Appearing as a guest on Friday's Last Word to discuss Republican presidential candidate Jon Huntsman's plan to simplify the income tax code, MSNBC political analyst Richard Wolffe saw extremism in the Tea Party movement as he asserted that Huntsman's plan was ” moderate when you compare it to where the Tea Party extremists want to take this.” As the discussion turned to the current anemic job growth numbers and Texas Governor Rick Perry's views on economics, Wolffe claimed that President Jimmy Carter had created more jobs that President George W. Bush as he blamed Bush and Republicans for the current economic slowdown: Most voters understand that this economy, this bad economy, is the result of Republican policies and the Bush administration. Poll after poll after poll has said that, and if you want to go into the details, over eight years of President Bush's policies of deregulation, of tax cuts, all things that Rick Perry says has created jobs, actually George Bush created a net three million jobs in eight years. He continued: Even Jimmy Carter created more jobs in one term than Bush did with these policies in two terms, so once we get into this debate, once we get beyond the superficial headlines of Perry's positioning, we're going to have this played out and people will recall, as they already in polls, that the Bush policies weren't too good. Below is a complete transcript of the segment from the Friday, September 2, Last Word on MSNBC: LAWRENCE O'DONNELL: Talking to reporters this morning from the bottom of the polls, former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman tried to use colorful language to energize his colorless campaign. JON HUNTSMAN, REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Our nation's economy is sucking wind big time, and we need a plan, we need a bold proposal. The President has had two and a half years to get something out there. He hasn't. We've been out there two and a half months. We've got, I think, the boldest of proposals, something that this country desperately needs. O'DONNELL: Huntsman's economic plan received a rave review from the Wall Street Journal editorial board today. The Journal said Huntsman's plan is “better than anything so far in the GOP presidential field.” The plan is called “Time to Compete: An American Jobs Plan.” Which is really just a tax-cutting and deregulation plan. Joining me now is the author of Revival: The Struggle for Survival Inside the Obama White House, MSNBC political analyst Richard Wolffe. Thanks for joining me tonight, Richard. WOLFFE: My pleasure, Lawrence. O'DONNELL: The Huntsman plan, huge hit with the Wall Street Journal editorial board. Is this a little bit like John Edwards' health care plan being a big hit in the last presidential campaign? WOLFFE: Either that or the Bill Bradley campaign, who also had a great health care plan. (BOTH LAUGH) O'DONNELL: It was. Bradley did have a great health care plan. WOLFFE: Great plan, and it went downhill from there. Here's the thing: It says something about the Republican Party when the Wall Street Journal editorial board is actually somewhere in the middle of Republican politics, that actually Huntsman's plan is moderate when you compare it to where the Tea Party extremists want to take this. And, you know, there's a lot to be said for Huntsman's plan. It actually is very similar in some degree to the Bowles-Simpson committee, which was actually set up by the President that the Wall Street Journal editorial board hates so much. There simplifying the tax code is great, and you just cannot get anyone in Congress to vote for ending the mortgage interest tax relief. O'DONNELL: Right, his plan in some specifics calls for lower tax rates across the board, income tax rates, just leaving us with only three, an eight percent rate for the lowest, a 14 and a 23. But to get there, he eliminates every single deduction and credit in the personal income tax code, so he eliminates the biggest one, the mortgage deduction, as you've said. It means it would also eliminate the deduction for health care that if you receive health care through your employer, that would be treated as taxable income, and so it's a very easy thing to rip apart. If a plan like that made its way into the general election, running against someone who wants to take away your mortgage deduction is running against someone who wants to, in effect, destroy the current dollar value of your home because the real estate market would sink on something like that. WOLFFE: Right, hits the middle class and hits the housing market, which has been one of the biggest drags on this economy. And this is he kind of big irony here, which is that these Republican candidates, and Huntsman is the most reasonable of them, but in general they're saying we get the economy more than this crazy Democrat who loves big governnment, we know what business