The Future of Legal Drugs in America

Discrepancies in Public Opinion

Since the early 1900s, the United States and the vast majority of other countries have forbade the use of THC (marijuana) with harsh penalties while, other than prohibition in the U.S., merely regulating the use of alcohol and tobacco. And, for most of that time, that has been exactly what an overwhelming majority of Americans wanted.

However, according the Gallup, since the 1990s, American support for legalizing THC has gone from the low 20s to over 40% of support. With talk of legalization and taxation of the drug in California, 42% of Americans favor such a law in their state. And recently in Massachusetts, non-medicinal THC made its first ballot appearance as Bay Staters voted overwhelmingly to decriminalize possession of small amounts of it.

However, when comparing these data to data on American support for lowing the drinking age, almost 80% of Americans are opposed to lowering the drinking age to 18 (although the poll does not ask more specific questions that are important we’ll get into later).

What may be at the root of this confusing data is the fact that this has become a national issue and thus, as with any other issue, public opinion has changed as people learn more and more facts. The fact is that alcohol poisoning kills thousands of people per year while there has never been any known case of death directly due to THC.

The only deaths THC causes are those caused by marijuana’s tendency to inhibit vomiting lowering the lethal dose of alcohol, however, those deaths are ultimately caused by alcohol not THC.

One measure of safety of a drug is the lethal dose. For alcohol, it is typically .4% of a person’s blood (meaning the percent of a person’s blood composed of alcohol exceeds .4%) which is only five times the legal limit to drive in most states. Most sources say that the lethal dose for THC is 1500lbs in 15 minutes—street value $120,000. In laymen’s terms, there is no known amount of THC that can kill a person.

Another interesting issue is addiction—the fact that THC has no known physically addictive element. Marijuana addiction is purely psychological. This is not to say that it is not addicting because, using the definition that an addicted person is a person who will continue use of the drug even if continued use will have negative consequences, people do become addicted. However, this does suggest that marijuana is less addictive than alcohol.

On the issue of cigarettes, while the CDC indicates (and I have no reason not the believe them) that joints have more carcinogens than cigarettes by a large margin, it should be noted that very few people become addicted to marijuana. Most tobacco smokers smoke several times per day—even double digits—while few THC smokers even smoke daily. In this respect, THC joints or pipes are safer than cigarettes.

These facts, which an increasing number of Americans are aware of, may explain why so many Americans favor legalized recreational marijuana while so few favor deregulation of alcohol.

K2—“Synthetic Pot”

A relatively not well researched drug has surfaced throughout the US known as “K2”. It is a drug that is chemically similar to THC and perfectly legal in all corners of the United States.

While a couple of states, counties and towns have discussed banning it (even making possession a felony), the US Government has yet to get involved.

Given the public opinion above, it is very likely that K2 will remain legal for a long, long time to come if not permanently. This is a major issue because while THC is well documented as a relatively safe drug, K2 is not. Additionally, it is made in China which has a recent history of making products that do not live up to our strict safety standards.

My Comment

After carefully researching this piece, my opinions changed quite a bit, primarily because I was convinced that THC is safer than ethyl alcohol.

But then I thought, while THC is safe, street marijuana might not be. So, just as the government makes sure that when you buy a fifth of Captain Morgan’s rum it is no less safe than any other type of alcohol, regulating the safety of marijuana is an excellent idea.

Marijuana should only be sold under strict conditions, however. First, it should not be smoked in public, not even outside—there shouldn’t be Weed Bars on 42^nd Street. Second, it should only be sold to people over the age of 19 (no high schoolers). Third, it should only be sold in licensed stores that check IDs upon entry (not at the point of sale—no one under 19 should even be allowed to enter such a store.

My opinions haven’t changed all that much on alcohol. At age 18, you should be able to drink beer, wine and anything less hard than wine. At age 20, you should be able to drink anything.

Having a zero tolerance 21 years old+ drinking age makes no sense because people under 21 drink anyway and when they get their hands on alcohol, especially after a long time of having none, they binge. It is dangerous and counterproductive while exposing kids to small amounts of alcohol before they enter college makes a whole lot of sense.

Many will disagree arguing that when the drinking age was raised to 21, drunk driving accidents plummeted. I remind them that nearly all states have adopted strict drunk driving laws since then. It is the drunk driving laws, not the drinking age itself, that is responsible for our safer roadways.

On Obama's Shoulders

A quiet problem has emerged out of the Middle East and it isn't Iraq or Afghanistan.  A quiet problem has emerged out of Asia and it isn't China.

This week a great crime occured in the Eastern World.  It was a copycat of one that occured not too long ago.  An election was stolen.

The President of Iran told his talking heads at the state run news headquarters to announce his landslide victory.  About 70% of people in Iran voted for the incumbent to re-elect him.

But if he's so popular then where are the anti-protesters?  Nobody is rushing to his aid except the police he has wrapped around his finger and the state run news agency that is as corrupt as that of North Korea.

Think back to 2000...December to be exact.  If I remember correctly, people like me were yelling bloody murder at the fact that Governor Bush claimed victory against VP Gore in the most corrupt election, the only corrupt Presidential election, in US history.  But for ever Gore fan screaming...there was an anti protester.  And think about it...half of Americans voted for George Bush!  In Iran 70% of Iranians voted for the incumbent President but none of them appear to be defending him against the "minority"!

If this all sounds familiar, remember a month ago.  Kim Jong Il of North Korea claimed he won the election unanimously.

The point is, if every country in the world was a democracy, we wouldn't have nearly as many problems as we do now.  A nut like Kim Jong Il or Mahmoud A. wouldn't stand any more of a chance over there than James von Brunn (the Holocaust Museum shooter) would stand here.

So now, we and our President can only pray that the rebels in Iran win the fight against their illegitimate leader.  If they don't, Obama is going to have to worry about nuclear weapons more than any President since Ronald Reagan.

