Home » Archives by category » News » Politics (Page 1930)
Matthews Snipes At Scarborough For Strolling House Floor

Professional jealousy, or something of a more personal sort?

Continue reading …
Newsweek’s Adler Uses Planned Phoenix Tea Party Summit As Occasion to Smear Entire State of Arizona

Yesterday the Tea Party Patriots announced that they will be hosting a policy summit in Phoenix, Arizona, in February. Newsweek's Ben Adler, no fan of the Tea Party movement, seized upon the occasion to smear the entire state of Arizona. “The Tea Party Patriots call Phoenix 'the great southwestern city, born from the ruins of a former civilization, now the rebirth place of American culture. It will also be our opportunity to support the citizens of Arizona in their current political battles that carry so many national implications,'” Adler noted, before setting out on his attack of the state, first as ecologically and economically “unsustainable”…: read more

Continue reading …
Gibbs To Sign Off as Press Secretary

Wednesday was a big day on Capitol Hill, what with the 112th Congress convening with a Republican at the helm of the House and with the announcement of a significant change in the Obama administration: Press Secretary Robert Gibbs will leave his post in February. Related Entries January 4, 2011 Darrell Issa, Step Away From the Corporations January 3, 2011 ‘The Left Has Nowhere to Go’

Continue reading …
Scalia: The Constitution Does Not Protect Women From Discrimination

Click here to view this media Ed Schultz talked to Salon’s Joan Walsh about right-wing ideologue Justice Antonin Scalia’s statement that the 14th Amendment doesn’t protect protect women from discrimination.

Continue reading …
That’s House Speaker John Boehner to You

It’s official: On Wednesday, the House of Representatives named its next speaker, replacing weeks of rumors with reality by handing Ohio Rep. John Boehner the gavel, “which I accept cheerfully and gratefully, knowing I am but its caretaker,” he said.

Continue reading …
Social Security 101

enlarge I am writing this after seeing young progressives I respect parrot conservative lies told about Social Security. It appears that the press has done a bang-up job of NOT reporting the truth about Social Security and allowing specious conservative lies to take deep root. So deep that intelligent young liberals even believe the spew, not to mention conservatives who have a vested interest in believing and spreading it. My career, pre-blogging, was as third-party administrator of employer-provided retirement plans. For years I was a certified practitioner, and I watched as private pensions were systematically dismantled, underfunded, and ultiimately converted to 401k plans subject to the whims of the market and unsophisticated investors. While owners might — MIGHT — have retired with adequate funds, workers almost never did. The one single thing that every worker could always count on at retirement was (and is) Social Security. Yet it seems that conservative lies have taken hold to the extent that the truth is called a lie, while lies are called the truth. Once upon a time, that only happened in fiction. Now it’s real. So let’s talk about Social Security, what it is, and why you shouldn’t believe everything conservatives and their minions in the press tell you. Lie #1: Baby Boomers Will Bankrupt Social Security Baby Boomers were already planned for during the reforms undertaken under Ronald Reagan’s administration. Here’s a chart with the inflows and outflows of the trust fund since 1958. As you can see, there has been positive cash flow since adjustments were made to the assumptions, tax rates and SSRAs. Even in 2009, cash flow was positive, leaving a $2.5 trillion surplus in the fund. Lie #2: There is no Social Security trust fund. It’s all smoke and mirrors and accounting lies. From the SSA.gov FAQ: Far from being “worthless IOUs,” the investments held by the trust funds are backed by the full faith and credit of the U. S. Government. The government has always repaid Social Security, with interest. The special-issue securities are, therefore, just as safe as U.S. Savings Bonds or other financial instruments of the Federal government. Not only are they the safest investment, they’re the only permissible investment under current law, because they are the safest investment. Social Security is probably the best-functioning and most solvent government program there is. The fact-twisting that yields the idea that surpluses invested in Treasury bonds makes the fund insolvent or non-existent is an infuriating product of right-wing nonsense spin. Think on this: The entire debate about raising the debt ceiling centers on the stability of the full faith and credit of the US Government. The fact that Social Security surpluses are invested in Treasury securities does not mean there are no surpluses. It means that excess dollars paid to Social Security are invested in the single available investment vehicle which carries a high level of security. China thinks they’re a great investment. So did lots of parents who saved for their kids’ college educations, until they discovered mutual funds and lost their shirts. If US Treasuries were a vapor investment, would they be sought after and bought by foreign investors? Do those investors think our treasury bonds are vapor? Of course they don’t and neither should we. The trust fund and the Treasury are two separate entities. They happen to fall under the auspices of the federal government, but they are not two pockets on the same pair of pants and shouldn’t be considered such. But what about the interest on those bonds, you ask? Isn’t that an obligation of the US Treasury and therefore contributory to our federal deficit? No. Because if they weren’t purchased by Social Security, they’d be sold to someone else, and the interest would still be paid. Lie #3: Means-testing benefits does no harm to Social Security There’s a movement afoot among Young Conservative Idiots to means-test Social Security benefits, which also appears to be embraced by some young progressives. Such a move would undermine the fundamentals of the program, because Social Security was established as an insurance program, not a welfare benefit. Because it is a contract between individual workers and the United States government, it cannot be contingent on need. It is a straightforward quid pro quo: workers and employers contribute throughout their working lives and benefits are paid upon attainment of Social Security retirement age, death or disability. Because contributions and benefits are tied to the Social Security Wage Base (wages subject to the OASDI tax), it doesn’t matter if a claimant is a billionaire or a pauper. Means-testing would remove that objectivity and open the door for the contract to be breached on a number of different levels. Eligibility for benefits must be based upon covered quarters and earnings taxed in those quarters, regardless of whether there might be excess earnings. Means-testing moves it from an objective standard to a subjective standard, leaving the door open for further erosion. For more factual information about Social Security, I highly recommend Nancy Altman’s book “The Battle For Social Security” . Altman is a tireless advocate for Social Security, was mentored by Robert Ball, and has a firm grasp on the history of the program as well as the law. It’s a fascinating read, especially the part where she reviews what it took to get the program passed in the form we know today. If you’re especially wonky, the 2010 Trustees’ Report (PDF) is also worth reading.

