Saudi women to be given right to vote and stand for election in four years
September 25, 2011 No Comment
King Abdullah’s ‘cautious reform’ will not take effect until 2015 but welcomed as cultural shift in conservative Islamic country Women in Saudi Arabia will be given the right to vote and to stand for election within four years, King Abdullah announced on Sunday, in a cultural shift that appears to mark a new era in the rigidly conservative Islamic kingdom. The right to vote in council elections will not take effect until 2015, and women will still be banned from casting ballots in elections this Thursday. However, the 87-year-old monarch has invited women to take part in the next shura council, a governing body that supervises legislation. King Abdullah has been trying to implement what he has described as “cautious reform” in the fundamentalist state, where women are strictly denied civic freedoms or any public role. “Because we refuse to marginalise women in society in all roles that comply with sharia, we have decided, after deliberation with our senior ulama (clerics) and others … to involve women in the shura council as members, starting from the next term,” he said in a speech. “Women will be able to run as candidates in the municipal election and will even have a right to vote.” Commentators in Saudi Arabia mostly reacted warmly to the announcement, but said broader change was needed to bring Saudi Arabia into line with other countries. Several said the move was a litmus test of the country’s appetite for more far-reaching reform. “So I can vote, but I can’t get a driver’s licence,” said one Saudi women from Jeddah, who said she had to remain anonymous. “If I use my name I may be breaching the guardianship law here.” Laws demand that a male guardian – a father, brother, or son – accompany women on any trip outside the house. When some women in Riyadh attempted to test it earlier in the year by driving car s, the move was seen as a provocation by authorities and several of the drivers were arrested. Separation of the sexes in public is also strictly enforced. Some Saudi observers say the announcement on Sunday is a nod to the popular participation showcased by the Arab spring that has led to revolts elsewhere in the region. However, democratic themes have so far won little resonance in Saudi Arabia, which is ruled by an absolute monarchy that defers to the Qur’an as the country’s constitution. King Abdullah emerged as a supporter of women playing a greater role in Saudi society two years ago when he was photographed with a group of young female students, none of whom wore the full niqab (face cover) common in Saudi society. He has since backed the establishment of a non-segregated university and has discussed appointing more women to senior positions. Both moves have drawn criticism from senior clerics and even members of the ruling family. An academic at a Riyadh University said she remained sceptical that the reforms would be implemented in time for the 2015 municipal vote. “The possibility for political participation is open, because it being discussed,” she said. “But I am not sure if it will happen. I would love to be able to vote, and think women will flock to the polls [if given the chance]. But I don’t think many will run [as candidates]. “I respect the king for trying to make a change,” she said. “This might encourage women, but they will have to fight hard against social conservatism, even if legally they are allowed to run.” The academic said the Arab spring had created a “sense of embarrassment that so much change is happening all around and the kingdom is standing still”. However, she claimed that the wholesale democratic freedoms being demanded in North Africa and on Saudi Arabia’s borders, in Yemen and in Bahrain, would not suit the desert kingdom. “Saudis do not want to change the royal family,” she said. ” They want … change, but under the family’s stewardship.” A Jeddah-based female member of the ruling family said: “People have it good here. They are sensible enough to know what to demand and what not to. What the king has done is a very good thing, but he knows and we all know that you cannot push a society like this too far too soon. “The west has come to understand that too. Democracy is something that will take the light of generations to arrive here.” Saudi Arabia Middle East King Abdullah Women Arab and Middle East unrest Martin Chulov guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …ABC and NBC Spike Solyndra Execs Taking the 5th, CBS Gives It 25 Seconds
September 25, 2011 No Comment
Appearing Friday before the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations , the CEO and CFO of Solyndra both invoked their fifth amendment right against self-incrimination. But instead of highlighting the cover-up in the scandal of the $535 million federal loan trumpeted by the Obama administration to the solar panel manufacturer which went bankrupt, neither ABC nor NBC mentioned the development Friday night and CBS allocated a mere 25 seconds. ABC’s World News, however, found time to fact check what Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry said during Thursday night’s debate and how no candidate condemned audience members who booed a soldier in Iraq posing a question via YouTube. NBC Nightly News viewers saw a laudatory full story on President Barack Obama’s decision to allow schools to op-out of “No Child Left Behind.” And Brian Williams devoted as much time – 25 seconds – to the illegible signature of OMB Director Jacob Lew as Pelley used for his Solyndra item.
