"It has to be pulled out by the roots." I thought Speaker Boner was talking about invasive species in the Farm Bill.

Speaking of roots, has the Speaker noticed the drought in the Corn Belt which caused a commodity increase by 35%?


This was the first time I have ever witnessed a Constitutional Law being repealed in a nonsensical vote. This is expensive. It is expensive to have Congress in session to play politics with the House when they are suppose to be conducting the country's business and it is expensive for all the work they could have done but didn't. All the country's business had to be put on the back burner while the majority Republicans played politics with our treasury paying for the entire mess.


Thirty - three times is ridiculous. How much money have the Republicans used to play politics from the House floor because all those games are ethical violations.

This isn't sweet corn. This is field corn. The plants get 12 to 15 feet tall.


by David Pitt 
Jul. 11, 2012 06:08 PM
Associated Press

DES MOINES, Iowa -- Some cornstalks in fields (click here) around the farm where David Kellerman works stand tall. But when the husks are pulled back, the cobs are empty. No kernels developed as the plants struggled with heat and drought.

The soil in Kellerman's part of southern Illinois is like dust after less than an inch of rain since mid-April. This week, he and the farmer he works with cut and baled the withered plants to use as hay for their cattle.... (They bailed it because corn is a form of grass, therefore, hay. It doesn't have the same nutritional value though.)

...Almost a third of the nation's corn crop is showing damage. On Wednesday, the U.S. Department of Agriculture released another report predicting that farmers will get only a fraction of the corn anticipated last spring when they planted 96.4 million acres, the most since 1937....

...A rule of thumb is that food prices typically climb about 1 percent for every 50 percent increase in average corn prices, said Richard Volpe, a USDA food markets research economist.

The government has already predicted food prices will increase this year by as much as 3.5 percent.

Kellerman, 28, farms near Du Bois, Ill., with his neighbor, Gerald Kuberski. He said they gave up last week after more than a week of 100-degree or hotter days.

Temperatures over 95 degrees while corn is pollinating can stunt the growth of ears and prevent kernels from fully developing.

"Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday, we had 108 degrees. It just pretty much fried the corn," Kellerman said....

I would have brought rotten tomatoes in full expectations of using them.

There was too much dignity in the room as far as I am concerned.


The soft bigotry of low expectations? What?


That is bizarre. 


Romney is a bigot. Racist, whatever you want to call him. He was speaking to a room of minority voters and never extended his hand to them.


There is no such thing as soft bigotry of low expectations. Ask President Obama, I am sure he'll tell you the demand by all minority parents on their children to reach for high goals. There is no such thing as soft bigotry.


The inner city is plagued with problems of violence that has nothing to do with low expectations, it has to do with the lack of hope and a drug economy. It is about complacency in believing life actually has a better outcome. There are many reasons why there are problems in some communities across the country, but, low expectations is not one of them, unless it is out of ignorance of knowing there can be a better life.


Let's just call this what it is, racism.


Yesterday, Dennis Miller did it again. He chuckled it up with a caller stating even the USA Park Commission demands 'No feeding of the animals to prevent from dependency.' I mean these people are a disgrace to the word American. 


It is racism. Just that simple.


One of the places the carpetbaggers of 2008 hit the worst was Black Wealth. Don't even try it.

Preserving the Middle Class Tax Cuts is not an attack on Small Business.

$250,000 threshold has nothing to do with Small Business Growth.


How many times does it have to be said for Republicans to change their rhetoric because they are "W"rong.


What do we know about the Income Tax Return FORM?


What do we know?


We know there are SCHEDULES on the Income Tax Return Form that allows Small Business their reduction in taxable income by the expenses of their business.


We know the taxes paid are on what small business owners REALIZE as profit.


Ready for this?

If I were a small business owner looking at paying a higher income tax because my bottom line is over $250,000, what would I do to bring the income tax level down?


Personally, I would be checking to be sure it is not time for expansion and/or whether or not I needed to make a capital investment and/or needed to increase my market share by adding advertising venues before I paid monies into the USA Treasury.


If I was comfortable with my market share, wasn't really ready for expansion and had all the updated equipment I needed; basically cruising along just fine. I would pay the extra tax over $250,000 and take a different vacation next year.


Why would I be happy to do that? Because I would be paying down the national debt, improving the financial viability of my country and be confident my children were going to have a better future; while my business was doing just fine.


The argument in preserving the Middle Class Tax Cuts are obvious, THEY are our economy and we are still growing every month. Let's get this done. The incomes over $250,000 are not necessarily returning monies into the USA economy; in the case of the disgustingly wealthy, we know they aren't; but are offshoring.


What can be done for those $250,000 to $1,000,000 income, make incentives to increase their interest in the USA economy and offer that as a tax break, but, that is all I'd do to bring interest to the economy for those making over $250,000. Otherwise, the Middle Class is where our economy is at and we need it to be as viable in the market place as possible.


One other thing, I'd re-examine "Income Averaging" for those having one exceptionally good year out of every five. This to be sure they aren't unfairly having a tax burden one year that sincerely would be unfair over a five year window. That would also provide a better option for those $250,000 to $1,000,000.


Another name for income averaging is "fairness." 

Bill Clinton reached into the USA economy and found strength with minority entrepreneurs.

This graph notes in 1992 the opportunity for loans were made to minority Americans for economic growth. That was Bill Clinton.


There was over growth and over confidence in regard to loans under Bush as revealed by this graph and it has one word, "Countrywide." Who should be trusted this November? The Republicans understand only one thing "Bigger is better." No so.


Bill Clinton, even today with his Global Initiative, champions minorities and WOMEN to the opportunity of business and economic growth.


Former President Clinton found a great deal of economic strength in believing in women in minorities. He opened new opportunities for women and minorities including college. The increase of women being the majority of college graduates occurred because of the years of Bill Clinton.


Women and minorities do better with Democratic leadership. 


Guess what? The best and most benevolent health care reform in the USA happened with a woman as Speaker of the House.


January 26, 2010

...But there is a growing set (click here) of data and trends indicating that men are not as well equipped for the demands and stresses of modern society as women.  Men die younger, have substantially higher substance abuse rates and are much more likely to be in jail. 

Recent studies also show a major shift in mental health, with depression rising among men and decreasing among women.

Men don't do as well in school as women.  The chart below is from The Rise of Wives, a Pew study on marital changes caused by women outpacing men in education and earnings growth over the past couple of decades....

Local economies are leading the way in job and economic growth in the USA.

The investor class, like Romney is not interested in the USA. Pay attention to the large firms and how they have negative growth in the USA economy. They are leaving. They are taking their money and leaving. The American people are growing their own economy. Congratulations, no one can take it away from you now.


September 01, 2011


...Nearly 2/3rd of private-sector hiring was done by firms with fewer than 50 employees (click title to entry - thank you) last month, which means they added 58,000 jobs in August. Compare this with the meagre 3,000 jobs added by large firms (firms with more than 500 employees). Here's a chart from Société Générale that shows the hiring patterns of small, medium and large firms:

The GOP is afraid of Democrats.

President Obama is correct. Where the Democrats and Republicans agree they should pass bills to make it law. Middle Class tax cuts is an excellent place to start. We know for a fact the driving force to our economy's stability and growth to date is due to the Middle Class. The "investor class" isn't interested in the USA. The Middle Class is interested in the USA. The wealthy class wants to pay their fair share in a fair manner mandated by law.

So, what is the problem? The problem is the GOP is afraid of Democrats. They are afraid if they don't get their tax cuts for the wealthy they won't get anything at all. Well, one has to ask, is the majority of the wealthy actually interested in continuing the UNBALANCED tax cuts during a difficult time for the country?


This graph was published by The New York Times years ago and to realize it still stands and is causing larger and larger deficits to our nation is absolutely immoral. Does the GOP actually think the wealthy want this to continue? They don't have a conscience I suppose, is that it? The wealthy have no conscience, they only have greed and bank accounts and political donations.


Amazing. The tax structure above named by the Democrats a long time ago, should be legislated by the Senate even if it doesn't pass. It is equitable across the spectrum of the citizenship of this country. It needs to be passed into law. It is a moral imperative the country bring its deficit under control and this begins that process.


If the Republicans want to roll back their military cuts and the Democrats want to roll back their domestic cuts, they need to agree on this tax structure and then begin to cut the fat from the USA budget. LEAN AND MEAN. What works, what doesn't. We have a President that cares about this country in a very wholesome way both on the military and domestic side. It is time to get this done! It is the moral thing to do. 


If this tax structure was instituted in the USA with the current funding cuts as of midnight plus one second of the New Year 2013, the country's credit rating would never be in question. It is time to get it done.

Why will the Affordable Care Act stabilize and then reduce health care costs?

The chart is from Wiki.


...In the decade before the law was passed, (click title to entry - thank you) national health expenditures increased about 7 percent a year. But in the past two years, those increases have dropped to less than 4 percent per year, saving Americans more than $220 billion. And that trend is expected to continue, with health-care costs projected to stay level as a share of gross domestic product from 2009 all the way through 2013....


The cost of health care in the USA has been out of control. Capitalists love it. The Health Care Insurance Companies have been free wheeling it and getting what they want without scrutiny. That will stop. The health care insurance companies have to spend 85% of their enrollment fees on the care of their members or refund the difference. Their middle management won't be allowed to grow out of control to justify costs. The companies will have to be efficient and not ungainly.


But, the most important aspect is a NEW health care market in the USA. The entire country is now the client base to the health insurance industry and while they have to spend 85% of their enrollment fees on actual care, the size of that 85% is larger. The 15% is larger. This is hardly the death of the private health care insurance industry.


In her Op-Ed, Secretary Sebelius clearly makes the argument the Affordable Care Act is already stabilizing the insurance industry. Small businesses are not falling off the enrollment, but, instead can offer health care to its employees in confidence they can continue to afford it.


The number enrolled in health care is going to grow as the years go by; not simply by the number of births in the country, but, by the sheer fact every American will continue to find health care insurance affordable and a wise investment. The free preventive care alone is worth the cost, both to the pocketbook and every person's vision of the future of their lives.


The free preventive care is the beginning of a nation far healthier and aware of their wellness. It will make a nation healthier. With a healthier and well cared for populous the USA will have falling costs by the virtue of its wellness alone, but, also because the cost will be carried by those generating the costs. Now, when a citizen is ill, they will have insurance to help with those costs and not pass the costs on to those insured but not necessary ill.


The health care industry is already stabilizing today. It is not only stabilizing but looking forward to the roll it will play in every American's life. 


The future for the country is brighter today than before the Affordable Health Care Act was passed into law. 


In the graph above, some of the escalation in costs globally is reflected by the high cost in the USA. The USA's economy has an impact on every other country. The cost of health care in the USA will come into line with other nations and will actually have a stabilizing effect on them as well. It is a hope of mine, that the stabilizing of the USA healthcare industry will not only bring USA health care costs into alignment with the rest of the world, but, in its stabilization will prove to be a factor in reducing those costs globally, too. 


Given the Affordable Care Act was a measure by Democrats in the USA, they already have reasons to be proud of their agenda for the nation. It is a good thing.


Go, Democrats, Go!

No one is saying Romney is breaking the law. At least that we know of.

But, it shows priorities and character.


Here is a man that has a history of destroying an American steel company with a leverage buyout. Then he raids other industries, buys up factories, limits the merchants to customers and runs the prices up to cause a contraction of the economy while he bank rolls millions.



