Bad Deeds for 5-10-2010

First, the Good News

 

The worst month (most job losses) was January, 2008. What happened then? G. W. Bush left the White House, and it’s been improving ever since.

 

And now, the Bad Deeds:

How Did We Get So Much Debt?

‘Nuff said.

 

A Problem of the Economy, Then and Now –

Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities. It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals. It is some fifty miles of concrete pavement.

We pay for a single fighter plane with a half million bushels of wheat. We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people. This is, I repeat, the best way of life to be found on the road the world has been taking. This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron. … Is there no other way the world may live?

Dwight D. Eisenhower
Speech to the American Society of Newspaper Editors, “The Chance for Peace”

 

Oklahoma Republican Used Taxpayer Dollars to Tout Reducing the Tax Burden on Americans – In a piece of campaign-like literature, which declares that the congresswoman wants to “reduce the tax burden on all Americans,” Rep. Mary Faillin (R-OK), complains of wasteful government spending.

The message would seem sincere, were it not for a block of small text noting that the congresswoman paid for the mailer with taxpayer funds.

 

Political Hacks – The Washington Post asked various luminaries to name one thing the world should just get rid of and political pundit Donna Brazile offered a suggestion that would afford her considerably more free time: get rid of the pundits:

“Get rid of the left-vs.-right commentators who are just out scoring points for their team. This sort of opinion-mongering is not only boring and predictable, it is destructive of the truth. If your only credentials are “GOP shill” or “Democratic hack,” you’ve no business cluttering up the airwaves or the op-ed pages. My momma always told me that if you don’t know what you’re talking about, it’s best to keep your mouth shut. That’s good advice.

Whom do we put in their place? I say replace the pundits with people who have genuine expertise — whether from their academic work, professional life or personal experience — on the key issues of the day. Instead of partisan talking heads or mad hatters from the “tea party” preaching their views on, say, health care and taxes, let’s hear from doctors and insurance professionals, or the number-crunchers from the Congressional Budget Office. They’re much better equipped to help viewers, listeners and readers wade through the facts, arguments and data.”

 

The White House Should Stop Pandering to Wall Street – The White House opposes three important financial reforms that have drawn bipartisan support in the Senate. It should reverse course.

1. Require the Fed to disclose the entities it lends to.
2. Require big banks to spin off their derivative businesses.
3. Cap the size of the biggest banks.

The White House dismisses all three of these three measures “populist,” as if that adjective is the equivalent of “irresponsible.” But in fact, these amendments are necessary in order to restore trust in our financial system. They would reduce Wall Street’s tendency to take huge risks, pocket the wins, and fob off the losses on the public.

Wall Street’s lobbyists have been fighting these amendments tooth and nail. The Street is willing to accept the Dodd bill that emerged from the Banking Committee, but no more. Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein told Congress last week he is “generally supportive” of the Dodd bill — which should be evidence enough of how weak it really is. The bi-partisan amendments just introduced would give it the backbone it needs. The White House should reverse course and support them. Senate Democrats (and Republicans) who want to be remembered for reining in rather than pandering to Wall Street should, too.

 

Republicans Insert Name ‘Kagan’ Into Speeches Opposing Obama’s Supreme Court Pick – Moments after news of President Obama’s choice for Supreme Court justice spread across Washington, congressional Republicans rushed to insert the name “Elena Kagan” into speeches opposing the President’s judicial nominee.

In the text of a speech released Sunday, hours before Ms. Kagan was selected, House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) states, “I opposed the nomination of BLANK because I believe BLANK would lead the court down a dangerous path towards judicial activism. In short, I cannot think of a worse choice for Supreme Court than BLANK.”

The anti-Kagan speeches were generated last week before Ms. Kagan was nominated, GOP insiders said, by using a new iPhone app called iOppose.

Regards,

Jim