In October of 1962, President John F. Kennedy was informed that Cuba was home to Russian nuclear weapons with the capability to reach the United States.  His brother, Robert, told him not to bomb Cuba.  Later, we found out that the Russians in Cuba were ordered to send a nuclear bomb to the US if the US attacked them.  On that day, the world came closer to its end than any day since a meteorite killed the dinosaurs.

Let the Iranian rebels succeed, because if they don't, we may come closer to such an end or worse.  And, at least in this respect, let Obama succeed because our future depends on it.  No true American would do anything but root for the President of the United States to succeed in protecting the homeland.

Paulson's Version of Capitalism

The United States of America was founded upon an economic philosophy that most members of both parties ultimately agree with to some degree or another.  That philosophy is, of course, capitalism.

Now we're told that capitalism is threatened by the incumbent President.  Obama with his tax cuts on the middle class and his spendthrift habits and his owning GM and Chrysler is turning this country into a socialist republic.

But where were these people at the end of the Bush administration warning us?  Was it not President Bush that was the first President to run a major corporation since FDR?  Was it not President Bush that took over 85% of AIG and ousted its CEO?

Again, no President since FDR (& Tennesee Valley Authority) has ever had a major government run corporation until Bush 43.  And AIG is publically traded!

So now these right wing crazies are suggesting we boycott General Motors and Chrysler.  Even moderate to conservative radio show host Michael Smerconish told Chris Matthews that he disagreed with the boycott and believed it was "a political ploy".  He even said that it was interesting that about the same number of people who support the boycott support the Republican party...in both cases near 20%.

But today we found out the worst of Paulson's socialism.  We already knew that he pressured CEOs to take bailout money (or else).

Now we know for almost certain thanks to the Congressional Oversight Comittee investigators that Paulson did in fact threaten Bank of America CEO Ken Lewis into purchasing Merryl Lynch.

We moderates and liberals knew back then that buying ML was a horrible idea because it was large corporations (and banks with risky assets) that destroyed the economy.  We just didn't know that the decision to purchase it was made by the US Government.

And they want to call us the Democrat Socialist Party?  They've pushed us so far down the path to socialism that I don't know whether Obama can bring us back. 

Dems Face Trouble in Northeast

Three Democrats are causing the party a great deal of trouble in the liberal northeast.  In New York, David Patteron's tax policy and Caroline Kennedy fiasco have sent his approval ratings to 30%...twice as many Democrats disapproving as approving.  In Massachusetts, Deval Patrick's taxes, ethics complains among other things have his approval ratings in the same territory.  And in New Jersey, polls have Jon Corzine behind his Republican challenger by about 10%.

In Massachusetts, as went the economy so went Deval Patrick's approval numbers.  While it's hard to complain about a mere $2B deficit during a crisis of this magnitude in a state as large as Massachusetts, after four years of balanced Romney budgets, Patrick looks like Bush next to Clinton.

People in Massachusetts are afraid of their healthcare plan failing.  Under Romney Healthcare, working families recieve a large government subsidy on their private plans while the unemployed are granted insurance for twelve months.  In Mass, it is illegal to not have health insurance.

And now, Patrick has decided to chip away at whatever is left of his base (although more Dems are against him than for him) by denying Boston Mayor Tom Menino stimulus money for Boston's schools.  Tomorrow, many Boston parents will march on the capital with a sign reading, "Patrick to Boston: Drop Dead".  I compare what Patrick's doing to Pres. Obama deciding to give California $1B and Maine $100B.

Patrick is up for re-election in 2010 and "does Patrick deserve re-election" poll has far more saying no than yes.  And his flipping of the Mass state bird at the city of Boston has yet to be responded to with a poll...that fiasco will likely push his numbers even lower.

If someone challenges Patrick, they will likely win the Democratic nomination for the 2010 election.  If not, Mass is likely to make an unexpected swing to the right following Vermont & Connecticut.  It should be noted that Patrick was never elected to any office before Governor.

Meanwhile in New York, David "I'm Only Governor Cuz My Boss was a Sex-addict" Patterson is about to be rudely interrupted from his new job by two Italians: Cuomo and Giuliani.

Patterson assumed office after Spitzer resigned.  Patterson decided to come clean on he and his wife's extra marital affairs among other issues.

Patterson has two problems.  Not-Senator Caroline Kennedy and taxes.

As preface, most of New York has 8% sales tax, the highest in the union.  It also has the unpopular bottle deposit program that charges 5 cents per bottle which most people never bother to collect when they finish their drinks.

Now, Patterson suggested many unpopular tax increases to balance the budget.  The most spoofed tax was the "fat-tax" on non-diet soda and other unhealthy drinks.  Taxes on haircuts, video games and music downloads were also proposed.  

Of course, we all know that nobody is more likely to stop spending as a result of tax hikes than teenagers so targeting that age group will obviously hurt the economy.  Patterson didn't consider that when he decided on the video game and music downloads tax.

$2.3B in taxes remained after the state's assembly and Senate compromised with the governor.

And of course, the speculation (probably not founded, but still believed by many) that Patterson waited days to tell Kennedy she was not going to be chosen (he said he knew he was choosing Gillibrand on Tuesday, January 20th but Kennedy didn't know that until days later).  Of course, the Kennedy democrats, many of whom were the last of Patterson's dwindling base, were furious.

Then, take a trip across the Hudson River to New Jersey and Jon Corzine.

Currently there are no serious Democratic challenges for the June 2nd primary and the obvious Republican challenger, Chris Christie is ahead in the polls solidly.

Corzine's accident caused a dip in approval ratings as he was regarded as the cause of the accident.  It didn't help that he let the officer driving him apologize when the officer was obviously speeding because the Governor told him to.  Few blamed the officer.

And, of course, the state government shut down angered many.  Taxes went up and the state deficit went up, too.  So New Jersans have to ask, why are we paying the same property taxes if not higher and 7% sales tax for no reason?

