[Update x3] Is Judd Gregg Really What the Democrats Want?
By SusanUnPC on February 3, 2009 at 5:44 PM in Commerce, Current Affairs, Economic Stimulus, Economy, Judd Gregg, Medicare, Social Security, Tom Daschle
Bumped up from early morning, with these additional thoughts:
UPDATE #3 (uh, did Obama know this when he decided on Gregg?): “Gregg Voted to Kill Commerce Before He Agreed to Lead It”, CQ Politics, February 2, 2009:
President Obama’s new candidate to run the Commerce Department voted in favor of abolishing the agency as a member of the Budget Committee and on the Senate floor in 1995.
Sen. Judd Gregg , R-N.H., whose nomination was expected to be announced Tuesday, also worked in the Senate to trim the department’s budget as head of the Commerce-Justice-Science Appropriations Subcommittee.
Gregg’s 1995 votes were cast for the fiscal 1996 budget resolution, a nonbinding blueprint that outlined the GOP’s fiscal priorities after Republicans won full control of Congress for the first time in 40 years.
The Senate version of the controversial measure envisioned spending cuts of more than $960 billion, almost half of it from Medicare and Medicaid. [MORE INDICATIONS that health care will not be reformed, but may be cut back? Just asking! - Susan] Democratic efforts to amend it were uniformly rebuked by a united GOP majority on the Budget Committee.
Ultimately, the Commerce Department survived, and Gregg has since shown more interest than most of his Republican colleagues in funding some of its agencies, particularly the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
Gregg also fought President Bill Clinton’s efforts to increase funding for the Commerce Department to administer the 2000 census. Indeed, Gregg’s commitment to basic functions of the department has been questioned at times.
“He was generally pretty harsh on them and not really interested in their programs, especially the commerce side of things,” said a Democratic appropriations aide. … Read all.
Update #1: Social Security and Medicare do require some adjustments, but aren’t we all grateful that the Republicans never managed to turn over Social Security monies to private account investments in the stock markets and mutual funds?!?!?! Social Security especially offers some future protection for the many people in our country who are stuck in dead-end, minimum-wage jobs and who will never be able to save enough to be able to provide income in their old age. And many of these minimum wage workers do the most physically taxing kinds of jobs, which are very hard on the body, and age them sooner than those who get white-collar jobs. As one Democratic senator said on an old West Wing I watched the other night, “What do we do about sheet metal workers whose knees and backs are shot by the time they’re 55?” We can’t bump up the age much more.
If we do anything at all, I’d advise we exclude those who are wealthy and have enough annual income in retirement that that SS monthly check is not a loss. And Medicare? It is so efficiently managed that its administrative costs run around 1.5-3% annually — amazing for a huge government-run enterprise. But it is far from free. The necessary supplementals can cost seniors at least $350 per month. And god help those who hit the “donut holes” in the Plan D prescription drug plans — they’re left with hundreds of dollars of expenses until the end of the year.
What scares me most is that President Obama doesn’t give a damn about any of this. During the campaigns, we TRIED to tell people this Obama’s economic advisers are in favor of privatizing Social Security but those who dared, like RonK Seattle, were summarily kicked out of true-believer blogs like Daily Kos. And what also frightens me is that we’ve lost Senator Daschle over a tax problem when he was one of the best-informed people anywhere on health care plans. It’s a tragic loss that may ruin our chance to improve health care in this nation. Yes, he screwed up. Damn, he wasn’t perfect, and yes he’d taken advantage of his Senate experience to make big bucks.
BUT, think about this? Who among any of us hasn’t got “skeletons” in OUR closets that would prevent us from confirmation, if the requirement is nothing short of sainthood? This is getting ridiculous. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone …. (Probably not accurate, but we heathens can’t quote the Bible perfectly.) But god we needed Daschle’s expertise. Obama should have FOUGHT for Daschle, but instead he did the easiest thing politically — he threw Daschle under the bus, just like he does most everyone who causes him any problems. [Update 2: The adage about "throwing the first stone" works if we consider the totality of what a man or woman has done, but Obama is the one who falls WAY too far for me. Not only has he never accomplished anything substantive that truly helped citizens, he's rarely if ever tried, and has only busted his ass when he wanted to win a campaign.]
The PREVAILING VIEW is that Daschle still had the votes to win confirmation, so what happened? I’ll bet you anything that Obama chickened out, and forced him to withdraw because he CAN’T TAKE THE HEAT of standing up for the best nominee! Daschle will never say that, but I’m nearly sure of it.