Continue reading …

As I’ve been watching cable TV during the holidays and now into the first week of January, I learned something that I kind of missed this past November. It appears that the Republicans have taken over the White House and the Senate along with the House. Did you know that? The media, at least, are trumpeting January 5th as being just as big as Obama’s Inauguration day because that’s the day Republicans will be sworn in to take control of the House. You don’t believe me? Check out Andrea Mitchell’s interview with a car salesman named Mike Kelly from Philly. He got elected not because he’s a terrific candidate, but because he wasn’t her . “There’s a lot we don’t know about this guy,” said G. Terry Madonna, director of the Center for Politics and Public Affairs at Franklin and Marshall College in Lancaster, Pa. “The voters don’t have a clear sense about who he is. It was more of a reaction about her .” And he told Andrea that he’s offended the US government would want to raise the debt ceiling. Can you image a thing like that? And to him all we needed was a little fiscal restraint and the USofA would be in fine shape economically. Kelly: Should we increase the debt ceiling, really? Should we go beyond 14.3 trillion? I mean, the human mind shuts down. We can’t begin to comprehend what a trillion dollars is so 14.3 trillion, yea, why not! President Obama had better call them out on the debt ceiling. Let these fools take down the government. Hey, the guy can’t comprehend what a trillion dollars is. I’d say he’s qualified to be in Washington as a Republican for sure. Earlier on the show another nutjob Republican said this to Mitchell , via Digby: I keep listening to tea party congressmen on MSNBC right now defending cut-go and this keeps coming up whenever Mitchell asks why they refuse to pay for tax cuts if they are so concerned about the deficit. I discussed it before and it’s really catching on now: ” We don’t think tax cuts are something that we have to be “pay for” because it’s the people’s money to begin with, not the government’s .” Greg Walden (R) Lunatic Get that? My GOD, it hurts. Make it stop. And lookie here. Guess who swore in Boehner’s staff? Good old, John Roberts, that’s who. ABC’s Ariane de Vogue reports: Behind closed doors Chief Justice John Roberts swore in members of speaker designate John A. Boehner’s staff this morning during a private ceremony. The Constitution requires all federal employees to take an oath to support the Constitution, but it’s not every day the oath is administered by the Chief Justice of the United States. Boehner invited Roberts to appear, and the speaker designee’s spokesman believes it could be the first time staff was sworn in by a Chief Justice. The world has gone mad, I tell you, and since Republicans have taken over one branch of the government, they are totally da bomb. The Villagers are just thrilled that it’s Republican Coronation Day. Do you think they’ll make it into a national holiday?

Continue reading …
Rep. Peter King: ‘I Have Nothing But Contempt for the NY Times. They Should Be Indicted for Espionage’

Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) made a statement about the New York Times Tuesday that is likely shared by conservatives and most right-thinking Americans from coast to coast. In an interview with The Hill, King said, ““I have nothing but contempt for them. They should be indicted under the Espionage Act”: read more

Continue reading …
Chris Hayes: White House Needs to Call Republicans’ Bluff on Debt Ceiling

Click here to view this media The Nation’s Chris Hayes, filling in for Rachel Maddow, points out that just as they did during the tax cut debate, Republicans have already shown their hand on whether they’d be willing to raise the debt ceiling. BOEHNER: We’re going to have to deal with is as adults, whether we like it or not. The federal government has obligations and we have obligations on our part. As Hayes noted, even though the Republicans are trying to placate the tea party, a.k.a. the extreme right wing of their base, they’re never going to allow their Wall Street masters actually be harmed. His recommendation: Call their bluff this time around and make the Republicans walk the plank on this.

