to our friends." He also criticized the president for not traveling to Israel and announced he would travel to that country on his first foreign trip as president. After his speech he answered questions from audience members.

Republican Candidates Court Jewish GOP Organization



 Newt Gingrich spoke at the Republican Jewish Coalition candidates forum about his campaign for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination. Among the topics he addressed were U.S. foreign policy, relations with Israel, economic policy, an his ethics violations while speaker of the House. After his speech he answered questions from audience members.

Republican Candidates Court Jewish GOP Organization




 Michele Bachmann spoke at the Republican Jewish Coalition candidates forum. She criticized the Obama administration's policy toward Iran, saying a more confrontational approach would improve Israeli security. After her speech she answered questions from audience members.

Kill the Poor, and other Republican Plans


May 4, 2011



                                                     Breadlines 1932 and 2008 

Power groups in society often mock the lower classes and minorities to keep them at a distance and to justify their superior social and economic status. Blacks, Latinos, and Asians (and others) have been called various names to contrast them from the self-aggrandized white races. Poor people are called lazy welfare queens, unmotivated cheats, and a drag on society. Recently, Republicans have felt more comfortable to openly express these views.
One current example comes from Oklahoma State Representative Sally Kerns, who says that minorities earn less because they don’t work as hard.  “We have a high percentage of blacks in prison, and that’s tragic, but are they in prison just because they are black or because they don’t want to study as hard in school? I’ve taught school, and I saw a lot of people of color who didn’t study hard because they said the government would take care of them.” (link)
That stereotype is completely untrue of course and ignores the reality of what it means to be poor and a minority in our society. Republicans make statements about the lazy poor to defend their alliance with corporations and the wealthy in society and to justify their policies against the poor such as cuts to education, heath care, and the social safety net in general. Republicans also denigrate the poor to create a wedge between the middling classes and the lower rung of society. If Congress, wealthy allies of the wealthy, can successfully lay the blame for the recent collapsing economy on the poor, then they win the debate. The strategy is to salute industry and capital while ignoring its responsibility for the loss of jobs and financial collapse while blaming the poor for being poor.
One way Blacks can get wealthy, or at least fit in, is by agreeing with the White power structure, like Dr. Williams does,
Dr. Walter E. Williams, a black man and economist, agrees. He says, “If you’re a poor adult in America, for the most part, it’s all your fault. That’s true, at least today, whether you’re black, white, brown or polka dot.” He adds,
Let’s look at poverty in female-headed households. Divorce and death of the father might explain a small part of why there’re so many female-headed households. But the bulk of it is explained by people having children and not getting married in the first place. For the most part, female-headed households are the result of short-sighted, self-destructive behavior of one or two people.
According to an NPR/Kaiser/Kennedy School Poll, the leading cause of poverty identified by both the poor (75 percent) and non-poor (65 percent) was drug abuse. Again, it’s not like you’re walking down the street and you’re struck with drug addiction; to use drugs is a conscious decision. Drug-users tend not to be very productive. They drop out of school, abandon their families, have scrapes with the law and don’t hold down jobs. Would anybody be surprised that poverty is one result of drug usage? (Williams)
What Dr. Williams is saying is that it’s your fault if you’re poor because you’re probably a slutty single mother or a drug addict. The rich like me are able to buy access and have laws passed to make us richer by taking money from you. Why don’t you buy influence from your own Congressman? From the Book, “A Patriot’s Guide to Right-Wing Thinking” by Tex Shelters
So, people think that the poor are poor because of drug abuse and that makes it true. If a majority of Republicans polled think Obama is Kenyan, does that make it true?
What’s better proof that there is no economic redlining or discrimination than having a minority agree with the paradigm laid out by the economic elite in society? And besides, Dr. Williams has his, and we have a Black president (though mixed race), so there is no discrimination left in society. Right?
The subprime mortgage crisis was a moment of truth for the high priests of the free market such as Milton Friedman and Ayn Rand. Blaming banks and bankers for creating unsecure loans and risky investments that collapsed is too much for the free marketeers to bear. The bankers and captains of industry were loath to admit blame in the economic crisis. Therefore, they worked with their Congressional and media allies to lay the blame for bad housing investments on the lower class homebuyers and ignore the clear reality that banks created the rules that allowed and encouraged these subprime loans in order to improve their bottom line. Why make paltry millions of the housing market when with a change of few rules you can make billions? The risky loans were of no consequence, for Uncle Sammy would bail out the moneylenders if anything went wrong.
The impetus for a big subprime market came from within the private sector, not from the poor: “innovation” by giant mortgage lenders like Countrywide, Ameriquest, and many others, backed by the big investment banks. And, to be blunt, it was some of Wall Street’s biggest players, not overleveraged homeowners, who received generous government bailouts in the aftermath of the crisis. (link)