NOW back to the original story I wrote late last night: I recall being impressed with Senator Gregg’s coherent, detailed explanations of negotiations last fall at the height of the presidential election race to forge a negotiated agreement for Bush’s economic rescue plan. And I’ve heard that he’s a “budget wonk,” which is an asset. But I just ran across this article, and am bringing it to your attention solely because you have to ask yourselves what kind of a real Democrat is Barack Obama? Or is he one? Or does he care?
Is he a fool? Or a callous deal-maker, the kind who consorted for years with Tony Rezko who stole millions of dollars of the hard-earned money of taxpayers and failed to keep his bond with the people, to improve heretofore public housing and left it to rot, to be foreclosed, to be uninhabitable while his friend, the ever-ambitious Barack Obama glanced away?
Is Barack Obama a fool, I ask again? Who else would appoint a man to be Secretary of Commerce who was planning to vote against Obama’s stimulus package, as was Gregg?
Or is Obama — as I feared throughout the contests because what little of a record the man does have suggests it strongly — a callous deal-maker who is manifestly untouched by the real lives of real American citizens and who only looks for the adulation and the next campaign dollar?
Would he really appoint a Secretary of Commerce in a Democratic party administration whose idea of improving the economy is to create “a commission of center-right insiders operating in secret and circumventing Congress in order to destroy Social Security and Medicare”?
Say what you want about the Democratic party but, at its finest, it has been about creating a harbor to protect our nation’s citizens.
Good men and women of the Democratic party fought the toughest battles against both giants of industry and hard-right conservatives to give Americans the safety nets of Social Security and Medicare.
I am reading a book about one such man, who served in the House from 1936 to 1944 and in the Senate from 1944 to 1981. Warren Magnuson, my representative and senator from the State of Washington, long before I was even born, looked out for me and you. He not only helped Franklin D. Roosevelt pass his great bills but he went on to create and pass bills that forever have changed all of our lives for the better, from the Consumer Protection Act to numerous environmental protection measures. Here are some of his words, in 1936, when he first ran for the House, and through a lingering Depression:
“Roosevelt has brought order from chaos,” he said. “The Democratic policy is water power without profit, schools for all children, programs to cure unemployment. … (page 56, “New Deal, New World,” from the book, “Warren G. Magnuson and The Shaping of Twentieth Century America.”)
Water power without profit? Yes, that had to be fought for. Schools for all children? Yes, that too had to be fought for.
The Washington state Democratic party platform, at its convention over which he presided, called for:
a social security program, unemployment compensation, aid to dependent children, public health programs, collective bargaining and labor arbitration, and federal aid for dams and irrigation.
Unemployment compensation? Yes that too had to be fought for. Public health programs? That too. Federal aid for dams and irrigation (which has made possible the great farming lands of the west)? Yes, those too had to be fought for.
And then there is social security. The “third rail” of politics, as it is sometimes called.
We know that Obama is a novice who skimmed the surface of the U.S. Senate fleetingly, never bothered even to learn all the rules, and who used his office solely as a springboard to the presidency. We know that such a man, with the ego to run with so little to show for his life, save a couple political victories and a best-selling biography, had to have the most exceptional nerve to run for the most powerful office in the world.
Obama touts his “bipartisan” approach to politics as if it makes him fly with the angels, above the blood sport that is really politics. There’s something naive about his approach. He played his “bipartisan” hand so overtly that the House Republicans were only too eager to show him how that works in their town, with nary a “bipartisan” vote from their side of the aisle.
It was almost as if he thought he could win over the Republicans the same way he had made women faint at his rallies and once-sensible people fall for his promises as if he were the next messiah.
Only those grizzled, cynical GOP veterans know the system in D.C., and they are not that easily won over, nor will they ever be won over by his supposed charm and charisma.
And now he’s bringing in another Republican, whose true allegiances are to his party and his GOP comrades in the Senate and House to oversee the nation’s commerce. But he’s doing so without the requisite experience and knowledge, himself, to see if Judd Gregg is on the up-and-up with him, or will be leading him down a path to the destruction of all that those courageous men and women fought for back in the 1930s and 1940s.
