According to the U.S. Constitution, there are three different branches of government: Executive, Judicial, Legislative. Each branch has its own responsibilities.
If you listen to the howling from Congressional Democrats , one would think that the deal the President cut with the GOP just dropped out of the sky, and he just strolled on into negotiations with them, without any CONTEXT whatsoever.
Here's the thing.
The President might have gotten a better deal, hell, he might not have had to make a deal at all..
IF CONGRESSIONAL DEMOCRATS HAD TAKEN CARE OF BUSINESS.
It was Congressional Democrats who didn't do squat about the 99ers. They've known about them for months...how do I know that? Because I heard rant upon rant from Ed Schultz about this topic.
The extension of unemployment benefits was no surprise either for Congressional Democrats. At any time, with a majority in the House, and Senate, they could have done unemployment benefit extensions.
Now, we get to the tax cuts.
Was the President the only person in Washington that knew that the tax cuts were going to expire and a vote needed to be taken on them?
Ummm......NOPE.
The Congressional Democrats were asked to vote on the tax cuts and make them an issue for the fall elections - by the President - in September.
They could have decoupled the tax issue between those making less than $250,000 and those making more than $250,000. They could have done an up or down vote on the tax issue BEFORE November 2010.
But, they didn't.
Not only did they not, but now, we're getting a list of Congresscritters who weaseled their way to the White House, begging off a vote on the tax issue.
So, the DEMOCRATS in Congress FAIL to live up to their legislative responsibilities. They chose NOT to vote on Unemployment Extensions. They chose NOT to add another tier to take care of the 99ers (which is the only part of the President's deal that I disagree with entirely). They chose NOT to vote on the tax cuts by decoupling them. They chose NOT to vote on them at the beginning of the lame duck session. They chose NOT to ram through their proposal on the Estate Tax that they've had on the table for at least a year.
So, they chose NOT to do all those things.
AND, now, they have the NERVE to be yelping like a beaten dog when the President steps in and tries to clean up their neglect. Their mess.
President Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama Speak at Signing of the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010
hat tip-zackboston
Here's a video made by some local Bedford, MA teens that is really fun, in honor of President Barack Obama's support of Michelle's let's move and child nutrition advocacy. . . i think they did a great job and it's funny too:
plus, if you watch and send it on to others, you can help these great young people with their goal to go viral! i think they are trying to get up to 5,000 views in the next week. Here is the link
The President and First Family light up the WH Christmas Tree.
US President Barack Obama, joined by his family including First Lady Michelle Obama, daughters Sasha and Malia, and mother-in-law Marian Robinson, react as they push a button to light the National Christmas Tree during a ceremony on the Ellipse near the White House in Washington, DC, December 9, 2010. ----SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images
WASHINGTON, DC - DECEMBER 09: U.S. First Lady Michelle Obama (R) reads story to children during the 2010 National Christmas Tree lighting ceremony December 9, 2010 at the Ellipse, south of the White House, in Washington, DC. The first family participated in the annual ceremony to kick off the 2010 National Christmas Tree Festival. ----Alex Wong/Getty Images
U.S. First Lady Michelle Obama reads a Christmas book to children on stage during the National Christmas Tree Lighting ceremony in Washington December 9, 2010. ----REUTERS/Molly Riley
US President Barack Obama, First Lady Michelle Obama and daughters Sasha and Malia take their seats at the National Christmas Tree Lighting ceremony on the Ellipse near the White House in Washington, DC, December 9, 2010. ----SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images
Singer Jackie Evancho gets a hug from first lady Michelle Obama as Santa Claus is seen at right at the lighting of the National Christmas Tree at the Ellipse across from the White House in Washington, Thursday, Dec. 9, 2010. ----AP Photo/Charles Dharapak
President Barack Obama, with First Lady Michelle Obama and daughters Malia, 12, and Sasha, 9, smile as they push the button to light up the National Christmas Tree on the Ellipse, just south of the White House, in Washington, Thursday, Dec. 9, 2010. ---AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite
WASHINGTON, DC - DECEMBER 09: Singer B.B. King performs during the 2010 National Christmas Tree lighting ceremony December 9, 2010 at the Ellipse, south of the White House, in Washington, DC. The first family participated in the annual ceremony to kick off the 2010 National Christmas Tree Festival. ----Alex Wong/Getty Images
Adam Levine of Maroon 5 performs after President Barack Obama lit the National Christmas Tree at the Ellipse across from the White House in Washington, Thursday, Dec. 9, 2010. ----AP Photo/Charles Dharapak
US President Barack Obama laughs with his daughter Sasha as they attend the National Christmas Tree Lighting ceremony on the Ellipse near the White House in Washington, DC, December 9, 2010. ---- SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images
Just an All-American Family.
