Morning Must Reads: Bees

  • Share
  • Read Later
436 comments
kumaran
kumaran

my neighbor's mother-in-law got paid $18513 past month. she is making money on the computer and moved in a $522200 home. All she did was get fortunate and work up the advice explained on this site 

http://www.lazycash49.com

LiberalLies2012
LiberalLies2012

"Look up the white supremacy movement Rod. They're closer to the kind of half baked birtherism you spew then liberalism."

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

White supremacists are not only racists (real racists), but also they are anarchists as well.  The nut job who killed 6 Sihks this past weekend, who are some of the most peaceful people on the earth was totally uncalled for.  Most likely the killer thought they were Muslim, when that is not the case.

Most of the hate spewed was from our left leaning friends here in the Swamp starting off with this good one from filmnoia:

"  With all the guns and right wing anger around it's amazing that we don't have these events on a weekly basis.Right wingers are more prone to 2nd amendment solutions."Read more: http://swampland.time.com/2012...

Followed up quickly by 53underscore3 with

"I think that's something worth saying again, filmnoia.  I don't know how many attempts on Obama's life there have been but HSA report doesn't scratch the surface, as "controversial" as it was.

I have a feeling that there have been far more attempts on Obama and government agencies during his time as POTUS than there ever was before, which, if true, would attest to the spectacular success the internal security agencies are having in dealing with it"

Read more: http://swampland.time.com/2012...

Another goodie from our friend filmnoia:

"It's coming out now  from multiple sources that the guy that shoot up the Sikh temple has been involved in the white supremacist movement since at least 2000. The resident right wing posters here who have vilified Obama for the last 4 years for his "otherness" must have a tingle of excitement going up their legs this morning. One of their boys have made the big time. There are tens of thousands of these cretinous powderkegs walking around."

Read more: http://swampland.time.com/2012...

Another rant by fhmadvocat:

As a Liberal, I don't take any joy out of any massive killing.  However, for the Muslim community, it must be a relief to find out the killer was not a Muslim terrorist.  It is all about protection.  Believe it or not African Americans are relieved when they hear a killer is a White person, because when an African Americans committed a crime, the whole community was attacked for the actions of one individual.  In fact the massive murder of the Sikhs is a White guy's revenge against Muslim terrorists, even though Sikhs are not Muslims.  That hasn't prevented attacks on Sikhs since 9/11.

As a White male, no one holds you personally accountable for the actions of other White males.  However, if you are a minority, like an African American, or if you are a Muslim, you are held accountable for the actions within your "community".

The fact that the killer was a White guy, just means the Muslim community can breathe a sigh of relief they are will not be blamed for every act of domestic terrorism in this country.

Read more: http://swampland.time.com/2012...

Followed quickly by filmnoia with another quip:

"I guess it's really tough for you wingnuts to admit that a far right racist  US based terrorist, the rightist killer up in Norway, and a Muslim terrorist in another country are brothers under the skin. Right wing fundamentalist extremist thought is deadly. Is today the day that your kind stops with the  Obama is a Kenyan Marxist (or is it Socialist today) birtherist venom? I doubt whether you have it in you."

Read more: http://swampland.time.com/2012...

And the suggestion from 53underscore3 that one of our fellow swampers is basically "just like the killer":

"The difference is that if he's for what 3x agrees with, it's ok to kill.Which says more about 3x than it does the terrorists."

Read more: http://swampland.time.com/2012...

And, it keeps going on and on without fail.  Those on the left from the swamp trying hard to connect this insane individual with conservatives, especially conservatives here in the swamp.  When in fact the killer was closely related to anarchy through a white supremacist group, the same group of people who for the past year have delivered violence in our streets and called for the over throw of our government.  

The only thing they haven't said yet is the guy was connected to the Tea Party, but I suspect this is yet to come.  

Good job my lib loony nut jobs, you are only one brain cell away from this ruthless killer.  

UPDATE:

kbanginmotown says:

"Are these the"2nd Amendment solutions" that the Tea Party was advocating a couple of years ago?"

Read more: http://swampland.time.com/2012...