And Franklin Roosevelt was so much more than Barack Obama. Roosevelt truly did “change” Washington, D.C. From the book again (Magnuson’s nickname was “Maggie”), in 1936:
Maggie would sit alongside another freshman, Texas Lyndon B. Johnson. Johnson was twenty-eight; Magnuson, thirty-two. …
This was Franklin Roosevelt’s Washington, not Herbert Hoover’s — a city in fundamental change from the center of a laissez-faire capitalist federation to a seat of government suddenly concerned about every aspect of American society from Wall Street to Main Street. It was more the Washington, D.C. we know today, a strong central government–…
This was the Neal Deal government, a consequence of its rescue of capitalism. …
Years later, when asked to explain his and Johnson’s devotion to the New Deal, Magnuson said, “All of us are creatures of our times. We needed to do something [in the 1930s] no matter what it was called. It was a modest approach.
A modest approach. What an understatement. He and Lyndon Johnson and Franklin Roosevelt changed our nation forever, and for the better.
Nowhere in the Obama “stimulus package” do we see any great programs such as we saw in what Magnuson mentioned.
And nowhere in Obama’s haphazard piling on of experts do we see even a glimmer of a coherent plan that will not only lift the recession/depression but will also reinvigorate this nation and the rest of the world.
It’s late. I’m done writing. There’s more to say. Another time.
(Release: November 13)
on sale for only $16.95.
has a spatula.)
8% Off at $11.95, with a rare five-star ranking by 294 customers: 
And check out these: 
("This crazy redhead is on to something. Her pink Rambler story alone is worth the price of the book," writes 
- “Richard Sale’s reportage on Washington, the CIA, the American armed forces, and foreign intrigue has created a perfect background for this account of the steady growth of President Clinton as a master of the game of nations.”--W. Patrick Lang, former head of Middle East Operations, DIA
"Anne C. Heller's stunning biography of Ayn Rand" uses a "plethora of newly unearthed research and fresh insight."
There’s also the fact that the New Hampshire governor (D) would appoint a Dem for Gregg’s Senate replacement. Add to that the possibility of Al Franken (D) getting the Minnesota seat (does anybody know how to count properly over there?–it’s different every time!) and the Dems would have a filibuster proof majority in the Senate.
No. He’s already said he would appoint a Republican.
excellent….
If he hadn’t, the Republican Senators would have pinned Gregg to the wall of his Senate office before they’d let him take that cabinet position.
Even with this deal, they’re not happy campers. McConnell was on TV yesterday denigrating the importance of cabinet positions.
My fear is that Gregg is smart enough, and has actually WORKED in the Senate long enough (UNLIKE, oh, our president) that he might be able to exploit that Cabinet post for all it’s worth. Maybe McConnell knows that too, and is just protesting because that’s what he is supposed to do, while being privately gleeful that Gregg will have an insider view of the economic, trade, and industry measures of the White House — and can make them favorable to industry.
The bottom line is to always remember that Obama does not care about these policies per se, nor does he care about the rich history of the Democratic party’s efforts on behalf of all the regular Joes and Janes that have made this nation great but who are all getting screwed now.
If Obama really cared about Joe and Jane, he’d have never given such pretty deals to his rich Chicago friends like Rezko, Cullen and Allison Davis, Valerie Jarrett (who made out like a bandit on that privatization of public housing that turned out to solely enrich its investors, and left the poor people with living conditions worse than ever).
I agree. And when it comes to Obama, it is right to remember lessons learned as opposed to ‘giving him a chance’. He blew it long ago and is not to be trusted.
Simpler reasons to explain why the Governor is appointing a Rethug. He is a Democrat and not single handedly changing the balance of the Senate and he also wants a run at the seat. If he appoints a Democrat - it would not be possible.
I leave it to you to guess which is reason 1 and 2
Wrong. Gov. Lynch made this statement two weeks ago:
“I am not going to run for the US Senate in 2010.”
http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090115/NEWS02/301159845/-1/XML15
Ahhh…now that reasoning rings very true, Sonic Ninja Kitty. I think you have something there…
Is this the same thing as “Pay to Play”? I think so!!
How crafty of Obama to try and get the 60 phillabuster proof Senate that Obama wants. Wow!!
There is no change that I can see with this administration except for the fact that Obama is really hiring foxes to guard the henhouse. That does NOT give me hope.
Senator Judd Gregg is a Republican. New Hampshire Governor John Lynch is a Democrat. Judd Gregg has “indicated he will only accept the [Secretary of Commerce] post if it does not change the makeup of the U.S. Senate.” (Wikipedia)
CBS News Political Hotsheet reports:
Interesting to think of what behind-the-scenes deals may be afoot to convince a Democratic Governor to appoint a Republican Senator!