Then he takes the money he made from destroying aspects of the American economy and puts it in offshore and Swedish accounts. 


He wants to be President? 


How can this man even offer his idea of appropriate use of the American economy to increase stability while offshoring his money and opening Swiss bank accounts. 


He has no credibility.


Romeny also has no experience in establishing thriving American industries except for Big Box stores stocked from China. 


Get for real with this guy. He isn't about America. He is about the opportunities in America, but, he doesn't care about the country, the people or their economy. There is absolutely nothing to say he does and he wants us to believe turning the corner on unemployment is as simple as creating cash flow for the Olympics. 


The Olympics are athletes with other jobs. There is no analogy. The athletes are guaranteed. The venues are guaranteed. There is no huge economic turn around there!

...The pressure followed a week of news reports (click title to entry - thank you) about a Bermuda company Romney owned and transferred to a trust in the name of his wife, Ann, on the day before he became Massachusetts’ governor in 2003.

The existence of the company, Sankaty High Yield Asset Investors Ltd., and other foreign assets — including investments in the Cayman Islands and a Swiss bank account maintained until 2010 — was not known to the public until Romney released his 2010 tax return and an estimate for 2011 in January....

I can understand why Ann Romney wants to be First Lady, she is going to be a wealthy woman. I suppose after leaving the governorship she had to give it all back to him. That would be the day I'd give a dime back. If Ann was good enough to be owner, operator at the Governor's Mansion, she should be good enough to keep on after vacating the mansion.


I really think the Presidency of the USA is simply on Romney's Bucket List, just like the Governorship of Massachusetts. He was there one term and thought it was fun, just like his Regatta boats, jets skies and horses.

Congress has a 17.8 approval rating.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid should have a symbolic vote on restructuring the tax schedule by adopting Simpson - Bowles recommendations and let the nation know it is a goal that is unattainable because of the obstructionist Republicans.


I always hear, "At least Ryan is trying." The President did too and it never made it out of committee. It is time to show the country Democrats are serious about tax reform.

By Associated Press,

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama, (click here - thank you) eager to shift election-year attention away from the nation’s lackluster jobs market, called on Congress Monday to extend tax cuts for families earning less than $250,000 a year while allowing taxes to rise for households making more.

“Let’s not hold the vast majority of Americans and our economy hostage while we debate the merits of another tax cut for the wealthy,” said Obama, flanked by a dozen people the White House said would benefit from the tax cut extension advocated by the president....

Who in this world didn't love Ernest Borgnine.

He was part of the American fascination with film. He knew no role he would not play. His ability ran the spectrum of roles. He was part of every American household and dearly loved. He should have lived longer. No one ever wanted him to leave.

Dennis McLellan | Los Angeles Times

LOS ANGELES — Ernest Borgnine (click title to entry - thank you) seemed born to play the heavy when he burst onto the Hollywood scene as "Fatso" Judson, a sadistic stockade sergeant who viciously beats a private to death in the 1953 movie "From Here to Eternity."

But two years later came the title role in "Marty," where the stocky, gap-toothed Borgnine defied typecasting and earned recognition as a versatile actor by inhabiting the part of a lonely Bronx butcher looking for love....

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/07/08/155390/ernest-borgnine-who-won-oscar.html#storylink=cpy

"Morning Papers" - Its Origins

The Rooster


"Okeydoke"

"Good Night, Moon"

Understanding waning gibbous moon (click title to entry - thank you)

Sunday, July 8, 2012

69% of Full

It is called the "Dawn Moon."

Waning Gibbous Moon

It doesn't matter the year. It doesn't matter the economy.

The Republican agenda is always the same. 


Dismantle government, cut taxes, run wars for profit, repeal civil rights and oppress the oppressed.


It never changes, except, it has gotten far worse over the years.

Republicans are greedy, self-righteous and ruthless. Gee, did I see "Dallas" and "The Big Valley" return to television lately?

