Liberal Forum

Automatic spending cuts is what's needed, if we're ever gonna get this country back on track It might be the only way, but it's a dullard's way out. We should not cut equally from a program studying the sex habits of south american swamp rats and a program studying the containment of viruses or the efficacy of a seawall. Some programs are more important than others, and we SHOULD be able to trim 10% by cutting 100% of certain programs while leaving others intact altogether. But, yeah - the dullardly way might be the ONLY way, given the utter corruption of congress.

That's the result of the Pelosi "We got to pass it so we can read it" deal that we go by now-a-daysShe's not running the House now, Boehner is.Doesn't matterShe set the precedent, and you were fine with thatYou got no right to bitch about it nowIt doesn't work like that in the House.Each new Speaker sets their own rules.Boehner is under no obligation to follow anything that Pelosi did.And you're back to blaming Bush for Obama's failures.Where? I never mentioned his name. He has nothing to do with this.I was referring to the spending done by the current Congress.The president has no power to appropriate any money.Spending bills originate in the House.Congress holds the purse strings.He can't spend a penny that they don't appropriate.Now they wanna default on the debt they ran up.The "cliff" needed nothing done to it. It should have been embraced.Automatic spending cuts is what's needed, if we're ever gonna get this country back on track.Republicans would never go along with any cuts to defense spending.All they care about is cutting the social safety net.They don't give a **** about the deficit and the national debt.Their agenda is to roll back the New Deal.Always has been.They won't be happy until old people are sick and starving in the streets.

Was just listening to a clip on YouTube from The Howard Stern radio show, and he mentioned this article from Rolling Stone magazine about the way gay teens are treated in one town in Minneapolis and how that treatment has resulted in a rash of suicides.Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann [R] is affiliated with the ultraright Minnesota Family Council mentioned in the article.The Anoka-Hennepin school board has a policy on the books known colloquially as 'no homo promo', and bullying against gays (even by some teachers) is routinely ignored.It's a long article, but worth the read.One Town's War on Gay Teens

After weeks of speculation, President Obama formally tapped former Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., to be defense secretary today, inviting a potential nominating battle from members of both sides of the aisle even as he prepares for several tough legislative fights in the coming months. Mr. Obama, announcing his pick in the White House this afternoon, lauded the Vietnam veteran and two-term senator for his military credentials, his loyalty to the troops, and his willingness to go against the party grain. He also formally nominated John Brennan, a 25-year CIA veteran and his top counterterrorism adviser, to lead the CIA. "Chuck Hagel is the leader that our troops deserve," Mr. Obama said today in the press conference announcing his decision. "He understands that America stands strongest when we stand with allies and friends... Maybe most importantly, Chuck knows that war is not an abstraction. He understands that sending young Americans to fight and bleed in the dirt and mud, that's something we only do when it's absolutely necessary." http://www.cbsnews.c...ense-secretary/ YAY!!! Misty loves her some Chuck Hagel.

Texas Lawmaker Wants Strippers To Wear Licenses Displaying Their Real NamesTexas state Rep. Bill Zedler [R] has earned a reputation as a fringe extremist even in the conservative state legislature. But Zedler has outdone himself with his latest bill, which would regulate “sexually oriented” businesses, in part by requiring strippers to obtain and wear a license to work.Licensing requirements for strip clubs and performers exist in many cities and in the state of Alabama. Usually, these laws require a background check and registration with the Labor Department. However, Zedler’s bill goes further, mandating that exotic dancers would need to “conspicuously display” the license while working.I wonder how Zedler feels about licenses or background checks for gun owners?Should they also be forced to 'conspicuously display' their license?Seriously? They have nothing better to do in Texas than waste time on **** like this?

seems stupid. must have something to do with taxes, since strippers rarely pay them. but yeah. texas should be more concerned with their border than their nudie bars.

Americans Prefer Cockroaches, Traffic Jams and Nickelback To CongressPublic Policy Polling decided to figure out just how much Americans hate Congress by asking respondents to compare their feelings about their lawmakers to a list of other unpopular things. The results were not pretty:Congress did beat out North Korea, Lindsay Lohan, the Ebola virus, gonorrhea and the Kardashians.

Wow... roaches!

seems stupid. must have something to do with taxes, since strippers rarely pay them. but yeah. texas should be more concerned with their border than their nudie bars. Zedler contends that his bill is meant to guard against human trafficking. Forcing strippers to wear something with their real name on it will onlyexpose themto harassment.

Was just listening to a clip on YouTube from The Howard Stern radio show, and he mentioned this article from Rolling Stone magazine about the way gay teens are treated in one town in Minneapolis and how that treatment has resulted in a rash of suicides.Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann [R] is affiliated with the ultraright Minnesota Family Council mentioned in the article.The Anoka-Hennepin school board has a policy on the books known colloquially as 'no homo promo', and bullying against gays (even by some teachers) is routinely ignored.It's a long article, but worth the read.One Town's War on Gay TeensIt's a damn shame the way some people are treated. I went to HS in the 80's in Northern MN. Tiny towns with tiny minded people. My very best friend was gay but didn't dare come out. He has suffered greatly from depression his whole life. He is just not finding happiness.Michelle Bachmann is a hateful bitch

Republican Senator Calls For Repeat Of 1995 Government Shutdown: If We Hold Strong We Can Do That AgainTea Party-aligned bagger Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), within days of being sworn in, is already calling for a government shutdown unless Congress agrees to massive budget cuts.During an appearance on Mark Levins radio show Friday, Cruz waxed poetic about the last time Republicans successfully shut down the government in 1995, arguing that a shutdown leads to better economic policies. Because Republicans stood strong in 1995, we saw year after year of balanced budgets, Cruz said. He went on to call for a repeat as Republicans hold the nations fiscal solvency hostage in the debt ceiling fight next month. If we hold strong we can do that again, the Texas Senator declared:CRUZ: What would happen if the debt ceiling isnt raised is it would be a partial government shutdown. Weve seen this before, we saw this in 1995, when Republicans in the House shut down the government. What happened was it was a partial shutdown, there was some political cost to be paid but at the end of the day, because Republicans stood strong in 1995, we saw year after year of balanced budgets and some of the most fiscally-responsible policies Congress has produced in the modern-era. If we hold strong we can do that again. It just comes down to Republicans. Are we willing to stand strong and face the wrath of the mainstream media criticizing us and the president saying nasty things about us?Ezra Klein explains what would happen if America defaults on it's debt.VIDEOTranscript:The Bipartisan Policy Center, or BPC, they project right now that the debtceiling doomsday, really the final day for it, would happen sometimebetween February 15th and March 1st. Either Congress figures out the debtceiling before then or things get very bad, very quick. First, it willmean that the federal government will have to default on about 40 percentof our obligations; 40 percent of what we do gone.So let`s say the government decides to pay off our debtors. They makepayments for Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, defense, education andFood Stamps, kind of just the bare services there. Doing all that willmean defaulting on everything, and really I mean everything else. The FBIwill shutdown. The people responsible for tracking down loose nuclearweapons lose their jobs. The prisons don`t operate. The biomedicalresearchers aren`t funded. The court system closes its doors.Federal Aviation Administration offline. The parks close. Food safetyinspections, they cease. No one gets tax refunds. Nobody is fixing yourroads. It is bad.Second, meanwhile, two, the financial markets will go into complete chaos.The U.S. government debt is, after all, supposedly the safest investment inthe world. So it is used as the benchmark for all other kinds of debt.What that means, in normal language, is when you buy a mortgage, your banklooks at what the government pays to borrow. And it begins your interestrate there. Then they add on top of that how risky they think you are.So if we spike the Treasury rate because nobody trusts our governmentanymore, that spikes credit card rates. That spikes mortgage rates, not tomention all manner of trillions and trillions of dollars of weird financialderivatives that are also benchmarked to Treasuries.The damage to the economy on that would be unbelievable. And it wouldoccur at every level, from individuals looking for a loan to get a house tohedge funders trying to play the markets. It would be like 2008 all overagain. And if we breach the ceiling for long, maybe even worse.All of what I have mentioned so far, amazingly, is actually a best casescenario. It is what happens if we breach the debt ceiling in an orderlyway. But what if it is not simple? What if it`s not orderly? That getsto the third point.The government`s computerized payment system could go haywire. The federalgovernment needs to make more than 100 million -- 100 million individualpayments between February 15th and March 15th, 100 million. That is notdone by a clerk in an office somewhere whose hand doesn`t get tired. Thosepayments are computerized. Those computer systems are not built to stopmaking half of them. There is a real question as to whether the federalgovernment could actually re-program its software to seamlessly beginpicking and choosing which bills to pay and which to ignore.And if there is a glitch, then it could that after assuring our bondholders that we would never miss a payment to them, the governmentaccidentally does fail to pay them, throwing financial markets into panicbecause they can no longer trust our word.Fourth, the consequences of breaching the debt ceiling, they don`t go away.We will have done something we told the markets and the world that we wouldnever do, not under any circumstances. The U.S. would have proven itself ariskier borrow, with a more broken political system than anyone everthought possible.The Bipartisan Policy Center, they estimate the last debt ceiling fight, itcost us 19 billion in higher borrowing costs over the next decade. In thatcase, we didn`t actually go over the debt ceiling. We didn`t breach it.If we actually do this time, the costs will, of course, be much higher, andthe damage much longer lasting.The fifth -- the fifth and final point is, ironically, for those who wantto use the debt ceiling as leverage to reduce the deficit, busting throughthe debt ceiling would almost certainly make our deficit so much worse.The damage to the economy now would increase the deficit. Spending goes upand tax revenues go down when the economy flags. We just saw this duringthe recession.And the higher borrowing costs later because nobody trusts America anymore,that would also increase the deficit, as we would paying more to servicethe debt we already have than we`re expected to do.

AIG: Thank You America, But We May Sue YouTalk about biting the hand that fed you.The ink has barely dried on the Treasury Departments final sale of American International Group shares, and now it appears the insurer is considering joining former CEO Maurice (Hank) Greenbergs shareholder suit against Uncle Sam.The lawsuit, filed in 2011, alleges that the federal government used AIG to execute a backdoor bailout of Wall Street firms like Goldman Sachs Group, Merrill Lynch and others. A portion of the money used to rescue AIG was steered toward settling credit default swap contracts with those firms for 100 cents on the dollar. (See Greenberg Suit Slams U.S. For Backdoor Bailout.)DealBook reported late Monday that AIGs board will meet Wednesday to consider whether or not to join the shareholder lawsuit, and take on the government that finally extricated itself from the insurer after more than four years of involvement.The choice of whether or not to get engaged is hardly easy for the board. As DealBook points out:Its board members, most of whom joined after the bailout, owe a duty to shareholders to consider the lawsuit. If the board does not give careful consideration to the case, Mr. Greenberg could challenge its decision to abstain.Should Mr. Greenberg snare a major settlement without A.I.G., the company could face additional lawsuits from other shareholders. Suing the government would not only placate the 87-year-old former chief, but would put A.I.G. in line for a potential payout.via Rescued by a Bailout, A.I.G. May Sue Its Savior NYTimes.com.Greenbergs suit also alleges that in order to repay the government bailout, AIG was forced to unload several of its most prized assets, including its lucrative business in Asia, AIA. The terms of the rescue, rather than its necessity, is the crux of the argument.AIGs board finds itself in a difficult position, but the stance of Chief Executive Robert Benmosche will be fascinating to watch. Benmosche, who managed to stabilize AIG after coming on board in August 2009 before leading the restructuring, chafed under the governments yoke early on. The executive took issue with the sharp limits on executive compensation, and made sure to tout the fact that the Treasury Department reported a $22.7 billion profit on its AIG investment after selling its remaining shares in December.With AIG in the midst of an ad campaign with a Thank You America tagline, joining Greenbergs lawsuit may be the prudent way for the board to meet its obligations to investors, but it surely wont play well in the court of public opinion.AIG and the Treasury Department declined to comment for this story.

Birthers Suggest Impeaching Chief Justice John RobertsThe birther movement is now targeting Chief Justice John Roberts for impeachment if he swears in President Barack Obama for a second term later this month.Craige McMillan, a columnist for the conservative publication WND.com, wrote a piece last week asking Roberts to not swear Obama in, because, according to McMillan, Obama does not meet the Constitution's definition of a natural born citizen. In the piece, McMillan claims that Obama is not a citizen because his father was a citizen of Kenya and the United Kingdom, and that Obama cannot be "a natural born citizen" because his father was not an American citizen. Obama's mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, was born and raised in Kansas by parents who were born in Kansas.McMillan wrote:Your failure to investigate these citizenship issues surrounding Mr. Obama at the time questions were raised during his first term places you in a terrible position. You are now confronted with a most difficult choice.Your own oath of office, sworn before God and the American people, requires you to uphold the Constitution. (If not you, then who?) If you now administer the oath of office for the presidency to a man who by his own admission fails to meet the natural born citizen requirement imposed by that Constitution, you have violated your own oath of office and are rightly subject to impeachment by any House of Representatives, at any time, now or in the future.McMillan then suggested that the outcome for the country would be "Illegal wars. Illegal debts. Illegal laws." The New Civil Rights Movement reported that the National Memo responded to McMillan's piece by noting that Obama has met all the qualifications for being a natural born citizen, including being born in Hawaii and his mother being born in Kansas.McMillan's argument is similar to one used by Kansas resident Joe Montgomery in September when he sought to have the Kansas Objections Board remove Obama from the ballot in the state. Montgomery at the time argued that citizenship flowed "primarily" through the father and that Obama could not be an American citizen since his father was not one. The Objections Board -- which consists of three Republican statewide officeholders -- voted to hold a hearing on Montgomery's case, but dropped the case when Montgomery withdrew his objection. Montgomery told The Huffington Post at the time that he withdrew his case due to threats. At the time, the singer Cher tweeted that the Kansas Republican Party was "beneath slime" for the board's decision to entertain Montgomery's case.Birther queen Orly Taitz intervened in the Kansas case, including flying to Topeka in an attempt to get the Objections Board to remove Obama from the ballot. Taitz has not taken a position on a Roberts' impeachment, but has used her website to call on Roberts to investigate Obama's citizenship.

I wonder how Zedler feels about licenses or background checks for gun owners?Should they also be forced to 'conspicuously display' their license?Seriously? They have nothing better to do in Texas than waste time on **** like this?Getting strippers murdered is a hobby that has always perplexed me. Zedler contends that his bill is meant to guard against human trafficking.Forcing strippers to wear something with their real name on it will onlyexpose themto harassment.Stopping human trafficking is a hobby that has always perplexed me. Zoon Khon Anj says that she doesn't get it, either.When I move, she moves. It's a damn shame the way some people are treated. I went to HS in the 80's in Northern MN. Tiny towns with tiny minded people. My very best friend was gay but didn't dare come out. He has suffered greatly from depression his whole life. He is just not finding happiness.Michelle Bachmann is a hateful bitchYou lefties don't understand capitalism. Who are we supposed to pick on - the jocks? Try again.Weak people are made for picking on. That's capitalism, you Murka hater.

Weak people are made for picking on. That's capitalism, you Murka hater.

Journalists react in shock to Drudge Report header featuring Hitler and Stalin.Shocked journalists this afternoon were quick to react to the Drudge Reports controversial header photo comparing President Obama to Hitler and Stalin.The item linked to a Weekly Standard article reporting that President Obama was willing to address the gun issue with an executive order.Hang on a minute......There ya go.

This little pinhead just loves to ignore the subject of any thread and get into some stupid argument over semantics. I've been arguing with him for days because like many people I used the term 'default on the debt' in relation to the Republican's threats not to raise the debt ceiling.He always insists he's right about everything and constantly suggests that other members 'educate' themselves on the issue at hand.Check out his siggy.As any idiot can see, I didn't say we never 'shut down the government' before.What I clearly said was, 'we have never NOT raised the debt ceiling'.The goverment shutdowns in the 90's had absolutely nothing to do with the debt ceiling.They were budget disputes between President Clinton and Congress.This is a whole different animal.Hoist by his own petard.If you're going to go around acting like you know it all, you'd better know it all.I wonder if Goofbot will remove his siggy, or if he will continue to advertise his ignorance and dishonesty?

The Debt Ceiling Pays Off Money That Republicans Already SpentFederal law requires Congress to authorize the government to borrow the money needed to pay for the programs that Congress has passed. In other words, Republicans in Congress are threatening to refuse to pay off their own bills by raising the debt ceiling.President Obama warned Saturday morning, If Congress refuses to give the United States the ability to pay its bills on time, the consequences for the entire global economy could be catastrophic. Our families and our businesses cannot afford that dangerous game again.Apparently Republicans are so offended by their own votes/programs/policies that they think downgrading our credit again might be the best thing they can do for America.In 2001, Bush inherited a surplus from Clinton; However, in every year starting in 2002 we were operating at a deficit. Each years deficit goes into the pot and becomes part of our debt. So for each year that we fail to collect enough revenue to pay off our spending, we contribute to our debt and it keeps growing.Public debt rose under Bush as a combined result of the Bush tax cuts (less revenue) providing less money to pay for spending, while they increased spending with two unfunded wars (borrowed money for the wars was left off of the budget by the Bush administration until the Obama administration put it on the budget no more creative accounting, please) and Medicare Part D, an unfunded entitlement program initiated under the Bush administration. These are facts, not spin. When you spend more money while you earn less, you end up in debt.Conservatives like to blame non-defense discretionary spending, but In fact, such spending, accounting for only 15 percent of the budget, has been basically flat as a share of the economy for decades. Cutting it simply will not fill the deficit hole. Much of that debt is war debt and we all know how we got that. The fact is that public debt as a share of GDP goes up when we are at war.We also spent a lot of money in order to bail out too-big-to-fail banks under Bush after the global financial crisis. This program was called Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). Contrary to conservatives understanding, TARP was Bushs baby.The CBO estimated at the time that TARP would cost around $189 billion. So, in 2009 when Obama took office, the CBO was saying we had a $1.2 trillion deficit for 2009 (2009′s budget was based on Bush policies) and they predicted future deficits due to continuing Bushs policies (by policies they mean the Bush tax cuts- yes, the very cut Republicans have been demanding for the rich ever since Obama wanted to raise some revenue to address our debt) and the recession. Recessions cost money.We spent more money trying to recover from the crisis under Obama. We refer to that spending as the stimulus something conservatives mocked when Obama did but something they supported when Bush did. Stimulating the economy was never a bad thing before, but suddenly conservatives dont want it stimulated. They want the economy to stagnate or recess even further, as evinced by their many votes to obstruct the things the economists agree we need in order to stimulate the economy.You arent likely to hear a conservative admit that the stimulus was a temporary program, unlike a policy of a permanent tax cut for the rich. In other words, Bushs policies got us into debt. Obamas stimulus increased the debt, but is not a policy. It was only temporary.Now our debt is very large. Before we concern troll over how large it is, we need to take responsibility for how it got here. It wasnt the American people paying into Social Security who were borrowing money they couldnt/wouldnt pay back.The folks whose votes contributed in large ways to the debt now want the American citizens to pay for the failure of this ideology, while refusing to admit that it does not work as they believed it would.Republicans are doubling down by trying to use the deficit their policies created in order to push more of their policies onto the people. This time theyre using their failed policies to justify killing social programs they never liked to begin with, but are unrelated to our current deficit problem. (Yes, some of these programs will need to be reformed in the future, but they are not the cause of the current debt problem.)Republicans are also telling Americans who have paid into the Social Security Trust Fund their entire working lives that they do not want to make good on that promissory note. As Reagan explained, this money is in its own trust and has nothing to do with the deficit.The debt ceiling has been raised under previous administrations as part of the unpleasant course of business. It was unthinkable when Republicans used it to destroy our credit in 2011, earning America our first credit downgrading. Your credit tends to go down when you signal to lenders that you may not pay them back (raising the debt ceiling can be seen as the promise to pay back what we already spent).Conservatives seem to believe that raising the debt ceiling is about new debt, when in fact, it is a promise to pay off existing debt. Try telling the credit card company that you MIGHT pay off your debt if only they will first give you some things youve been wanting for a long time. Thats what Republicans are doing.So what we really have here are alleged fiscal conservatives trying to break Americas contract with lenders, as if you ran up your credit cards and then just told the bank that you refused to pay it back because you are philosophically against the idea borrowing (but obviously not against the idea of stealing). Then you suggest the banks go dip into your neighbors contributions to their retirement fund in order to pay off your debt.The time for Republicans to fight over the budget is in the budget fight, not the agreement to pay off our debt. Republicans keep fear-mongering that they have to threaten our credit rating because of the debt they dont want to hand down. They should have thought of that when they were actually voting yes on the policies that created the debt, not later, after the money has already been spent.No one disputes that we have a debt problem. The dispute derives from the fact that Republicans refuse to admit how we got here, which suggests that their solutions are just as dishonest. Yes, Democrats passed legislation that cost money as well, but they arent pretending they arent responsible for authorizing the government to borrow the money they spent. Furthermore, Democrats didnt refuse to raise the debt ceiling under Bush just because they disagreed with the wars. And thats basically what Republicans are using the debt ceiling showdown for its just another way to attack social programs they dont like.

Hang on a minute...... There ya go. Now I'm really not sure what type of Executive Orders Obama would impose on the populace in regards to guns. But if it's to restrict access to weapons, whether purchasing or trading or accoutrements thereof, then this would define Obama as a de facto dictator. Can't get it done through Congress so he'll do it by fiat decree.

Now I'm really not sure what type of Executive Orders Obama would impose on the populace in regards to guns. But if it's to restrict access to weapons, whether purchasing or trading or accoutrements thereof, then this would define Obama as a de facto dictator.Can't get it done through Congress so he'll do it by fiat decree.Did you watch the actual video of what Biden said?Seems to me he didn't even mean to say Executive 'Orders'.From what I saw, he immediately corrected himself and said that the President would take excecutive 'action'.Hang on, let me see if I can find it.........Here is the exact quote: "The president is going to act. Executive orders, executive action, can be taken, we haven't decided what that is yet."See?It would not be grammatically correct to say Executive Orders can be 'taken', we haven't decided what 'that is' yet'.He would have said, Executive Orders can be 'issued', we haven't decided what 'those are' yet.I guess Drudge heard the word 'orders' and immediately went deaf.And many other news outlets reported it the same way.I don't see how Obama restricts access to guns with an Executive Order.It has to be done legislatively.