Continue reading …Cain’s Convincing Fla. Straw Poll Win Refutes Press Meme That GOP Nomination Is a Two-Person Race
September 24, 2011 No CommentHerman Cain won the Florida straw poll tonight, winning the votes of 37% of those who participated. No other candidate came within 20 points of Cain. As of 8:20 p.m., roughly two hours after the result was announced, the Associated Press's Philip Elliott and Kasie Hunt had a blatantly obvious contradiction in their 6:51 p.m. story (“Perry works to show he's strongest GOP contender”; saved here for future reference, fair use, and discussion purposes), as seen in this comparison of Paragraph 2 to Paragraphs 12-14 (bolds are mine throughout this post): (Paragraph 2) Perry lost a key test vote in Florida to businessman Herman Cain on Saturday after making a strong effort to win. Perry's second-place finish in the straw poll came just days after he faltered in a debate in Orlando, Fla. (Paragraphs 12-14) Cain captured 37.1 percent of the vote at Saturday's Presidency 5 straw poll in Orlando, with Perry coming in second with 15.4 percent. Mitt Romney came in third with14 percent and former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania followed with 10.88 percent. (Complete standings
Continue reading …Cain’s Convincing Fla. Straw Poll Win Refutes Press Meme That GOP Nomination Is Two-Person Race
September 24, 2011 No CommentHerman Cain won the Florida straw poll tonight, winning the votes of 37% of those who participated. No other candidate came within 20 points of Cain. As of 8:20 p.m., roughly two hours after the result was announced, the Associated Press's Philip Elliott and Kasie Hunt had a blatantly obvious contradiction in their 6:51 p.m. story (“Perry works to show he's strongest GOP contender”; saved here for future reference, fair use, and discussion purposes), as seen in this comparison of Paragraph 2 to Paragraphs 12-14 (bolds are mine throughout this post): (Paragraph 2) Perry lost a key test vote in Florida to businessman Herman Cain on Saturday after making a strong effort to win. Perry's second-place finish in the straw poll came just days after he faltered in a debate in Orlando, Fla. (Paragraphs 12-14) Cain captured 37.1 percent of the vote at Saturday's Presidency 5 straw poll in Orlando, with Perry coming in second with 15.4 percent. Mitt Romney came in third with14 percent and former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania followed with 10.88 percent. (Complete standings
Continue reading …You know, for all of the blustery promises made at these crazy Republican debates about how they will kill “Obamacare” with an executive order once elected, there aren’t really that many times where an executive order will actually work that way. The best they could do with the ACA would be to give states waivers, which would allow them to opt out of exchanges but wouldn’t change the consumer protections or statutory requirements insurers would have to abide by. However, today is one time where an executive order is a terrific way to kill a bad law, and President Obama exercised that discretion today. Via CBS : President Obama unveiled the most significant changes to U.S. education policy in a decade, using his executive authority to give states more flexibility to opt of some provisions of the controversial No Child Left Behind program that was a signature initiative of President George W. Bush. “We can’t let another generation of young people fall behind,” Mr. Obama told an audience of education leaders in the East Room of the White House. Mr. Obama expressed frustration with lawmakers on Capitol Hill, who have bickered about the best way to improve the increasingly unpopular program championed 10 years ago by Bush and liberal Massachusetts Sen. Ted Kennedy. Mr. Bush signed the law in early 2002 at an Ohio high school in the congressional district of House Speaker John Boehner, who was then chairman of the House panel overseeing responsible for education. “Our kids only get one shot at a decent education. They cannot afford to wait any longer. So, given that Congress cannot act, I am acting,” Mr. Obama said. The Wall Street Journal has more details on the waiver requirements (Note: article behind a paywall): To qualify, states must meet three tests. First is the rigorous evaluation system for teachers and principals. Second, they must set high achievement standards. Under existing law, states can set their own standards, and Education Secretary Arne Duncan has said many set the bar too low. Under the new waiver program, students who meet standards must be considered ready for college or a career. Third, states must develop strategies targeted to the worst-performing schools. For the bottom 5% of schools, that means turnaround plans akin to those under the existing rules. Other interventions must be targeted to another 10% of schools deemed low-performing. Obama’s plan will basically throw out the requirement that every student pass state tests by the 2013-2014 school year, and let states draft their own plans to improve the performance of struggling students in troubled schools. Schools will not necessarily get failing grades for missing particular goals on state achievement tests, and states will be eligible for more flexibility in how they spend federal money previously marked for special tutoring programs. To me, this is a very big, very huge, BFD in a bittersweet kind of way. My youngest child will graduate in June of this year. She entered the school system the same year as NCLB, and she’ll leave it in the last year these stupid idiotic test standards are required. Fortunately, she