Conservative Social Values Meet Immigration & Gitmo!

The GOP lead House passed a $46 billion Homeland Security spending bill that includes a provision prohibiting Immigrations and Customs Enforcement from providing abortions to illegal immigration detainees except in cases of rape, incest or endangerment to the mother.

First of all why is the Department of Immigration and Customs providing abortions to illegal immigration detainees in the first place?  And, assuming they are; has there been such a rash of abortions provided to illegal immigrants that it requires intervention by the United States House of Representatives?  Or is this just another opportunity to insert social ideology and bigotry into governing?

Republicans are fond of calling themselves “small government conservatives.”  But when it comes to social issues they have no problem inserting government into the equation at every turn. 

While they are digging through the Homeland Security weeds conservatives  might want to check out Guantanamo Bay.  They might be doling out free abortions to illegal detainees there as well.  You never know!  And while they are at it, conservatives might explain why we are spending $800,000 a year to house EACH detainee in Guantanamo.  Or why we just spent $750,000 to build the Guantanamo detainees a new recreation/soccer field.  Or why Gitmo detainees get better health care services than most Americans.  Talk about social welfare! 

Since Republicans love to cut social programs maybe they could start here at Guantanamo.  After all it was the Republicans that raised holy hell when Obama wanted to close the place.  So maybe they can explain the rational for spending billions to house and entertain a bunch of folks who haven’t even been charged with a crime.  Perhaps Republicans could come up with a bill that reduces some of the waste and abuse they like to talk about…not that anyone begrudges enemies of the state a new recreation field. 

If nothing else it would give conservatives an opportunity to hang another anti-abortion amendment on piece of legislation.          

Smoking Out The "Weed" Demographic

We are all familiar with the phrase:  “Every vote counts.”  We hear it every election cycle.  This year is no different.  The November presidential election promises to be extremely close, with 2-3 percentage points separating the candidates.  Voter turnout is key.  Both parties will leave no stone unturned to get their message out to the voters…and the voters to the polls.  It is anticipated that a record $3.2 billion dollars will be spent on campaign ads and grassroots efforts to get people to the voting booths.  Everyone remembers the Bush v. Gore fiasco that played out in Florida…and no one wants a repeat.  So the push for voter turnout is expected to be unprecedented. 

Most of the campaign’s focus is on key swing states.  With every electoral vote treated like gold it is imperative that the campaigns win over voters in these tightly contested states.  And no state is more important or more tightly contested than Colorado.  A recent Rasmussen Poll has Obama and Romney tied at 45% of the vote.  With gridlock on the horizon Colorado Democrats may have stumbled on a unique way to swing the state into the President’s win column.

Weed!

Joshua Green of "Bloomberg Businessweek" writes that when Colorado voters go to the polls in November they will be asked to vote on a ballot initiative that legalizes pot in the state.  Not just medical marijuana but good old every day, recreational, Doobie Bothers Mary Jane.  Pot smokers tend to be 18 to 35 years old, students and progressive thinking; the very demographic that came out in droves to sweep Obama into office four years ago. 

The President has been tough on pot smokers ordering his justice department to crack down on illegal drugs use.  But this initiative might turn tokers out in droves.  And it is unlikely that many of them are going to vote for Romney; the guy who ran off some kids smoking pot on his property and then “narced’ them out to the cops. 

Republicans are crying foul.  They see this ballot initiative as a brazen attempt to swing voters.  Perhaps they are right.  But given that pot smokers are not the most organized bunch it seems more likely that the timing is little more a convenient coincidence. J  The real question is whether or not they’ll get off the couch and actually show up.

If this “pot strategy” works on the state level then perhaps Congress would consider implementing it on the federal level as well.  It could prove to be an effective negotiating tool.  Perhaps Harry Reid, Mitch McConnell, John Boehner and the President could pass a joint around while negotiating the debt limit and tax reform.  A little mellowing out certainly couldn’t hurt.                 

"There Are No Facts, Only Interpretations."

“There are no facts, only interpretations.”  “Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.”

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              Nietzsche

Most people have better things to do with their lives than fact check the daily spin that pours out of the mouths of politicians.  These “interpretations” when repeated often enough become part of our social commentary and form the basis from which people make decisions.

That said…we would like to comment on some of the more glaring “interpretations” being uttered by those who occupy the conservative side of the aisle.