Continue reading …
C&L Opening Bell: Legalizing fraud

enlarge If I could pick one idea to purge from the American psyche, it would be the idea that rich people are special, magical wealth leprechauns who must be allowed to pursue their interests without hindrance lest the entire economy collapse. The reason this elitist Randroid idea is particularly noxious is because it results in things like this being taken seriously: If mark-to-market accounting is to blame for the current financial crisis, then the National Weather Service is to blame for Hurricane Katrina; if it hadn’t told us the hurricane hit New Orleans, the city would never have flooded. This is the logic the bankers are using, and they are getting sympathetic ears in Congress. The bankers have gotten two members of Congress to introduce a bill to establish a new body that could suspend accounting rules for financial institutions. Edward L. Yingling, the president of the American Bankers Association, says the proposal addresses “systemic risks that accounting standards can have on the economy.” Steve Forbes, the publisher and erstwhile presidential candidate, goes even further. “Mark-to-market accounting is the principal reason why our financial system is in a meltdown,” he wrote in a Wall Street Journal op-ed piece. They say the problem, in short, is not that the banks acted irresponsibly in creating financial instruments that blew up, or in making loans that could never be repaid. It is that someone is forcing them to fess up. If only the banks could pretend the assets were valuable, then the system would be safe. Mark-to-market accounting isn’t a perfect way to keep books — in bubble times, for instance, it makes financial institutions look much financially stronger than they really are — but it beats what Forbes wants, which is the right to just make crap up. Lookit : But put aside for a moment the absurdity of trying to price assets in a disrupted or non-existent market, of not distinguishing between distress prices and “normal” prices. Regulatory capital by its definition should take the long view when it comes to valuation; day-to-day fluctuations shouldn’t matter. Assets should be kept on the books at the price they were obtained, as long as the assets haven’t actually been impaired. Ah, if only Milo Mindderbinder had thought of this when he was going bust from investing in all that chocolate-covered cotton! Instead of panicking and trying to unload it at bargain prices, he could have simply insisted that it was worth precisely what he’d originally paid for it and then the Syndicate would still be up and running! In all seriousness: Forbes’ argument is basically the same as the warblogger argument we heard back in 2004, namely that the Iraq war was going super-duper well but that Bush wasn’t getting credit for it because the wicked hippies weren’t clapping loudly enough. He’s basically saying that banks should have a right to create whatever bulls*** securities they want and price them however they want without ever having to account for whether they’re really worth anything. If you let them do this then pretty soon banks will be reporting record profits from their investments in magic beans. That doesn’t strike me as a very wise idea. Other news: D-Day reports that the Cuyahoga County Court actually believes in enforcing the rule of law and isn’t allowing lenders to use forged documents in foreclosure cases. He comments: Basically it makes it nearly impossible to do anything but use verifiable documents and signatures, without risking sanctions and the dismissal of the foreclosure case. As 4closure fraud , which first noticed the affidavit policy of the court, said, “This is all we ever asked for, the rule of law, that is already in place, be followed.” Courts are slowly but gradually codifying policies that put much greater burden on mortgage lenders and their counsels to actually follow the law. We’ve seen in recent years that the banks cannot be expected to do that. So something’s gotta give. Indeed it does. But for now let’s bask in a brief instance where major financial institutions are being forced to comply with the law. It’s sadly a rare occurrence these days. On the other hand, this is highly discouraging (my emphasis): The five largest loan servicers, including Bank of America Corp. and JPMorgan Chase & Co., may be the first to settle with the 50 state attorneys general probing foreclosure practices, Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller said. The probe has since widened to include other mortgage practices, with attorneys general suggesting a potential resolution should include improving the loan modification process, barring foreclosures when people are modifying loans and creating a general fund to compensate homeowners who may have been victims of wrongful foreclosures. The group isn’t pursuing a criminal investigation , Miller said. “Our focus is to reform the servicing process and that’s inherently civil, not criminal,” he said. I have a real problem with this. One of the more astounding aspects of modern America is how often major financial institutions are busted for overtly criminal activity and how rarely any of them ever go to jail for it. Instead they pony up some “Oopsie!” cash, admit to no wrongdoing and call it a day. I may be old-fashioned but I’d really like to imprison the people who forged foreclosure documents, who committed perjury in foreclosure affidavits and who needlessly caused God-knows-how-many people senseless grief and agony. You get three extra days to file your taxes, you lucky duckies! Be sure to enjoy your recently-renewed income tax cut, as well as your soon-to-be-implemented payroll tax cut. Socialism sure is cheap nowadays, donchathink? And finally, here’s an interesting piece on Goldman’s recent investment in Facebook (or is that Squidbook now?). The piece basically asks whether Facebook can issue shares as it plans to do without having to go public. I’m no expert but if Facebook wanted to find a firm that could help them arrange a legally questionable equity issuance, they probably picked the right one.

Continue reading …