has been a terrific student with the ability to learn in spite of it, but it has sorely tested her ability to love learning, which is my ultimate goal. Her school is an under-performing school, largely due to the number of non-English speaking students, the number of students who live in poverty and less-than-optimal conditions for learning, and the fact that her school is the one where they send the kids who aren’t disruptive but face learning and life challenges causing them to underachieve. As a result, funds have diminished steadily year after year. When that happens, the school refocuses on their underachievers, not the students who achieve. The net result for my daughter has been an erosion of resources, instructors, and time for her classes. It’s true that she’ll overcome it, and we hope she’ll be able to go to the college of her choice (and that we can pay for it without loans). But it never had to be that way. There was no reason for it to be that way, and I can’t see where any discernible benefit came from hammering on these kids year after year to step up and make a showing “for their school” on the standardized tests. So thank you, Mr. President. Hopefully this will be the beginning of a true effort to reform education in meaningful ways, at least, after we win back the House in 2012 and keep the Senate. [h/t Daily Kos ]
Continue reading …NPR Uses Joplin’s Tea Party Congressman to Gush Over Obama Disaster Relief Team
September 23, 2011 No Comment
On Thursday, NPR's Morning Edition used a Republican mayor to boost Obama's push for infrastructure spending. On Friday, the same show displayed a new Tea Party Republican House member representing tornado-ravaged Joplin, Missouri to gush over the effectiveness of the Obama disaster relief team, as if to say “No Katrinas here, America.” Janet Napolitano told NPR Long would give them a “12″ out of 10. Liberals have this habit of thinking that disaster relief somehow rebuts “foes of Big Government,” or that Tea Party members ran on the promise of abolishing disaster aid. NPR reporter Frank Morris pressed hard on the chastened-anti-statist angle: STEVE INSKEEP, anchor: The gridlock in Congress over disaster aid affects Joplin, Missouri, which was hit in May by a tornado. The devastated area is represented on Capitol Hill by Congressman Billy Long. He's a Tea Party favorite who won his seat in November as a man fed up with Washington. BILLY LONG: Fed up with reckless spending. Fed up with the threat to our values. INSKEEP: Since the tornado, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has spent millions of dollars in the congressman's district. And the spending continues. Congressman Long says that's perfectly appropriate, which is leading to questions about whether he abandoned his Tea Party principles. Frank Morris, of member station KCUR, reports. FRANK MORRIS: Billy Long is a pretty popular guy in Joplin. Last April he fired up a Tea Party crowd there, pretending to auction off the national debt. Five weeks later, Long was back in Joplin, this time in the dark, and rain, surveying the aftermath of an apocalyptic tornado. And, this time, the federal government was his friend. LONG: FEMA called as soon as I got there, and said, Congressman Long, we're on the way. We'll have boots on the ground there in an hour or two. And I said, no you won't, they're already here. MORRIS: What followed, Long says, has been a superb relief effort. LONG: The president came in. He was great. Janet Napolitano came in, she's been great. And Leader Pelosi came up to me on the floor and hugged me and said anything people in Joplin need they will have. MORRIS: And that's just what they've gotten. FEMA has spent close to $100 million just on the cleanup, another $19 million plus on rent and home repairs. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano was back in Joplin just yesterday, praising Joplin's can do attitude and Congressman Long. Secretary JANET NAPOLITANO: He's worked well with our office, with our shop. W hen he was asked about FEMA shortly after the fact, to rank it on a scale of one to 10, he said he would give it a 12. The Obama campaign really ought to be shelling out cash for advertising like this. But in a sense, it does: it keeps the taxpayer spigot open so the liberal messaging can continue. Morris did get current Tea Party opinion: MORRIS: This kind of talk doesn't square with some of Long's constituents. Bloggers say he's shredding his Tea Party stripes, drinking the Potomac Kool-Aid. He's portrayed as another politician bellying up to the trough. Perhaps surprisingly, some of this grief for helping tornado-ravaged Joplin, has come from Joplin. JOHN PUTNAM: Joplin would be, some people would use the phrase, the buckle of the Bible Belt. It's very conservative. MORRIS: John Putnam leads a Tea Party group in these parts. PUTNAM: I think the bottom line for most of us, is that we can do it locally. MORRIS: Putnam says it was volunteers, local folks hit by the tornado, and tens of thousands more streaming in from across the country, many of them evangelical Christians with ties to Joplin's numerous churches, who've done the most of the work. But Putnam, unlike some in the blogosphere, is willing to give Long a pass. PUTNAM: I think this is the system we operate under, and everybody thinks as long as we're under this system, it's fine for him to try to maximize FEMA's contribution. What's interesting here is that some local bloggers attacked Long for drinking “Potomac Kool-Aid” before the tornado. In March, “Bungalow Bill” was already unhappy with the smallness of the spending cuts achieved.
Continue reading …
To his critics, he’s guilty of turning pop into factory farming, mocking the afflicted, skewing the values of a generation. To his fans, he is an
Continue reading …Despite the overwhelming din of right-wing noise, the President gave a speech. It’s one worth watching. Speaking to a fired-up crowd in Ohio at the Brent Spence Bridge, the President gave his best shot at getting people to understand the value of shoring up our crumbling infrastructure, while bringing back echoes of Ronald Reagan’s speech at the Berlin Wall. The gloves are off in this battle, and anyone who doubted this President’s will to fight should rethink that idea. No more compromising, no more calling out of “Congress”. It’s all about Republicans and Republican (lack of) leadership. Here’s the snippet of the transcript where he calls them out by name: So my question is, what’s Congress waiting for? Why is it taking so long? Now, the bridge behind us just happens to connect the state that’s home to the Speaker of the House — AUDIENCE: Booo — THE PRESIDENT: — with the home state of the Republican leader in the Senate. AUDIENCE: Booo — THE PRESIDENT: Now, that’s just a coincidence. (Laughter.) Purely accidental that that happened. (Laughter.) But part of the reason I came here is because Mr. Boehner and Mr. McConnell, those are the two most powerful Republicans in government. They can either kill this jobs bill, or they can help pass this jobs bill. (Applause.) And I know these men care about their states. They care about businesses; they care about workers here. I can’t imagine that the Speaker wants to represent a state where nearly one in four bridges are classified as substandard — one in four. I know that when Senator McConnell visited the closed bridge in Kentucky, he said that, “Roads and bridges are not partisan in Washington.” That’s great. I know that Paul Ryan, the Republican in charge of the budget process, recently said that “you can’t deny that infrastructure does creates jobs.” That’s what he said. Well, if that’s the case, there’s no reason for Republicans in Congress to stand in the way of more construction projects. There’s no reason to stand in the way of more jobs. Mr. Boehner, Mr. McConnell, help us rebuild this bridge. (Applause.) Help us rebuild America. Help us put construction workers back to work. (Applause.) Pass this bill. It’s past time, in my opinion, for us to stand up and get this President’s back. We can either let him give these speeches and pretend he isn’t, or we can start trying to get past the ridiculous right-wing nonsense flooding every airwave in the land and put some eyes and ears on what the man is saying. We need this bill. We need these infrastructure projects. The right-wing took right on off today on how the Brent Spence Bridge wouldn’t be eligible under the President’s proposal. So what? Republicans are in charge of the House, let them amend it to include it! If the damn bridge needs to be rebuilt, then they should be responsible enough to include provisions to rebuild it. For way too long, Republicans have owned all of the narratives about spending and the economy, but narratives aren’t fact, and the facts are pretty clear on who is responsible for keeping it suppressed. This isn’t a question of Keynes versus Friedman at this point. It’s a question of supply and demand, which will remain low until jobs are available. Infrastructure spending is one way to create jobs and create them rapidly. As Robert Reich pointed out, we could actually do an entire remake of the WPA right now and it probably wouldn’t be enough, but still, it would stimulate the economy. Here’s another classic moment: Now, the Republicans, when I talked about this earlier in the week, they said, well, this is class warfare. You know what, if asking a billionaire to pay their fair share of taxes, to pay the same tax rate as a plumber or a teacher is class warfare, then you know what, I’m a warrior for the middle class. (Applause.) I’m happy to fight for the middle class. I’m happy to fight for working people. (Applause.) Because the only warfare I’ve seen is the battle against the middle class over the last 10, 15 years. I would have stretched that back farther, but I’m guessing he didn’t want to step on Bill Clinton. Clinton, by the way, had this to say about the ridiculous austerity “screw them all” tea party nonsense: You know, there’s not a single solitary example on the planet, not one, of a country that is succesful because the economy has triumphed over the government and choked it off and driven the tax rates to zero, driven the regulations to nonexistent and abolished all government programs, except for defense, so people in my income group never have to pay a nickel to see a cow jump over the moon. There is no example of a succesful country that looks like that. President Obama is doing what everyone said he should have done during the debt-ceiling debate. I am of the opinion that there was a broader strategy to what he did there and what he is now doing here — a carrot and stick strategy. But we are past the debt ceiling debate and onto one that will, in my opinion, be a make-or-break debate. He can’t stand out there and call for people to “pass the whole bill” or “rebuild this bridge” if we’re not behind him. If his speech doesn’t inspire you, and the insanity of the last three Republican debates don’t do it, maybe John Dean’s warning about the resurgence of Nixonian politics on the right, and their efforts to game American democracy will convince you, beginning with his analysis of how the media has been gamed via advertising revenue: There is a second reason for the disinterest, too—and an even more troubling one. Today’s mainstream news organizations are largely controlled by major corporations, which are profit-driven like never before. Most members of corporate management lean toward Republican views, and while top corporate executives typically give their news editors and producers great leeway, news organizations do not go out of their way to annoy their corporate bosses. The big money that is involved in reshaping America’s political processes has been, and will continue to be, a wonderful source of revenue for these organizations. News organizations need advertisers, and they love all the disingenuous advertisements that this political undertaking is generating. To those of you who might be inclined to say that I am writing from a purely partisan standpoint, rest assured that indeed, I am. Because I see absolutely no reason to give these insane, power-hungry, greedy people any more traction than they already have. You don’t have to love everything this president has done to understand that we’re on the precipice of a very, very deep, dark chasm, a place where no bridge will save us.
Continue reading …Despite the overwhelming din of right-wing noise, the President gave a speech. It’s one worth watching. Speaking to a fired-up crowd in Ohio at the Brent Spence Bridge, the President gave his best shot at getting people to understand the value of shoring up our crumbling infrastructure, while bringing back echoes of Ronald Reagan’s speech at the Berlin Wall. The gloves are off in this battle, and anyone who doubted this President’s will to fight should rethink that idea. No more compromising, no more calling out of “Congress”. It’s all about Republicans and Republican (lack of) leadership. Here’s the snippet of the transcript where he calls them out by name: So my question is, what’s Congress waiting for? Why is it taking so long? Now, the bridge behind us just happens to connect the state that’s home to the Speaker of the House — AUDIENCE: Booo — THE PRESIDENT: — with the home state of the Republican leader in the Senate. AUDIENCE: Booo — THE PRESIDENT: Now, that’s just a coincidence. (Laughter.) Purely accidental that that happened. (Laughter.) But part of the reason I came here is because Mr. Boehner and Mr. McConnell, those are the two most powerful Republicans in government. They can either kill this jobs bill, or they can help pass this jobs bill. (Applause.) And I know these men care about their states. They care about businesses; they care about workers here. I can’t imagine that the Speaker wants to represent a state where nearly one in four bridges are classified as substandard — one in four. I know that when Senator McConnell visited the closed bridge in Kentucky, he said that, “Roads and bridges are not partisan in Washington.” That’s great. I know that Paul Ryan, the Republican in charge of the budget process, recently said that “you can’t deny that infrastructure does creates jobs.” That’s what he said. Well, if that’s the case, there’s no reason for Republicans in Congress to stand in the way of more construction projects. There’s no reason to stand in the way of more jobs. Mr. Boehner, Mr. McConnell, help us rebuild this bridge. (Applause.) Help us rebuild America. Help us put construction workers back to work. (Applause.) Pass this bill. It’s past time, in my opinion, for us to stand up and get this President’s back. We can either let him give these speeches and pretend he isn’t, or we can start trying to get past the ridiculous right-wing nonsense flooding every airwave in the land and put some eyes and ears on what the man is saying. We need this bill. We need these infrastructure projects. The right-wing took right on off today on how the Brent Spence Bridge wouldn’t be eligible under the President’s proposal. So what? Republicans are in charge of the House, let them amend it to include it! If the damn bridge needs to be rebuilt, then they should be responsible enough to include provisions to rebuild it. For way too long, Republicans have owned all of the narratives about spending and the economy, but narratives aren’t fact, and the facts are pretty clear on who is responsible for keeping it suppressed. This isn’t a question of Keynes versus Friedman at this point. It’s a question of supply and demand, which will remain low until jobs are available. Infrastructure spending is one way to create jobs and create them rapidly. As Robert Reich pointed out, we could actually do an entire remake of the WPA right now and it probably wouldn’t be enough, but still, it would stimulate the economy. Here’s another classic moment: Now, the Republicans, when I talked about this earlier in the week, they said, well, this is class warfare. You know what, if asking a billionaire to pay their fair share of taxes, to pay the same tax rate as a plumber or a teacher is class warfare, then you know what, I’m a warrior for the middle class. (Applause.) I’m happy to fight for the middle class. I’m happy to fight for working people. (Applause.) Because the only warfare I’ve seen is the battle against the middle class over the last 10, 15 years. I would have stretched that back farther, but I’m guessing he didn’t want to step on Bill Clinton. Clinton, by the way, had this to say about the ridiculous austerity “screw them all” tea party nonsense: You know, there’s not a single solitary example on the planet, not one, of a country that is succesful because the economy has triumphed over the government and choked it off and driven the tax rates to zero, driven the regulations to nonexistent and abolished all government programs, except for defense, so people in my income group never have to pay a nickel to see a cow jump over the moon. There is no example of a succesful country that looks like that. President Obama is doing what everyone said he should have done during the debt-ceiling debate. I am of the opinion that there was a broader strategy to what he did there and what he is now doing here — a carrot and stick strategy. But we are past the debt ceiling debate and onto one that will, in my opinion, be a make-or-break debate. He can’t stand out there and call for people to “pass the whole bill” or “rebuild this bridge” if we’re not behind him. If his speech doesn’t inspire you, and the insanity of the last three Republican debates don’t do it, maybe John Dean’s warning about the resurgence of Nixonian politics on the right, and their efforts to game American democracy will convince you, beginning with his analysis of how the media has been gamed via advertising revenue: There is a second reason for the disinterest, too—and an even more troubling one. Today’s mainstream news organizations are largely controlled by major corporations, which are profit-driven like never before. Most members of corporate management lean toward Republican views, and while top corporate executives typically give their news editors and producers great leeway, news organizations do not go out of their way to annoy their corporate bosses. The big money that is involved in reshaping America’s political processes has been, and will continue to be, a wonderful source of revenue for these organizations. News organizations need advertisers, and they love all the disingenuous advertisements that this political undertaking is generating. To those of you who might be inclined to say that I am writing from a purely partisan standpoint, rest assured that indeed, I am. Because I see absolutely no reason to give these insane, power-hungry, greedy people any more traction than they already have. You don’t have to love everything this president has done to understand that we’re on the precipice of a very, very deep, dark chasm, a place where no bridge will save us.
Continue reading …Despite the overwhelming din of right-wing noise, the President gave a speech. It’s one worth watching. Speaking to a fired-up crowd in Ohio at the Brent Spence Bridge, the President gave his best shot at getting people to understand the value of shoring up our crumbling infrastructure, while bringing back echoes of Ronald Reagan’s speech at the Berlin Wall. The gloves are off in this battle, and anyone who doubted this President’s will to fight should rethink that idea. No more compromising, no more calling out of “Congress”. It’s all about Republicans and Republican (lack of) leadership. Here’s the snippet of the transcript where he calls them out by name: So my question is, what’s Congress waiting for? Why is it taking so long? Now, the bridge behind us just happens to connect the state that’s home to the Speaker of the House — AUDIENCE: Booo — THE PRESIDENT: — with the home state of the Republican leader in the Senate. AUDIENCE: Booo — THE PRESIDENT: Now, that’s just a coincidence. (Laughter.) Purely accidental that that happened. (Laughter.) But part of the reason I came here is because Mr. Boehner and Mr. McConnell, those are the two most powerful Republicans in government. They can either kill this jobs bill, or they can help pass this jobs bill. (Applause.) And I know these men care about their states. They care about businesses; they care about workers here. I can’t imagine that the Speaker wants to represent a state where nearly one in four bridges are classified as substandard — one in four. I know that when Senator McConnell visited the closed bridge in Kentucky, he said that, “Roads and bridges are not partisan in Washington.” That’s great. I know that Paul Ryan, the Republican in charge of the budget process, recently said that “you can’t deny that infrastructure does creates jobs.” That’s what he said. Well, if that’s the case, there’s no reason for Republicans in Congress to stand in the way of more construction projects. There’s no reason to stand in the way of more jobs. Mr. Boehner, Mr. McConnell, help us rebuild this bridge. (Applause.) Help us rebuild America. Help us put construction workers back to work. (Applause.) Pass this bill. It’s past time, in my opinion, for us to stand up and get this President’s back. We can either let him give these speeches and pretend he isn’t, or we can start trying to get past the ridiculous right-wing nonsense flooding every airwave in the land and put some eyes and ears on what the man is saying. We need this bill. We need these infrastructure projects. The right-wing took right on off today on how the Brent Spence Bridge wouldn’t be eligible under the President’s proposal. So what? Republicans are in charge of the House, let them amend it to include it! If the damn bridge needs to be rebuilt, then they should be responsible enough to include provisions to rebuild it. For way too long, Republicans have owned all of the narratives about spending and the economy, but narratives aren’t fact, and the facts are pretty clear on who is responsible for keeping it suppressed. This isn’t a question of Keynes versus Friedman at this point. It’s a question of supply and demand, which will remain low until jobs are available. Infrastructure spending is one way to create jobs and create them rapidly. As Robert Reich pointed out, we could actually do an entire remake of the WPA right now and it probably wouldn’t be enough, but still, it would stimulate the economy. Here’s another classic moment: Now, the Republicans, when I talked about this earlier in the week, they said, well, this is class warfare. You know what, if asking a billionaire to pay their fair share of taxes, to pay the same tax rate as a plumber or a teacher is class warfare, then you know what, I’m a warrior for the middle class. (Applause.) I’m happy to fight for the middle class. I’m happy to fight for working people. (Applause.) Because the only warfare I’ve seen is the battle against the middle class over the last 10, 15 years. I would have stretched that back farther, but I’m guessing he didn’t want to step on Bill Clinton. Clinton, by the way, had this to say about the ridiculous austerity “screw them all” tea party nonsense: You know, there’s not a single solitary example on the planet, not one, of a country that is succesful because the economy has triumphed over the government and choked it off and driven the tax rates to zero, driven the regulations to nonexistent and abolished all government programs, except for defense, so people in my income group never have to pay a nickel to see a cow jump over the moon. There is no example of a succesful country that looks like that. President Obama is doing what everyone said he should have done during the debt-ceiling debate. I am of the opinion that there was a broader strategy to what he did there and what he is now doing here — a carrot and stick strategy. But we are past the debt ceiling debate and onto one that will, in my opinion, be a make-or-break debate. He can’t stand out there and call for people to “pass the whole bill” or “rebuild this bridge” if we’re not behind him. If his speech doesn’t inspire you, and the insanity of the last three Republican debates don’t do it, maybe John Dean’s warning about the resurgence of Nixonian politics on the right, and their efforts to game American democracy will convince you, beginning with his analysis of how the media has been gamed via advertising revenue: There is a second reason for the disinterest, too—and an even more troubling one. Today’s mainstream news organizations are largely controlled by major corporations, which are profit-driven like never before. Most members of corporate management lean toward Republican views, and while top corporate executives typically give their news editors and producers great leeway, news organizations do not go out of their way to annoy their corporate bosses. The big money that is involved in reshaping America’s political processes has been, and will continue to be, a wonderful source of revenue for these organizations. News organizations need advertisers, and they love all the disingenuous advertisements that this political undertaking is generating. To those of you who might be inclined to say that I am writing from a purely partisan standpoint, rest assured that indeed, I am. Because I see absolutely no reason to give these insane, power-hungry, greedy people any more traction than they already have. You don’t have to love everything this president has done to understand that we’re on the precipice of a very, very deep, dark chasm, a place where no bridge will save us.
Continue reading …