Coalition deadlock as Nick Clegg and David Cameron veto each otherPatrick Wintour, The GuardianMonday 6 August 2012Nick Clegg's plan for constitutional reform and David Cameron's scheme to shift parliamentary boundaries in the Conservatives' favour both[...]
Read The Full Article:
The Gold Report: Edward, because you’re based in Switzerland, it would be interesting to get your perspective on the Eurozone’s new rescue fund, the Eurozone Stability Mechanism (ESM). There is talk in the market . . . → Read More: Why Junior Gold Stocks Are Still the Place to Be: Edward Karr
Read The Full Article:
Just last week, Romney told ABC News that he's paid a "very substantial amount" in taxes every year?at least "so far as [he] can recall." But despite his claim, Romney refuses to release any evidence to support it?and unlike Reid, he's got the evidence at his fingertips.
In the same interview, Romney said he'd be happy to go back and look at his returns to see if he'd ever paid less than 13.9 percent, but if he did go back and look, he hasn't told anyone about it. He's released zero evidence to back up his claim.
Bottom-line: what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. If Harry Reid's pants are on fire, so are Mitt Romney's. And the difference is, Mitt Romney is the one running for president. He's the one who has got to answer the questions. Not the honey badger.
Yeah, it's yet another one of those "back in my day" stories that young people hate to hear but I'm gonna do it anyway.
When I was a kid, if we were smart we learned to seek out old folks because we understood that the things you could learn from what often amounted to their wealth of life experiences could save you a ton of grief down the road. It's one thing to learn from your mistakes but it's a better thing to learn from other people's. So we tended to honor our elders and at least have some respect for the fact that whatever we knew at the time was based on their experiences because we weren't old enough to have any of our own and whatever we had existed because someone in some older generation had thought of it and worked their ass off to bring it about.
Not that way today. Today, it's all about the 30 somethings and the 40 somethings who somehow were born knowing everything they needed to know about everything they need to know about and to whom "seniors"... I hate that damned word... are simply burdens that the world would probably be better off without if only there was some way to shuttle them all off to another planet somewhere once the're past their shelf date.
Ever try to explain how Social Security works to someone who is sure that you are spending his money and that there will be nothing left for him when the time comes? No? Then do yourself a favor and don't even try. The best you're going to get from them in response is a glazed look and a "But Rush says..." and hell, we all know that Rush is always right, eh?
They're simply not going to understand that the Social Security system was designed to be self-supporting and actually IS self-supporting as long as it is operated in the manner it's designers intended. What that means is as long as the government isn't borrowing billions from the Social Security trust fund to make up revenues lost because of the tax cuts in 2001. A large portion of Social Security's assets are now in the form of government issued T-bills, worth only as much as the integrity of the government issuing them is worth which these days means probably not much. When the right wing starts spewing about Social Security being broke by such and such a date, it's not that it won't have any assets, it's that the assets it does have will be government issued IOUs and monopoly money and worth about as much as a Mitt Romney campaign promise.
The US government has been robbing Peter to pay Paul for over twelve years now and ol' Pete's beginning to realize that he can't meet his own obligations with a bunch of IOU's in the form of pieces of scrip with nothing of any value backing them. So what's the official government response? Well, so far it's been "We're going to have to cut Social Security benefits" in order to save the program. Even PBO has expressed his desire to discuss cuts to SS benefits as part of his "outreach to morons" program. And every damned year there's a budget shortfall they talk about MORE cuts, which brings up the most pertinent question of all as far as I'm concerned: "Why the hell are we trying to "save" a program by eliminating the very things the program was started in order to provide?"
But you try explaining this to a bunch of youngsters who have been thoroughly schooled to believe that greed is a good thing and that they have a right to keep every dime they make, people who have thoroughly schooled to believe that anyone who gets any part of their basic subsistence in the form of a check from the government... including government EMPLOYEES for crap's sake... is on a par with the infamous "welfare queens" of the Reagan era and robbing them of their hard-earned nickels and dimes.
Many of them are the same people who haven't a problem in the world with MY tax dollars being used to finance a new football stadium or a racetrack somewhere as we found out when the city where I live spent several million bucks to overhaul an old baseball diamond for the approximately 1000 or so fans (out of a population of app. 125k) who actually show up to watch home games. But you let one single mom trying to raise a child on a part-time fast food or retail job or one old person who no longer contributes to anyone's stock portfolio get a dollar in public assistance and they're all howling like a dog shittin' a peach pit.
THIS is what we fail to acknowledge in most of our rantings and raving. The average American has a streak of selfishness a mile wide that the last 50 years of the 20th century... in which far too many people were able to float to the top without ever having done anything to earn their position there... has made a major component of the American psyche. It's what allowed the middle class to basically look the other way when the attacks on the social safety nets started and were aimed at only the least among us.
Even AARP... which should actually be renamed the AARRP for the American Association of RICH Retired persons has been trying to weasel/waffle its way into the anti-Social Security movement so prevalent amongst the right wingers for the past few years. People with Social Security as their primary or only source of income don't get much notice from AARP since they don't take expensive cruises or buy expensive insurance and that's really about all AARP deals in anymore. I suspect that it's because AARP has become just another massive cash cow for a few at the top of its hierarchy and that most of the people working in their front offices aren't old enough to be members of the organization they work for.
So what I'd like to say to the Generations that have followed mine is this: If you haven't been there and done that... then don't be preaching about the state of the nation today to those that have been. Try... just this once... to remember that a lot of what you read about and hear about from your peers, I was there for and a part of. If you can't remember that, then stay the hell out of my face and just go on back to enjoying all the things that we had to bust our asses for and that you now seem take for granted as something you're entitled to while nobody else deserves the same breaks you got. I don't need lessons in life from people who have the worst of theirs still to go through.
