Walking up the backs of the middle-class to
Posted By: get the job........nm on 2008-10-13
In Reply to: His speech and the audience response - is making a liar out of you as we speak.
xx
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
And I'll say it again...walking up the backs of the
=
helping the lower class and middle class will NOT
Giving handouts to those that do not work certainly does nothing to help their situations; it only encourages it. Middle class are your working class, the support and backbone of this country. Obama's interference in their lives is just that, interference. The democrats have always felt they have the right to interfere in our lives by taxing us to death. What does that do to help us? It only makes us MORE dependent on the government......nothing about MORE government is helping us in any way.
I'm glad you think crime is JUST a biproduct of poverty, not race, which proves you obviously don't live in an area where that would prove you wrong. I live in an area where I know that every BLACK has the same opportunities as whites, the EXACT same education and FREE two college years....FREE, FREE, FREE.....all they have to do is finish high school....not all As or even any Bs, just finish high school. Now, a lot of young people take advantage of that but MANY do not. What do they do instead? Stand on the street corner, run around with their pants hanging down to the knees, steal for drugs, sell drugs to make money so they can buy expensive hubcaps for their souped up cars, buy their expensive shoes and ugly pants, and make MORE BABIES, which by the way, I SUPPORT with my taxes. No, I don't want to hear all that hogwash about their poverty. The media has made so much of that garbage, those that don't live in or near it, don't realize many blacks have the same opportunities; it's just that a lot of blacks, especially in my town, have grown up generation after generation living off the taxpayer and see no reason whatsoever to change their situation. They make more babies.....I'm forced to raise them so that generation can make more babies. Do I wish their situation would change? ABSOLUTELY! Do they have plenty of resources available in this town alone to change that? ABSOLUTELY! Do most of them take advantage of that? ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!! Yes, the majority of crimes in our town is committed by blacks but it AIN'T because of poverty; it's because THEY WANT TO COMMIT A CRIME!! We have poor whites as well and the majority of those do not feel they have the right to steal what belongs to others, kill someone over drugs or a stupid girl, or whatever else one wants to use as an excuse.
Obama will do nothing to help those that feel entitled and look to Obama as just a bigger free paycheck. You don't help anyone by giving them free handouts. If they don't want an educate, won't help themselves, and continue to feel ENTITLED to MY money, Obama certainly won't change that by encouraging laziness and lack of worth ethics.
Making the middle class dependent on the government is in no way helping them; if anything, Obama will be the end to the middle class as we know it today.
Middle class
Didn't McCain define "middle class" as anyone with $5 million??? How realistic is that? I don't personally have, nor do I know anyone, who has $5 million. The "real" middle class is screwed with either of these clowns.
If the new middle class is $120,000 (sm)
Then my income will just push us into that bracket. I wonder if that will negate my entire income? If so, I guess we may be better off if I just quit? Right now I work because I can't afford to quit. I won't be able to afford it then either so what will I do? I wonder how many others will be in my situation?
FYI, we live in a small older home that we are trying to pay off so that when our two children are college-age, maybe we can afford it. We don't live extravagently by any means. What will happen to people like us?
Middle class? sm
If Obama is elected, that is something that our children's children will be reading about in a history book. It is fast disappearing and will be completely gone if Obama takes office.
A New Way To Tax the Middle Class
Just call it something besides a tax.
Who Pays for Cap and Trade?
Hint: They were promised a tax cut during the Obama campaign.Article
Cap and trade is the tax that dare not speak its name, and Democrats are hoping in particular that no one notices who would pay for their climate ambitions. With President Obama depending on vast new carbon revenues in his budget and Congress promising a bill by May, perhaps Americans would like to know the deeply unequal ways that climate costs would be distributed across regions and income groups.
Politicians love cap and trade because they can claim to be taxing "polluters," not workers. Hardly. Once the government creates a scarce new commodity -- in this case the right to emit carbon -- and then mandates that businesses buy it, the costs would inevitably be passed on to all consumers in the form of higher prices. Stating the obvious, Peter Orszag -- now Mr. Obama's budget director -- told Congress last year that "Those price increases are essential to the success of a cap-and-trade program."
Hit hardest would be the "95% of working families" Mr. Obama keeps mentioning, usually omitting that his no-new-taxes pledge comes with the caveat "unless you use energy." Putting a price on carbon is regressive by definition because poor and middle-income households spend more of their paychecks on things like gas to drive to work, groceries or home heating.
The Congressional Budget Office -- Mr. Orszag's former roost -- estimates that the price hikes from a 15% cut in emissions would cost the average household in the bottom-income quintile about 3.3% of its after-tax income every year. That's about $680, not including the costs of reduced employment and output. The three middle quintiles would see their paychecks cut between $880 and $1,500, or 2.9% to 2.7% of income. The rich would pay 1.7%. Cap and trade is the ideal policy for every Beltway analyst who thinks the tax code is too progressive (all five of them).
But the greatest inequities are geographic and would be imposed on the parts of the U.S. that rely most on manufacturing or fossil fuels -- particularly coal, which generates most power in the Midwest, Southern and Plains states. It's no coincidence that the liberals most invested in cap and trade -- Barbara Boxer, Henry Waxman, Ed Markey -- come from California or the Northeast.
