Political Punch

Palin need to get ojt for VP position.
Do they have ojt for VP?
Here is an idea for financial baliout.
The richest 400 Americans -- that's right, just four hundred people -- own MORE than the bottom 150 million Americans combined. 400 rich Americans have got more stashed away than half the entire country! Their combined net worth is $1.6 trillion. During the eight years of the Bush Administration, their wealth has increased by nearly $700 billion -- the same amount that they are now demanding we give to them for the "bailout." Why don't they just spend the money they made under Bush to bail themselves out? They'd still have nearly a trillion dollars left over to spread amongst themselves!
Of course, they are not going to do that -- at least not voluntarily. George W. Bush was handed a $127 billion surplus when Bill Clinton left office. Because that money was OUR money and not his, he did what the rich prefer to do -- spend it and never look back. Now we have a $9.5 trillion debt. Why on earth would we even think of giving these robber barons any more of our money?
I would like to propose my own bailout plan. My suggestions, listed below, are predicated on the singular and simple belief that the rich must pull themselves up by their own platinum bootstraps. Sorry, fellows, but you drilled it into our heads one too many times: There... is... no... free... lunch. And thank you for encouraging us to hate people on welfare! So, there will be no handouts from us to you. The Senate, tonight, is going to try to rush their version of a "bailout" bill to a vote. They must be stopped. We did it on Monday with the House, and we can do it again today with the Senate.
It is clear, though, that we cannot simply keep protesting without proposing exactly what it is we think Congress should do. So, after consulting with a number of people smarter than Phil Gramm, here is my proposal, now known as "Mike's Rescue Plan." It has 10 simple, straightforward points. They are:
1. APPOINT A SPECIAL PROSECUTOR TO CRIMINALLY INDICT ANYONE ON WALL STREET WHO KNOWINGLY CONTRIBUTED TO THIS COLLAPSE. Before any new money is expended, Congress must commit, by resolution, to criminally prosecute anyone who had anything to do with the attempted sacking of our economy. This means that anyone who committed insider trading, securities fraud or any action that helped bring about this collapse must go to jail. This Congress must call for a Special Prosecutor who will vigorously go after everyone who created the mess, and anyone else who attempts to scam the public in the future.
2. THE RICH MUST PAY FOR THEIR OWN BAILOUT. They may have to live in 5 houses instead of 7. They may have to drive 9 cars instead of 13. The chef for their mini-terriers may have to be reassigned. But there is no way in hell, after forcing family incomes to go down more than $2,000 dollars during the Bush years, that working people and the middle class are going to fork over one dime to underwrite the next yacht purchase.
If they truly need the $700 billion they say they need, well, here is an easy way they can raise it:
a) Every couple who makes over a million dollars a year and every single taxpayer who makes over $500,000 a year will pay a 10% surcharge tax for five years. (It's the Senator Sanders plan. He's like Colonel Sanders, only he's out to fry the right chickens.) That means the rich will still be paying less income tax than when Carter was president. This will raise a total of $300 billion.

b) Like nearly every other democracy, charge a 0.25% tax on every stock transaction. This will raise more than $200 billion in a year.

c) Because every stockholder is a patriotic American, stockholders will forgo receiving a dividend check for one quarter and instead this money will go the treasury to help pay for the bailout.