We do have our Tea Party connection. Thank you so much kbanginmotown for proving my point.

brooklin352
brooklin352

my

classmate's aunt makes $61/hour on the internet. She has been out of a

job for five months but last month her check was $20573 just working on

the internet for a few hours. Read more on this web site

http://LazyCash49.com

brooklin352
brooklin352

my

co-worker's mom makes $68 hourly on the internet. She has been laid off

for five months but last month her payment was $14957 just working on

the internet for a few hours. Here's the site to read more

http://LazyCash49.com

MomentoMori
MomentoMori

It's important not to politicize a tragedy. Oh, really?

paulie: "How do you know that the shooter is not a homosexual?"

Lliar: "But, it is still very early yet, I will not go so far as to connect him with Barry Obama, not yet."

3x: "1 white terrorist extremist to 100 Muslim trrorist extremist"

Great job, guys. Way to stay classy.

apr2563
apr2563

https://twitter.com/JCTRambler

I'm sure the private sector could have won World War II if they wanted to.

I'm sure the private sector could have landed a 2,000 pound SUV on Mars if they wanted to. But they didn't want to.

apr2563
apr2563

The bill for establishing religious freedom. I had drawn in all the latitude of reason and right. It still met with opposition; but with some mutilations in the preamble, it was finally passed; and a singular proposition proved that its protection of opinion was meant to be universal,” wrote Jefferson. “Where the preamble declares that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed, by inserting the word ‘Jesus Christ,’ so that it should read ‘a departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion.’ The insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo, and infidel of every denomination.”

Thomas Jefferson

apr2563
apr2563

http://www.politicususa.com/si...

Sikh Temple Shooting Reveals the Devastating Results of Hate Mongering

 Using fear-mongering to achieve an effect is a favorite tactic of Republicans...

 The opposition to an Islamic community center near Ground Zero was a result of conservative propaganda that had no basis in fact...

Wisconsin is home to an ongoing movement to block construction of a mosque in Brookfield, because of community fears of Sharia Law being implemented and spreading throughout the region. In fact, across America there is case after case of Republicans warning that Sharia, or Islamic law, poses a threat to the United States... sharp increase in the number of conservative Republicans who are certain President Obama is a Muslim, and it is due in no small part to the escalation of lies from right-wing talking heads. Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, and the Fox News crowd...

Troubador222
Troubador222

I have tons of work, so i do not get to come in here like I used too, but any regs, can you fill me in on how the resident TPer's are justifying the massacre yesterday of Sikh American Citizens?  Because i am sure they will, complete with quoting Rush on how it makes them all victims.

filmnoia
filmnoia

Willard's campaign is out with another deceptively edited ad about Obama's "you didn't build that" comment. They got some poor mope locksmith in San Antonio to cut an ad for them. The sap's business is now going to be tarred with the same lying cynical meme of Willard's campaign. The guy needs people to show him how he is being used-Quality Security Products 210- 320-1979

outsider2011
outsider2011

Ask again why having hateful, backwards, prejudiced outlooks is wrong:

The shooting at a Sikh Temple in Oak Creek, Wisconsin is the day’s

worst example of hateful violence — but it is not, sadly, the only one.

Early Monday morning, someone set fire to the Islamic Society of Joplin

during Islam’s holy month of Ramadan. The mosque couldn’t be saved, so

now there are 50 Muslim families in Joplin, Missouri — the same town

devastated by a tornado last May — without a place to worship.

The

destruction follows earlier fires, including one on July 4, when

someone threw a flaming object onto the mosque’s roof. If it was an

attempt at arson, it wasn’t a very good one. There wasn’t much damage,

though the miscreant managed to be captured in a security video, and the

FBI offered a reward for information on the arson.

Oddly, despite

the video evidence and reward, there was never an arrest. Muslims in

Joplin probably weren’t surprised: When they opened their mosque and

community center in 2007, their sign was torched. That crime, too,

remains unsolved.

That’s a lot of open cases in a town as small as

Joplin. I do not believe the arsonist acted alone, or in a vacuum. The

perpetrator has bragged somewhere, in a bar, at work, at – yes! —

church. And while Joplin residents would do well to hold a vigil and

take up a collection to help their Muslim neighbors rebuild, the best

thing would be to turn this yahoo in.