Coal provides more than half of U.S. electricity, and 25 states get more than 50% of their electricity from conventional coal-fired generation. In Ohio, it totals 86%, according to the Energy Information Administration. Ratepayers in Indiana (94%), Missouri (85%), New Mexico (80%), Pennsylvania (56%), West Virginia (98%) and Wyoming (95%) are going to get soaked.
Another way to think about it is in terms of per capita greenhouse-gas emissions. California is the No. 2 carbon emitter in the country but also has a large economy and population. So the average Californian only had a carbon footprint of about 12 tons of CO2-equivalent in 2005, according to the World Resource Institute's Climate Analysis Indicators, which integrates all government data. The situation is very different in Wyoming and North Dakota -- paging Senators Mike Enzi and Kent Conrad -- where every person was responsible for 154 and 95 tons, respectively. See the nearby chart for cap and trade's biggest state winners and losers.
Democrats say they'll allow some of this ocean of new cap-and-trade revenue to trickle back down to the public. In his budget, Mr. Obama wants to recycle $525 billion through the "making work pay" tax credit that goes to many people who don't pay income taxes. But $400 for individuals and $800 for families still doesn't offset carbon's income raid, especially in states with higher carbon use.
All the more so because the Administration is lowballing its cap-and-trade tax estimates. Its stated goal is to reduce emissions 14% below 2005 levels by 2020, which assuming that four-fifths of emissions are covered (excluding agriculture, for instance), works out to about $13 or $14 per ton of CO2. When CBO scored a similar bill last year, it expected prices to start at $23 and rise to $44 by 2018. CBO also projected the total value of the allowances at $902 billion over the first decade, which is some $256 billion more than the Administration's estimate.
We asked the White House budget office for the assumptions behind its revenue estimates, but a spokesman said the Administration doesn't have a formal proposal and will work with Congress and "stakeholders" to shape one. We were also pointed to recent comments by Mr. Orszag that he was "sure there will be enough there to finance the things that we have identified" and maybe "additional money" too. In other words, Mr. Obama expects a much larger tax increase than even he is willing to admit.
Those "stakeholders" are going to need some very large bribes, starting with the regions that stand to lose the most. Led by Michigan's Debbie Stabenow, 15 Senate Democrats have already formed a "gang" demanding that "consumers and workers in all regions of the U.S. are protected from undue hardship." In practice, this would mean corporate welfare for carbon-heavy businesses.
And of course Congress is its own "stakeholder." An economy-wide tax under the cover of saving the environment is the best political moneymaker since the income tax. Obama officials are already telling the press, sotto voce, that climate revenues might fund universal health care and other new social spending. No doubt they would, and when they did Mr. Obama's cap-and-trade rebates would become even smaller.
Cap and trade, in other words, is a scheme to redistribute income and wealth -- but in a very curious way. It takes from the working class and gives to the affluent; takes from Miami, Ohio, and gives to Miami, Florida; and takes from an industrial America that is already struggling and gives to rich Silicon Valley and Wall Street "green tech" investors who know how to leverage the political class.
She actually grew up middle class
and made her own money. Then married Sir Rothschild. Why couldn't I have found a guy like that?!?
The middle class has already all but disappeared under...sm
republican rule. Based on earnings, we have a huge lower class, a very small middle class, and a tiny upper class that makes over 90% of the income in the US.
The middle class needs to realize
that John McCain's economic plan is designed from the ground up to raise incomes and create jobs for Americans - especially middle-class Americans - and get our economy moving again. It is in sharp contrast to Barack Obama's plan, which does not treat the middle class well and which will reduce jobs rather than create them.
"The McCain tax plan will allow middle-class Americans to keep more of what they earn than the Obama tax plan. McCain will increase the exemption for children from $3,500 to $7,000 per child, and he will provide a refundable health care tax credit of $5,000 for every family. What does this mean for middle-class families? Consider a married couple, one of whom works, earning $55,000 plus employer-paid health insurance of $8,000, and who rent their home and have two young children. Under McCain's plan, this family would receive a tax refund of $2,087 for health care and other things. Under Obama's plan, including his proposed worker's credit, this same family would not get any tax refund; in fact, they will have to pay taxes of $1,213. That's a $3,300 advantage for that family with McCain's plan compared with Obama's.
McCain's plan also provides incentives for firms to hire more workers and to pay them more. He will stop penalizing American firms when they create jobs in America rather than overseas. The U.S. tax code now levies a tax of 35 percent on American firms, the second highest in the world. McCain would reduce the tax to 25 percent, an important reason why his plan creates more jobs than Obama's. Another reason is that McCain will not raise the tax on small businesses, as Obama's plan does. Under Obama's plan, the top marginal income tax rate, which many small businesses pay, will rise to over 50 percent, including his proposed 5 percent increase in the statutory rate, 3 percent for Medicare, 3 percent for Social Security, and 4 percent from the phase out of exemptions.