d) 25% of major U.S. corporations currently pay NO federal income tax. Federal corporate tax revenues currently amount to 1.7% of the GDP compared to 5% in the 1950s. If we raise the corporate income tax back to the level of the 1950s, that gives us an extra $500 billion.
All of this combined should be enough to end the calamity. The rich will get to keep their mansions and their servants, and our United States government ("COUNTRY FIRST!") will have a little leftover to repair some roads, bridges and schools.
3. BAIL OUT THE PEOPLE LOSING THEIR HOMES, NOT THE PEOPLE WHO WILL BUILD AN EIGHTH HOME. There are 1.3 million homes in foreclosure right now. That is what is at the heart of this problem. So instead of giving the money to the banks as a gift, pay down each of these mortgages by $100,000. Force the banks to renegotiate the mortgage so the homeowner can pay on its current value. To insure that this help does no go to speculators and those who have tried to make money by flipping houses, this bailout is only for people's primary residence. And in return for the $100K paydown on the existing mortgage, the government gets to share in the holding of the mortgage so that it can get some of its money back. Thus, the total initial cost of fixing the mortgage crisis at its roots (instead of with the greedy lenders) is $150 billion, not $700 billion.
And let's set the record straight. People who have defaulted on their mortgages are not "bad risks." They are our fellow Americans, and all they wanted was what we all want and most of us still get: a home to call their own. But during the Bush years, millions of them lost the decent paying jobs they had. Six million fell into poverty. Seven million lost their health insurance. And every one of them saw their real wages go down by $2,000. Those who dare to look down on these Americans who got hit with one bad break after another should be ashamed. We are a better, stronger, safer and happier society when all of our citizens can afford to live in a home that they own.
4. IF YOUR BANK OR COMPANY GETS ANY OF OUR MONEY IN A "BAILOUT," THEN WE OWN YOU. Sorry, that's how it's done. If the bank gives me money so I can buy a house, the bank "owns" that house until I pay it all back -- with interest. Same deal for Wall Street. Whatever money you need to stay afloat, if our government considers you a safe risk -- and necessary for the good of the country -- then you can get a loan, but we will own you. If you default, we will sell you. This is how the Swedish government did it and it worked.
5. ALL REGULATIONS MUST BE RESTORED. THE REAGAN REVOLUTION IS DEAD. This catastrophe happened because we let the fox have the keys to the henhouse. In 1999, Phil Gramm authored a bill to remove all the regulations that governed Wall Street and our banking system. The bill passed and Clinton signed it. Here's what Sen. Phil Gramm, McCain's chief economic advisor, said at the bill signing:
"In the 1930s ... it was believed that government was the answer. It was believed that stability and growth came from government overriding the functioning of free markets.

"We are here today to repeal [that] because we have learned that government is not the answer. We have learned that freedom and competition are the answers. We have learned that we promote economic growth and we promote stability by having competition and freedom.