I am from Joplin, and so I

believe in the goodness of people who live there. Last May after a

tornado blew a third of Joplin to thunder, people fell all over

themselves to come do something – anything – for that broken town. It

wasn’t just ex-­pats like me, but people with no connection – none – who

came to Joplin with shovels, water bottles and recipes for pulled pork.

It hurt to be from Joplin, because you couldn’t read the obituaries

without feeling a knot unravel. I remember mostly Johnnie Ray Richey. We

used to race one another on the playground. He was a sweetheart, and he

died trying to save someone at the local Elks Club.

Maybe

it’s a hillbilly thing, those knots. We are fiercely private and

fiercely independent, and yet the tornado forced on us the goodwill of

people we’d never met, and gave us connections we never thought we’d

have. We found ourselves standing next to people with whom we never

thought we’d share a rope. Because we’re from Joplin, as President Obama

said at this year’s high school graduation, we know what it’s like to

see the goodness of people – all of them, and not just ones who look,

smell and sound like us.Which makes the most recent news out of

Joplin that much more unbearable — but not insurmountable. The good that

flowed into Joplin after the tornado is still there. Someone needs to

tap into that good, step up and turn this perpetrator in.http://www.salon.com/2012/08/06/mosqu...

outsider2011
outsider2011

 

The GOP’s favorite government jobs

Republicans have no problem with shrinking

government, as long as defense contractors don't feel the axe.

Politico’s Austin Wright has a crazy little story

about a spat between Congressional Republicans and the Labor Department

that hinges on the possibility of mass defense contractor layoffs.

The

fight is over whether defense contractors are required to send out

notices warning their workers of layoffs that would kick in as a result

of the large defense spending cuts due January 1 — a.k.a

,”sequestration.”

Republicans say yes, citing the WARN

Act, which requires large employers to give 60 days notice of possible

layoffs. The GOP has been chortling in glee at the prospect of such

notices going out to every single employee of the largest defense

contractors, because the 60-day countdown just happens to arrive four

days before Election Day. Because, you know, layoffs are bad, even if

they mean Big Government is shrinking.

But the Labor Department says no! Labor’s main argument is based on the reasoning that sequestration is not inevitable

— Democrats and Republicans still have time to come to a budget deal

that would avoid sharp defense cuts. (Indeed the whole point of

sequestration was that the prospect of such cuts was supposedly so

drastic that it would force a compromise.).

According

to Politico’s Wright, Congressional Republicans consider the Labor

Department’s decision a “political stunt.” That accusation has a high

likelihood of being true, but it seems just a little bit hypocritical

coming from Republicans who are hoping that layoff notices timed to be

delivered just before Election Day will help their own electoral

chances.And that’s hardly the tip of the hypocrisy iceberg.

Buried beneath the surface of this latest example of Washington

dysfunction is a basic truth: Government budget cuts result in layoffs.

That’s not good during a period of very slow economic growth. And yet,

Republicans seem to have little problem when the newly unemployed are

teachers or firefighters. But when defense’s ox is getting gored, then

it becomes a big deal, and then the layoffs are presumed to be Obama’s fault and thus embarrassing to the White House.http://www.salon.com/2012/08/06/the_g...

outsider2011
outsider2011

 The three amigos of death are back with a hot new Washington Post

joint editorial, and you’ll never guess what they’re recommending this

time! (War.)

Senators John McCain (R-Ariz.), Lindsey Graham

(R-S.C.) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) are three of the most respected

foreign policy experts in all of Washington. They became three of the

most respected foreign policy experts in Washington by following a

simple, one-step plan: Always demand more war, everywhere.

This

time, they would like us to intervene in the deadly civil war raging in

Syria, where rebels are fighting the forces of brutal strongman Bashar

al-Assad. The administration is in favor of the removal of Assad, and

has offered the rebels non-military assistance, but it has been

reluctant to actually send arms or troops. McCain, Graham, and Lieberman

would obviously like to change all that. It is time for “active

involvement on the ground in Syria,” you see, and “we can and should

directly and openly provide robust assistance to the armed opposition,

including weapons, intelligence and training.” That’s well and good, but

isn’t something missing?