McCain's economic plan is comprehensive and helps the middle class in many other ways. By promoting domestic energy production, including nuclear power and exploration and production of oil and gas - which Obama has opposed - McCain will reduce the price of gasoline, electricity and heating oil. By promoting free-trade agreements, he will reduce taxes on job-creating exports and reduce the prices that middle- and lower-income families pay for food and clothing. In contrast, Sen. Obama opposes good trade agreements - voting against the Colombia free-trade agreement - that would create jobs in America."
Does the middle class ever get a break?
All I heard during Barrack Obama's campaign was how he was going to look out for the middle class and how Bush and McCain would do nothing more than make the rich richer. Well, every time I turn on the news, I cringe. All I see are crooks. CEO crooks, rich crooks, and political crooks. These crooks are getting rich off of taxpayers and we are getting nothing in return. The initial bailout has done nothing. The stock market is still extremely low. The only good thing I've heard of late is that gas is below 2 dollars a gallon right now. Now GM wants a bailout. Their CEOs flying in on private jets and asking for a handout. I truly do not want to get them one because I know it won't change anything. However, it breaks my heart to think of the millions of people who will truly suffer from this....including my mother.
Now President-elect Obama still claims to be out there for the middle class, but I just don't see it. His plans will do nothing more than to help the lower class. The rich will survive as they are rich, but it will be the middle class who again takes the hit. The more TV I watch, the more I see Obama as nothing more than a puppet of his political party.
My husband is so stressed out about this economy and his business that he is losing sleep at night. He had to fire someone yesterday to save costs which means he will have to work a lot more hours to cover for the person he had to let go which will add more stress and little to no downtime for him. Not to mention the poor bloke he had to fire right before the holidays.
I'm sitting here at my desk thinking about our monthly house payment and our two kids and I wonder how we will make it if my husband's boss decides to close his store. Will he send him to another store or will he just let him go? How will he find another job in this economy that would make enough money to pay our house payment? What will happen to my mom if GM gets rid of legacy expenses and she loses my dad's pension and her health benefits. What happens to my brother when his factory goes under and he is left with three kids and a wife to support?
Is anyone else literally sick to their stomach about all of this? I feel like I could just hurl and then I turn TV on and see all these crooks and I just want to scream. I've tried to stay positive and I've tried to give Obama the benefit of the doubt but his pal Bill Clinton is the one who started the housing crisis by forcing bad loans to be given and Obama has done nothing but surround himself with Clintons and I just can't shake the feeling that we won't rebound from this......at least not for a very very long time.
Dems to focus on middle class..sm
Pelosi, Hoyer Say Their Focus Will Be on Helping Middle Class
Monday, November 20, 2006
Associated Press
WASHINGTON House Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi said Monday her new Democratic majority will extend a hand to Republicans in moving the agenda of relieving the middle-class squeeze. She said restoring the military draft will not be part of that agenda when Democrats take over the House in January.
Pelosi, following a strategy meeting with the next House majority leader, Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said she will meet with incoming House Minority Leader John Boehner and we'll find our common ground for the American people.
The principle of civility and respect for minority participation in this House is something we promised the American people. It's the right thing to do, she said.
Pelosi and Hoyer repeated that in the first 100 legislative hours of the new Congress that convenes in January, they will try to pass bills that directly affect the pocketbooks of working-class and middle-class people, including raising the minimum wage, cutting interest rates for student loans and allowing the Medicare program to negotiate lower drug prices.
Other top priorities for January are lobbying reform, implementing the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission and rolling back subsidies to the oil industry.
Pelosi said restoring the draft will not be on that list and was not something she supported.
The speaker and I discussed scheduling and it did not include that, Hoyer added.
Incoming Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charlie Rangel, D-N.Y., caused a stir by repeating a long-held position that a draft is the best way to ensure that all levels of society are represented in the military. Besides Rangel, there is almost no support in Congress for restoring the draft.
It's not about a draft, it's about shared sacrifice in this country, Pelosi said. She said Rangel is a strong voice for social justice in our country and his support for the draft was a way to make a point.
And do you know why the cost of living for the middle class has gone down...?
because we are being taxed to death. The amount of our income off the top for taxes has increased over all those years. More programs to help the "poor," some of which have moved people from what used to be middle class to the "poor class" to get on some of those social programs...which is never a good thing...and meanwhile the working middle class continues to get the tax shaft. Yeah, we are being had...by those who want to spend, tax, spend, tax, spend....
Obama's tax cut plan for middle class
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/#tax-relief
Provide Middle Class Americans Tax Relief
Obama will cut income taxes by $1,000 for working families to offset the payroll tax they pay.
Provide a Tax Cut for Working Families: Obama will restore fairness to the tax code and provide 150 million workers the tax relief they need. Obama will create a new "Making Work Pay" tax credit of up to $500 per person, or $1,000 per working family. The "Making Work Pay" tax credit will completely eliminate income taxes for 10 million Americans.
Eliminate Income Taxes for Seniors Making Less than $50,000: Barack Obama will eliminate all income taxation of seniors making less than $50,000 per year. This proposal will eliminate income taxes for 7 million seniors and provide these seniors with an average savings of $1,400 each year. Under the Obama plan, 27 million American seniors will also not need to file an income tax return.