wants, and yet, and yet their economic plans would either hurtsthe housing market, which this reasonable plan from Huntsman would do, or it would cut those government jobs that have done so much good for Rick Perry's job record in Texas or it would just kill jobs in general because there is no growth in anything other than the public sector right now because the private sector has been spooked by the Republican tactics over things like the debt limit. O'DONNELL: Of course, there's the mandatory, you know, defang that horrible EPA, that Environmental Protection Agency that's ruining the country and killing jobs. Never mind that job growth and wealth in the country has exploded since the creation of the EPA to levels uncontemplated before, especially top end wealth. But now to Rick Perry: Is today, like most campaign days so far today for Perry and the Rrepublican campaign, the really good day for Rick Perry since he's the job king at this stage of the Republican campaign, zero job growth number lets him trumpet everything he's done or claims to have done in Texas on job creation. WOLFFE: Look, this should be the best day of any of the Republican candidates' news agendas, news moments, because they're terrible numbers for the White House, and the President has a bad record on jobs that he's got to go out and defend. When you look at Rick Perry, though, there's the Texas echo that's a problem. Never mind if you strip aside the headline numbers and get into all of that, most voters understand that this economy, this bad economy, is the result of Republican policies and the Bush administration. Poll after poll after poll has said that, and if you want to go into the details, over eight years of President Bush's policies of deregulation, of tax cuts, all things that Rick Perry says has created jobs, actually George Bush created a net three million jobs in eight years. Even Jimmy Carter created more jobs in one term than Bush did with these policies in two terms, so once we get into this debate, once we get beyond the superficial headlines of Perry's positioning, we're going to have this played out and people will recall, as they already in polls, that the Bush policies weren't too good. O'DONNELL: We now have projections that the jobs picture a year from now in the presidential campaign is going to look pretty much like the jobs picture does today. If that holds, if that is true, and if Perry is the emerging nominee for the Republicans, it seems like it will clearly be a jobs campaign at that point. What does the Obama campaign think it's going to be able to do against Perry on jobs? WOLFFE: Well, I think the, what they're expecting is that this is not just going to be about jobs, it's going to be about the role of government when times are tough. And if you assume that the economy is the same – and, by the way, t hat's a big assumption. You know, in 2007, Barack Obama thought the whole campaign would be about Iraq, and by 2008 it wasn't about the war at all, it was about the economy. So a year is an extremely long time in politics. But the debate here is: W hat can government do when times are difficult? Should government be cut? Will that create jobs? Or is government the last best hope? That's how this is going to play out – at least that's how the White House hopes it's going to play out. And judging by what the Republicans are saying, they think small government means more jobs. Well, let's take it to the people and see what they think, too. O'DONNELL: Richard Wolffe of MSNBC, thanks for joining me tonight, Richard. WOLFFE: You bet,
Continue reading …Trending Topics is a column that looks at the week in hockey according to Twitter. If you’re only going to comment to say how stupid Twitter is, why not just go have a good cry for the slow, sad death of your dear internet instead? James van Riemsdyk signed a six-year deal with the Philadelphia Flyers worth $25.5 million earlier this week. People pretty much seemed to agree that the deal was …
Continue reading …This year’s saga of Apple’s missing iPhone prototype is getting nearly as melodramatic as last year’s . San Francisco police have changed their tune and now say “three or four” detectives accompanied private detectives hired by Apple to search a local home, reports the San Francisco Weekly . The officers remained outside…