So the Republicans will likely keep their seat in Connecticut until 2014 with their untouchable governor, Jodi Rell, a likely re-elect.  Will they gain three more in the next few years?

Without Democratic challenges to Patrick, Corzine and Patterson, most likely.

College Costs

Private education has become a private business, one with zero regulation and zero ethics.  Many of them use their endowments to invest and when times were good, many made double digit returns.  They never lowered their costs.  Now, their endowments are down...but still sky high...and in the midst of the worst downturn in history, prices are still rising.

Colleges should be given the same choice every other organization is given...you're either a for-profit or a not-for-profit organization.

If colleges want to choose to be for-profit, they may solicit absolutely no donations what-so-ever.  There should be a federal law guaranteeing that those colleges be treated as companies in every way from property tax to income tax.  And it should be illegal for students or anyone else to volunteer for them...WalMart can't have volunteers, afterall.  And they cannot unionize with other schools such as when private pharmacy schools lobbied the government collectively to make pharmacy a six year program.

If they want to be non-profit, give them the benefits.  They can have their donations, they can have their tax breaks or reprieves.  But here's the list of regulations.

• No corporate donations...prevent the Harvard Medical/Pfizer embarrassment
• 2% per year limit on tuition hikes
• Strict rent control on student living space without kitchens & private bathrooms...dorms are meant to provide students with cheap housing, not crappy housing for an arm and a leg
• Requirement that 99% of each student's tuition be spent to directly benefit that student (that means no new buildings that they won't see completed before graduation)...only 1% left for Dean/Presidential salaries...none for endowments
• Ban on the practice of flat tuition rates so students don't pay rates meant for 17 credits when they only take 14 credits
• Ban on endowment investments not protected by the FDIC and requirement that donations be spent at a rate of 75% per year almost 100% of that to benefit students.
• Ban on professors holding second jobs in related fields such as Harvard medical professors holding jobs with drug companies
• Require full access for students to all salaries from janitors to the President
• End mathematical dishonesty such as saying the student to faculty ratio is 30 to 1 and counting security guards and janitors as faculty
• Absolutely no unionization of colleges...as mentioned above
• Pass any additional regulations required to ensure all colleges resume being educational institutions

This would legally and constitutionally pressure colleges to choose the non-profit option.  Choosing to be for-profit would be the same as choosing to be a company, zero donations and zero volunteers.  Choosing to be non-profit would be agreeing to a set of regulations that would 1) slow tuition growth, 2) ensure students' tuition benefits them and 3) provide transparency for current and prospective students.

Moreover, I believe that Collegeboard should be bought out and made part of the Health & Education Department.  And all colleges that choose to be non-profit must use the Education Dept's test (SATs).  The price of an SAT test and AP tests would become so low that it would begin to end the correlation between money and score.

Stalking is Illegal, Pinhead

Today, I recieved an email in my Facebook inbox that the creator of the Facebook group that was petitioning for the uninviting of the rape vitim blaming Bill O'Reilly for a rape victim support group was ending.  Why?  Well, as Keith Olbermann reported last night, Bill...er...the producer he sheepishly sent, stalked a critical "far-left blogger" as she was on vacation.

She, Amanda Terkel of thinkprogress.org, says she left her home traveling two hours to her vacation destination in Virginia.  Terkel rightly complained that no one from Fox News attempted to speak with her before the ambush.  O'Reilly has previously claimed he would never send fox news stalkers unless someone declined to comment or be interviewed.

O'Reilly thinks MSNBC, where she appeared, pressured Terkel to write the entry.

Tim Kaine, the Governor of Virginia, should notify Fox News that the state does not tolerate harassment or stalking.  Terkel could have pressed charges in the state and caused Murdoch and O'Reilly a great deal of trouble.  The last thing Murdoch needs right now is more evidence his waiver to have multiple networks and newspapers in a single city should be revoked.

Bill O'Reilly has freedom of the press, and with it power, but he does not have the power to intimidate bloggers for quoting him...O'Reilly (who previously knocked mediamatters.com) seems to hate nothing more than people quoting him.

And by the way, that's all Terkel did.  She quoted something O'Reilly said that was offensive, placed the blame for a rape-murder with the victim and condescendingly refered to her as "that".

"Now Moore, Jennifer Moore, 18, on her way to college. She was 5-foot-2, 105 pounds, wearing a miniskirt and a halter top with a bare midriff. Now, again, there you go. So every predator in the world is gonna pick that up at two in the morning.She’s walking by herself on the West Side Highway, and she gets picked up by a thug. All right. Now she’s out of her mind, drunk."

-The Radio Factor, April 3rd, 2006

Unpatriotic Anti-Obama Cheers Hinder Progress

Rush “I Should Just Move to Canada” Limbaugh

First it was Rush Limbaugh.  Just before inauguration day on January 16^th, he wished failure on the President-elect of the United States because “[he is] a conservative”.  That prompted millions of people to question Limbaugh’s patriotism…why would anyone wish failure on a U.S. President when his failure means the entire nation’s failure.

And unfortunately, there are the Michelle Bachman’s of Congress that get all of their information from Rush Limbaugh and the right-winged website Townhall.com.  Perhaps a few of them learned their history from Conservapedia, a site that claims Obama was “allegedly” born in Hawaii.

Perhaps the worst story out of this was that of Phil Gingrey who criticized Rush Limbaugh on hardball.  For that, he received a spot on Keith Olbermann’s best persons list.  Then, he went back and apologized to Limbaugh as if Limbaugh were in any way his leader.  Both Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann heavily criticized Gingrey for the move.

And of course, we learned quickly how many Republicans do think of Rush as a leader when only three of them ultimately voted for the Economic Recovery Package.  Two of them from Maine have both repeatedly been called “Republicans in name only” by critics while the third, Arlen Specter, is also a notorious moderate. 

All 216 of the rest voted no because the Democrats were not willing to adopt a 100% tax cuts plan that…wait didn’t the people vote against upper class tax cuts on November 4^th or something?