In 2008, Republicans were trying to lay the blame of the housing crisis on Latinos and Blacks. They said that the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) that encouraged loans to inner city minorities was to blame for the housing market’s collapse. However, the CRA was involved in a tiny portion of the housing market, and the loans were for low cost housing that would have a much smaller impact on the market if they went into foreclosure. The CRA only makes loans available to low income minorities and others who qualify. The CRA does not require loans to be made at all. Furthermore, the CRA loans have a lower default rate than subprime loans as a whole.
How could the Blacks and Latinos involved with the CRA, with a net income perhaps equal to one member of the Wal-Mart and Sam’s Club owning Walton family, have such a great impact on our economy? They can’t, but they are convenient scapegoats for the right-wing defenders of income inequality in America.
Blaming the CRA for the housing crisis is another case of Republicans blaming programs to aid low-income citizens for our economic crisis. The current crisis was created on Wall Street and in major banks, not by the working poor of the United States. Read Nomi Prins book “It Takes a Pillage” for a more thorough description of the financial industry’s responsibility for the current housing and financial crisis.
After decades of “blame the poor” messages, the Republicans are now going directly after Medicaid, Social Security, and other programs set up during the New Deal. Ronald Reagan used the fact-challenged phrase “Cadillac-driving welfare queens” in his presidential campaign as a way to discredit programs for the poor and Social Security. (link)
Republicans are now demanding that we balance the budget on the backs of the poor while they try to sneak in further tax cuts for the wealthy. For more, see Paul Ryan’s Republican budget, then compare it to the fiscally sound People’s Budget. (link)
South Carolina Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer compared helping the poor to helping feed stray animals that continually breed. Also, Colorado state legislator Spencer Swalm said that poor people in single parent homes are dysfunctional. (link)
All this divisiveness seems to work when times are hard (and in general), and Republicans are banking on it. In 2007, 69 percent of Americans thought that the poor rely too heavily on government programs, and in 2009, it was 72 percent according to a Pew Research poll. (link) My question is, how many poor people were polled for this study about how the poor rely too heavily on government spending? The oil industry, the mining industry, pharmaceutical firms, and especially the U.S. agriculture industries depended on U.S. grants in land, subsidies, R & D money and protective tariffs for their companies. But somehow, poor people who need help surviving are the big welfare queens. (link)
The problem is that people don’t understand, or ignore, the causes of poverty,
“People ignore the structural issues — jobs leaving, industry becoming more mechanized,” said Yale sociologist Elijah Anderson, renowned for his study of the Philadelphia poor. “Then they point to the poor and ask, ‘Why aren’t you making it?’ ” (link)
And when you don’t understand the causes of poverty, it’s easy to blame the poor themselves for their economic situation. Inevitably, the question arises about drug addicts, and how they to blame for their poverty. However, there is no causal link between drug addiction and poverty. Some say it is actually poverty leads to drug addiction. (link)
The evidence showing causality between drug use and poverty is either weak or non-existent. One can see a correlation between poverty and drug use, but that does not prove causality. There is also a question of compassion for those less well off. However, Republicans side more with Ayn Rand, who despised government handouts, than they do with Jesus Christ, who sided with the poor as the gospels tell us.
For many in the United States, attitudes toward the poor range from hatred to misunderstanding. And, poverty hits minority communities the hardest. Even though African Americans are about ten percent and Latinos are about seventeen percent of the population, “Twenty-five percent of African Americans, 23 percent of Latinos and 9 percent of whites live in poverty. Overall, 13 percent of the U.S. population is poor.”   (link) Does this mean that Blacks and Latinos are just less fit, as many Republicans might want you to believe? Are Whites just more capable and thus a smaller proportion is poor? Only racists and Republicans believe this.
We have a deficit that is growing too large to sustain. Republicans have decided that this is the moment to take advantage of this crisis and cut education, job training, head start, Medicaid, and other programs that invest in workers and people. Their hypocrisy shines through when at a time of deficits they decide to put tax cuts for their wealthy donors in Ryan’s Republican budget and state budgets around the nation while cutting programs for everyone else. Arizona cut corporate taxes, the Ohio budget proposes the same, as does the budget in Michigan and nine other Republican controlled states. (link) In the meantime, two-thirds of all U.S. corporations pay no federal taxes. If the deficits are so dire, one wonders why they would cut corporate taxes in the states and continue the corporate federal tax loopholes that serve to raise the debt further.
Republicans blame the poor and plan to make the poor and other non-rich people in society pay for the mistakes of the financial markets and banks while their millionaire and billionaire friends continue to get a free ride.
Is this really the kind of nation we want to live in?
Links
U.S. Uncut
http://usuncut.org/blog/what-to-do
Blame the poor while taking their money
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article25430.htm
Even in India, they blame the poor
http://www.hindu.com/2011/03/11/stories/2011031165231600.htm
Peace,
Tex Shelters