"I am proud to be here because this is an important bill; it is a deregulatory bill. I believe that that is the wave of the future, and I am awfully proud to have been a part of making it a reality."
This bill must be repealed. Bill Clinton can help by leading the effort for the repeal of the Gramm bill and the reinstating of even tougher regulations regarding our financial institutions. And when they're done with that, they can restore the regulations for the airlines, the inspection of our food, the oil industry, OSHA, and every other entity that affects our daily lives. All oversight provisions for any "bailout" must have enforcement monies attached to them and criminal penalties for all offenders.
6. IF IT'S TOO BIG TO FAIL, THEN THAT MEANS IT'S TOO BIG TO EXIST. Allowing the creation of these mega-mergers and not enforcing the monopoly and anti-trust laws has allowed a number of financial institutions and corporations to become so large, the very thought of their collapse means an even bigger collapse across the entire economy. No one or two companies should have this kind of power. The so-called "economic Pearl Harbor" can't happen when you have hundreds -- thousands -- of institutions where people have their money. When you have a dozen auto companies, if one goes belly-up, we don't face a national disaster. If you have three separately-owned daily newspapers in your town, then one media company can't call all the shots (I know... What am I thinking?! Who reads a paper anymore? Sure glad all those mergers and buyouts left us with a strong and free press!). Laws must be enacted to prevent companies from being so large and dominant that with one slingshot to the eye, the giant falls and dies. And no institution should be allowed to set up money schemes that no one can understand. If you can't explain it in two sentences, you shouldn't be taking anyone's money.
7. NO EXECUTIVE SHOULD BE PAID MORE THAN 40 TIMES THEIR AVERAGE EMPLOYEE, AND NO EXECUTIVE SHOULD RECEIVE ANY KIND OF "PARACHUTE" OTHER THAN THE VERY GENEROUS SALARY HE OR SHE MADE WHILE WORKING FOR THE COMPANY. In 1980, the average American CEO made 45 times what their employees made. By 2003, they were making 254 times what their workers made. After 8 years of Bush, they now make over 400 times what their average employee makes. How this can happen at publicly held companies is beyond reason. In Britain, the average CEO makes 28 times what their average employee makes. In Japan, it's only 17 times! The last I heard, the CEO of Toyota was living the high life in Tokyo. How does he do it on so little money? Seriously, this is an outrage. We have created the mess we're in by letting the people at the top become bloated beyond belief with millions of dollars. This has to stop. Not only should no executive who receives help out of this mess profit from it, but any executive who was in charge of running his company into the ground should be fired before the company receives any help.
8. STRENGTHEN THE FDIC AND MAKE IT A MODEL FOR PROTECTING NOT ONLY PEOPLE'S SAVINGS, BUT ALSO THEIR PENSIONS AND THEIR HOMES. Obama was correct yesterday to propose expanding FDIC protection of people's savings in their banks to $250,000. But this same sort of government insurance must be given to our nation's pension funds. People should never have to worry about whether or not the money they've put away for their old age will be there. This will mean strict government oversight of companies who manage their employees' funds -- or perhaps it means that the companies will have to turn over those funds and their management to the government. People's private retirement funds must also be protected, but perhaps it's time to consider not having one's retirement invested in the casino known as the stock market. Our government should have a solemn duty to guarantee that no one who grows old in this country has to worry about ending up destitute.
9. EVERYBODY NEEDS TO TAKE A DEEP BREATH, CALM DOWN, AND NOT LET FEAR RULE THE DAY. Turn off the TV! We are not in the Second Great Depression. The sky is not falling. Pundits and politicians are lying to us so fast and furious it's hard not to be affected by all the fear mongering. Even I, yesterday, wrote to you and repeated what I heard on the news, that the Dow had the biggest one day drop in its history. Well, that's true in terms of points, but its 7% drop came nowhere close to Black Monday in 1987 when the stock market in one day lost 23% of its value. In the '80s, 3,000 banks closed, but America didn't go out of business. These institutions have always had their ups and downs and eventually it works out. It has to, because the rich do not like their wealth being disrupted! They have a vested interest in calming things down and getting back into the Jacuzzi.
As crazy as things are right now, tens of thousands of people got a car loan this week. Thousands went to the bank and got a mortgage to buy a home. Students just back to college found banks more than happy to put them into hock for the next 15 years with a student loan. Life has gone on. Not a single person has lost any of their money if it's in a bank or a treasury note or a CD. And the most amazing thing is that the American public hasn't bought the scare campaign. The citizens didn't blink, and instead told Congress to take that bailout and shove it. THAT was impressive. Why didn't the population succumb to the fright-filled warnings from their president and his cronies? Well, you can only say 'Saddam has da bomb' so many times before the people realize you're a lying sack of shite. After eight long years, the nation is worn out and simply can't take it any longer.
10. CREATE A NATIONAL BANK, A "PEOPLE'S BANK." If we really are itching to print up a trillion dollars, instead of giving it to a few rich people, why don't we give it to ourselves? Now that we own Freddie and Fannie, why not set up a people's bank? One that can provide low-interest loans for all sorts of people who want to own a home, start a small business, go to school, come up with the cure for cancer or create the next great invention. And now that we own AIG, the country's largest insurance company, let's take the next step and provide health insurance for everyone. Medicare for all. It will save us so much money in the long run. And we won't be 12th on the life expectancy list. We'll be able to have a longer life, enjoying our government-protected pension, and living to see the day when the corporate criminals who caused so much misery are let out of prison so that we can help reacclimate them to civilian life -- a life with one nice home and a gas-free car that was invented with help from the People's Bank.

Respectfully,

Texans

wouldn`t it have been nice to have been able to hear the conversation behind closed doors with Obama and Bill Clinton. lol. (well, here we are again. still can`t win it without us?) lol. hilarious! Bill and Hillary (and the 2 female governors helping Obama)...stay home, this isn`t your fight for the presidency, it is Obama`s. If he can`t win it on his own, then guess he shouldn`t be the one running for office. This is the message they are sending the public. And Why would I vote for a canidate that comes across SOOOOOO weak? I WOULDN`T...AND I WON`T.

GOOOOOO MCCAIN/PALIN! "GIVE US THEIR NAMES AND MAKE THEM FAMOUS!" (LOVIN` IT!)LOL. THAT IS AWESOME! I LOVE THIS REPUBLICAN PARTY!

THE DNC, DELEGATES, AND SUPERDELEGATES ARE TO BLAME FOR THIS MESS IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY. I WILL NOT VOTE FOR OBAMA BECAUSE OF "PARTY UNITY". I THINK THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTE SHOULD BE DONE AWAY WITH COMPLETELY,...BECAUSE THEN "THE VOTE" WOULD BE STRICTLY FROM "WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES!" AND NOT FROM ANYONE ELSE. OUR VOTES NEED TO BE COUNTED AND MATTER! NOT LETTING "THOSE IN POWER" OVER-RIDING OUR VOTES. POPULAR VOTE SHOULD WIN YOU THE PRESIDENCY AND NOTHING ELSE....REGARDLESS WHO IS RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT. THEN WE WOULD TRULY BE A FREE COUNTRY.

It surprises me how people can tear down McCain and Palin; they have more intregity, morals, and values than some of you could ever have. And when did those qualities become a "bad thing"? Just another problem going on with this country today! Hillary and her supporters called "whiners".....sounds like there is a plenty of Obama "whiners" out there. Well remember what was repeatly told to the Hillary supporters...."get over it!" BOO FREAKIN` WHO! Bunch of big babies! The truth hurts sometimes, you need to suck it up and "MOVE ON!"

Obama is the LIAR, that new ad he came out with "fundamental economy is strong".......noticed he left the last part off of what McCain said, "but these are very, very difficult times". How convienant Obama left that off. Thats` not exactly being honest and trustworthy on Obama`s case now is it? What a lying jerk! He has to lie and ride the shirt and skirt tails of others (Bill, Hillary, and 2 women govenors)to "try" to get votes to "try" to win the presidency! McCain and Palin can stand on their own feet, why can`t Obama stand on his own? Again and again,he just shows how weak, untrustworthy, and discreditable person he is. The truth comes out about him, over and over, more and more. He is weak and pathetic!

to gettinmedieval:
FACT: Obama did not list his race on his application to Harvard. And as an attorney who actually went to law school, let me tell you that you can't get into Harvard without a minimum GPA and LSAT score. They won't even look at your application to SEE what race you are without those minimum requirements that are FAR higher than about 75% of law schools in the country. Getting into Harvard is REALLY hard. And their bar passage rate is 99% - the highest in the country, party because they only admit the best and brightest. And IN law school you are graded anonymously by NUMBER so professors can't even take your race or your charming personality into account. He graduated Magna Cum Laude.

I don't think you're a racist, but I don't think you're thinking all that clearly either. We had 8 years of C-student governing. Look where it has gotten us. Personally, I'd like someone who can think and ponder and act wisely for a change, rather than someone who doesn't blink but just acts. Now we have McCain (at the bottom of his class) and Palin (6 years to her degree & no transcripts from her ONLY higher education released). I think it's time to let some of the people who got good grades do some governing. You want to take the risk that THIS time the lackluster students won't fail. I say, we have too much to lose to risk that.

Cronyism, secrecy, disregard for the Constitution, skeptical of science on global warming, extreme personal partisanship - sound familiar, hiring people who are less qualified solely on their fierce personal loyalty and friendship. Remember Bush's greatest hits? "Brownie" at FEMA, Harriet Miers for Supreme Court, Alberto Gonzales as Atty General & the debacle in hiring at Justice, outing Valerie Plame to retaliate against her husband's right of free speech & letting Scooter take the rap, the scientific "jury" is still out on global warming, the ENTIRE Interior Dept.

Well, Palin is Bush times 100.

Ethics problems aren't always related to just bribes. It is also the abuse of power and disregard of the Constitutional separation of powers and of Church & State.

Dems,
I think Moderate tactfully brought up an important point. As someone who not only went to college but who holds a doctorate and teaches at one, I can tell you that scholarship students are not always brilliant people. Many get scholarships for a number of reasons other than academic excellence. Then lots of people hang onto scholarships despite less than great work. The simple fact that Obama went to Columbia with a scholarship does not prove he was a talented student. I am not arguing that he was not, simply that you should not jump to conclusions based on the limited evidence.

What some have suggested as the reason that he has not spoken of his undergraduate grades, even in his revealing memoirs, is that his grades were less than top-drawer. He does not want to be accused of getting into Harvard Law as an affirmative action pick. You ignore this very real possibility. You assume his grades must have been high because they led to his admission to Harvard grad. However it is equally likely the grades were average and he was chosen for graduate school for other reasons, including the need to increase minority admissions and his years after Columbia spent as a community organizer, the sort of life experience admissions officers eat up with a spoon.

Now do I sit back and wait to be labelled a racist for bringing up an alternative explanation? Hope not. Just pointing out that these things are often more complicated than they may appear. College admissions are not simply a matter of skimming off the smartest students from the earlier levels and advancing them. That's a good thing, by the way. Being intellectually gifted is not the only criteria for success, or even the most important one. I am not saying Barry Obama is not very intelligent, but I am surrounded at my workplace by brilliant thinkers and am no slouch intellectually myself. It takes more than academic excellence alone to impress me.

Palin is nothing more than a face

Let's look at her record.....

1) Notes thanks but no thanks for bridge to nowhere, truth flopped on support for bridge after media pressure from congress. She also kept the earmark money for the bridge and spent it on other pet projects in Alaska the truth is she never rebuffed congress (NBC 08/31/08,Anchorage Daily News 08/31/08, CBS 08/31/08, Reuters, CNN, CBS 09/03/08)
2) Not in Iraq as previously stated only at Kuwait-Iraq boarder...Didn't have clearance to enter Iraq. (Boston Globe 09/13/08, CNN 09/13/08, NBC 09/14/08)
3)Against earmarks is not a true statement the truth is Alaska is the largest state per capita for the use of earmarks (LA Times 09/03/08, Washington Post 09/11/08)
4) Posable abuse of power (Troppergate) Used her position as governor to fire her ex brother in law due to bitter devorce with her sister. (CNN 09/11/08, NBC 09/03/08, Anchorage Daily News 09/05/08)

Palin may say the media is out to get her but the truth is she doesn't tell the truth.

With all due respect. Most Europeans I believe view Palin as symptomatic of the superficiality of US Politics. You are becoming the laughing stock of the worlds intelligentsia. It really is embarrassing to watch.

Belle writes, "To ask is to answer: if the transcripts DID support The CHANGEling's entree to Harvard Law, they'd be out there -- right?"
====================================
The question isn't whether they are out there or not Belle. Those of us who have gone to college KNOW that in order for college transcripts to be released the "student" must approve the release. Now the question I have for you is this.....If someone graduates WITH HONORS why would you NEED to see them? Surely you realize we're talking about Columbia (NY) and Harvard Law right?

Bell writes, "If the transcripts DIDN'T support it, the press might say more on the reports of special handling for Obama -- and maybe for Axelrod's other "change" candidates, Deval Patrick and Azevedo, who were at Harvard Law at the very same time ...
================================
I'm sorry Belle but you're allowing your personal bias to intefere with your logic. While you can "buy" your way into an Ivy league education (your current President) with having a less than stellar academic background, you can't BUY the degree. Obama graduated with HONORS from Havard, taught at the University of Chicago.