Conservative Columnists Write Obama Off

Then came the editorials.  Just two weeks in, several conservative editorial writers said that Hillary Clinton and John McCain were obviously right about Obama’s experience problem because of his first two weeks in office with his cabinet problems…this coming after a Republican aggressively sought an appointment to the cabinet only to quit because of ideological differences…evidently he did not know that Obama was a liberal until recently.

Well these people who are counting Obama out within a couple weeks of the administration are the people hoping for a failure.  They want Sarah Palin or Bobby Jindal to be President at cost of four more years of people like Henrietta Hughes suffering without jobs or homes of their own. 

I wish the whole Republican Party could be more like MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough who was never afraid to call out Bush’s uncontrolled expansion of government.  He was never afraid to criticize Bill O’Reilly who often said “Joe Scarborough is a liberal because he doesn’t support Bush”.  And now, Scarborough is not afraid to admit that he is pulling for Obama like everyone should be.  He’s an American who just happens to be conservative, not the other way around.

Former Obama Rival Spews Lies

So then came Reagan’s former Assistant Secretary of State for International Organizing Affairs, Alan Keyes.  More importantly, he’s the guy who lost to Obama during the 2004 Senatorial election by a margin of 70% to 27%.  You ought to hear what he has to say now.

Keyes started off discussing how Obama is not really President because last he checked, the President had to be a natural born citizen.  He claims Obama “refused to prove he was” born in Hawaii.  Except that he released his birth certificate and upon examining it, nearly every independent and even some conservative websites concluded it was legitimate. 

The reporter evidently couldn’t help but laugh at Keyes and Keyes told him “this is not a laughing matter”.  He went on to discuss how soldiers are in court asking whether they have to obey the President (well a conservative swore him in so that’s a pretty damn good sign).  That latter part of course would be where the laughing stops…except there are currently no such cases in any courts, at least none any sources are bothering to even cover (because they’re all obviously absurd).

Keyes called Obama a “radical communist” and said that everyone realizes that now.  By that logic, over 60% of people support a radical communist President then, according to Gallup and 53% of Americans voted for one.  It is clear that Keyes who held just one major government job for two years over two decades ago, never an elected one (unless he was on Student Council or something) and who lost the 2004 race by an embarrassing margin is just trying to pay back Obama for taking away his dignity.

NY Post Offends Millions…including Rupert Murdoch???

By now, everybody’s seen the racial and more importantly violent depiction of President Obama.  If anybody had compared Fmr. Pres. Bush to something dead, conservatives everywhere would have called upon the Secret Service to arrest them.

Yet just a month into the new Presidency, the NY Post has done something even worse…promoted violence AND racism.  The cartoonist said that if the monkey was anybody, it was Nancy Pelosi…as if it is any more justified to call for her assassination than it is to call for Obama’s.

Few thought the Post would apologize, but it gave a non-apology apology (a big step for that paper) the next evening.  It said that to any who were offended, it apologizes but to those who have had disagreements in the past and want to retaliate for past problems, no apology is due.

Here’s the interesting part though…the man who wrote The Man Who Owns the News who heavily interviewed Murdoch and said that he has become more liberal in his old age because of his spouse appeared on Countdown w/ Keith Olbermann twice to discuss the subject. 

He says that Murdoch likely called for the apology himself and was likely angered when the editor of the paper did not actually apologize in the apology.  Also, the only reason Murdoch owns several papers and television stations in New York right now including the local Fox 5 NY, Fox News Channel, the NY Post and others is because of a waiver to a rule barring such a monopoly. 

That could be the other reason for the apology…if that waiver is revoked as Sharpton is calling for (of course, NY’s Governor just happens to be black furthering fears at NewsCorp of such a revocation) Murdoch may have to sell parts of NewsCorp, move Fox News Channel or other major inconveniences or even financial disasters.

Stimulus or No Stimulus?

Education

• Expanding the FAFSA Pell Grant program at a time when a frozen credit market is preventing millions from going to school is an absolute necessity.  I've always said, if they banks don't lend to students and the U.S. Government refuses to bail the students out, our economy will never recover because there won't be an educated people to push its recovery.  That is why I support $15.6B to the Pell Grant program.  Impoverished people used to rely on loans as well as government aid to go to school but this crisis has taken away their loans.
• Within education is the $56B in state aid that Sen. Collins and Sen. Nelson agreed upon (Nelson implied that the cut was not for himself but for Collins, Snowe and Specter on the Rachel Maddow Show).  This will prevent layoffs of teachers and might be used to also prevent layoffs of police and firefighters.  It will save (or create if people have already been laid off) a great deal of jobs.
• $26B will go to local school districts.  Not to belabor the point, education spending is stimulative.

Healthcare

• Doctor's handwriting used to be a joke...until it started causing 7,000 deaths per year.  $19B will go towards smart technology in our healthcare system.  It will save money too and the more money we save the more people will get to see doctors based on need rather than money.
• $2B will go to preventative healthcare.
• Something similar to the 1994 Clinton Healthcare bill is required to save businesses money.  If businesses did not have to worry about healthcare costs, they'd be laying off a lot less people and we would not be as far in this recession as other parts of the world like Japan.

Welfare Relief

• There is no more stimulative thing we know of than foodstamps.  They're guaranteed to be spent, they create jobs in the retail sector and they keep people from going hungry in the United States...something that should never happen.  $20B will go to that program to "defray" rises in food prices.
• $13.6B will go directly to families to help them through the housing crisis...Pres. Obama just discussed that topic today.
• $4.8B will help the unemployed find jobs and train workers.
• What's missing here?  A four month extension of unemployment benefits from 12 to 16 months.  The Republican Senators did away with it...hopefully Maine doesn't have too many unemployed or Sens. Collins and Snowe will have a fun time explaining that decision.

Public Sector

• As mentioned before, fiscal relief will go to states for the purpose of education spending.
• $4B will also go directly to law enforcement officials local and state.