...De-funded vs. repealed

Key senators like Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Dallas, a member of the powerful Senate Appropriations Committee, hold potential levers as well. "The court's ruling does not settle the debate," says Hutchison, who leaves office in January. "Congress can stop implementation of this disastrous government takeover of health care by repealing the law - or by de-funding implementation."

The little-known budget reconciliation procedure, dating from the 1974 Congressional Budget Act, enables a politically-divided Congress to drive through controversial tax and spending legislation to finance the annual budget blueprint adopted by the House and Senate.

The measure limits debate in the House and the Senate to just 20 hours, bars Senate filibusters and enables a Senate majority with less than a 60-vote super-majority to approve legislation.

It has been used almost two dozen times since 1980 to break Senate logjams, helping Republicans win passage of welfare reform in 1996 as well as $1 trillion in tax cuts enacted under former President George W. Bush in 2001, 2003 and 2005.

Amid the current political gridlock on Capitol Hill, with Republicans controlling the House and Democrats controlling the Senate, "there is zero chance the health care law will be repealed this year," says political scientist Larry Sabato of the University of Virginia. "But if Republicans gain enough seats in the Senate, hold the House and win the presidency, 'Obamacare' will be dramatically changed or abolished."

No abortion. No contraception. A woman's place is in the home and that will solve the unemployment problem.

After all, even Rosie the Riveter went home to have babies after the war was over.

Another month in the ramped-up war on women, and another unfortunately successful attack on women’s access to contraception. The story of the North Carolina legislature defunding Planned Parenthood is remarkable mainly for the doggedness of the anti-choice faction, from the fact that it had to be done with an override of the governor’s veto to the fact that it was done late at night before a holiday. Never let it be said that North Carolina conservatives don’t take keeping affordable birth control out of the hands of women very seriously....


You think I am joking? Not!

The most outrageous statement I heard today...

...was again by Stephen Moore.


He complained that Mitt Romney had to not only pay corporate tax on his businesses, he had to pay personal tax as well.


Is that not like an amazing statement or what?


Romney was founder of Bain Capital. He was employed as a CEO receiving a salary. He owns stock in the company he started. That stock was facilitated by initial investments and incorporation. Now, the complaint is Romney has to pay personal income tax and his corporation has to pay income tax, too.


Is that some of the most twisted thinking in the entire world? The ego involved believing that a corporation founded by someone should supply its founder with unlimited income without tax, while it pays income tax is completely bizarre. 


Individuals and corporation are two separate legal entities, but, maybe Romney has a marriage with his corporation since he believes they are people. I just wonder if his wife knows.

Another coveted agenda item is Tort Reform.

All anyone has to ask is, "Has Tort Reform contained health care costs?"\


The obvious answer is no.


Tort Reform has done nothing to reduce health care costs, it has allowed unsafe physicians to continue to practice while removing the rights of patients of malpractice and neglect to be victimized by this very faux standard. 


The Republican standard states, with Tort Reform comes lower health care costs. 


IT  IS  A BLANTANT  LIE!


There is discussion now about how the Affordable Care Act will inhibit Tort Reform at the federal level. Robert's stated, "The facets of governing that touch on citizens’ daily lives are normally administered by smaller governments closer to the governed. The Framers thus ensured that powers which, ‘in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people’ were held by government more local and more accountable than a distant federal bureaucracy.”


There are lawyers that practice in the area of victim rights whom believe his will inhibit the federal government from acting to victimize the citizens further.


June 25, 2012

AUSTIN, Texas - A new study has found no evidence (click title to entry - thank you) that health- care costs in Texas dipped after a 2003 constitutional amendment limited payouts in medical malpractice lawsuits, despite claims made to voters by some backers of tort reform.