Ah, wait, there it is, in the second-to-last paragraph:

Second,

since the rebels have increasingly established de facto safe zones in

parts of Syria, the United States should work with our allies to

reinforce those areas, as Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton

suggested last week. This would not require any U.S. troops on the

ground but could involve limited use of our airpower and other unique

U.S. assets.

There you go. That means bombs! We definitely need bombs.

The

best part of any McCain/Lieberman/Graham editorial is when they say “we

know the risks of [MORE WAR EVERYWHERE]” and then they just never

actually say what the risks are because they don’t actually ever care

about the risks and downsides of military intervention:

We

know there are risks associated with deepening our involvement in the

profoundly complex and vicious conflict in Syria. But inaction carries

even greater risks for the United States — in lives lost, strategic

opportunities squandered and values compromised.

Maybe

you agree with the liberal interventionist case for greater U.S.

involvement in the fight, as argued by Anne-Marie Slaughter and others.

Maybe you think in the wake of the failure of Kofi Annan’s mission,

there’s a better case to be made for acting forcefully to remove Assad.

Maybe your opinion has changed as the conditions have changed, like a

responsible thinking person.But with McCain, Graham and

Lieberman, the actual facts on the ground, the details of this fight,

don’t actually matter at all, because McCain, Graham and Lieberman were

calling for bombs and arms five months ago

— before Kofi Annan’s assignment even commenced — and they’re calling

for bombs and arms now and they’ll keep calling for bombs and arms

everywhere as long as there are still newspaper editorial sections and

Sunday morning political chat shows. If they’re accidentally stumbled

upon the correct response to Syria, please stay tuned for when they turn

their attention back to Iran! (And the Washington Post editorial page,

which has never met an overseas military intervention it didn’t declare

urgent with barely concealed glee, will be happy to print whatever they

come up with.)http://www.salon.com/2012/08/0...

paulejb
paulejb

"The Obama recovery isn’t worse than just the Reagan recovery, but also worse than the Teddy Roosevelt and Grover Cleveland recoveries"

http://www.aei-ideas.org/2012/... 

The worst president ever!

paulejb
paulejb

MrObvious,

"so you say but I rember the discussion when removing the tax breaks for oil companies and how you defended them."

=================================\

Pshawww, Ob! Eliminate all tax breaks.  No tax breaks for oil, natural gas, coal, solar, wind or water and let the best source of energy win.

outsider2011
outsider2011

 

For the third straight month, Mitt Romney and the RNC have outraised

President Obama and the DNC. This time the margin is more than $25

million — $ 101.3 to $ 75 million. Last month it was about $ 35 million,

and in May it was $ 16 million. It’s starting to look like this trend

will last through the fall, and that the incumbent president will end up

with less money to spend than his challenger – especially when you

factor in the considerable advantage Republicans enjoy with super PAC money.

If

this sounds like an election-altering development, just consider that a

total of $50 million was spent last week alone by the campaigns and by

outside groups, virtually all of it in a small number of swing states.

As NBC’s First Read puts it:

“We

often struggle to find the words to describe UNBELIEVABLE amounts of

money being spent on this presidential race. But close to $50 million in

a week is absolutely stunning. It’s also unchartered territory. Are

there diminishing returns on this advertising? Do ads become less

effective? How do you break through the clutter? We just don’t know. But

here’s one thing we do know: At some point, no matter how much more

water you put on a towel, it becomes harder to make it wetter. That’s

why they call it saturation.”

It’s true, we don’t know for sure how all of this spending will affect the presidential race, but the most likely answer

is that it basically won’t – that each side will have more than enough

to saturate the airwaves and that the difference between the average

swing voter seeing 682 pro-Romney spots and only 606 pro-Obama spots

won’t translate into anything meaningful at the ballot box. Maybe a particularly craft or devastating ad

will have extra-resonance, but that’s a different matter than the basic

volume of advertising. At the presidential level, the role of money may

be an over-reported story.

This

isn’t the case down the ballot, though, as two stories today remind us.