Simplify Tax Filings for Middle Class Americans: Obama will dramatically simplify tax filings so that millions of Americans will be able to do their taxes in less than five minutes. Obama will ensure that the IRS uses the information it already gets from banks and employers to give taxpayers the option of pre-filled tax forms to verify, sign and return. Experts estimate that the Obama proposal will save Americans up to 200 million total hours of work and aggravation and up to $2 billion in tax preparer fees.
Well I guess the middle class who can't scrape
enough together to feed their kids, or pay their bills don't really have a good sense of humor right now - imagine that.
IMO it was just another insensitive remark he has made, trying to be the comedian.
He plans to give the middle class (that would be US)
Don't know about you, but I just can't pay any more taxes without going under financially. (Unless someone invents a vaccine that makes it possible to survive without having to EAT.)
Big corporations (I'm not talking about SMALL businesses, here... I said 'BIG'), aren't paying their fair share & pulling their weight tax-wise. Compounding that is the fact that they currently are actually getting incentives for sending work offshore. Why else do you think the LARGEST MT companies are the ones that offshore? In addition to paying p1ss-ant wages to us peons, they're getting financial incentives to do so.
There are also too many loopholes in labor laws that the big co's have going for them. How else would it be possible to tell a U.S. MT that they cannot work overtime, yet that MT has to work 2-6 hrs. over OT per DAY, just to make the 'minimum' line count and keep her health insurance. All withOUT getting paid for said overtime.
With McCain in office, there is little hope that any of that will improve. The fact that Obama is from a younger generation, with newer ideas, at least gives me a glimmer of HOPE, and right now hope means a lot to me, and alot of other people in the US. Will he get some things wrong? Undoubtedly. No one has ever had a 'perfect Presidency'. But will he get some things RIGHT? Absolutely. He will base a lot of his military decisions on TODAY's world situation, not the one that existed in 1942, or 1969.
I don't agree with EVERYthing Obama says (but then again, I never agree with everything ANYone says.) But I think that for this particular time in our country's and the world's history, we stand a better chance of improving the way things are with some new blood in the White House, NOT the same-ol', same-ol'.
Why wasn't he worried about us in the middle class...
when first McCain and then the Bush admin warned about fannie/freddie and that they needed to be reeled in? Where was all that concern for us then, when it realy mattered??
I hope you are right, that someone is standing up for the middle class (sm)
But I think what is more likely to happen is that we will ALL be taxed more and we will ALL have less money and it will be spread throughout the world. What you see as wealth and middle class will no longer be the same. Wealth will be being able to afford to feed your family. The jobs will go overseas alright, even more so than they are now. I wish I believed that you are right. That would be great! Unfortunately, I think it is a dream, far from the reality of the nightmare that is coming.
Just proof that Obama really isn't out for the middle class.
He just wants our vote and he figured this would be the way to get it. To promise to not tax us middle class folks. I don't believe he intends to keep his promise. He may at first but the bottom line is that all the government spending of his and the 3 trillion dollars he plans to spend....where he is going to get that money? He is going to get it from us and that includes the middle class.
All the companies who get tax hikes will pass that tax onto us as well by jacking up prices of products and services so we the consumers pay for that tax hike. Then Obama will have to raise taxes on the middle class as well to cover his government spending. It is common sense people. Look at his record. He has consistently wanted to raise taxes and that includes on us middle class folks he is all of sudden so interested in helping out since he is up for election. Give me a break. I see through the lies and false promises. That isn't change. That is Washington elitists at their norm.
I see the new middle class has dropped from 250,000 to 120,000 and could be lower.
Very, very contradicting to me. Obama changing a lot of what he said lately and it gets worse. He wants us to vote early and take off from work Nov. 4th to help him win. Fox news also reports Obama and his campaign lays out plans to kill expectations after win because of concerns that many supporters are now harboring unrealistic hopes of what can be achieved. What the heck? Now he says, "it will be hard to achieve goals and will take time." He says one thing and then says another. I want to know where these unauthorized credit cards came from for his campaign. I want to see his birth certificate that he cannot cough up and there is a petition out and he is under investigation if he was truly born in the good ole USA. Call your State Department and they will tell you there is an investigation and they trying to get this resolved before Nov. 4th. So much uncertainty. Hope I do not offend anyone, but just like a bumper sticker I read
I'll keep my God, my freedom, my guns, and my money, you can keep THE CHANGE. VOTE FOR MCCAIN/PALIN.
Not super rich, am middle class, but i am not a ...
Marxist socialist. That kind of stomping on I can do without. I may have to live through it, but I am not handing him the ball bat to hit me over the head with.
What tax cuts is Barack going to give middle class?
facts to back it up. We are most definitely middle class and in the last 4 years, I made more money as an IC but didn't have to pay in at year end, for the first time in YEARS. We also got a higher child credit, etc. Or maybe I should ask what you consider middle class, but I am quite sure my measly salary doesn't qualify as anything but and I sure as heck am not in the upper 10%. The proof is in the pudding for me, and not having to pay taxes when I always had before, despite having made more money as an IC, is tasty pudding to me. I can't complain on that particular point.