The researchers, who include University of Texas law professor Charles Silver, examined Medicare spending in Texas counties and saw no reduction in doctors' fees for seniors and disabled patients between 2002 and 2009. A 2003 voter campaign in Texas, and some congressional backers of Texas-style tort reform in every state, however, argued that capping damage awards would not only curb malpractice lawsuits and insurance costs for doctors but also lower costs for patients while boosting their access to physicians.

Tort reform is a controversial topic likely to be resurrected by Republicans and doctors' groups who hoped to make it part of the federal health-care law in 2010....

Republicans always want to end The Estate Tax. Can't imagine why, could it be their concern with personal wealth?

By Aulva Aron-Dine

March 12, 2008

Permanent repeal of the estate tax (click here) would reduce revenues to the USA treasury by almost $1 trillion between 2012 and 2021, the first ten-year period in which its cots would be fully felt. With the economy slowing and deficits returning -- and with far larger deficits projected for future years. -- there is increasing recognition that estate tax repeal is unaffordable...

The Estate Tax could not be repealed in early 2008 and I doubt seriously that should continue to be an agenda item given the state of the country's national debt, but, no doubt it is still a goal.

From Forbes:

6/29/2012 @ 10:47AM

...You would know that I am in favor of a repeal (click title to entry - thank you) of the estate tax largely because, triggered only when wealthy people die (usually the death of a surviving spouse), it does not raise enough annual revenue to run the government for more than a few days....

Besides the fact the EFFECTIVE rate of the Estate Tax is 13.7 percent, less than Romney pays in taxes, the idea the funds would 'run the government for more than a few days' intrigued me. See, the opposition to The Buffet Rule was it would ONLY run the government for one day. One day. Then this statement about the Estate Tax running the government for only a few days. I thought, heck, we are up to an entire week now without borrowing a dime. I thought that was interesting. Also interesting was the fact that a few days of government being paid for is not necessarily important to Republicans.

The Republicans always want to privatize the entitlements.

There was an interesting hearing in regard to Social Security recently. It is at the title to this entry. I found the interest of Congressman Xavier Becerra a healthier response to the report of the Trustees. 


Forty-seven minutes into the hearing there is the comment, "The Republicans want to kill Social Security..." 


The Republicans are always inflammatory.


The Social Security Trustees agree. They are bipartisan. The bottom line is Social Security is solvent until 2033. There are 2.3 Trillion in the trust fund. The trust fund is held in USA Bonds. 


The recommendations is for the Congress to act within five years to develop a strategy to continue the fund for current generations.


There was a loss of two years of solvency lost due to the events of 2008. The solvency was 2035, but, the trust

The ink wasn't dry on the re-election of George W. Bush when it announced he wanted to reform Social Security.

How Bush's Plan Would Secure Social Security (click here)

Posted on November 28, 2004

 

Bush's plan for privatizing SSI was the most aggressive to date. He wanted to remove $2 Trillion immediately to the private sector to begin the investment porfolion and to allow up to four percent of taxable wages, up to a maximum of $1000, could be diverted from FICA and voluntarily placed by workers into private accounts for investment.

Does anyone stop to realize the devastation this country would be looking at if this was done in 2004 knowing 2008 followed?

Republicans are not trustworthy. There is concern for the Social Security program, it is not an emergency and it can be addressed. 

For a very long time and before "W" the Republicans have wanted to privatize SSI. As a matter of fact Dick Armey was its strongest advocate.

The agenda of the Republcians never change.

Ask not what you can do for your country, ask what your country can do for your pocketbook.

How about that? The Flat Tax (click title to entry - thank you) where everyone, including, the low income brackets pay the same amount of tax every year.


I don't believe that is what the Buffet Rule is all about though.


This book was published in 1996, probably for election purposes. It was written before that, so this agenda item has been around now for at least 16 years.

The "Fair Tax" is not high on the agenda of most Republicans because it is a national sales tax. Republicans like a guarantee of income, so putting the entire nation on a fluctuating tax structure which would be high during boom years and lean during those pesky recessions is not their idea of a treasury they can count on.