The first comes from Missouri, with the New York Times reporting

on a flood of Republican-aligned super PAC money that is being

channeled against Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill. The GOP primary to

pick her opponent will be held tomorrow, with three Republicans vying

for the honor. As they’ve gone after each other, though, the Times

points out that pro-GOP super PACs have hit McCaskill with about $15

million of negative ads. Not surprisingly, McCaskill is probably the

most endangered Democratic Senate incumbent right now, trailing all

three Republicans in polls in a state that if friendly to the GOP but

hardly unwinnable for a Democrat (at least under normal circumstances).Then there’s Ohio, where Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown is better-positioned than McCaskill to survive. But as Newsweek’s Andrew Romano reports,

GOP aligned outside groups like the Chamber of Commerce and Karl Rove’s

Crossroads GPS have invested $ 11.5 million in attack ads against Brown.

As a result, Romano writes, “Brown’s average polling lead over his

Republican opponent, State Treasurer Josh Mandel, has been cut in half.”It’s

races like these that have the potential to be the real campaign money

stories of the year. Voters know far less about the average Senate

candidate than they do about Obama and Romney, and they follow Senate

races with much less interest than presidential contests. The same is

even more true when you get farther down the ballot to contests for the

U.S. House and state and local offices. This is where the Republican

super PAC advantage could really be felt in November, with massive

spending disparities lifting GOP candidates in races they might

otherwise lose, potentially flipping the Senate and making it impossible

for Democrats to win back control of the House.This is why I’ve been saying that

Democratic fears about Obama’s financial footing are misplaced. He can

survive in November even if he’s outspent by a significant margin. But

the same isn’t true for many Democrats running under him on the ballot.

At this point, they probably need the help more than him.

http://www.salon.com/2012/08/0...

outsider2011
outsider2011

 

A Super PAC wake-up call for Dems

Forget Romney's big fundraising haul -- look

what's happening down the ballot

For the third straight month, Mitt Romney and the RNC have outraised

President Obama and the DNC. This time the margin is more than $ 25

million — $ 101.3 to $ 75 million. Last month it was about $35 million,

and in May it was $16 million. It’s starting to look like this trend

will last through the fall, and that the incumbent president will end up

with less money to spend than his challenger – especially when you

factor in the considerable advantage Republicans enjoy with super PAC money.

If

this sounds like an election-altering development, just consider that a

total of $50 million was spent last week alone by the campaigns and by

outside groups, virtually all of it in a small number of swing states.

As NBC’s First Read puts it:

“We

often struggle to find the words to describe UNBELIEVABLE amounts of

money being spent on this presidential race. But close to $ 50 million in

a week is absolutely stunning. It’s also unchartered territory. Are

there diminishing returns on this advertising? Do ads become less

effective? How do you break through the clutter? We just don’t know. But

here’s one thing we do know: At some point, no matter how much more

water you put on a towel, it becomes harder to make it wetter. That’s

why they call it saturation.”

It’s true, we don’t know for sure how all of this spending will affect the presidential race, but the most likely answer

is that it basically won’t – that each side will have more than enough

to saturate the airwaves and that the difference between the average

swing voter seeing 682 pro-Romney spots and only 606 pro-Obama spots

won’t translate into anything meaningful at the ballot box. Maybe a particularly craft or devastating ad

will have extra-resonance, but that’s a different matter than the basic

volume of advertising. At the presidential level, the role of money may

be an over-reported story.

This

isn’t the case down the ballot, though, as two stories today remind us.

The first comes from Missouri, with the New York Times reporting

on a flood of Republican-aligned super PAC money that is being

channeled against Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill. The GOP primary to

pick her opponent will be held tomorrow, with three Republicans vying

for the honor. As they’ve gone after each other, though, the Times

points out that pro-GOP super PACs have hit McCaskill with about $15

million of negative ads. Not surprisingly, McCaskill is probably the

most endangered Democratic Senate incumbent right now, trailing all

three Republicans in polls in a state that if friendly to the GOP but

hardly unwinnable for a Democrat (at least under normal circumstances).Then there’s Ohio, where Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown is better-positioned than McCaskill to survive. But as Newsweek’s Andrew Romano reports,

GOP aligned outside groups like the Chamber of Commerce and Karl Rove’s

Crossroads GPS have invested $11.5 million in attack ads against Brown.