Read The Full Article:
The Obama Administration will consider an executive order on cybersecurity in the wake of a defeat in the Senate on a bill to deal with the issue. This is another example of the executive branch taking action when the legislative branch bogs down in[...]
Read The Full Article:
Harry Reid who's a Mormon himself is not backing down from demanding that Mitt Romney release years of his tax returns which he has refused to do.
After creating a political firestorm and being accused of lying, U.S. Sen. Harry Reid on Monday refused to back down from his challenge to GOP presidential contender Mitt Romney to release his income tax returns to prove he paid every year. Reid raised the stakes last week when he said a source who invested in Bain Capital told him Romney hadn't paid taxes for 10 years.
Reid said he didn't know If that was true but said Romney ought to release his returns to demonstrate he had paid. Romney was co-founder of the Bain investment firm and its CEO in the 1980s and 1990s.Asked Monday if Reid had been in touch with his source and if the man was willing to go public with evidence, Reid turned the question back on Romney."This whole issue is not about me," Reid said at a news conference after he helped dedicate a new VA hospital in Southern Nevada.
Reid noted Romney's father, George, had released 12 years of tax returns when he ran for president in 1968. And he added that Mitt Romney has released only one full year return, which Reid said showed he had overseas bank accounts in the Bahamas and Switzerland, raising questions about what Romney is trying to hide."The whole controversy would end very quickly if he would just release his income tax returns just like everybody else that runs for president," Reid said.
The media needs to keep pressuring Romney to release his tax information. If candidate Obama had released only a couple of years of tax returns in 2008, he would have been hounded into releasing more by FOX and every other media outlet because it would appear that he's hiding something. They are insipidly demanding that Obama release his college information for God's sake. Romney is definitely afraid of something major or else he would have squashed this controversy immediately. I don't understand why Kevin Drum and others are already saying Mitt didn't do anything illegal. Why?
Henry Blodget says he doesn't think Mitt Romney is trying to hide anything illegal by refusing to release his tax returns. Rather, he thinks Romney simply doesn't want it to become clear just how carefully he's structured his income over the years.
Like Blodget, I also doubt that Romney has done anything illegal, and probably not anything that's even too close to the line. And yet, it somehow seems as though there must be a little more there than just evidence of aggressive tax avoidance. Blodget thinks that would outrage the American public, but I'm not sure I buy that unless there's some pretty shady stuff there. But then again, I'm not exactly plugged into the id of the average American. Maybe Blodget is right.
So many companies and rich elites have gone down because of illegal and fraudulent practices that it's not a reach to suggest illegal practices took place. Romney should be pounded over and over again as Harry Reid is doing. If there's nothing illegal in Romney's tax returns then he should prove it. Mittens must feel that revealing the truth about his finances will hurt him tremendously in the eyes of the American public. The media also needs to keep digging into this story and not rely on a Senator to kick up a firestorm to keep the story alive.
The American rightwing?from the U.S. Chamber of Congress to the Club for Growth to anti-choice groups?are targeting Tammy Baldwin and Claire McCaski in attacks ads that can only be described as neo-fascist.
So, we have the religious right and the One Percent joining forces as never before.
In modern politics, the proposition that Democratic Party and the GOP-Tea Baggers present no appreciable policy difference in no longer tenable.
What does your money buy you?Sheldon Adelson, the billionaire casino baron who owns the biggest paper in Israel and has pledged to spend $100 million to defeat President Obama this year, is reportedly pressuring Romney to agree to release Israeli spy[...]
Read The Full Article:
“Any time you’re deciding a case involving a presidential election, it’s awfully close to politics.” – Sandra Day O’Connor on “Face the Nation
THIS WAS JUST too much to believe. How did former Justice Sandra Day O’Connor have the unmitigated gall to weigh in with those words? Close to politics? It was politics and it disgraced the Rehnquist court and showed the Supreme Court for what it is today.
“That trend down began with the Bush-Gore decision…” – Sandra Day O’Connor
The trend she’s talking about is the sullied reputation of the Supreme Court.
There’s been a great deal written about Mrs. O’Connor’s dissatisfied ruminations over getting slimed with her own decision to join what was arguably the worst opinion in modern history, because it actually manifested in the Supreme Court choosing the president of the United States, wiping out the votes of citizens.
The Supreme Court should not have been anywhere near Bush v. Gore, which should have been left to Congress.
It is a horrible stain on Mrs. O’Connor’s career, for which she deserves and earned historical infamy, along with Justices Scalia, Kennedy and Thomas, all of whom joined arguably the most politically motivated Chief Justice in modern times, William Rehnquist.
Well-Regulated Militiaman Wade Michael Page was a member of one of our nation's most proudly white rock and roll bands, "Definate Hate."
Page was also a founder of Great White Odin praise band End Apathy and member of Youngland, Celtic Warrior, Radikahl, Max Resist, Intimidation One, Aggressive Force and Blue Eyed Devils.
Here, he and the snowy-white boys of Youngland perform "Thank God I'm a White Boy."
From Page's myspace page for End Apathy:
We just finished recording for our upcoming release on Label 56, check back for release date!...The music is a sad commentary on our sick society and the problems that prevent true progress...
Wade - Vocals/Guitars....Brent - Bass.....Ozzie - Drums
Sabbath, Slayer, Maiden, DRI, COC, RKL, GWAR, GBH, Aggresion, Misfits, Bad Religion, Sick Pleasure, Exploited, Dayglow Abortions, Crumbsuckers, Cryptic Slaughter, Mike Watt, Innocent Addiction, Soak, BumKon, Burnt Fase, etc...