Norquist Tells GOP That Raising Taxes On The Middle Class Doesn’t Count As A Tax Increase

By Travis Waldron on Dec 1, 2011 at 5:50 pm


Anti-tax zealot Grover Norquist, the president of Americans For Tax Reform and author of the radical anti-tax pledge that has played a significant role in hamstringing budget and deficit-reduction negotiations, has said that it is unacceptable for those who have signed his pledge to vote in favor of any tax increase. But now that President Obama and congressional Democrats are backing a tax cut aimed at stimulating economic growth, Norquist has changed his tune.
Norquist met with Republican members today to let them know that opposing the extension of the payroll tax cut — which would provide many families an extra $1,000 a year — would not amount to supporting a tax increase, National Journal’s Billy House reported today:

That stands in contrast, however, to Norquist’s position on tax cuts for the wealthy. Norquist has repeatedly warned GOP members about voting in favor of repealing the Bush tax cuts for the rich or tax hikes on millionaires, even verbally sparring with a member of a group of millionaires advocating for higher taxes on themselves last month in Washington, D.C. And yet, when it comes to tax cuts for the middle class meant to drive economic recovery, Norquist clearly takes a different stance.
Republicans who have defended those tax breaks for the wealthy aren’t so sure about holding the Norquist position, though. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) warned his rank and file this morning about opposing the extension, telling them that “taxes are a Republican issue and you aren’t a Republican if you want to raise taxes on struggling families to fund bigger government.” Multiple Republican senators, meanwhile, have come out in favor of the extension, and Sen. Sue Collins (R-ME) even proposed raising taxes on some wealthy Americans to pay for it.

