This is too good an article to just link to, So I'm gonna give Theda Skocpol the bragging rights to it and post so you can comment. Thanks to TPM also.
We dems are talking about this republican sabotage but who is stepping up to the plate to stop them? Most of us here in our little blogs have said the same thing as Ms. Skocpol, but she says it so well, worth reading again and again....
Republicans are Undercutting National Economic Recovery -- and Dems Need to Say So 24/7
By Theda Skocpol - June 24, 2010, 12:18PM
The same old story happens again and again. Dems in the House pass reasonable legislation, and Senate Dems dicker with centrists and Republicans over "compromises," weakening the legislation step by step over many weeks, only to find zero Republican support in the end.
The public has no idea what is going on, and just blames Democrats, who appear to be in charge in DC. Now it is happening gain with vital public spending for national economy recovery -- state aid, unemployment relief, and adjustments in taxes and Medicare payments. This legislation is not just important to this or that group. It matters for keeping any semblance of national economic growth going, for creating and saving hundreds of thousands of jobs.
The President, Congressional leaders, and Democrats of all stripes should be yelling day in, day out, that REPUBLICANS ARE SABOTAGING NATIONAL ECONOMIC RECOVERY. AND PREVENTING JOB GROWTH, JUST FOR POLITICAL ADVANTAGE. That should be the message all the time, led by the President. Stop the murky compromises and the whining about "helping the unemployed." Stop pretending this is about the deficit -- nothing will hurt the deficit more than delayed economic growth. Say what it happening in terms of the national interest.
Republicans are not "compassionate" toward the unemployed, complain Democrats and bloggers. Sorry, folks, that is not what is happening here.
It is past time for President Obama to pin the tail on the Republican obstructionist elephant -- and do it loud and clear all the way to election day. So what if a few conservaDems are part of the problem, too? The real issue is 41 Senate Republicans who will not help the nation's economy recover fast, because they want political advantage. Say so.
read more here
9 hours ago
24 comments:
She's absolutely right and said that very well. Everyday, Obama needs to be out there saying this. And this compromise BS with the Blue Dogs and Repubs needs to stop - they don't vote for it anyway. If they say they are going to filibuster a reasonable, then let them read the phone book, like was done in the past. It's time for the Dems to get some balls and do it - NOW - before the elections.
The Republicans started bankrupting this country in 1983, with massive tax cuts, but no corresponding spending cuts. Promise a "free lunch" and people will line up to vote for you.
Kook alert!
TOM: Go to the GAO website and you will see just how full of it the "tax cuts bankrupted us" is.
Reagan indeed spent more, but look at the growth in revenue. He almost doubled it in his administration alone. It continued growing under Clinton, as did annual budgets, but revenue grew faster, producing the GOP Congress-Clinton surpluses.
psst! it's the out of control spending...
Government does not create economic activity, private businesses do. And those greedy capitalists who hire us will sit on their money until they get some regulatory certainty. Nobody knows what's next out of this White House.
This administration is a bull in a china shop. That is what is killing jobs.
I don't understand the passiveness of dems, it's so damn frustrating!! If they don't fight back and fight LOUD for all us to hear and understand, it will be nobody's fault but their own if they lose more seats then planned. This sabotage is real and the people need to pay attention. A lot of Americas problems lie with the lazy voter.
NO SF, sabotage is killing jobs. Where will revenue come from if republicans keep killing jobs bills? People have to go to work to put money into the system, even little unemployment checks would have done that. Now who gets to take care of those with no check and no job prospects? repubs are shooting themselves in the foot..
Americans are saying in the polls they want JOBS first then worry about the deficit, that is last on the list.
... And now ladies and gentlement, with the GOP starring as Emmanuel Goldstein, we present Two Minutes Hate!
Silverfiddle, c'mon. Your beloved Saint Ronnie ran up deficits unheard of in peacetime, and then your monkey managed to run up more debt by himself than the 43 Presidents before him COMBINED.
This "give the rich all the money and we all prosper" bullshit is so disproven that anyone spewing it has to be looked upon as a fool.
Jolly: "My monkey" "Your guys"...
This ain't a sporting event and nobody is my guy.
It's about free-market principles versus collectivist busybodies.
National debt more than tripled from 900 billion dollars to 2.8 trillion dollars under Reagan.
To quote: "The bottom 40% of households paid out more of their income in federal taxes in 1988 than they had in 1980. Increases in the payroll taxes that finance Social Security and Medicare, which made up a far higher portion of their federal tax bill than income taxes, swamped what little benefit these taxpayers received from lower income tax rates. For the richest 1%, on the other hand, the Reagan tax cuts were pure elixir."
the rest of that is here:
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Ronald_Reagan/Ronald_Reagan_Legacy.html
Enjoy
Sorry that link is incomplete because of comments formatting... here it is again:
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/
Ronald_Reagan/Ronald_Reagan_Legacy.html
cheers
Social Security revenue went up under Reagan because he raised Social Security taxes Silver fish. You know that. Yet your deluded right wing hoards try and make that out as a panacea from tax cuts. Take out that and the real Reagan picture is revealed.
You're a petty, selfish, mindless sheep for the right. Open your eyes to the devastation wrought by supply side economics. And what's making them worse everyday is kooks like you and your masters delaying the cure.
When we are at thrid world nation status in ten to fifteen years you can look back and thank yourself for the death of America.
As an amused and disinterested observer from across the pond, I enjoy how people like Truth101 respond with name calling when unable to stay on topic and refute the arguments of others.
I also respectfully ask, what is the alternative to capitalism you propose?
"Trickle down economics" helped no one. That is an American economical fact of History.
Meathead.
Truth has stayed on topic and refuted SF's arguments just fine anon. If you need more facts try GOOGLE! We are not here to write essays in the comments section for right wingers.
Hey Sue!
I'll comment on the subject at hand as soon as I get settled again.
Anyway, click here for the teeshirt I promised you!
And thanks for the "welcome back!".
Republicans place Party over Principle, Elections over Ethics and Nepotism over Nation.
thanks Hugh, great t shirt!
it's true true and true Gene!
""Trickle down economics" helped no one. That is an American economical fact of History.
Meathead."
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
If you believe that, Tomfoolery, then you are saying that the Carter years were better than the Clinton years?
Can anyone here explain the basic economic fundamentals you base your opinions upon?
I guess the Reagan recession and high unemployment - were not true? Check the facts.
OK Tom, you're just being obtuse now.
Unemployment, taxes, interest rates inflation all lower when he left office.
GDP, number of small businesses, revenues all up.
You still didn't answer my question: Were we really better off under Carter than under Clinton?
I'll ask again. What criteria are you using to measure economic well-being?
Obtuse?
Your the one who wants to change the conversation to Carter. Your the one who seemed to forget the hard economic times during Reagan's term. History (time) is the best judge of political decisions. Only KOOKS would disagree that the debt run up by Reagan was harmful to America. Sorry, your hero (RR) will not do well in the hindsight of History.
Yes Tom, you are obtuse. You make the assertion that trickle down helped no one, and I offer to compare data before and after. Carter was before, Bush and Clinton were after. The data is clear. you are wrong, but keep changing the subject.
What data? You offered an opinion, not facts, or data.
Post a Comment