U.S. President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama stand with their daughters Sasha (2nd R) and Malia (L) during the National Christmas Tree Lighting in Washington December 9, 2010. Marian Robinson, the president's mother-in-law, stands behind Sasha. -----REUTERS/Molly Riley
US President Barack Obama, First Lady Michelle Obama, daughters Sasha and Malia attend the National Christmas Tree Lighting on the Ellipse near the White House in Washington, DC, December 9, 2010. ---SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images
Elizabeth Edwards, who as the wife of former Senator John Edwards gave America an intimate look at a candidate’s marriage by sharing his quest for the 2008 presidential nomination as she struggled with incurable cancer and, secretly, with his infidelity, died Tuesday morning at her home in Chapel Hill, N.C. She was 61. Her family confirmed the death, saying Mrs. Edwards was surrounded by relatives when she died. A family friend said Mr. Edwards was present. On Monday, two family friends said that Mrs. Edwards’s cancer had spread to her liver and that doctors had advised against further medical treatment.
Mrs. Edwards posted a Facebook message to friends on Monday, saying, “I have been sustained throughout my life by three saving graces — my family, my friends, and a faith in the power of resilience and hope.” She added: “The days of our lives, for all of us, are numbered. We know that.”
In a life of idyllic successes and crushing reverses, Mrs. Edwards was an accomplished lawyer, the mother of four children and the wife of a wealthy, handsome senator with sights on the White House. But their 16-year-old son was killed in a car crash, cancer struck her at age 55, the political dreams died and, within months, her husband admitted to having had an extramarital affair with a campaign videographer.
The scandal over the affair faded after his disclosure in 2008. But in 2009, Mrs. Edwards resurrected it in a new book and interviews and television appearances, telling how her husband had misrepresented the infidelity to her, rocked their marriage and spurned her advice to abandon his run for the presidency, a decision in which she ultimately acquiesced.
Last January, on the eve of new disclosures in a book by a former political aide, Mr. Edwards admitted he had fathered a child with the videographer. Soon afterward, he and Mrs. Edwards separated legally.
Mrs. Edwards, a savvy political adviser who took on major roles in her husband’s two campaigns for the White House, learned she had a breast tumor the size of a half-dollar on the day after Election Day 2004, when the Democratic ticket — Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts and Mr. Edwards, his running mate from North Carolina — lost to President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.
Radiation and chemotherapy appeared to put the cancer into remission. In a best-selling memoir, “Saving Graces: Finding Solace and Strength from Friends and Strangers” (Broadway Books, 2006), Mrs. Edwards chronicled her fight for survival. But in March 2007, with her husband again chasing a presidential nomination, this time against Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton, Mr. and Mrs. Edwards disclosed that her cancer had returned.
They said it was malignant and in an advanced stage, having spread beyond the breast and lymph nodes into her ribs, hip bones and lungs. It was treatable but “no longer curable,” Mr. Edwards explained. But he said he would continue his bid for the presidency, and Mrs. Edwards said that she, too, would go on with the campaign. “I don’t expect my life to be significantly different,” she declared.
Rest of Obituary at link above.
May prayers of comfort come to her children right now and hold them up as they deal with this loss.
Waters Has Plenty Of Questions On Suspension Of Ethics Lawyers Ryan J. Reilly | December 1, 2010, 6:03PM
Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) doesn't know why two of the ethics committee lawyers who had been working on the ethics case against her were placed on administrative leave. But she does know that something "has gone wrong in the ethics process." And she's got plenty of questions.
Waters said in a statement late Wednesday that the House ethics committee has yet to inform her directly that two of the lawyers working on the ethics case against her had been suspended. She said the "integrity of the Committee and its investigative process have been compromised" and called on the panel to clarify why the disciplinary action had been taken.
"Did the Committee's attorneys withhold exculpatory evidence? Leak documents or speak to the press without authorization? Engage in partisan activity? Mislead Members of Congress? Was the disciplinary action justified? What impact does this have on my case?" Waters said in a statement issued late Wednesday.
Committee lawyers Cindy Morgan Kim and Stacy Sovereign were placed on administrative leave on Nov. 19, the day the panel announced the Waters trial had been delayed.
Ok, if that's not enough to raise the eyebrow, I don't know what would.
The lawyers in charge of your trial get SUSPENDED?
In what world doesn't that throw shade ON THE WHOLE DAMN CASE?
Juan Williams is shinning and grinning while earning his Fox paycheck.