I've compared both Obama's and McCain's tax proposals, and I sure didn't see a lot of give for middle class in either so apparently you are privy to some information that I am not. Can you show me where I can find that? IMO, they are both ignoring the middle class and the middle class is most of America.
I am middle class, but I dont "buy" Obama's
nm
Actually, the black middle class is the fasted growing population, but
x
working poor and middle class need defending not rich
Believe me, the rich do not need to be defended. They are getting along just fine and can pay for the best defense in the world. Debating about how the rich should have their money, on and on..if anyone needs defending, it is the working poor and the middle class whose salary for the past five years has gone down, not increased.
I didn't realize middle class meant uneducated......
xx
So, rich tax cuts expire, middle class gets benefit,
will undermine, erode and ultimately vaporize capitalist money/greed ambition and incentive to produce, but keep minimum wage workers at sub-living-wage levels and expect them to have exhibit impeccible work ethic and slave away 24/7 with no complaints? I think I got it now.
Also, because we are white middle class and have a house, we are putting kids through college, ever
nm
Her point is that Obama voted repeatedly against tax breaks for the middle class and suddenly he'
the middle class person's best friend! Funny how now he wants to help us, when each time he had the opportunity to, he voted against it.
is the the starting point or the end point for the middle class?
x
Walking the walk
So do you condemn the people who have blown up abortion clinics and killed the OB/GYN physicians who perform abortions?
No, they live in the US, and the US backs Israel.nm
z
Hawaii backs Martin
The state of Hawaii has backed Andy Martin. CNN, Factcheck.org and Obama campaign exposed as liars.
http://contrariancommentary.blogspot.com/
Barry is lying to the people and they don't care. They don't care that the constitution is not being followed.
Whether Barry wins or not I believe Hillary should file lawsuit to sue him and the DNC chair for covering it up.
Hawaii backs Martin? What does that mean? nm
.
I remember my mother walking in the pouring rain
vote for JFK. Ended up that the election was very close, and she was so happy she decided to brave the rain to vote. I feel the same way this election. It is so important, the most important election EVER. Y'all get out to vote!! No matter what; rain, hail, sleet, snow, hurricane, avalanche, VOTE!
WaMu Exec walking away with a cool $11.6 Million? plus
$7.5 million in (something else). He was top exec for 3 weeks!
I just caught the tail end of this info on Oprah and have been looking for verification of this. Haven't found it yet. They might keep this under wraps since the bail out still hasn't happened yet.
I'm curious if this is true and if it is.....
It appears to me that the governors are just walking in lockstep to politics......
It's all about politics - screw the people! Pretty sad when a political party wants to see our country fail......
Majority backs GIs, not Iraq War...see link
Interesting poll, allbeit before the death of Zarqawi and approval of ministers of the police and army.
Greenspan Backs Bank Nationalization
Wednesday 18 February 2009
by: Krishna Guha and Edward Luce, The Financial Times
Former Chairman of the Federal Reserve Alan Greenspan has come out in favor of nationalizing some banks. (Photo: Reuters Pictures)
The US government may have to nationalise some banks on a temporary basis to fix the financial system and restore the flow of credit, Alan Greenspan, the former Federal Reserve chairman, has told the Financial Times.
In an interview, Mr Greenspan, who for decades was regarded as the high priest of laisser-faire capitalism, said nationalisation could be the least bad option left for policymakers.
"It may be necessary to temporarily nationalise some banks in order to facilitate a swift and orderly restructuring," he said. "I understand that once in a hundred years this is what you do."
Mr Greenspan's comments capped a frenetic day in which policymakers across the political spectrum appeared to be moving towards accepting some form of bank nationalisation.
"We should be focusing on what works," Lindsey Graham, a Republican senator from South Carolina, told the FT. "We cannot keep pouring good money after bad." He added, "If nationalisation is what works, then we should do it."
Speaking to the FT ahead of a speech to the Economic Club of New York on Tuesday, Mr Greenspan said that "in some cases, the least bad solution is for the government to take temporary control" of troubled banks either through the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or some other mechanism.
The former Fed chairman said temporary government ownership would "allow the government to transfer toxic assets to a bad bank without the problem of how to price them."
But he cautioned that holders of senior debt - bonds that would be paid off before other claims - might have to be protected even in the event of nationalisation.
"You would have to be very careful about imposing any loss on senior creditors of any bank taken under government control because it could impact the senior debt of all other banks," he said. "This is a credit crisis and it is essential to preserve an anchor for the financing of the system. That anchor is the senior debt."
Mr Greenspan's comments came as President Barack Obama signed into law the $787bn fiscal stimulus in Denver, Colorado. Mr Obama will announce on Wednesday a $50bn programme for home foreclosure relief in Phoenix, Arizona. Meanwhile, the White House was working last night on the latest phase of the bailout for two of the big three US carmakers.