Republicans are on a sugar high over Scott Walker’s recall victory in Wisconsin.  They see this vote as a referendum on their small government agenda and a national mandate to continue their attack on unions.  In fairness, Democrats billed this election as having significant national implications.  So it isn’t too big a stretch for Republicans to paint this win with the same broad brush. 

The facts are that we do not know what implications Wisconsin will have on a national level.  While the events in Wisconsin have framed the current debate; the outcome does not necessarily reverberate on a national scale.  Just last November voters in Ohio, a key swing state, rebuked their Republican governor’s efforts to curb the collective bargaining rights of government employees.  They repealed Ohio SD 5; dealing a severe blow to Governor Kasich’s small government agenda.  Perhaps more significantly the same voters who returned Scott Walker to the governor’s mansion were asked who they were voting for in the Presidential election.  51% said they were voting for President Obama; 44% said they were voting for Mitt Romney.

While non-union voters may not like the high salaries and hefty retirement plans that unionized employees enjoy, they understand that unions were largely responsible for the creation of the middle class in the 40’s and 50’s. Their negotiation of competitive wages and benefits during the manufacturing and construction boom in the years following World War II resulted in a class of people that could buy homes and send their kids to college.  As union wages increased so did the wages of non-union workers.  A rising tide lifts all boats. But  as globalization took jobs overseas the influence of labor unions declined and so did middle class.  From 1973 to 2007 union membership declined from 34% to 8%.  At the same time wage inequality increased by more than 40%.  The unions are dying…and so is the middle class.  So Republicans might want to curb their chest thumping over Walker’s victory.  While voters may not like unions they do like good wages and benefits.  Voters may “interpret” that win in Wisconsin differently; and it may have unintended consequences.

Bill Clinton has been in the news a lot lately.  As a former President and important and effective surrogate for Obama it is only natural for people parse and analyze his every word.  So it is with great fervor that Republicans take to the airwaves whenever they believe they have caught the former President uttering anything that seems contrary to President Obama’s message.  Such was the case the other day when Clinton, in a CNBC interview appeared to say that he was in favor of extending ALL of the Bush tax cuts.  President Obama has said repeatedly that he would not approve extending the Bush tax cuts for the top 1% wage earners.  Republicans, who want to see all of the tax cuts extended, jumped all over this apparent conflict.  Republican heavy weights Boehner, McConnell, Thune and Henslering all took to the microphones to weigh in.  “Even Bill Clinton agrees that this is not the time to raise taxes on the job creators.”  Casual listeners will believe this “interpretation” of Clinton’s remarks to be gospel.  However when examining the entirety of Clinton’s comments on the subject it is clear that he is in lockstep with Obama.  Never mind what the former President actually said. ‘Interpretation” and distortion can be effective when repeated often enough.

We believe that far more interesting than the selective editing of sound bites for political advantage is the difference in overall strategy of the two campaigns.  The Obama Campaign is eager to trot out former President Clinton as a key spokesperson.  They feel that Clinton’s experience and record are a benefit to their efforts.  So we wonder why the Romney Campaign hasn’t employed the talents of former President George W. Bush as a surrogate for their campaign.  After all the plans that Team Romney has for the country are mirror images of the policies George W. Bush employed while serving as our 43^rd President…

           

                         

Big Money Wins In Wisconsin Recall

In a historic recall election that garnered national attention, embattled Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker defeated Democratic challenger Tom Barrett 53%-44%.  Walker’s lieutenant governor and three Republican state senators were also able to overcome recall challenges.

But this race was never really about Scott Walker versus Tom Barrett.  This race was about business/corporate funded Super PACS and outside interests versus unions and local grassroots operations.  This race was a test…a science project…a Petri dish experiment to see if big money/outside interests could influence a local election.  The answer is an emphatic, YES!  

In 2010, of the top ten outside organizations funding political campaigns, the top four and six of the top ten were corporate groups giving to the Republican side of the ledger.  Karl Rove’s Super PACS; “American Crossroads” and “Crossroads GPS,” are examples of these corporate groups; ranking #3 and #4 on the list of contributors.  These PACS poured millions of anonymous outside money into the coffers of Republican candidates.