Continue reading …PocketBook , primarily known for its e-readers, introduced the A 10 this week at IFA — that’s “A” for Android and “10″ for 10-inches (well, 10.1 inches). The Android in this case is Gingerbread, nothing particularly exciting on that front, in a world that has largely moved on to Honeycomb in all its iterations, but at the very least, the company is doing some cool stuff on the design front in a world of infringingly lookalike devices. The body was reportedly inspired by an airplane wing, encased in white plastic that forms a wedge on the rear. The tablet’s a bit on the chunky side, with a row of actual physical buttons located on the bottom of the bezel. On the rear is a white plastic around a soft, rubbery back. The tablet is a bit less exciting on the inside, with 4GB of storage, a 1GHz TI OMAP 3621 processor, WiFi and optional 3G. Not surprisingly, given the company’s history, the device is reading-minded, with proprietary software built around the e-book experience and page buttons built in. The company is also looking to possibly position the device for the educational sector. The A 10 should be hitting Europe around October, with a price tag of less that €300. The company is also planning on US availability for the tablet but isn’t offering much in the way of specifics on that front. Gallery: Pocketbook A10 hands-on Continue reading Pocketbook A10 hands-on (video) Pocketbook A10 hands-on (video) originally appeared on Engadget on Sat, 03 Sep 2011 15:17:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds . Permalink
Continue reading …“Going To The Store” is a bizzare short film by David Lewandowski that he created for the final episode of “Everything”, an anthology series at Channel 101. This guy looks like he might be from The Ministry of Silly Walks (video). via Videogum Broadcasting platform : YouTube Source : Laughing Squid Discovery Date : 02/09/2011 17:38 Number of articles : 3
Continue reading …On MSNBC's Political Nation Friday evening, host Al Sharpton interviewed Ryan Grim, Washington bureau chief for The Huffington Post.
Continue reading …Charles Schulz drawing Charlie Brown, a segment from the never released documentary A Boy Named Charlie Brown. via Drawn Broadcasting platform : YouTube Source : Laughing Squid Discovery Date : 02/09/2011 10:36 Number of articles : 3
Continue reading …Charles Schulz drawing Charlie Brown, a segment from the never released documentary A Boy Named Charlie Brown. via Drawn Broadcasting platform : YouTube Source : Laughing Squid Discovery Date : 02/09/2011 10:36 Number of articles : 3
Continue reading …Former Liberal leader and architect of 1967 act speaks out amid fears of an American-style anti-termination agenda David Steel, the former Liberal leader and architect of the 1967 Abortion Act, has lobbied ministers to vote against a bill to change the counselling system for women who want terminations. Lord Steel, who has talked of the need to amend his original legislation to limit late abortions, said that there was no need for the proposed amendment to the health and social care bill, which MPs will vote on this week. He has written to key figures in the government to urge them to reject it. The amendment, put forward by the Tory MP Nadine Dorries, would strip established abortion providers and charities of their role as counsellors to women with unplanned pregnancies. Critics say the move would create a gap that would be filled by religious anti-abortion charities and medical professionals. Steel said: “Under the Abortion Act, the Department of Health has complete power over licensing and de-licensing clinics. If there were any evidence of failure to carry out proper counselling of patients, they can close clinics. More positively, there is nothing to stop them issuing guidelines on counselling if they think that necessary. There is no need to amend the health bill.” Dorries has emerged as the figurehead of the “right to know” campaign that has emerged in the run-up to the vote. Her amendment is almost certain to be rejected this week after the government indicated it did not have the support of David Cameron or the Department of Health. But there is unease among pro-choice campaigners that a US-style anti-abortion agenda is starting to take root in the UK, supported by American Christian evangelical movements. Ann Furedi, chief executive of BPAS (formerly the British Pregnancy Advisory Service) said: “Over the past couple of decades, anti-choice organisations in the US have moved away from arguing about the morality of abortion, towards presenting their cause in the language of women’s health. This often leads them to promote misinformation – for example, that abortion causes breast cancer, infertility or mental illness – as a means of scaring women about abortion, or encouraging legislators to restrict access to abortions. There are important moral and political arguments that should be had about abortion; hiding behind non-evidence based, pseudo-scientific health claims reveals the moral bankruptcy of some anti-abortion campaigns today.” She added: “The Dorries amendment – tagged on to a bill which has nothing to do with abortion – seems to be an example of using legislation to interfere with women’s access to a legal abortion service, with the goal of making the experience more unpleasant.” Other providers are worried they may have to take on a new role. “We are not the place for moral or