Other Economic News

Some other healthcare related news...the New York Times reported late Wednesday that Gov. Kathleen Sebelius is the top choice to be Secy. of Health and Human Services.  No, she never received a free car or driver from a friend who never told her she had to pay taxes on it.  Don't worry about it.  She brings eight years of experience as Insurance Commissioner of Kansas to the department.  Obama has reportedly decided on her aides say.  But we still need a commerce secretary...hmm...Gov. Corzine (D-NJ)?  Mayor Bloomberg (I-NYC)?

It may have been a photo-op, but it was a great symbol.  Just after the bill was signed into law yesterday, a Missouri bridge project began as the first project to be financed by the President's stimulus package.

Pres. Obama has also unveiled a $75B plan to aid homeowners.

Resign Roland/Concede Coleman

Roland Burris is guilty of purgery.  I wasn't sure of that just two days ago, but now new revelations confirm that.  For the purpose of this article I will refer to the former Governor of Illinois as Rodney (not his real first name but it'll prevent confusion with his brother, Robert).

Burris intentionally evaded a question about talking to a list of people including Robert Blagojevich, the former Governor's brother, about the Senate seat during an impeachment hearing.  Then he snuck an affidavit on February 5th that stated he discussed the Senate seat with Robert Blagojevich and was asked to help raise money for Rodney Blagojevich.

Now, the Senator (for now) admits that he atempted to raise funds for the then Governor even as he was expressing interest in the Senate seat that would be vacated if Senator Obama were elected President.  Now, we know how that turned out.

Yesterday, my guess is Patrick Fitzgerald had no inclination of prosecuting Burris.  Today, that might've been a hot topic at Justice.  Unless, of course, Fitzgerald already well knew about it and Burris wanted to break the news before Fitzgerald could.

Senators Reid and Durbin, the top Democrats in the Senate, had no idea that Burris had talked to anyone near Blagojevich.  They were lied to...sitting Senators lied to...while at the same time, in a different Washington, D.C. building prosecutors discussed cases involving baseball players who lied to sitting Congressmen.  

And more importantly, he lied under oath to the Illinois Senate.

This blog is taking a firm and official stand in favor of the resignation or expulsion of Senator Roland Burris of Illinois.

---

To Norm Coleman of Minnesota.

You just failed to silence thousands of proper absentee votes for Al Franken for reasons your Supreme Court found baseless.  A bipartisan board declared Al Franken the winner in your state.  Your former colleague, Sen. Klobuchar (D-MN), needs help securing your states fair share of federal grants from the stimulus package.

Yet, now you baselessly accuse the canvasing board of double counting over 200 ballots.  And you want...votes to be included that weren't included before?  Like the ones you tried to throw out?

Shortly after the election, Citizen Coleman, you said that if you were Al Franken you'd step aside.  Well, for all intents and purposes, you are now Al Franken.  So step aside.

Stimulus or No Stimulus?

Here is a new feature on the recent passage and signing of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.  Twice a week during these next few weeks, I will disect this law item by item and describe how each item will or will not stimulate the economy.  Also in this feature, I will discuss the latest on how this money is actually being spent as told by the new government webpage, recovery.gov.

First, as preface, this bill is neccessary and in general a very effective bill.  If we do nothing other than bail out banks, which is what Herbert Hoover did in a nutshell, our economy will do exactly what Hoover's did...go from 3% unemployment in 1929 to 25% in 1933 (or in this case, 3% in 2008 to 25% in 2012).  And spending billions on infrastructure such as mass transit, broadband and highways as well as billions in state aid to keep unemployment benefits flowing and neccessary government officials like police and firefighters from being layed off will create millions of jobs.

It's priorities are sound and well layed out.  It will aim to create clean, renewable (and cheap) energy to end our dependence on foreign oil that funds terror and causes global warming.  It will modernize bridges, highways and roadways to prevent tragedies like the Minneapolis bridge collapse and daily breakdowns of our transportation services.  It will increase consumer spending with tax cuts targeted at the middle and lower classes, the most likely people to spend money.  And it will transform our education department for the 21st century while preventing mass layoffs of neccessary public sector jobs like mentioned before.

And while I may have criticized Sens. Nelson, Specter, Collins and Snowe last week for their watered down version of the stimulus package, most of their cuts will have no impact on the economy for years (the point of the cuts) and they were neccessary for us to have any package at all.  To get started, here are today's items.

Energy

• Five billion dollars will go to weatherizing modest income homes.  This will weatherize up to one million homes when all is said and done (source: Miami Herald).  This money will ideally be spent before next winter and will mainly go to purchasing materials hopefully made here in the U.S. and paying workers.  Rather than waste billions of dollars per year handing out cash to the poor for their heating bills, this section aims to fix the problem once and for all.
  
• Everybody by now has seen the recent IBM ad campaign lobbying for a new energy grid run by technologically advanced computer systems rather than inefficient, never upgraded grids.  It's called a "smart grid" and if it makes this country just 5% more energy efficient, it'll be like taking 53 million cars off the road (source: Wikipedia).  Well that's part of the next thirty billion dollars that'll go to smart grid technology and renewable energy.

Science and Technology

• Senators Collins and Nelson cut about 50% off of most science sections of this bill.  They left in a very important $7.2B in spending on broadband technology.  It aims to link up as may underserved Americans as possible to the broadband internet system.  That will create millions of jobs from building the nuts and bolts (in this case, wires and telephone polls) of the system to the jobs that the system itself aims to create through creating efficient businesses.
• The package aims to spend about $15B for creation of science facilities.  Obviously, science is a hit or miss so it's hard to say whether this will work or not.  It could create a cure for cancer or it could create a three-eared mouse...who knows?