Juan Williams: Extended Jobless Benefits Hurt The Unemployed (VIDEO) On Fox News today, Juan Williams, formerly of NPR, advanced an argument about the detrimental effects that extended jobless benefits can have on people. You see, Williams said, these unemployment checks can kill people's work ethic, hurt their values, even harm their sense of style. ..............................
"To me it's crazy because the longer that person is unemployed the more difficult it is then for them to get a job," Williams said. "Because employers, potential employers, will look and see that gee, they've been out forever, it doesn't make sense. And I think that's partly playing in to this cycle. And at some point then it becomes a matter of you lose your work ethic, your values are impacted, you know, getting up, showing up, dressing well, all that good stuff."
VIDEO: The Faces Of The Millions Of Americans Who Will Suffer After Conservatives Kill Unemployment Extension Today, “thousands of Americans are set to begin losing unemployment benefits” after conservatives in Congress successfully prevented an extension from being passed. 8,400 Americans will lose their benefits by the end of this week, and the Labor Department estimates that “by the end of the third week of December, aid to 1.36 million Americans will be interrupted.”
Those Americans are not just statistics. They are very real single mothers, struggling families, hardworking young adults, and non-retired seniors. In every corner of America, everyday people who can’t find work thanks to a disastrous economy created by the misdeeds of Wall Street and other elites will suffer because of Congress’s failure to extend unemployment benefits.
83,000 Pennsylvanians will soon lose their jobless benefits. 10,600 Nevadans will stop receiving aid by mid-December, such as 46 year-old Doyle Carr, who worked in a warehouse until he was laid off in 2008. “I just want to go to work,” Carr told the local media. “I’ve got skills. That’s all I really want to do.” But because of the poor economy, he can’t find work, and he is scared of what will happen to him. “‘They want to squabble about this in Congress? Why?” Carr asks. “Survival. Health issues. That’s what’s important. That’s why people need this money.”
ThinkProgress has compiled video reports from around the country showcasing the suffering Americans are about to experience due to the expiration of jobless benefits. Like Carr, these Americans are hard working and strive to find employment, but the economy, shattered by the misbehavior of Wall Street and not Main Street, is unable to provide them with those opportunities. These are the faces of the Americans who will suffer as a direct result of conservative obstruction. Watch it:
This is who they are. This is who the GOP is. Stop trying to pretend that they're anything other than this.
And for anyone who voted for them and knows someone who is unemployed - no better for you.
The House of Representatives voted 332 to 79 to censure Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY) on Thursday for violations of the body's ethics laws.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) read the censure on the floor of the House immediately following the vote.
Today's vote brought an end to the investigation of the long serving New York Democrat, who was found to have violated 11 of the House ethics rules. The charges centered upon four issues: that Rangel used Congressional resources to raise money for an educational center bearing his name; that he failed to report taxable income on a rental villa in the Dominican Republic; the he filed inaccurate financial disclosure forms; and that he used a rent-controlled apartment in Harlem as a campaign office.
Several members from both parties spoke in support changing the punishment from censure to reprimand (For more on how these punishments have played out in the past, see here.)
And Rep. G.K. Butterfield (D-N.C.), a member of the ethics committee, proposed a motion to lessen the sanction from censure to reprimand that ultimately failed by a vote of 146-267. It had the support of 143 Democrats and three Republicans: Reps. Pete King (NY), Ron Paul (TX) and Don Young (AK).
Rep. Bobby Scott (D-VA) argued that the whatever sanction was levied against Rangel should be consistent with precedent. "He knows he messed up," Scott said. Censure would be "singularly harsh and unfair and without precedent."
King also spoke in support of reducing the punishment to a reprimand, but upped the ante on the rhetoric. Censure is to a reprimand as the death penalty is to prison, King said, while noting that he and Rangel "disagree on virtually every issue."
START (for Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) was a bilateral treaty between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) on the Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms. The treaty was signed on 31 July 1991 and entered into force on 5 December 1994 . The treaty was signed by the United States and the USSR, that barred its signatories from deploying more than 6,000 nuclear warheads atop a total of 1,600 ICBMs, submarine-launched ballistic missiles, and bombers. START negotiated the largest and most complex arms control treaty in history, and its final implementation in late 2001 resulted in the removal of about 80 percent of all strategic nuclear weapons then in existence. Proposed by United States President Ronald Reagan, it was renamed START I after negotiations began on the second START treaty, which became START II.
The START I treaty expired 5 December 2009. On 8 April 2010, the new START treaty was signed in Prague by U.S. President Obama and Russian President Medvedev. It will enter into force after its ratification through the parliaments of both countries.