You are good!
Thanks SNK; still half-asleep. This just seems so strange to me. I don’t recognize the landscape anymore. What the heck is really going on here?
I have been very disconcerted, too.
The birth certificate issue is still going strong in some circles as well. It is not going away nicely.
Is this whole thing just a show? Do citizens really matter? Does this have something to do with that gaff Biden made about a crisis?
Only among the most stupid of stupids. Certainly not with the Supreme Court. I guess the same people who made some pennies being a 9/11 conspirator can now make some pennies being birthers. Do they get you to donate?
Hi there UKforDems! Nice to talk with you, too!
None of the cases have been heard on merit–all dismissed on standing. Don’t worry, though, the later cases will have those pesky standing issues all worked out. Smile
Keep positive, UKforDems! We will get to the bottom of this eventually. I’m sure Obama has not minded spending almost $1 million in hiding it, but it can’t stay a secret forever.
Love ya!!! xoxoxo
It seems that Soertoro/Obama (for the first time ever I have no idea what the guy in the Oval Office’s legal name is) has missed a fundamental part of our history called “The Great Depression” and so he appears “doomed to repeat it” because the wealthy in charge of our government has failed to realize that without a solid foundation a house will not stand.
Our government and those who run it should look at some photos that show what erosion does to houses built upon sand. Our democratic/republic foundation built on our Constitution once made us the most self-sufficient, prosperous country in the world. Now we have lost that solid foundation and our leaders are just stuffing sandbags under those elite citizens that they feel are entitled but rescuing them will not keep this ocean of problems from undermining Our country’s foundation built upon We the people. This is what happens when that foundation of prosperity and pursuit of happiness that comes from security is swept away.
http://coastal.er.usgs.gov/hurricanes/ivan/photos/index.html
Only the shortsighted who can’t see the ties between the taxes we pay in and our ability to earn income are surprised that their privileged lives will be sliding downhill along with the rest of us. But then, $750 million dollars is quite a big boat to rescue you if you fail.
well said. The biggest problem I see with society today is NO ACCOUNTABILITY. Why? Because leaders from parents, to schools to employers to our government make too many excuses for people when they are not responsible, make a mistake or don’t use judgement. Want to help someone…God helps those who help themselves. People learn NOTHING if someone constantly bails them out. Everyone makes mistakes. But if you keep doing the same stupid shit then it seems to me the best way to learn not to do it again is feel the pain that follows poor choices.
Susan - the Democratic Party you write about is the REAL Democratic Party; the Party I grew up with in the 50’s and 60’s; and that my grandparents and parents were members of for life, and the party I was an active member in. And for the reasons you cite here.
Some where along the way this grand old party lost its way; lost its soul. The Democratic Party that exists today is a pale imitation of FDR’s, JFK’s, and LBJ’s Party. Even today’s Republican Party is not the Party of the 50’s and 60’s.
There has been a fundamental shift in America. No longer is the Congress the people’s House. It is the house of the rich and the privileged few, not the majority. It is the house of corruption - just look at Tom Daschle or Nancy Pelosi. Both parties today are just flip-sides of the same corrupt coin where personal aggrandizement and personal monetary gain are what rule.
The empty, self-aggrandizing, egotistical Obama is just the logical conclusion to this fundamental change in America’s governing elite.
I weep for my country and her citizens and I long for the day and for a leader who can get us back on track. It is not too late. YET. But we are fast approaching that day.
I agree with you.
Nancy Pelosi THNKS she’s preserving it with her pet projects — but pet projects are NOT the same as rescuing a nation’s, indeed a word’s people during a time of recession/depression.
Barack Obama: Flat out DOES NOT CARE. DOES NOT CARE. Only cares about winning and fawning. It’s why I was thunderstruck when I went to the White House Web site last night and took those screenshots - can you imagine that, if he’d had a Web page, that FDR would have had photos up of HIMSELF ALONE watching the Superbowl? My god — Eleanor would have had a picture up of a soup kitchen for the hungry, freezing people of Kentucky. Etc.
I swear to god: I’d give anything to bring back Johnson, Magnuson, Scoop Jackson (yes, him too), Dirksen, et al.
I do not know if they could operate in these environs, but they’d try.
Why do people blame this on Pelosi?
The blame falls squarely on the shoulders of the president, who is blowing a perfect opportunity to transform our infrastructure to one that includes more light rail and high-speed rail.
Because he’s an empty suit with no ideas of his own, he’s allowing his loud, elbow-throwing economic adviser Larry Summers, who hates infrastructure, to ruin this stim package. Pelosi had to push just to get what little infrastructure spending there is.
great comment as well as yours Susan. I agree.
The fundamentals of this country are wonderful. But the rich, greedy people have a grasp on it from both sides. It sickened me to see what the Republicans did the last 8 years and then the Democrats turned around and are emulating the very behavior and actions that they despised and hated.
But I don’t believe anyone who engages in wrongful behavior ever stays on top long. Good always wins over evil and I will believe that until the day I die.
GOD BLESS AMERICA!
If you have 10 minutes to spare, this is an excellent refresher about what our true form of government is supposed to be:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7M-7LkvcVw
We are now an oligarchy. We must work to change it back.
“And now he’s bringing in another Republican, whose true allegiances are to his party and his GOP comrades in the Senate and House to oversee the nation’s commerce”
Wait a minute. This blog enthusiastically endorsed John McCain and Sarah Palin for President, right? What type of economic policies do you think would been have enacted under a McCain/Palin Administration?
I thought you would applaud the fact Obama was reaching across the aisle. IMO, Obama knows the Democrats, especially in the House, will try to overreach and push him too far to the Left. Look at what the House did to the bailout bill. Bringing in Repubs into his cabinet(while still maintaining control over them) is smart practically and politically.
Or he’s trying to get Gregg out of the way so a Dem can be elected against the one who is appointed in the next election cycle.
Who knows what is going on. I do think he gives the “appearance” of trying to reach across the aisle, just has O gives the “appearance” of being many things. Being something and giving the appearance of something is not what I am wanting in a leader.
Do you think the Republicans are that easily used by a political novice?
No. They have it ALL planned out.
They are exploiting a political novice (Obama) who believes in bipartisanship but doesn’t know how to protect his own party’s flank — and the heartstone of his party, an issue like Social Security.
Gregg is twice as smart as Obama and TEN TIMES better with words. Did you hear him in those negotiations last fall? He was superb! The calm voice with the rich vocabulary and the wonderful analogies that made what he said easily understood by all? He is perfect for that job.
Any Republican who underestimate Obama should call the certain office in Foggy Bottom and see how that worked out for her.
Do you mean underestimate Axelrod, Pelosi, Reid, Dean, and “Brazilla”?
And so I am wondering how long before he gets a “pink slip.”
Johnny, if you’d actually read this blog during the campaign, you would know that the support for McCain/Palin was largely tempered with the expectations of a solid Democratic majority in both Houses of Congress which would help restrain the GOP White House far better than it had done with Dubya in charge. (Of course, the Dems didn’t have a SOLID majority in either House during Dubya’s term. A modest 30-35-seat majority in the House and a virtual split in the Senate makes it much harder to keep the Democratic caucus in check. Having a near-80-seat majority in the House and a 15-seat majority in the Senate–even allowing for “Independent” Lieberman–doesn’t require quite the same level of arm-twisting to ensure a voting majority. In the House, the Dems can afford to let 30 Representatives “stray”, and in the Senate, they can afford to let 5 or 6 “stray” while still winning the battle. But McCain would’ve been able to read the hand he would’ve been dealt and not continued the Bush policies or appointed another bunch of GOP cronies/lackeys to the Cabinet.)
Um, I’m a centrist Democrat. We were for Hillary. We opposed Barack Obama for many reasons, but the SOLE reason that would easily suffice is that he hasn’t the experience to be president. Another is that he is too vainglorious and cares to little about real issues.
And to answer SusanUnPC’s question about what kind of democrat O is: He is neither a Democrat or a democrat. Who the H@#%^ he is no one knows.
We should all be worrying more about the daily goings on of Pelosi and Reid. They’re in control. They put a pretty boy, narcissistic incompetent who hasn’t held down a real job for any length of time into the highest office in the land so they could pull strings while he gets to use his very own work out gym and listen to Jay-Z, a fact he makes clear all the time.
All I know is he has 99 problems and (in his thing he calls a mind) a bitch ain’t one. That’s what I hear every time he mentions his love for Jay-Z.
You know, I think it was the readers HERE who came up with the theory that Nancy and Harry were anointing Barack simply because they could control him but knew that Hillary would be far too strong, and far too knowledgeable and savvy.
But Obama is both naive and vainglorious. He doesn’t know how the Republicans are playing games with them — yes, the GOP is down and out right now, but they’re fighting like wounded animals and I think they’ve found they’ve got the perfect TOOL in Barack Obama.