Transporation

• $17.7B will go to creation and fixing of mass transit sytems.  This was raised significantly through grassroots lobby from such pubic interest groups as U.S. Public Interest Research Group (PIRG).  Across the nation, thousands of construction jobs on subway stations, bus terminals, busses, trains, etc have been halted due to bankruptcy of mass transit departments.  These jobs already have all the neccessary permits to restart...they just need money.  That's "shovel-ready".
• $18.8B will go to clean water, environmental restoration and flood control so that something with so many warnings like the levee breach in New Orleans (something that we'd been warned about long before Hurricane Katrina was even a tropical depression) never happens again.  And we have to end these constant "boil-water warnings" that have become much more than annual throughout major cities.
• $27.5B to highway construction...that's pretty much self-explanatory.  This creates a slew of jobs (at least 10 or 20) for every individual project, so collectively it will create millions of them.
• $16.5 will to go "other federal and public infrastructure" whatever that means.  Sort of a miscallaneous category.

This will continue on Thursday...probably Tuesday and Thursday of each of the next few weeks.

FDR, Clinton and Reagan...Let's Keep it Truthful

When the Republican party last lost its way in 1992 having their President unseated and still having minorities in both houses of Congress, the party needed a demagogue to follow.  They chose Ronald Reagan.  Now, in 2009 as they have again lost their way, they are choosing to target two great Presidents: Bill Clinton and Franklin D. Roosevelt.

The So-Called, "Clinton Surplus Myth"

Most recently, Republicans have targeted the Bill Clinton surplus saying that the national debt increased every year of the Clinton administration.  That is true (source: treasury.gov), but it is too simple a way of looking at this situation.  Let's look at it at a more person level.

Now, I emailed a person with such a claim on his blog and he quickly responded.  His page has the explanation that if you borrow $500 from your friend and make $1000, spending $1200 then you've spent in deficit.  But that analogy applies to a government spending more than it makes and borrowing the rest...like now.  The following analogy applies to the late 1990s and early 2000s under Bill Clinton.

Let's say you owe $100,000 and you pay 5% per year in interest.  At the end of the year, you owe  $105,127 (using the continuous compounding equation).  You make $50,000 and spend $45,000 during that year.  So at the end of the year, you spend that $5000 to pay down the $105,127 debt you owe.  Yet, your debt has increased to $100,127.  You spent less than you took in, but your debt has increased.

Now think about this in terms of the national debt.  The national debt was between $4T and $6T during the Clinton administration.  The amount of interest that piles up on th

at debt is the hardest part of paying it off and will be an issue for many years to come.  

Now, in all fairness, most people present the so called "Clinton surplus myth" in the context of, "without condoning Pres. Bush's irresponsible spending" but the bottom line is, the problem Clinton faced with paying down the debt is doubled for President Obama thanks to Pres. Bush's doubling of it.  Republicans should find a new issue to work with because after Reagan, Bush41 and Bush 43, Americans aren't listening to their claims of fiscal responsibility.

"FDR Caused or Prolonged the Great Depression"

It started when Brit Humes of Fox News said, "now everyone agrees the New Deal failed".  Keith Olbermann rightly responded, "wow he must have a lot of invisible friends."  Mitch McConnell just said on the Senate floor, "we now know the New Deal programs did not work".  Many 

Republican pundits cite the New Deal "failure" as proof that spending is not stimulative.

Starting with Mitch McConnell...he stated that by 1936 the unemployment rate was still 15%.  That's absolutely true and that's an inexcusable number.  But it's inexcusable for President Hoover...not Roosevelt.  Because when FDR took office in 1933 the unemployment rate was almost 25%.  That's a 10% drop in just three years.  The only thing inexcusable about 15% is that Hoover let it get that high.

While Mitch McConnell was misleading, but other Republicans have fudged the numbers in an even more misleading way.  A lot of Republicans say that "the unemployment rate was still 18% by 1938".  That is also true...but again it is misleading.  In 1937, the unemployment rate was about 14% because FDR got nervous about the deficit and cut spending which is now considered his biggest mistake...the recession came back and FDR quickly put his foot back on the gas.

And to that point, that recession called the "Roosevelt Recession" is the most definitive proof we have that spending stimulates the economy.  For four years, unemployment crashed from its high of 25% at the start of the Roosevelt administration.  This was as he spent billions of dollars in deficit because it was absolutely necessary.  And then, he hit the brakes and most economists from all parts of the political spectrum agree caused the recession.  We have no more definite proof than that that spending is stimulative for the economy.

So let's not fudge the facts here.  FDR got us well on our way to economic stability and had WW2 not gotten us out sooner, we would have been out by fully recovered by the late 1940s, an incredible feat.  Under Herbert Hoover, the unemployment rate went from 3% to 25%...and he was a ONE TERM president.

In Hoover's second year, unemployment was just about where it is now.  Just two years later it was 25%.  That's what would have happened if we hadn't passed this spending bill.

Of course, there are the Glen Becks of the world who think that FDR "caused" the Depression but they're not worth elaborating on.  Clearly the Depression peaked in 1933 as FDR was inaugurated and the stock market first crashed in 1929 (right VP Biden?)...neither his fault.

The Reagan Legacy Project

The year was 1992.  There was a general feeling of pride throughout America after we stepped in to Iraq to help out the helpless Kuwait.  But then, the recession came into full swing and people began to question Bush's ending the war in Iraq with the dangerous Saddam still in power.  So when some no-name Governor from Arkansas who nobody ever heard of came along and unseated a man who had been in the White House twelve years between his own Presidency and his Vice Presidency, the Republicans were shell-shocked.

So the Republicans decided to take Reagan's mediocre Presidency and turn it into something great.  Now don't get me wrong, Reagan got us out of a bad economic way, but the way he did it is different from what the legacy project says.  And his views on foreign policy were at times criminal.

In 1981, Reagan delivered on his campaign promise to cut taxes.  At the same time, he increased spending on defense.  During his first year as President, Reagan essentially kept the deficit he inherited from Jimmy Carter, just $74B, the same.  But then, in 1982 it went to $128B then $208B peaking at $218B in 1986 (Source: CBO.gov).  