political arbitration,” said one pregnancy counsellor. “Our job is to support women and make sure they are making the right decision for them. The last thing I want is to have to spend my time defending the rights and wrongs.” The Royal College of GPs and the BMA have said they do not see any reason for the amendment. Any GP who has an ethical or religious object to abortion is allowed to “conscientiously object” and take no part in referring or treating a woman with an unplanned pregnancy. Dr Peter Saunders, of the Christian Medical fellowship, which has more than 4,500 doctors as members, said GPs were the right people to give independent counselling. “They would not need to state their own ethical position until it gets to the point that the woman says she would like an abortion and then the doctor can explain to her that they are not able to help,” said Saunders, who has advised Dorries. Abortion Health Women Health policy Public services policy Tracy McVeigh guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Former Liberal leader and architect of 1967 act speaks out amid fears of an American-style anti-termination agenda David Steel, the former Liberal leader and architect of the 1967 Abortion Act, has lobbied ministers to vote against a bill to change the counselling system for women who want terminations. Lord Steel, who has talked of the need to amend his original legislation to limit late abortions, said that there was no need for the proposed amendment to the health and social care bill, which MPs will vote on this week. He has written to key figures in the government to urge them to reject it. The amendment, put forward by the Tory MP Nadine Dorries, would strip established abortion providers and charities of their role as counsellors to women with unplanned pregnancies. Critics say the move would create a gap that would be filled by religious anti-abortion charities and medical professionals. Steel said: “Under the Abortion Act, the Department of Health has complete power over licensing and de-licensing clinics. If there were any evidence of failure to carry out proper counselling of patients, they can close clinics. More positively, there is nothing to stop them issuing guidelines on counselling if they think that necessary. There is no need to amend the health bill.” Dorries has emerged as the figurehead of the “right to know” campaign that has emerged in the run-up to the vote. Her amendment is almost certain to be rejected this week after the government indicated it did not have the support of David Cameron or the Department of Health. But there is unease among pro-choice campaigners that a US-style anti-abortion agenda is starting to take root in the UK, supported by American Christian evangelical movements. Ann Furedi, chief executive of BPAS (formerly the British Pregnancy Advisory Service) said: “Over the past couple of decades, anti-choice organisations in the US have moved away from arguing about the morality of abortion, towards presenting their cause in the language of women’s health. This often leads them to promote misinformation – for example, that abortion causes breast cancer, infertility or mental illness – as a means of scaring women about abortion, or encouraging legislators to restrict access to abortions. There are important moral and political arguments that should be had about abortion; hiding behind non-evidence based, pseudo-scientific health claims reveals the moral bankruptcy of some anti-abortion campaigns today.” She added: “The Dorries amendment – tagged on to a bill which has nothing to do with abortion – seems to be an example of using legislation to interfere with women’s access to a legal abortion service, with the goal of making the experience more unpleasant.” Other providers are worried they may have to take on a new role. “We are not the place for moral or political arbitration,” said one pregnancy counsellor. “Our job is to support women and make sure they are making the right decision for them. The last thing I want is to have to spend my time defending the rights and wrongs.” The Royal College of GPs and the BMA have said they do not see any reason for the amendment. Any GP who has an ethical or religious object to abortion is allowed to “conscientiously object” and take no part in referring or treating a woman with an unplanned pregnancy. Dr Peter Saunders, of the Christian Medical fellowship, which has more than 4,500 doctors as members, said GPs were the right people to give independent counselling. “They would not need to state their own ethical position until it gets to the point that the woman says she would like an abortion and then the doctor can explain to her that they are not able to help,” said Saunders, who has advised Dorries. Abortion Health Women Health policy Public services policy Tracy McVeigh guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …