Friday, October 17, 2008
Takin’ It Back With Barack, Jack! (For Swing Voters)
Here are the lyrics:
Hate to see the nation being run by a hack
Dig the situation that he dug in Iraq
Half the population wants to give him the sack
And now he’s lookin’ round for somebody else to attack
We need somebody great to get us back on the track
So we’re takin’ it back with Barack, Jack!
Choo Choo, Change to believe in
Woo woo, we can achieve it
Choo Choo, Change to believe in
Takin’ it back with Barack, Jack!
Now that global warming is a matter of fact
The only real question is just how to react
The new administration needs the guts to enact
Drastic legislation, leave the planet intact
We can’t be foolin’ round with some Republican Mac
So we’re takin’ it back with Barack, Jack!
Choo Choo….
He only gets his money from your regular macs
Doesn’t take a penny from some whackity PAC’s
For bringin’ folk together he’s the man with the knack
And he’ll supply the hope and inspiration we lack
Cause he’s the best we got and did I ….mention he’s black?
So we’re takin’ it back with Barack, Jack!
Now is not the time to worry about the deficit
Noble Prize winning economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman writes that now is not the time to worry about deficits.
One can only hope Congressman Paul Ryan, an unrepentant deficit hawk, and the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel editors are paying attention.
The engines of economic growth, consumer spending, fueled by private debt through most of the last two decades, and private investment are stalled. The only way to get the economy moving is to increase government spending.
But state and local government are legally required to balance their budgets. They cannot increase spending. They will be forced to cut it which will make the downturn worse.
Last year state and local government spending was one of the only engines of economic growth and job creation, increasing by $40 billion. Now Wisconsin is facing a $3 billion deficit. California just slashed its budget by $7 billion. Next year states will be forced to cut their spending by at least $60 billion, and that number is rising. That amounts to a $100 billion reduction in demand that will make what is shaping up as a nasty recession worse.
Interest rates are already extremely low. They need to be cut again. But that won't be enough. The only policy left is to use deficit spending to jump start the stalled economy.
Here's what Krugman has to say:
It’s now clear that rescuing the banks is just the beginning: the nonfinancial economy is also in desperate need of help.
And to provide that help, we’re going to have to put some prejudices aside. It’s politically fashionable to rant against government spending and demand fiscal responsibility. But right now, increased government spending is just what the doctor ordered, and concerns about the budget deficit should be put on hold...
...there’s a lot the federal government can do for the economy. It can provide extended benefits to the unemployed, which will both help distressed families cope and put money in the hands of people likely to spend it. It can provide emergency aid to state and local governments, so that they aren’t forced into steep spending cuts that both degrade public services and destroy jobs. It can buy up mortgages (but not at face value, as John McCain has proposed) and restructure the terms to help families stay in their homes.
And this is also a good time to engage in some serious infrastructure spending, which the country badly needs in any case. The usual argument against public works as economic stimulus is that they take too long: by the time you get around to repairing that bridge and upgrading that rail line, the slump is over and the stimulus isn’t needed. Well, that argument has no force now, since the chances that this slump will be over anytime soon are virtually nil. So let’s get those projects rolling.
Will the next administration do what’s needed to deal with the economic slump? Not if Mr. McCain pulls off an upset. What we need right now is more government spending — but when Mr. McCain was asked in one of the debates how he would deal with the economic crisis, he answered: “Well, the first thing we have to do is get spending under control.”
If Barack Obama becomes president, he won’t have the same knee-jerk opposition to spending. But he will face a chorus of inside-the-Beltway types telling him that he has to be responsible, that the big deficits the government will run next year if it does the right thing are unacceptable
He should ignore that chorus. The responsible thing, right now, is to give the economy the help it needs. Now is not the time to worry about the deficit.
One can only hope Congressman Paul Ryan, an unrepentant deficit hawk, and the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel editors are paying attention.
The engines of economic growth, consumer spending, fueled by private debt through most of the last two decades, and private investment are stalled. The only way to get the economy moving is to increase government spending.
But state and local government are legally required to balance their budgets. They cannot increase spending. They will be forced to cut it which will make the downturn worse.
Last year state and local government spending was one of the only engines of economic growth and job creation, increasing by $40 billion. Now Wisconsin is facing a $3 billion deficit. California just slashed its budget by $7 billion. Next year states will be forced to cut their spending by at least $60 billion, and that number is rising. That amounts to a $100 billion reduction in demand that will make what is shaping up as a nasty recession worse.
Interest rates are already extremely low. They need to be cut again. But that won't be enough. The only policy left is to use deficit spending to jump start the stalled economy.
Here's what Krugman has to say:
It’s now clear that rescuing the banks is just the beginning: the nonfinancial economy is also in desperate need of help.
And to provide that help, we’re going to have to put some prejudices aside. It’s politically fashionable to rant against government spending and demand fiscal responsibility. But right now, increased government spending is just what the doctor ordered, and concerns about the budget deficit should be put on hold...
...there’s a lot the federal government can do for the economy. It can provide extended benefits to the unemployed, which will both help distressed families cope and put money in the hands of people likely to spend it. It can provide emergency aid to state and local governments, so that they aren’t forced into steep spending cuts that both degrade public services and destroy jobs. It can buy up mortgages (but not at face value, as John McCain has proposed) and restructure the terms to help families stay in their homes.
And this is also a good time to engage in some serious infrastructure spending, which the country badly needs in any case. The usual argument against public works as economic stimulus is that they take too long: by the time you get around to repairing that bridge and upgrading that rail line, the slump is over and the stimulus isn’t needed. Well, that argument has no force now, since the chances that this slump will be over anytime soon are virtually nil. So let’s get those projects rolling.
Will the next administration do what’s needed to deal with the economic slump? Not if Mr. McCain pulls off an upset. What we need right now is more government spending — but when Mr. McCain was asked in one of the debates how he would deal with the economic crisis, he answered: “Well, the first thing we have to do is get spending under control.”
If Barack Obama becomes president, he won’t have the same knee-jerk opposition to spending. But he will face a chorus of inside-the-Beltway types telling him that he has to be responsible, that the big deficits the government will run next year if it does the right thing are unacceptable
He should ignore that chorus. The responsible thing, right now, is to give the economy the help it needs. Now is not the time to worry about the deficit.
McCain's policies won't help workers
In an editorial on the third presidential debate, the New York Times observed:
...it’s a shame that Mr. McCain hasn’t come up with policies that would actually help workers. Instead, he’s served up the same-old trickle-down theories and a government-is-wrong, markets-are-right fervor that helped create this economic disaster.
Wednesday night’s debate was another chance for Mr. McCain to prove that he is ready to lead this country out of its deep economic crisis. But he had one answer to almost every economic question: cut taxes and government spending. Unfortunately, what Mr. McCain means is to cut taxes for the richest Americans and, inevitably, to reduce the kinds of government services that working Americans need more than ever. ..
Mr. McCain’s biggest problem is that he has no big ideas for fixing the country’s problems. His speech on the economy this week was replete with seriously bad ones, starting with cutting the already very low capital gains tax in half. That won’t rescue the economy. What it will do is dig the government further into debt while making the current tax structure that rewards the rich even more unfair.
Mr. McCain made more sense when he proposed eliminating income tax on unemployment benefits in 2008 and 2009. He would have done a lot more for struggling Americans if he had pressed his party earlier this month to help extend expiring unemployment benefits.
Mr. McCain says he wants to help Americans threatened with foreclosure by using federal money to purchase loans that exceed the value of the home. A better approach — one that would not overburden the taxpayer — would be to allow a bankruptcy court judge to modify mortgage terms. Mr. Obama has long supported that change. Mr. McCain has not.
Mr. Obama has better ideas to respond to the financial crisis and to put the economy back on the right track. He supports a 90-day moratorium on foreclosures and more money for states and localities, both of which would quickly bring relief beyond Wall Street.
Mr. Obama wants to raise the minimum wage and tie it to inflation. Mr. McCain wants to make the Bush tax cuts permanent — a big break for the top 1 percent of society. Mr. Obama would cut taxes for low- and moderate-income families and raise them for richer Americans.
As for how Mr. McCain would create jobs, his big idea in Tuesday’s speech — surprise, surprise — was that “the most effective way a president can do this” is to use “tax cuts that are directed specifically to create jobs.” After the last eight years, that pinched view of government ought to sound depressingly familiar to the millions of Americans who are still waiting for that downward trickle of prosperity.
...it’s a shame that Mr. McCain hasn’t come up with policies that would actually help workers. Instead, he’s served up the same-old trickle-down theories and a government-is-wrong, markets-are-right fervor that helped create this economic disaster.
Wednesday night’s debate was another chance for Mr. McCain to prove that he is ready to lead this country out of its deep economic crisis. But he had one answer to almost every economic question: cut taxes and government spending. Unfortunately, what Mr. McCain means is to cut taxes for the richest Americans and, inevitably, to reduce the kinds of government services that working Americans need more than ever. ..
Mr. McCain’s biggest problem is that he has no big ideas for fixing the country’s problems. His speech on the economy this week was replete with seriously bad ones, starting with cutting the already very low capital gains tax in half. That won’t rescue the economy. What it will do is dig the government further into debt while making the current tax structure that rewards the rich even more unfair.
Mr. McCain made more sense when he proposed eliminating income tax on unemployment benefits in 2008 and 2009. He would have done a lot more for struggling Americans if he had pressed his party earlier this month to help extend expiring unemployment benefits.
Mr. McCain says he wants to help Americans threatened with foreclosure by using federal money to purchase loans that exceed the value of the home. A better approach — one that would not overburden the taxpayer — would be to allow a bankruptcy court judge to modify mortgage terms. Mr. Obama has long supported that change. Mr. McCain has not.
Mr. Obama has better ideas to respond to the financial crisis and to put the economy back on the right track. He supports a 90-day moratorium on foreclosures and more money for states and localities, both of which would quickly bring relief beyond Wall Street.
Mr. Obama wants to raise the minimum wage and tie it to inflation. Mr. McCain wants to make the Bush tax cuts permanent — a big break for the top 1 percent of society. Mr. Obama would cut taxes for low- and moderate-income families and raise them for richer Americans.
As for how Mr. McCain would create jobs, his big idea in Tuesday’s speech — surprise, surprise — was that “the most effective way a president can do this” is to use “tax cuts that are directed specifically to create jobs.” After the last eight years, that pinched view of government ought to sound depressingly familiar to the millions of Americans who are still waiting for that downward trickle of prosperity.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
McCain not Bush, but voted with him 90% of the time
Last night John McCain tried to distance himself from George Bush when he said: "I'm not George Bush."
In his latest ad, Barack Obama responds:"You may not be George Bush, but you voted with him 90% of the time."
In his latest ad, Barack Obama responds:"You may not be George Bush, but you voted with him 90% of the time."
Palin's geography: bobcats, moose and my hometown!
Sarah Palin drew some boos and shouts of confusion from her supporters yesterday, when while speaking in New Hampshire she mistakenly claimed that the Granite State was part of the "great Northwest.
"I like being here," she told the crowd in Laconia, "because it seems like here and in our last rally too -- other parts around this great Northwest -- here in New Hampshire you just get it."
I grew up in New Hampshire, on Oyster River Road in Durham, to be exact. Went to Oyster River High School and played ice hockey for the Bobcats, although we never saw one in Durham or there abouts. No moose or hockey moms either, although I hear there are plenty of both in the state now.
New Hampshire was in the Northeast, you know, bordered by Massachusetts, Maine and Vermont, when I left in 1966 to attend the University of Wisconsin. It's still there as far as I can tell.
"I like being here," she told the crowd in Laconia, "because it seems like here and in our last rally too -- other parts around this great Northwest -- here in New Hampshire you just get it."
I grew up in New Hampshire, on Oyster River Road in Durham, to be exact. Went to Oyster River High School and played ice hockey for the Bobcats, although we never saw one in Durham or there abouts. No moose or hockey moms either, although I hear there are plenty of both in the state now.
New Hampshire was in the Northeast, you know, bordered by Massachusetts, Maine and Vermont, when I left in 1966 to attend the University of Wisconsin. It's still there as far as I can tell.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
McCain smear campaign has crossed the line!
There is a fine line between a smear campaign and an incitement to violence. The McCain Palin campaign has crossed that line.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)