President Reagan realized his mistake and attempted to balance the budget.  He raised payroll taxes and cut benefits quite famously in 1983.  The automatic raises in payroll taxes have yet to be repealed still affecting the middle class today.  The only thing that does not rise quickly enough is the maximum tax amount which positively affects millionaires who are only taxed on their first one hundred grand.

After 1981, Reagan raised taxes many times.  Just after the Carter recession having everything to do with oil, Reagan raised gas tax.  He also raised the same taxes he originally cut restoring 1/3 of the original cut just a year after it happened.  He raised taxes more than any time since world war two.

And the notion that his tax cuts were what led to the economic boom in the 1980s is also incorrect.  Again, he surged defense spending.  That creates high paying jobs and stimulates the economy.  That's supposedly a Democratic philosophy, right?

Reagan stimulated the economy by spending billions and giving a jolt to the economy with an income tax rebate in 1981.  Why do the same men and women voting against the Obama stimulus constantly a man who did the same thing throughout the 1980s?

Eleven people were convicted during the Reagan administration out of fourteen arrests.  Among the list of convicts was Reagan's Defense Secy. Caspar Weinburger.  Why?  The Iran-Contra Affair.  During the mid 1980s, the Reagan administration decided to take the easy way out of a hostage crisis (American hostages) in Lebanon caused by Hezbollah.  

Rather than send troops to Lebanon to convey a, "we're American, you mess with one of us, you mess with all of us" attitude, the Reagan administration (and I don't say Reagan because we don't know that...he withheld a lot of evidence) Reagan began bribing Iran with weapons under the table.  Israel would sell weapons to Iran, the U.S. would replace Israel's weapons and Israel would give us the money from Iran.  In return, Iran promised to do everything it could to get the hostages freed.  Reagan admitted it was wrong but maintained his innocence.

Earlier, in 1983, Reagan had invaded a small island nation of 110,000 called Grenada.  The U.N. and world denounced it as a flex of Reagan's muscle and nothing more.  Immediately after the attack, Reagan's approval rating jumped a few points and he needed that because his rating was getting into Carter territory.  No other major power, not even Great Britain, helped out in this invasion.  Historians will treat it as nothing more than what it is...flaunting of power.

So please, Senator McConnell and others, let's stick to facts when we discuss millions of people out of work, okay?  Let's remember who balanced the budget before you claim your party is the fiscally responsible one.  And let's remember how quickly spending forced the unemployment rate down and how the only recession Roosevelt caused was caused by a lack of spending.  

And most of all, let's remember that under Reagan, government was not the solution to our problems...it was the problem.  Reagan created so many jobs in the defense industry related to government spending (that he allegedly opposed) that when the Cold War ended it caused a major recession.  Reagan did not reverse Carter's Government-Economic Complex like he promised, he made it so large that this nation could not survive without it and it took years to fix that problem between George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton (only to be destroyed again by George W. Bush).  

In other words, you're a sitting Senator...let's stick to the facts, okay?

February 16th-20th Preview

Monday, February 16th

Have you noticed that a lot of Conservatives have been bashing FDR and Clinton lately?  I'll break down their arguments' validity.  Did Clinton end his second term with a surplus?  Did the New Deal work?

And what about Reagan?  Does a man who bribed Iran with weapons during the Iran-Contra affair deserve such a legacy?  And how did he fix the economy...tax cuts or spending?

Tuesday, February 17th

So how did Pelosi, Reid, Obama, Collins and Nelson do?  I'll break down the stimulus bill item by item, give you my opinion and let you decide in this ongoing feature, "Stimulus or No Stimulus?".

Wednesday, February 18th

How many Americans think that we should investigate Bush criminally or by a panel?  3 in 5. 

And is this precedented?  Well...how many Reagan officials were convicted after he left office for the Iran Contra affair?  Eleven...including his Defense Secretary and they weren't pardoned until the end of Pres. Bush 41's term.

Thursday, February 19th

Another installment of "Stimulus or No Stimulus?".

Friday, February 20th

Midterm watch...what will become of the dying breed of Northeast Republicans?  Only Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe, Arlen Specter and Judd Gregg remain in this club even smaller than the "living Presidents" club.  Specter and Gregg are up for re-election in 2010...what'll happen to them?  

Or better yet...will the 62 year old Gregg even run...he said "will I run? Probably not." the other day.

The "Center Ring"

An end of the week update on the less important, more entertaining stories of the week.

Anyone who saw the Congressional grill of Bank leaders yesterday must have been quite...gratified. But I think the best part was Mass. Congressman Mike Capuano's angry rant. Who did he compare the bank executives to? The people who rob those executives banks. He said that he would not listen to a bank executive say "I learned my lesson" any quicker than he'd listen to a bank executive say so. Oh and of course, his neighboring district's rep, Barney Frank, was entertaining as usual asking the CEOs why they had to be "bribed with bonuses" to do their jobs.

House Minority Whip Eric Cantor's press secretary apologized yesterday for a staff member's response to a request by Politico for the Congressman's response to anti-Republican leadership ads. He sent Politico a link to a spoof on an old ASFCME that when aired on TV required 14 bleeps saying that they should post the video as the Congressman's response. Politico obeyed posting the video with the headline, "Cantor's Effing Response". With millions out of work, it did not get a warm reception with the public. WARNING: Explicit video, not bleeped.


After weeks of it appearing that Republicans were actually winning the fight on the stimulus bill, Gallup put forth a poll that surprised most. It has Obama with a 67% approval rating on the poll. Congressional Democrats are quite a bit lower, but have a higher approval than disapproval rating (48-42). Only Republicans have a higher disapproval rating with an approval rating of just 31%...58% disapproval. That's Pres. Bush territory, a sign that Republican hopes that Pres. Bush's (a man Mitch McConnell called a political burden) absence will solve all of their problems is wishful thinking on their part.