Am I the only person who found his blather about bipartisanship, luncheons, cocktail parties, and Super Bowl parties to be a bit of a stretch of effort?
After that vote last week — on a bill that the White House, not Nancy, should have had control of — maybe Obama should have given the Republicans the deep freeze.
Is there any hardball in our President’s arsenal? Or does he only fight when he’s running for office?
nope, when the pork bill fails, the Dimocrats want to spread the blame. That’s what they do best, no accountability for them or their supporters.
In the primaries and general election, time after time he “reached out” to Republicans to get elected and in the process corrupted the ideals of the Democratic Party. He learned how to campaign in Chicago, but he doesn’t know how to govern and that isn’t something you can learn from campaigning in spite of what his team claims. Part of that team was Tom Daschle and I respectfully disagree with you about his fitness to serve as Sec. of Health and Human Services, Susan. Daschle’s dishonesty in reporting his taxes is not the only problem he has. No matter whether he worked under the name of lobbyist, in effect that is what he is. His employers, Alston & Bird, are a K-Street Law Firm and represented CVS Caremark, the National Association for Home Care and Hospice, Abbott Laboratories and HealthSouth. He also supported the warrantless surveillance of the Bush Administration. The logical choice would have been Howard Dean and I’ve read he expected to be nominated to this position. Howard is now under the bus with the rest of us. He deserves it, we didn’t.
As everyone who’s actually read the book Team of Rivals knows, Lincoln was sorely vexed by his own cabinet. That should have been a warning to Obama.
Intrigue and Plots Against the King by his own Generals and Ministers of War.
No, it’s not “The Tudors” on Showtime, it’s Gates, Petraeus and Odierno. They’re plotting against Obama’s Iraq Withdrawal Plan.
http://www.antiwar.com/porter/?articleid=14184
Is that Lincoln book worth getting?
Hey, I asked Larry about that article on the supposed. Sent him this:
I won’t quote Larry precisely since it was a private e-mail, but let’s just say that he does NOT think highly of Porter, the reporter. So, I think we should wait and see on this one.
Susan, wouldn’t it make sense if Obama really wanted to change directions in Iraq, he would have replaced Gates and Petraeus? There have been many military experts on talk shows who believe a phased withdrawal is the best way out. This has been an extremely long war. The US military has occupied Iraq for six years and it’s time to declare victory and leave. If more troops have to be moved to Afganistan, then fine. That makes some kind of sense, but staying in Iraq indefinitely costs too much and ties up the military whose leaders are predicting ten more years in Afganistan. It’s time for the Iraqis to stand or fall on their own and since they just held an election, this seems like a good time to leave. They want us out.
Interesting link–thanks, Mountainaires. But don’t they know? Obama WON–HE WON HE WON HE WON!! (Joy Behar imitation) Who do those Generals think they are, rising through the ranks on expertise, leadership, discipline and courage–oh, never mind…
I have watched Senator Gregg very often, and he always holds his own against Senator Conrad, when the budget bills are being debated.
I would have considered him to be ultra-conservative on the fiscal side.
Why he would want this job puzzles me…and I heard this morning that it will be announced later today.
I give BO no credit for this, however, for he is a callous deal-maker.
This is an attempt to deflect some of the republican fire-power, and make himself appear reasonable!
As to those pictures, BO always checked his blackberry when he was voting in the Senate…he likes watching himself!
Just because it’s subterfuge doesn’t mean it’s a good move.
One can still make underhanded, BAD moves, moves which come back to bite one in the *ss, and big time…
I read this early this morning and didn’t have time to add a comment so I came back.
I want to say thank you for your refreshing post. Every paragraph made me see another facet of the culture around me.
Though retired, I managed to catch a two day a week job with my former employer. Last summer when the first bank started fail I cashed out enough of my retirement funds to pay every bill I owed. My friends and family thought I was nuts but now wish they had the money they lost to pay down their bills. Any way there is a older lady here who sits at her computer all day who after the few times we spoke about politics has decided that I am one of those conspiracy nuts. She doesn’t believe that the DNC changed the vote of millions of Michigan voters from Hillary to Obama. She gently chuckles and says of Harry Reid’s stinking masses, “he’s right, I guess they really do stink the place up”. You gave me a way to describe their - she thinks she flys with the angles. And she reminds me of the story of the guy who tells the story of how the Nazis came for the groups around him and he didn’t fight and then they came for him. With that story we can go all the way back to when Reagan broke the air traffic controllers union and I don’t know enough current history to say all the steps in between. But I know one day she will get up from her computer and start looking for allies to fight to protect her SS and perhaps find none. My sister sent me a power point about the coal miners at the turn of the century and I watched it and wept because I fear we have broken faith with
. When I get back home tonight I will email it to you and hope you can find a way to make it accessible to everyone. Everyone should see the 12 year old children, noses blacked from breathing coal dust, standing in a row for their picture. Or other children who sat huddled over a huge conveyor belt sorting coal, dust thick in the air.