In his speech after signing the stimulus, which he called the "most sweeping recovery package in our history", Mr Obama set out a vertiginous timetable of federal decisions in the coming weeks that included fixing the US banking system, submission next week of the 2009 budget and a bipartisan White House meeting to address longer-term fiscal discipline.
"We need to end a culture where we ignore problems until they become full-blown crises," said Mr Obama. "Today does not mark the end of our economic troubles
but it does mark the beginning of the end."
um...you're thinking of Bill and Hill, walking out of the white house with everything
That was a fact, overlooked by most libs.
Bush's Own Panel Backs Data on Global Warming
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-sci-warming23jun23,1,200411.story?coll=la-headlines-frontpage&track=crosspromo
U.S. Panel Backs Data on Global Warming
Growing Washington acceptance of climate change is seen in the top science body's finding.
By Thomas H. Maugh II and Karen Kaplan
Times Staff Writers
June 23, 2006
After a comprehensive review of climate change data, the nation's preeminent scientific body found that average temperatures on Earth had risen by about 1 degree over the last century, a development that is unprecedented for the last 400 years and potentially the last several millennia.
The report from the National Research Council also concluded that human activities are responsible for much of the recent warming.
Coupled with a report last month from the Bush administration's Climate Change Science Program that found clear evidence of human influences on the climate system, the new study from the council, part of the National Academy of Sciences, signals a growing acceptance in Washington of widely held scientific views on the causes of global warming.
The council's review focused on the controversial hockey stick graph, which shows Earth's temperature remaining stable for 900 years then suddenly arching upward in the last century. The curve resembles a hockey stick laid on its side.
The panel dismissed critics' charges that fraud and statistical error were responsible for the graph's sharp upward swing, noting that many studies had confirmed its essential conclusions in the eight years since it was first published in the journal Nature.
There is nothing in this report that should raise any doubts about the broad scientific consensus on global climate change
or any doubts about whether any paper on the temperature records was legitimate scientific work, said House Science Committee Chairman Sherwood Boehlert (R-N.Y.), who requested the study in November.
The finding was a rebuke to global warming skeptics and some conservative politicians who have attacked the hockey stick as the work of overzealous scientists determined to shame the government into imposing environmental regulations on big business.
Geophysicist Michael E. Mann of Pennsylvania State University, lead author of the study that debuted the graph, said it was time to put this sometimes silly debate behind us and move forward, to do what we need to do to decrease the remaining uncertainties.
Though scientists have cited various factors as evidence of global warming including the melting of polar ice caps and measurements of atmospheric carbon dioxide the hockey stick encapsulated the issue in an instantly recognizable way.
It's a pretty profound, easy-to-understand graph, said Roger A. Pielke Jr., director of the University of Colorado's Center for Science and Technology Policy Research. Visually, it's very compelling.
The chart drew little attention until it was highlighted in a 2001 report by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
After that, the hockey stick was everywhere, Pielke said.
It also became an easy target.
If you are someone who's interested in critiquing climate science, he said, the hockey stick would be a lightning rod.
One prominent attack came from the House Energy and Commerce Committee chairman, Rep. Joe L. Barton (R-Texas), who last year launched an investigation of Mann and his colleagues. Barton demanded information about their data and funding sources an effort widely viewed as an attempt to intimidate the scientists.
Barton's committee has launched an inquiry into the statistical validity of the hockey stick. Larry Neal, the committee's deputy staff director, criticized the National Research Council panel Thursday for having only one statistician among its 12 members.
The crux of the dispute is that thermometers have been used for only 150 years. To determine temperatures before that, scientists rely on indirect measurements, or proxies, such as tree ring data, cores from boreholes in ice, glacier movements, cave deposits, lake sediments, diaries and paintings.
Mann and his collaborators tried to integrate data from many such sources to produce climate records for the last 1,000 years. Their report was filled with caveats and warnings about the uncertainties of their conclusions caveats that were overlooked as the research achieved more celebrity.
The panel affirmed that proxy measurements made over the last 150 years correlated well with actual measurements during that period, lending credence to the proxy data for earlier times.
It concluded that, with a high level of confidence, global temperatures during the last century were higher than at any time since 1600.
Although the report did not place numerical values on that confidence level, committee member and statistician Peter Bloomfield of North Carolina State University said the panel was about 95% sure of the conclusion.
The committee supported Mann's other conclusions, but said they were not as definitive. For example, the report said the panel was less confident that the 20th century was the warmest century since 1000, largely because of the scarcity of data from before 1600.
Bloomfield said the committee was about 67% confident of the validity of that finding the same degree of confidence Mann and his colleagues had placed in their initial report.
Panel members said Mann's conclusion that the 1990s were the warmest decade since 1000 and that 1998 was the warmest year had the least data to support it.
The use of proxies, they said, does not readily allow conclusions based on such narrow time intervals.
The report said that establishing average temperatures before 1000 was difficult because of the lack of data, but said the trend appeared to indicate that stable temperatures could extend back several thousand years.
Senator Frist Now Backs Funcing for Stem Cell Research
Finally! A neocon wants to save life AFTER it's born, too!