Tell me something....At what point do you recognize ACHIEVEMENT? McCain graduated almost at the bottom of his class at Annapolis. If it had not been for the fact that his Grandfather was an Admiral he most likely would not have even been admitted. THAT is affirmative action at its finet. Palin attended 6 colleges in 5 years and walked away with a B.A. in Journalism.

At some point you have to be honest. As far as intelligence goes? The sum of McCain and Palin is LESS than Obama. It is what it is.....

I was watching an old interview between oreilly and Hillary Clinton, and comparing it to Obama's interview.

You Dems really blew it. She is so much more intelligent and informed than Obama.

What were you guys thinking?

I was watching an old interview between oreilly and Hillary Clinton, and comparing it to Obama's interview.

You Dems really blew it. She is so much more intelligent and informed than Obama.

What were you guys thinking?

anon sez:

Now is the time to trade
in second-rate Biden for
first-rate Hillary.
------------------------------------

a Republican alternate reality where the country rallies around Hillary

Lord Haw Haw or Tokyo Rose - take your pick.

"Considering he had to use those same TRANSCRIPTS to get into Harvard Law School I think it is safe to say they were pretty exceptional, right?"
-----
To ask is to answer: if the transcripts DID support The CHANGEling's entree to Harvard Law, they'd be out there -- right?

If the transcripts DIDN'T support it, the press might say more on the reports of special handling for Obama -- and maybe for Axelrod's other "change" candidates, Deval Patrick and Azevedo, who were at Harvard Law at the very same time ...

Now is the time to trade
in second-rate Biden for
first-rate Hillary.

The interview showed Palin
would be a calamity as Veep.
McCain as we all know would
be a calamity as POTUS.

Not only did Palin call Hillary
a whiner during the Dem primaries,
but she also showed more of her
nastiness by joining the chorus
of people who were urging Hillary
to drop out of the race.

Her new-found admiration for
Hillary is a ruse to attract
Dem Hillary supporters who she
thinks are patsies.

Palin's critic of Obama is interesting in that we all know there is a problem in the Obama campaign. The air of inevitability has been lost - to say nothing of the fact Obama is behind in a lot of the polls and the electoral college map has tightened up.

Palin is the most charismatic person running. However Obama's gaffes with his lipstick on a pig comment are not helping. The perception on Main Street is that the Obama campaign in in a tail spin. The commentators like Frank Rich are so stuck on attacking that they are missing this shift in the public perception.

Obama has to get it together and it is pretty clear that the media are not going to be much help this time around. Biased journalists like Charles Gibson and Wolfe Blitzer are infact hurting Obama and he has to do something to counteract that force.

Compare the questions Charlie asked Obama with the questions he asked Sarah.
And REMEMBER, Obama is the TPO of the ticket.

Fair??? No.

Obama interview:

How does it feel to break a glass ceiling?
How does it feel to “win”?
How does your family feel about your “winning” breaking a glass ceiling?
Who will be your VP?
Should you choose Hillary Clinton as VP?
Will you accept public finance?
What issues is your campaign about?
Will you visit Iraq?
Will you debate McCain at a town hall?
What did you think of your competitor’s [Clinton] speech?

Palin interview:

Do you have enough qualifications for the job you’re seeking? Specifically have you visited foreign countries and met foreign leaders?
Aren’t you conceited to be seeking this high level job?
Questions about foreign policy
-territorial integrity of Georgia
-allowing Georgia and Ukraine to be members of NATO
-NATO treaty
-Iranian nuclear threat
-what to do if Israel attacks Iran
-Al Qaeda motivations
-the Bush Doctrine
-attacking terrorists harbored by Pakistan
Is America fighting a holy war? [misquoted Palin]