And Thank You for speaking truth to pseudo historians and giving LBJ back his place in history. The short coal miners video along with all your paragraphs re-telling what these selfless people faught, and in some cases died for, is powerful.
It is like the “greatest generation” had in mind making life better for all subsequent generations and the “Baby Boomer” generation thought they were all subsequent generations.
Thank you Susan for a great post.
Not much a surprise for us who had been pointing out that Obama hung the “FOR SALE” sign out to get where he wants to go. And he rationalized long ago that as long as he toss some crumbs for the people and gives to his donors and special interests, that’s a “compromise” necessary and considers it progress. He IS a Corporatist Republican in sheeps clothing.
And also that we pointed out that his advisers, Rubin, Goolsbee and others, were proponents of privatizing school and Social Security and that Obama would go there.
Also that this is why they keep pushing so much money in to the financial markets and Wall Street. How can they talk American’s in to privatizing social security on CHANCE Stock Market, when they look so risky and lose money. Banking on American’s greed and ignorance to see that that OBVIOUS problem with the Market is WHY YOU WOULD NEVER PUT SECURE FUNDS IN TO THE MARKET.
Obama keeps going in the direction we all expected. And totally away from the direction his naive and ignorant promoters were HOPING.
I agree, Susan, a very thoughtful post, raising legitimate concern about Obama, and his intentions.
I can’t believe that BO actually thought he could pull off the transparent ploy of putting Gregg in and having a Dem replace him in the Senate. If he did, it appears that the plan is a “no go”, but he has still managed to rid the northeast of their only Republican Senator and replace him with an unknown quantity, which gives them a better chance of winning that seat the next time around.
Regarding the stimulus plan, I just don’t understand why Obama doesn’t go out there and defend all of the elements. Use a Perot-style pie chart or something to make everything clear. If we’re going to foot the bill, the Dems owe us at least that. “Be very afraid and just trust us” ain’t gonna work this time — at least I hope that it won’t.
Thanks for the comment–my thoughts exactly.
The fact that Sen. Gregg would vote against this so-called Stimulus Bill only enhances his reputation. Great Pick, Mr. President.
Obama actually has a lot in common with Cheney, I think he has kept the practice of rendition, (though I know others disagree), in addition, it appears economically he is sticking with a rather limited supply side POV (IMO this is due to a lack of emphasis, or perhaps a lack of understanding, in regard to the function of economic development on the American economy), and now, perhaps he is sending another signal with the appointemnt of Gregg.
Really, all those afraid of him, those who embarced Cheney, might not have had reason to be concerned, after all.
Not saying it’s right or wrong, it just is…
JMO.
I think most people are missing the most important component of the economy, that one that can’t be measured easily or passed in a stimulus package, that is the “confidence” the market has on the political leaders. As for as the free market is concern, Obama gives them ZERO confidence. They could passed one million stimulus packages for the next 4 years, as longer as the market doesn’t believe Obama on the economy, companies will continuing laying off, the Wall Street will sink and the American people will not spend and the economy will surfer. Just look at Obama and you tell me does that guy gives you confidence in the economy? He doesn’t.It’s the end.
He gave 69 million people confidence and almost every World Leader. Now that says something. Also the market has no stability as the banks have not yet stabilised. As a result even strong companies face collapse. This is why stupid Republicans were beaten out - no understanding of the economy.
He gave a lot of young people who have never really had to pay for their own living expenses confidence because they can’t see through his changing positions. All they heard was “yes, we can.” He gave many “elites” confidence because he could speak like an elite.
Many voted for him not because they really had confidence in him but only because he was not running for the Republican party. They had no idea who he really is or what he stands for.
I know no one among my friends who actually voted for him who has expressed confidence in his ability to get us out of this financial jam.
Below is Obama’s gift to Arizona…he appointed our democratic gov. to head Homeland Security even though he knew our republican sec. of state would become gov.and now…….