July 29, 2005
Veering From Bush, Frist Backs Funding for Stem Cell Research
WASHINGTON, July 29 - In a break with President Bush, the Senate Republican leader, Bill Frist, has decided to support a bill to expand federal financing for embryonic stem cell research, a move that could push it closer to passage and force a confrontation with the White House, which is threatening to veto the measure.
Mr. Frist, a heart-lung transplant surgeon who said last month that he did not back expanding financing " P nonetheless.< bill the supports he work, for financing taxpayer on limits strict placed which policy, four-year-old Bush?s Mr. altering about reservations had while that said He speech. Senate lengthy a in morning this decision his announced juncture,? at>
"While human embryonic stem cell research is still at a very early stage, the limitations put in place in 2001 will, over time, slow our ability to bring potential new treatments for certain diseases," Mr. Frist said. "Therefore, I believe the president's policy should be modified."
His speech received the approval of Democrats as well as Republicans.
"I admire the majority leader for doing this," Senator Harry Reid, the minority leader and Democrat of Nevada, said immediately after the speech. He and Senator Dick Durbin, Democrat of Illinois, said Mr. Frist's stance would give hope to people everywhere.
Senator Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania, contending they were discussing "the difference between life and death," said of Mr. Frist, "I believe the speech that he has just made on the Senate floor is the most important speech made this year, and perhaps the most important speech made in years."
He added: "This is a speech that will reverberate around the world, including at the White House."
Scott McClellan, Mr. Bush's chief spokesman, said Mr. Frist had told Mr. Bush in advance notice of his planned announcement. "The president said, "You've got to vote your conscience," Mr. McClellan said, according to The Associated Press.
"The president's made his position clear," Mr. McClellan said when asked if Mr. Bush would veto a pending bill that would liberalize federal support for stem cell research, The A.P. reported. "There is a principle involved here from the president's standpoint when it comes to issues of life."
Mr. Frist's move will undoubtedly change the political landscape in the debate over embryonic stem cell research, one of the thorniest moral issues to come before Congress. The chief House sponsor of the bill, Representative Michael N. Castle, Republican of Delaware, said, "His support is of huge significance."
The stem cell bill has passed the House but is stalled in the Senate, where competing measures are also under consideration. Because Mr. Frist's colleagues look to him for advice on medical matters, his support for the bill could break the Senate logjam. It could also give undecided Republicans political license to back the legislation, which is already close to having the votes it needs to pass the Senate.
The move could also have implications for Mr. Frist's political future. The senator is widely considered a potential candidate for the presidency in 2008, and supporting an expansion of the policy will put him at odds not only with the White House but also with Christian conservatives, whose support he will need in the race for the Republican nomination. But the decision could also help him win support among centrists.
"I am pro-life," Mr. Frist said in the speech, arguing that he could reconcile his support for the science with his own Christian faith. "I believe human life begins at conception."
But at the same time, he said, "I also believe that embryonic stem cell research should be encouraged and supported."
Tony Perkins, the president of the Family Research Council, a conservative Christian group, said today in a statement that Senator Frist's decision was "very disappointing but not a surprise," given the senator's previous testimonies advocating stem cell research.
"As a heart surgeon who knows that adult stem cells are already making huge progress in treating heart disease in humans, it is unfortunate that Sen. Frist would capitulate to the biotech industry," Mr. Perkins said. "Thankfully, the White House has forcefully promised to hold the ethical line and veto any legislation that would expand the president's current policy."
Rev. Patrick J. Mahoney, director of the Christian Defense Coalition, also objected to Mr. Frist's decision and alluded to its political impact. "Senator Frist cannot have it both ways," he said, according to The A.P. "He cannot be pro-life and pro-embryonic stem cell funding. Nor can he turn around and expect widespread endorsement from the pro-life community if he should decide to run for president in 2008."
Backers of the research were elated. "This is critically important," said Larry Soler, a lobbyist for the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation. "The Senate majority leader, who is also a physician, is confirming the real potential of embryonic stem cell research and the need to expand the policy."
Mr. Frist, who was instrumental in persuading President Bush to open the door to the research four years ago, has been under pressure from all sides of the stem cell debate. Some of his fellow Senate Republicans, including Orrin G. Hatch of Utah and Mr. Specter, who is the lead Senate sponsor of the House bill, have been pressing him to bring up the measure for consideration.
"I know how he has wrestled with this issue and how conscientious he is in his judgment," Mr. Specter said today. "His comments will reverberate far and wide."
But with President Bush vowing to veto it - it would be his first veto - other Republicans have been pushing alternatives that could peel support away from the House bill.
Last week Mr. Castle accused the White House and Mr. Frist of "doing everything in their power to deflect votes away from" the bill. On Thursday night, Mr. Castle said he had written a letter to Mr. Frist just that morning urging him to support the measure. "His support of this makes it the dominant bill," he said.
Despite Mr. Frist's speech, a vote on the bill is not likely to occur before September because the Congress is scheduled to adjourn this weekend for the August recess.
With proponents of the various alternatives unable to agree on when and how to bring them up for consideration, Mr. Frist says he will continue to work to bring up all the bills, so that senators can have a "serious and thoughtful debate."