PROPOSAL The first START proposal was presented by United States President Ronald Reagan in Geneva on 29 June 1982. Reagan proposed a dramatic reduction in strategic forces in two phases, which he referred to as SALT III at the time.[2] The first phase would reduce overall warhead counts on any missile type to 5,000, with an additional limit of 2,500 on ICBMs. Additionally, a total of 850 ICBMs would be allowed, with a limit of 110 "heavy throw" missiles like the SS-18, with additional limits on the total "throw weight" of the missiles as well. The second phase introduced similar limits on heavy bombers and their warheads, and other strategic systems as well.
So, the original START Treaty was presented by GOP Hero Ronald Reagan. Ronald ' He defeated the Commies' Reagan.
The President has negotiated START II, and now it needs ratification by the Senate. The problem with is that all treaties need 2/3 majority in the Senate to be ratified.
Of course, the problem is the GOP. They suddenly have a problem with START II.
WHY?
Because President Obama negotiated it.
If this had been George Bush, and he had negotiated anything with our international allies, the first thing that would have been said about any Democrat who opposed it was how the Democrats were once again ENDANGERING OUR NATIONAL SECURITY. And, how dare they oppose the President. Aren't they REAL Americans?
You know it. I know it.
START II IS about the national security of the United States of America, and these mofos could care less. It's quite obvious that they could care less. How bad is it?
LUGAR: Please do your duty for your country. We do not have verification of the Russian nuclear posture right now. We’re not going to have it until we sign the START treaty. We’re not going to be able to get rid of further missiles and warheads aimed at us. I state it candidly to my colleagues, one of those warheads…could demolish my city of Indianapolis — obliterate it! Now Americans may have forgotten that. I’ve not forgotten it and I think that most people who are concentrating on the START treaty want to move ahead to move down the ladder of the number of weapons aimed at us.
Appearing on Meet The Press, Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R-AZ) said that the Senate would not be able to ratify the START treaty during the lame-duck session: "If the leader of the Senate, Senator Reid, were to allow a couple of weeks for full debate and amendment of the resolution of ratification, then theoretically there would be time. But he has made it clear that he has a different agenda in mind. And I, I think clearly they've got to set some priorities here. Are they going to deal with the funding of the government for the remainder of the fiscal year? They've got to do that. Are they going to deal with the issue which is on everybody's mind, that you mentioned earlier, and that is to ensure that we don't have a big tax increase, the largest tax increase in the history of the country. These are higher priority items."
Higher priority than the national security of the United States?
G-T-F-O-H
You have other Republicans calling the Senate out for their insanity.
Former Republican Sen. Warns GOP May ‘Have Gone So Far Overboard That We Are Beyond Redemption’
In an age when far-right tea party activists have taken over the Republican Party and demanded lockstep allegiance, Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN) has been one of the few GOP lawmakers to step out of line. In particular, Lugar, the ranking GOP member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has blasted his own party for relentlessly blocking ratification of the New START nuclear arms treaty with Russia, calling on his fellow GOP senators to “do your duty for your country” and complete the pact.
Not surprisingly, this insubordination has earned Lugar significant scorn within the Republican base, which now seems to value blind obedience over principled independent decision-making. In a New York Times profile of Lugar published today, former GOP Sen. John Danforth feared that the backlash against Lugar from his own party signals that the GOP has gone “far overboard” with no hope of turning back:
“If Dick Lugar,” said John C. Danforth, a former Republican senator from Missouri, “having served five terms in the U.S. Senate and being 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.”
Mr. Danforth, who was first elected the same year as Mr. Lugar, added, “I’m glad Lugar’s there and I’m not.”
THIS from the man who brought us Unca Clarence.
Richard Lugar, could in no way, be considered a liberal anything. Hell, he couldn't even be considered a moderate anything. He is a conservative, but the man actually thinks about the national security of this country over getting a defeat of the President.
Imagine that - National Security of America and what's in America's international best interests - EVEN IF IT GIVES PRESIDENT OBAMA A WIN - over being a loyal GOP slop.
A REAL American, would want our country to be safe internationally. Would want this country to be in good standing - around the world.
These people are not Real Americans. They are not Good Americans. And, the left has to stop believing that they have any redeeming qualities. That they are nothing but powerhungry animals who could give a rat's ass if this country goes down the tubes, as long as they are in power and can loot the treasury for their friends. They have had MONTHS to look over this treaty. The only reason why they are objecting is because they don't want the President to get any credit for an International Foreign Policy Success.
PERIOD.
A sum up of the GOP Obstructionists with START II on Olbermann:
"The two parties have combined against us to nullify our power by a ‘gentleman's agreement' of non-recognition, no matter how we vote ... May God write us down as asses if ever again we are found putting our trust in either the Republican or the Democratic Parties." -- W.E.B. DuBois (1922)
Posts