The GOP Presidential Field Is ‘Embarrassing’

Former Republican Senator: 


Republican John Danforth, who served as a senator from Missouri for nearly 20 years and later as George W. Bush’s ambassador the United Nations, is not happy with the slate of Republican presidential candidates. “I’ve been watching some of these Republican debates and they’re just terrible. Terrible,” he told KTRS in St. Louis yesterday. “It’s embarrassing for me as a Republican to watch this stuff,” he added, calling out audiences for applauding the candidates’ morbid boastings. Via Fired Up Missouri:
DANFORTH: What have been the big applause lines in these debates? Well, a statement that the governor of Texas is responsible for killing 234 people on death row. Or that we favor torture. Or that we’re creating a fence on the Mexican border that electrocutes people when they try to cross it. Or when people show up at the emergency room at hospitals and they’re not insured don’t treat them. And that, I mean these are the big applause lines, people just hoop and holler when they hear all that. [...]
It doesn’t have anything to do with the republican party that I was a part of. This is just totally different. And all of these people who are saying this, y’know, and claiming that, y’know, they’re for all this stuff, they also sort of ostentatiously say, “Oh, we’re very religious people. We really, we’re just very pious, Christian people.” They were for torture, and electrocution of the people on along the border and all of that. That doesn’t have anything to do with, is contrary to the Christianity that I understand.
Danforth is an ordained Episcopal priest.
Since leaving public office, Danforth has often publicly criticized the Republican party, of which he remains an active and influential member, for drifting father and farther to the right. A year ago, he said that if Sen. Dick Lugar (R-IN) — the “most respected person in the Senate and the leading authority on foreign policy” — “is seriously challenged by anybody in the Republican Party, we have gone so far overboard that we are beyond redemption.” As it goes, Dick Lugar is already facing a “tough primary challenge” from state Treasurer Richard Mourdock (R), and several other Republicans are also thinking of entering the race.

GOP Supercommittee Member Admits Bush Tax Cuts Didn’t Create Jobs, Can’t Explain Why

Know this is late, but still having big impact on what is happening righjt now in Congress, and the tax extend holiday and unemployment.....


Republicans this week filibustered a Democratic plan to extend a soon-to-expire payroll tax cut, objecting to the fact that the extension was paid for by implementing a small surtax on income in excess of $1 million. To justify their objection to taxing the wealthy, Republicans have revived their false claim that taxing the rich amounts to taxing small business owners and job creators.
Bloomberg’s Al Hunt asked Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI) — who represented the GOP on the fiscal supercommittee that failed to craft a deficit reduction package — to explain this viewpoint, considering that more jobs were created under the Clinton administration and its higher taxes on the rich than were created following the Bush tax cuts. Upton admitted that “I don’t know specifically the answer to that question,” nonsensically pointing to Friday’s jobs report instead of trying to argue the premise of Hunt’s question:
HUNT: Why under those pre-Bush tax cut tax rates did the economy do so well in the ‘90s? And why under the Bush tax rates, less for the wealthy, to do so poorly in this decade?
UPTON: Well, a couple things. One, spending went up, Al, the wars. I mean, that’s trillions of dollars. And also there was no change in the entitlements. And we also know -
HUNT: But that shouldn’t hurt the economy. That shouldn’t hurt economic growth.
UPTON: Yeah, but that impacts the debt and the deficit.
HUNT: But I’m asking, why did the economy grow a lot? Why were more jobs created in the previous decade under higher taxes than in this decade under lower taxes?
UPTON: I don’t know specifically the answer to that question. I can – I can maybe merit a guess. But, I mean, in large part is because our job – we lost jobs. I mean, look at the jobs report that came out this last week, three-hundred- some-thousand people actually stopped looking for jobs.
Watch it:


As Center for American Progress Director of Tax and Budget Policy Michael Linden found, “in the past 60 years, job growth has actually been greater in years when the top income tax rate was much higher than it is now.” In fact, “if you ranked each year since 1950 by overall job growth, the top five years would all boast marginal tax rates at 70 percent or higher.” The GOP, as Upton displays, simply has no explanation for these facts.
In a Bloomberg op-ed, wealthy investor Nick Hanauer also blew a hole in the GOP’s line of thinking, writing, “I can start a business based on a great idea, and initially hire dozens or hundreds of people. But if no one can afford to buy what I have to sell, my business will soon fail and all those jobs will evaporate. That’s why I can say with confidence that rich people don’t create jobs.” The GOP would do well to take note.