Human embryonic stem cells are considered by scientists to be the building blocks of a new field of regenerative medicine. The cells, extracted from human embryos, have the potential to grow into any type of tissue in the body, and advocates for patients believe they hold the potential for treatments and cures for a range of diseases, from juvenile diabetes to Alzheimer's disease.
"Embryonic stem cells uniquely hold some promise for specific cures that adult stem cells just cannot provide," Mr. Frist said.
But the cells cannot be obtained without destroying human embryos, which opponents of the research say is tantamount to murder. "An embryo is nascent human life," Mr. Frist said in his speech, adding: "This position is consistent with my faith. But, to me, it isn't just a matter of faith. It's a fact of science."
On Aug. 9, 2001, in the first prime-time speech of his presidency, Mr. Bush struck a compromise: he said the government would pay only for research on stem cell colonies, or lines, created by that date, so that the work would involve only those embryos "where the life or death decision has already been made."
The House-passed bill would expand that policy by allowing research on stem cell lines extracted from frozen embryos, left over from fertility treatments, that would otherwise be discarded. Mr. Castle has said he believes the bill meets the president's guidelines because the couples creating the embryos have made the decision to destroy them.
In his speech, Mr. Frist seemed to adopt that line of reasoning, harking back to a set of principles he articulated in July 2001, before the president made his announcement, in which he proposed restricting the number of stem cell lines without a specific cutoff date. At the time, he said the government should pay for research only on those embryos "that would otherwise be discarded" and today he similarly supported studying only those "destined, with 100 percent certainty, to be destroyed."
Moreover, he said, "Such funding should be provided only within a comprehensive system of federal oversight."
After Mr. Bush made his 2001 announcement, it was believed that as many as 78 lines would be eligible for federal money. "That has proven not to be the case," Mr. Frist said. "Today, only 22 lines are eligible."
But, Mr. Frist says the Castle bill has shortcomings. He says it "lacks a strong ethical and scientific oversight mechanism," does not prohibit financial incentives between fertility clinics and patients, and does not specify whether the patients or the clinic staff have a say over whether embryos are discarded. He also says the bill "would constrain the ability of policy makers to make adjustments in the future."
Mr. Frist also says he supports some of the alternative measures, including bills that would promote research on so-called adult stem cells and research into unproven methods of extracting stem cells without destroying human embryos.
"Cure today may be just a theory, a hope, a dream," he said in conclusion today. "But the promise is powerful enough that I believe this research deserves our increased energy and focus. Embryonic stem cell research must be supported. It's time for a modified policy - the right policy for this moment in time."
Jennifer Bayot and Shadi Rahimi contributed reporting for this article from New York.
This happened while walking door to door
His true colors are coming through bright and clear. "Spread the wealth" came out of his own lips. He didn't even need an advisor for this one. Yea, he is going back to redo his economic plan which means all those who like being led by a nose ring and singing the praises of Obama's economic plan will now have to watch for a new and NOT improved plan. Same old, same old. Only the next one will be bigger taxes, more programs, more freebies and their little paychecks will be getting even smaller.
I took a class
I took the NRA class, but I haven't gotten up the nerve to buy the gun.
Still low class
But would expect nothing less.
Welcome to the Class War,
Companies that take advantage of the provisions of the tax laws are not "tax cheats", by the way. A very prominent Supreme Court justice once said that no one is obliged to pay one penny more in taxes than the law requires.
Sorry, he has no class
Sorry, he has no class and neither does she. They are a couple of scam artists. They got where they got by scamming people into believing something that is not true. And race had a big play in it. People felt threatened...remember the panthers standing in front of the voting areas with clubs, and remember when people said they didn't like his policy about this, or his plan about that and they were shouted back with "your a racist". Then there was the oh so lovely (NOT) Garafool gal that when people were trying to stand up at the tea parties because we were tired of being taxed to death she called them all racists. There was just so much wrong with what has happened. However, back to the point - he has no class. He's a smooth talker and struts across the stage. Sure he may move gracefully and has a pleasant speaking voice, but I don't equate that with having class.
I know about his history, how he was raised, where he has been, his associations, how he got as far as he has today, and what he plans to do to our country. It's all been one huge scam and we the people have been duped.
Compared to the last president...sure he has class, but taken on an individual basis he has no class, and if I see that evil creepy grin he has one more time I feel like I will just throw up.
yea? well someone w/middle name Hussein
I'm not voting for Hillary but....
know that it scares the heck outta me and others, Obama.......his middle name is hussein.....
one of the bibles say something to the effect of when the *stuff* happens (the bad stuff) - it's going to happen from the *inside out* -
but glad you are ALL so trusting.......i trust nobody 100%.
i cannot stand ALL of these candidates this time around......
JMHO - no flames please
You have a problem with his middle name?
__
Yes he did in the middle of the night
:{
Beacuse of his middle name?...sm
My middle name is Ellen. Does that make me a lesbian?
Exactly! I love that he's using his middle name...
...and throwing all that fear and hatred right back in their faces!
|