Only three of the top ten outside organizations funding political campaigns supported Democratic candidates.  And these three organizations had one thing in common…they were all unions.  Unions were the only major funding organizations that could stand up to the Republican corporate Super PACS.  Republicans correctly understood that if they could kill off the unions they would eliminate a major source of the Democrats’ funding and grassroots organization.

Scott Walker’s union busting agenda quickly made him the poster boy for the Republican game plan.  Of the $68 million spent on the Wisconsin recall election, 70% came from sources outside of the state. Walker and his corporate contributors outspent Barrett and the Democrats 7.5 to 1.  In the end, outside big money trumped local grassroots efforts.

Republicans will no doubt be emboldened by this victory.  They have proven that even in a blue state like Wisconsin, the state where collective bargaining got its start, you can bust the unions and implement your austerity agenda if you pour in enough money.

Scott Walker is now a national hero within the Republican Party.  You can expect to see him prominently featured at the Republican convention; perhaps a speech given in prime time.  You can also expect to see this same Republican strategy played out in swing states all across the country as the election season heats up.  If you can’t beat them with ideas…then drown them in money.

This was a great day for big business and corporate America.  It was a bad day for unions and middle class wage earners.  The implications going forward are worrisome.

As we watched the election returns come in we could not help but hearken back to the President’s 2010 state of the union address.  The President criticized the Supreme Court’s decision on “Citizen United,” where the court in effect said that corporations and wealthy individuals could anonymously give unlimited funds to political campaigns.  The President said:  “Last week the Supreme Court reversed centuries of law to open the floodgates for special interests…including foreign corporations…to spend without limit in our elections. Well I don’t think that American elections should be bankrolled by America’s most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign interests.”  In the classic camera shot, Justice Samuel Alito was caught shaking his head in response and mouthing the words: “that’s not true.”

The President’s words have proven to be prophetic. The old adage “one man…one vote” no longer applies.  Not when that one man is writing multi-million dollar checks.             

           

Pay Checks, Walker and Chicken Little

The Senate will vote on the Paycheck Fairness Act today; a bill intended to give woman more legal tools to press for equal pay for equal work.  The bill is expected to fail along party lines.  Women are currently paid on average 77 cents on the dollar compared to men performing the same job.  This seems like a no brainer for Republicans who need to find a way to attract women voters.  But Republicans find themselves torn between their desire to attract women voters and their aversion to giving Democrats a win this close to the election.  Republicans see the timing of this vote as little more than a ploy by Democrats to get a “No” vote on the record that Democrats can campaign on in the upcoming months.  Lost in the politics is the fact that women get paid less for doing the same job as a man.  That’s wrong and it needs to be fixed.  Just another example of why the approval rating for congress is below 10%.

All eyes are on Wisconsin today where embattled GOP Governor Scott Walker faces a historic recall vote.  Walker is only the third governor in US history to face a recall.  Walker gained national attention when shortly after his inauguration he succeeded in eliminating collective bargaining rights for government employees.  This set off a firestorm of opposition that set in motion a petition drive to call for Walker’s removal.  More than 900,000 signatures were gathered…360,000 more than needed to trigger a recall election.  The events in Wisconsin attracted national attention and outside money poured into the state.  The governor pulled in over $30 million; two thirds of which came from anonymous donors outside the state of Wisconsin.  Walker’s opponent, Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett raised $4.2 million; most of which came from within Wisconsin’s boarders.  Polls show a very close race with Walker in the lead heading into today’s vote.  This race has national implications.  If a polarizing candidate like Walker can win re-election in a typically blue state it will be seen by many as an affirmation that you can govern conservatively in today’s economy and still win.  While traditionally blue Wisconsin will still in all probability go for Obama in November, a Walker win may force Team Obama to spend time and money in a state believed to be safely in their corner.  Obama did not campaign for Barrett choosing instead to send Bill Clinton to the stump.  We are troubled by the amount of outside money and outside influence pouring into this race; over $60 million when you include outside PACS and national organizations like the Republican Governors Association and the NRA.  Thanks to the Supreme Court and their dumbfounding decision on Citizens United, democracy is up for sale.  May the highest bidder prevail!

We have spent a lot of time recently criticizing the Obama Campaign’s re-election strategy. In particular we found their response to Friday’s weak job numbers and the DOW’s plummeting response to be a bit “tepid.”  In fairness it should be noted that many notable economists and pundits disagree with our assessment.  Their counter argument lies along two paths.  One group believes that even with three straight months of weak job numbers there is nothing for Obama to be concerned about.  They point to a booming auto industry which will produce 14 million cars this year…up from 11 million last year.  They point to a housing market that is growing and retail sales which are steadily increasing.  “It’s only a blip” they say.  "No, chicken little...the sky is not falling."  There is another group who believe that all of these economic indicators and the ongoing political infighting mean nothing.  They believe that the respective ideological bases have already made up their minds and will not be swayed; no matter how persuasive the argument against their position.  These folks make up 93-94% of the electorate.  The remaining 6-7% are the independent swing voters who will decide this very close election.  This group believes that these swing voters will base their decision on five separate events:  three debate performances plus two convention acceptance speeches.  That’s it.  All the rest of the stuff coming from the parties and through the media is just white noise.  Perhaps these folks are right.  Perhaps the recent economic indicators are just inconsequential “blips.”  Perhaps performance will play  a more important part than policy or substance.  We’ll see.                            

"Never Let A Crisis Go To Waste"

There is a saying in politics attributed to Obama’s former Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel that says: “Never let a crisis go to waste.”  He explained that a crisis moment is also an opportunity to do something that you didn’t think that you could do.  Well if ever there were a crisis moment for the President’s re-election prospects it is occurring right now.

The recent economic reports coming out of Washington dealt a severe blow to the Obama Campaign.  The economy produced a miserable 69,000 net private sector jobs in May, the fewest in a year, and half what economist expected.  For the first time since last June the unemployment rate rose from 8.1% to 8.2%.  And the markets responded to the news with their worst day of the year.  The Dow dropped 275 points effectively wiping out all of the gains for 2012.  The only good news for Obama is that these results came out in May rather than in September or October.  If the economy continues to move in this negative direction…he’s toast.  

Naturally the Republicans responded with glee to the President’s misfortune.  House Whip Eric Cantor called the reports “pathetic.”  Mitt Romney declared that the country was “moving backward.”  He called the numbers “devastating news” and said that Obama’s policies and his handling of the economy had “been dealt a harsh indictment.”  “It is now clear to everyone,” Romney said, “that President Obama’s policies have failed to achieve their goals…”

The President responded to the news during a stump speech in Minnesota.  He called on congress to pass some of his job proposals.  And once again he tried to explain that our economy has been struggling “against a head wind brought on by the economic downturn in Europe.”

That response won’t cut it.  Nibbling around the edges of this problem won’t work.  The base may nod their heads in agreement like a bobble head on a dashboard.  But independent voters don’t want to hear excuses about the effects of the Eurozone or the economic bubble in China.  They want to know what their President is going to do to fix the problem.  And if all he seems to have are excuses instead of solutions…well maybe they’ll give the other guy a shot.

This is “crisis time” for Team Obama.  But as Rahm said, it is also an opportunity to do something they didn’t think you could do. He has an opportunity to right the ship.  We wrote yesterday about  strategy Obama should use to defend his record against criticism from the Romney Deathstar.  Here is the offensive strategy that the President should follow moving forward.

Obama needs to think big and bold.  He needs to think FDR/WPA big.  He needs to think Eisenhower/interstate highway system big.  He needs to think JFK/man on the moon big.  Obama needs to come out with a massive, comprehensive ten year jobs and infrastructure plan that includes repairing and modernizing roads, bridges, dams, light rail, airports, broad band and upgrading our electrical grid.  He needs to be specific about its components and in how we pay for it.  And he needs to be willing to compromise on heretofore liberal untouchables like reforming entitlements and tax cuts for the rich.  He needs to explain that this plan will not only put millions of Americans back to work, it will enable us to be more productive, more efficient and better able to compete in the global economy.  To the deficit hawks he needs to explain that according to the bi-partisan CBO, we can pay for it by borrowing $200 billion for the next ten years without driving ourselves into insolvency because this plan would immediately put 5 million people back to work with good paying jobs that will boost our economy.

He needs to DEMAND that congress pass this plan for the good of the country.

And to stress the importance of this proposal; he needs to deliver this message in a nationally televised address to the American people.

Will Congress agree to pass this proposal?  Perhaps not!  But their partisan stubbornness will not sit well with independent voters who will be impressed with his leadership and his willingness to compromise.

The Obama Campaign is facing a crisis...and so is the nation.  The President has an opportunity here to turn this crisis into something good for the country.  He can pass legislation that will reform our country and improve our lives immeasurably.

The President needs to lead...and he needs to think BIG.                   

A Winning Strategy

The Obama Campaign has drawn a lot of heat from opponents, supporters and surrogates for demonizing Mitt Romney’s record at Bain Capital.  You can include us among those detractors.

But as we all know it is easy to criticize something and a whole lot harder to offer a viable solution.  With that in mind we suggest that instead of criticizing Romney and Bain the President try something like this…

“There seems to be general consensus that I am reluctant to run on my record.  Quite the contrary.  I am proud of what we have accomplished over these past 3 years; particularly considering the condition things were in when we got here.  So to all those who say that I should steer clear of my record I offer this in response:

Millions of you went to the ATM today.  You were able to go to the ATM and get the cash you needed because of the steps I took to keep the banking industry from collapsing.  Mitt Romney said that I should have allowed the banks to collapse.

Millions of you went to work today at automobile assembly plants.  Hundreds of thousands of you went to work in machine shops and manufacturing companies that make parts for the auto industry.  Tens of thousands of you went to work in local diners and coffee shops and retail stores and other small businesses that cater to the auto industry workers.  You have your jobs, your pensions and your livelihood today because I took steps to save the auto industry.  Mitt Romney said that was a bad idea.  He said I should have let the auto industry go bankrupt.

Many of you were in danger of losing your homes.  But you have your homes today because of the steps I took to save the home mortgage industry and stop the predatory foreclosures. Mitt Romney said that was a bad idea.  He said I should have let the homeowner industry “hit rock bottom.”

Millions of you out of a job and are forced to collect unemployment insurance.  I know that it embarrasses many of you to find yourself in that position.  I know that you are hardworking people and you need that money to support your families.  Mitt Romney and his party wanted to cut your benefits.  Mitt Romney and his party say that you are lazy, slackers and drug addicts.  He and his party say that by allowing you to collect unemployment I am only encouraging you NOT to work.  I know that’s not true.  You have those benefits today because I would not allow Congress to cut them.  Mitt Romney wanted to cut your benefits so he could afford to give tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires.

All of you that are working are receiving a little bit more in your take home pay because of a payroll tax holiday that I passed.  It may not be much.  But it will put groceries on your table and gas in your tank.  Mitt Romney and his party didn’t want to give you that payroll tax cut.  They wanted to reduce the federal tax rates for millionaires and billionaires. 

Many of you are students who are paying for your education through low interest government loans or Pell Grants.  Mitt Romney wants to increase the interest rate on those loans and do away with Pell Grants all together.  He says you should borrow the money from your parents.  You still have those loans and those Pell Grants today because of steps that I took to preserve them.

Many of you have graduated from college but can’t find a job.  Because I passed the Affordable Health Care Act you are able to stay on your parents’ health insurance policy until you are twenty six years old or until you find a job with benefits.  Mitt Romney doesn’t want you to have that option.  He thinks your parents or your church should help you pay for any medical needs you may have.

Millions of you have just recovered from a major illness that was covered by your health insurance company.  In the past you would have seen your insurance cancelled because you were no longer a profitable risk to your health insurance carrier.  Millions of you have a preexisting condition that in the past would have prohibited you from obtaining health insurance.  And millions of you have lost your jobs.  In the past you would have lost your insurance coverage as well.  But because I passed the Affordable Health Care Act all of you have insurance coverage today. Mitt Romney says that the first thing he will do if he is elected will be to repeal the Affordable Health Care Act.  If he succeeds you will lose your coverage.  When asked how you will pay for your medical needs he says that you’ll either have to find a way to pay for it out of your pocket or your family or your church will have to take care of you.

As I said, I’m proud of the things that we have accomplished over these past three and a half years.  The economy is growing.  The unemployment numbers are down.  We’re creating more jobs; 4.2 million of them in the past three years.  But we are not done.  There is more that we need to do.  We need to get more people working and we need to get the economy growing faster than it is. Things are better but we need to keep moving forward.   The last thing we need to do is return to the exact same policies that got us in this mess in the first place.  And if you listen to Mitt Romney, his plans are to do just that.”

If we were Barak Obama we would repeat this over and over and over and over…