As a result, Romano writes, “Brown’s average polling lead over his

Republican opponent, State Treasurer Josh Mandel, has been cut in half.”It’s

races like these that have the potential to be the real campaign money

stories of the year. Voters know far less about the average Senate

candidate than they do about Obama and Romney, and they follow Senate

races with much less interest than presidential contests. The same is

even more true when you get farther down the ballot to contests for the

U.S. House and state and local offices. This is where the Republican

super PAC advantage could really be felt in November, with massive

spending disparities lifting GOP candidates in races they might

otherwise lose, potentially flipping the Senate and making it impossible

for Democrats to win back control of the House.This is why I’ve been saying that

Democratic fears about Obama’s financial footing are misplaced. He can

survive in November even if he’s outspent by a significant margin. But

the same isn’t true for many Democrats running under him on the ballot.

At this point, they probably need the help more than him.http://www.salon.com/2012/08/06/a_sup...

paulejb
paulejb

MomentoMori.

"paulie just proposed the largest corporate tax increase in recent memory. I wonder if he realized that?"

========================================

No more loopholes for favored corporations. Level the playing field and reduce tax RATES for all.

ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®©
ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®©

It's 3:39 pm on the East Coast, and spambot is working his "magic".

To what purpose, spambot?  Do you really think your efforts will make one iota of difference?

I'll bet you repel more voters than you attract.

~

paulejb
paulejb

MomentoMori,

"That was the International Space Station, not 'outsourcing'."

---------------------------------------------------

We used to be able to get their on our own without renting a seat of Russian space craft.

sacredh
sacredh

Well, it's finally dry outside. Gotta cut grass. It poured again yesterday.

53underscore3
53underscore3

paulejb:

Bravo NASA!

===============

Oh, so now you're for the gubmint, eh, paulejb?

Richard Giles
Richard Giles

The deficit, government spending and “big government” haven’t caused our problems and constantly harping on them as if they did, is really a distraction, no doubt intentionally, from what did cause the problems.  To reduce government spending and the deficit are important goals but by themselves they won’t even address the negatives that did cause the hardships.  In every case our economic downturn was precipitated by run-away greed, gross dishonesty and self-indulgence where “the few” took advantage and created negative pressure on the very industries they depended on for their substantial gains.  Excessive deregulation, lax enforcement, little oversight and permissive policies provided the opportunities and that actually made the “puppet” politicians, who cater to “the money”, the responsible parties.  We have experienced the repeated crises in savings-and-loans, banks, dot.coms, manufacturing, the mortgage, financial, and investment industries as well as corporate corruption (like Enron) and industrywide failures (like the auto and financial industries), always with “the few” walking away with substantial profits and the costs being left to the majority.  

Calling those policies “conservative” is really a disguise for feeding the insatiable “more” (never enough) appetite of the 1% and is seeking to allow it to continue unabated.  It has drastically impacted our economy, and no doubt the worldwide economy, and those benefitting are making an all out effort with their mega-millions to con the people and manipulate public opinion in order to have their “puppet” politicians in power and to maintain their irrational advantage.  It is up to the voters, and they really don’t have to be “liberal”, just rational and objective to see through the subterfuge that is victimizing them and to firmly reject the “puppet” candidates, no matter how strong the propaganda is to do otherwise.  

outsider2011
outsider2011

Over the fiscal cliff we go

The GOP's insistence in protecting low taxes

for the rich has businesses putting off new investments and hiring

From inauguration day onward, a favorite GOP go-to attack on Obama

has been that his tax, spending and regulatory policy proposals were

causing “uncertainty” about the future. This uncertainty about the shape

of things to come was supposedly impelling business executives towards

excessive caution, dampening their enthusiasm for hiring and investment.

This

criticism, especially in the early years of Obama’s administration,

always seemed precipitate. What could possibly cause more uncertainty

about the future than a massive economic crash responsible for half a

million layoffs a month during the worst of the crisis?

Wouldn’t a

decision not to pass new regulations on the banking sector

after a systemic crash seem more scary than the possibility that some of

the new rules might have costs? But the attack was still effective

because it contains a nugget of truth. There seems little question

that the debt ceiling showdown during the summer of 2011 — an incident

entirely created by House Republicans — did indeed cause economically

damaging uncertainty about the future.

Cue the déjà vu machine: On Monday, the New York Times provided new, distressing proof of the destabilizing impact of “uncertainty.” Look out everyone, we’re about to tumble over the “fiscal cliff”!

A

rising number of manufacturers are canceling new investments and

putting off new hires because they fear paralysis in Washington will

force hundreds of billions in tax increases and budget cuts in January,

undermining economic growth in the coming months….

Hubbell, a maker of electrical products, has canceled several million

dollars’ worth of equipment orders and delayed long-planned factory

upgrades in the last few months, said Timothy H. Powers, the company’s

chief executive. It has also held off hiring workers for about 100

positions that would otherwise have been filled, he said.

“The fiscal cliff is the primary driver of uncertainty, and a person

in my position is going to make a decision to postpone hiring and

investments,” Mr. Powers said. “We can see it in our order patterns, and

customers are delaying. We don’t have to get to the edge of the cliff

before the damage is done.”

So

who gets the blame this time around? A cynical person would note that

an economic downturn, right now, increases the GOP’s chances of moving

into the White House. So from a realpolitik point of view, it’s hard to

see a downside for Republicans. They can claim they’re acting on

principle while executing a hugely advantageous strategic maneuver.Judging by the Times’ reporting, however, business leaders are feeling extra apprehension this time around because Democrats are acting like Republicans!Business

leaders say the latest fight feels different. Last summer, during a

confrontation over raising the debt limit that risked a government

shutdown, Mr. Powers of Hubbell did not alter course at his company, as

he is doing now. “We never expected the government to shut down,” he

said. “This bluff carries much more weight.”

So why

would Democrats willingly fling themselves over a fiscal cliff that

threatens their own party more than the opposition? The answer to that

requires a close look at what this struggle is really about. If no

action is taken, taxes will rise by nearly $ 400 billion. But that

scenario can only happen if the GOP sticks to their guns in refusing a

tax hike on the wealthiest Americans. This whole fiscal cliff nightmare

just goes away if Republicans are willing to make a deal that includes

some revenue increases.The closer you look, the more untenable

the GOP’s negotiating position becomes. A majority of Americans support

higher taxes on the rich. But the GOP is willing to crash the economy to

defend historically low taxes on the Americans who have prospered the

most over the last 30 years.There’s only one reason why the GOP

is refusing to budge. As history has shown again and again, Democrats

will cave. So far, that doesn’t seem to be the case, a fact that

justifiably has the business community worried. Executives are freaking

out because Democrats are signaling that they can be crazy too. Maybe

it’s time for them to pressure their GOP proxies to cut a deal — in the

interests of everyone.http://www.salon.com/2012/08/06/over_...

outsider2011
outsider2011

 While it’s still too early to jump to any conclusions about the

tragic shooting at a Sikh temple in Wisconsin yesterday that left seven

people dead, including the gunman, and others, including a police

officer, wounded, some information has emerged about the shooter. The

FBI has taken over the incident and is treating it as a potential case

of domestic terrorism, though they’ve been careful not to publicly

speculate about motives. The assailant has been identified as Wade

Michael Page, a 40-year-old Army veteran who was honorably discharged in the late 1990s. Page’s landlord said the suspect was a bit of a loner, and that he recently broke up with his girlfriend, but that he cleared a background check and thus likely did not have a criminal record.

The Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks extremist hate groups, described Page as “a frustrated neo-Nazi

who had been the leader of a racist white-power band.” According to the

SPLC, Page had been in several white supremacist bands in Colorado and

Wisconsin, and told a white nationalist website in 2010 that his goal

was to “figure out how to end people’s apathetic ways” — the name of his

band was End Apathy (they have a Myspace page here, with a photo of a man the SPLC identifies as Page). Dave Wiegel has more on his music.

Indeed,

ABC News reports that two sources said the shooter was “heavily

tattooed” — including one relating to 9/11 — and that investigators

suspect he may be a “white supremacist” or a “skinhead.”

“It is being investigated. And what his tattoos signified is being

investigated. They are all pieces of a possible puzzle to learn what was

his motive in carrying out such a horrific act,” Bureau of Alcohol,

Tobacco and Firearms Special Agent Thomas Ahern told the network.

The

shooter reportedly used two semi-automatic handguns. So far, it’s

assumed he purchased the guns legally. And while there’s no evidence

that a recent change in Wisconsin’s gun laws had any effect,

the massacre comes not long after the heated gubernatorial recall

campaign, where debates over gun policy played a central role. As Mother

Jones notes, almost exactly a year ago, Gov. Scott Walker signed the Personal Protection Act (PDF), a law that for the first time allowed Wisconsinites to carry a concealed gun

with a license, something Page likely would be eligible for, if current

reports hold true. The NRA aggressively campaigned for Walker, running

an ad suggesting Democrat Tom Barrett would take away hunters’ guns.

(Politifact called the NRA’s claims “mostly false.”)Interestingly, there are more restrictions on realistic toy guns than real guns under Wisconsin law. “No person may carry or display

a facsimile firearm in a manner that could reasonably be expected to

alarm, intimidate, threaten or terrify another person,” state law

stipulates, defining a facsimile firearm as “any replica, toy, starter

pistol or other object that bears a reasonable resemblance to or that

reasonably can be perceived to be an actual firearm.” Meanwhile, it’s

completely legal to display or carry a real firearm, as long as other

regulations are followed.http://www.salon.com/2012/08/06/templ...

outsider2011
outsider2011

 

Republicans are scared of gay marriage

Well, some of them are -- or at least

they're scared that opposing it will cost them votes

Writing at Politico, Maggie Haberman and Emily Schultheis pick up on the relative silence

of Mitt Romney and much of the Republican Party’s national leadership

over Democrats’ embrace of gay marriage. This doesn’t mean, they are

quick to point out, that the language of the GOP’s platform will be any

different than usual – just that Romney has little interest in playing

up his gay marriage opposition on the campaign trail.

On one

level, this reflects a basic political calculation. Support for marriage

equality is nearing majority status nationally, and it’s already there

among Democrats (65 percent) and independents (51 percent), according to

a recent Pew poll. But it lags far, far behind among Republican voters, only 24 percent of whom favor it.

As

Haberman and Schultheis note, this is a far cry from 2004 when gay

marriage was a new issue and opposition (especially among independents)

was much higher. Back then, there was little downside to George W.

Bush’s decision to use the issue as a wedge. But the world is different

now. This fall, the unblemished streak of states voting against marriage

equality in referendums will almost certainly come to an end. Running

on “traditional marriage” would still help Romney motivate a good chunk

of the GOP base, but it would also carry a real risk of alienating swing

voters. So Romney is saying as little as he can.

There’s also

something of an elite/grass roots divide within the GOP at work here.

Some Republicans, like those running Romney’s campaign, grasp the danger

their party faces as the public’s attitudes toward gay marriage

continue to evolve. Others, especially in the donor class, actually

support marriage equality themselves. (This is essentially the reason several Republican senators in New York were persuaded to help legalize gay marriage last year.)

The

problem is that these forces will be badly outnumbered within the GOP

for the foreseeable future. Currently, 70 percent of Republican voters

oppose gay marriage. For many of them, this grows out of their religious

faith; nearly half of Republicans today identify themselves as

evangelical Christians. Within the evangelical world, there seems to be a generational divide,

with the younger set far more supportive of marriage equality, but at

the very least it will take years before there’s anything approaching

broad support for gay marriage within the GOP.

In

the meantime, the question is how much pragmatism the party’s anti-gay

marriage forces are willing to tolerate. That is, will they be satisfied

with the approach Romney is apparently taking this year – to pay lip

service to their cause in the primaries, etch their views into the

platform, then ignore it all in the fall? Especially if Romney loses,

it’s not hard to imagine them making more forceful and specific demands

the next time around. And given their power within the party, any future

GOP candidate will have to take those demands seriously.http://www.salon.com/2012/08/06/repub...