“GOP passes devastating budget bills to harm children, middle-class families.”
“STATE CAPITOL, PHOENIX (Jan. 31, 2009) – House Republicans voted unanimously early Saturday to pass budget bills that will make deep cuts to education, health care and state employee pay, all of which are unnecessary cuts that harm children, middle class families and the economic vitality of the state.”
The morning news reported Obama had nominated Rep.Sen. Gregg as Sec. of Commerce AND convinced the dem. governor of N.H. not to apt. a democrat to replace Gregg.
What the hell is going on?? Is Obama a “closet” republican? Doesn’t he realize how weak, wimpy, unsure of himself he appears? Did his “unity” campaign theme mean he would “share” governing with republicans?
3 republicans in top Cabinet posts! Doesn’t Obama believe any dems. are qualified to fill these positions? How many competent dems. has he overlooked and angered by doing this?
So you blame Obama for GOP spending cuts? And will vote GOP as a result. Right
[steps away]
Absolutely: a callous deal-maker. Perfect description and great post SusanUnPC.
Thank you.
Since early on in the primaries I have warned time and again to be very weary of Obama and his intentions regarding Social Security. I can’t recall the number of times I had read what he was saying (on “reducing Payroll taxes and FICA for example) and thinking “he will move to privatize SS” …
Never forget:
(1) 2005 Cheney Energy Bill
(2) Voting AGAINST predatory credit cards interest rates
(3) Confirming Gen.Casey
(4) Doing away with public financing of his pres. campain
(5) FISA
On SS I bet he will move much closer to what Republicans want than what the American people do and
the New Deal intentions were.
If he announces publicly that he will move to privatize SS, Hillary should resign and run against him or at least threaten to.
Obama is playing politics with this economic crisis. Anyway, Not even the republicans wanted Judd Greg as Commerce Secretary. It seems that Obama is just going aorund and asking anybody to serve without even knowing their position on issues.
A few years ago Judd Greg wanted to get rid of that department. hehehe. Now he is asked to run it.
So he is now a commie right wing would be republican socialist?
Wow. What do the readers of NQ drink?
Obama is reducing payroll taxes as part of this stimulus package, as I understand it.
That impacts Social Security. Individuals will get a payroll tax break on their 6.2%; and as far as I can tell, that means their employers don’t have to pay their 6.2% either.
It’s income relief for low income people, but it’s also a tax break for business. And it cuts tax revenues.
The thing to watch out for, however, is that those payroll taxes you pay in are what determines your Social Security at the time you file for it.
It looks like just another shell game to me. Obama’s not going to come out and say “I’m privatizing Social Security.” That’s not how it’s done.
I didn’t see it asked before so if it was, I apologize.
Is a Cabinet postition under a “democratic president” what Judd Gregg really wants?
If I were Gregg, I’d be finding the nearest exit, pronto.
UK for dems…..
Yes, the republican controled AZ state legislature which is as right-wing as many in the deep south, would do as they please. However democratic governor Janet Napolitano, vetoed ridiculous legislation. One republican state legislator had proposed allowing high school students to carry concealed weapons to school for their protection!!
By law the AZ republican secretary of state replaced Napolitano as governor after Obama whisked Janet off to Washington to head Homeland Security. A job for which she has no special qualifications.
It was more important to Obama to reward Napolitano for her early support of his candidacy than look forward to problems our state would have with a rep. governor.
Obama doesn’t see beyond his kiss my ass, and I’ll do the same for you Chicago politics.
Social Security is NOT an entitlement program. If you paid into it for 50 years, as I have, and are fortunate to have worked hard, saved and made good sound investment choices, why in the world would I forgo it because someone else did not?
That would be distribution of wealth. Go join a Socialist State if you want that or Communist. Lenin didn’t work out so well!
Whatever O is doing with this nomination is a total mystery to most of us because none of us really know O except as a liar and a cheater and a narcissist.
No matter what his reasons for putting Gregg in this position, I don’t trust him. Either it IS just a ploy to get him out of the Senate and get a Dem in his seat during the next election, or he does have plans to mess with SS and then blame it on Republicans.
I am just wishing we had a leader we could trust to tell us what SHE really thinks. We could agree or disagree, but we wouldn’t be guessing.
[...] some work hard to preserve Social Security, it is sad to see people who should know better, out of ignorance or misunderstanding, acquiece to schemes -such as means testing - that will [...]