And what did Pres. Obama say?? Hold me responsible? If my plans don't work, blame me and we'll have a new President? I've never heard such a blunt statement from a President. He seems to know that he only has four years or less to turn this thing around...two if he's worried (and he is) about the midterms in 2010. But I think that he'll be a term-term President...his economic ideas are right for this country.

A Big News Day...Here's What's Happening

Pelosi says that the bill that came out of the Senate is large enough and has the right priorities. Congress and the Senate have reached a deal on the $789B Nelson-Collins Stimulus bill with little or no changes. Collins, Snowe and Specter had fragile votes and Nancy Pelosi clearly recognized that. I never thought the conference comittee would only take one day.

The Taliban kill twenty people in attacks in Kabul. This event is making it very easy for President Obama to sell his plan to surge troops in Afghanistan. Unlike in Iraq, I don't believe we are obliged to rebuild Afghanistan because the country under the Taliban embedded our enemies. That is reason enough to invade a country and we do not need to stick around and wait for a strong government to appear. On the other hand, we do have to make sure that that strong government is never again the Taliban.

As Pres. Obama promised when he was posed the question the other night, Secretary Gates has ordered a review of the policy on media showing soldier's coffins. It is absolutely necessary that the media be allowed to show these images so that we the people can see the human side of this war. That is our right.

Henrietta Hughes is "satisfied" with what the White House promised her after she moved Pres. Obama with her request for help at the town hall meeting. The Obama staff contacted her local housing department and the wife of Florida Congressman Nick Thompson has offered Hughes use of a home she is not using. Some in the blog world are calling Hughes "the face of the economic crisis".

The President of the Peanut Corp. of America pleaded the fifth to Congress today saying he did not want to incriminate himself. People will go to jail over this and changes will have to be made. One of the saddest stories was one of a husband telling the tale of his cancer surviving wife's death calling for jail time for anyone who knowingly sold tainted peanut products.

The scheduled story on FDR and Reagan will appear in the next week.

Wall Street Rejects Accountability?

The damned near 400 point loss today was in large part due to fear about the banking systems.  Those stocks including Bank of America and Citigroup lost 15-20% of their assets.  Virtually all newspapers and television stations reported the plunge was the fault of the treasury secretary Tim Geithner's new TARP plan.  I never buy into these theories...the media try to assign meaning to these numbers all the time but in the end, they are just theories.

But in this case, it seems that everything makes a whole lot of sense.  The Secretary spoke at 11AM and the sell off began at 11:21AM hitting banks the hardest.  The banks in the worst shape like Bank of America had a lot to gain from this speech because they need the TARP funds.  Fortunately for the taxpayer, but unfortunately for our market, the new administration and Senate/House Dems are pushing for massive regulation.

It all started when Claire McCaskill said what everybody was thinking..."these people are idiots".  She inspired Pres. Obama's $500K salary cap.  Then Republican Senator Olympia Snowe (ME) and Democratic Senator Ron Wyden (OR) announced a bipartisan amendment crafted by the two moderates (who have worked together like this before) that would recall all bonuses of $100,000 or more to the treasury within 120 days of the bill's signing into law or a 35% excise tax would go into effect.  The TARP law is vauge and not only allows Obama to apply the cap to future loans but also allows Snowe and Wyden to apply their amendment to past loans.

Geithner's first mistake of the day was using a very scary number...$2 trillion.  People on Wall Street are very fond of Tim Geithner so when he says that the banks are in bad enough shape to require that amount of money in additional bailouts, a lot of investors are going to get the Hell out of banks and quick to avoid calamity.  Geithner should have layed out a specific plan for the $350B stimulus and not looked ahead, at least not out loud.

The other complaint was Geithner was too vauge.  That is simply not true.  He outlined specific pillars that I believe will work.  First, he wants to continue the current flow of public funds to banks in need of capital.  But with executive pay compensation, full public disclosure and other "strings".  He's going to have a new website, economicstability.gov, that will outline specific use of dollars.

The bottom line is, this sell-off had nothing to do with the plan's vaugeness.  This had to do with the fact that there is a direct correlation between income and conservativeness.  So the people who own stakes in these banks do not like these liberal policies.  Geithner in his introduction repeatedly echoed Olympia Snowe, Ron Wyden, Barack Obama and Claire McCaskill while discussing executive greed and regulations thereof.

I encourage you to watch the full address...part one is on the top, part two is on the bottom.  Think about who the audience is...I think that it's average people.  He even said that this program is not for the banks who caused this problem, it's for the people and businesses who need them.

On To Conference

Debate on the Nelson-Collins amendment to H.R. 1, the Economic Recovery Bill, was closed last night by a vote of 61 to 36 including Sen. Kennedy and Republican Senators Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe and Arlen Specter.  It is expected to pass by that same number tomorrow.  

While the Senate added a limited amount of infrastructure to the bill, it also created a great deal of tax cuts that I disagree with.  Senator Collins consistent assertion that this was a "Christmas tree upon which virtually all members of Congress have hung their favorite programs" is wrong.

I'll go through the proposed cuts presently one at a time.

Cuts to agriculture include a subsidy for aquaculture losses, upgrades of USDA facilities ("new computers") and Agriculture and Food Research Initiative.  At a time when the entire economy is hurting, subsidizing one very specific industry, the aquaculture industry, does not make much sense.  Upgrading the USDA facilities will not necessary in this bill, although at a time when the big two computer companies, Microsoft and Apple, are both hurting purchasing technology cannot hurt.  The AFRI is something designed to educate and create high paying jobs, so that I do disagree with and believe is stimulative.  So I agree with the former two cuts and disagree with the latter.

In science, Collins and Nelson have proposed cuts to NASA, the National Science Foundation and the Bureau of Industry & Security.  NASA is a typical Republican target but they only cut half; still building a new shuttle with the original $1.5B will create a lot of jobs and could be used as a tool to shore up the dwindling American pride so crucial to our economy.  The NSF is purely for education so I obviously differ with the moderates here.  But the BI&S is an organization dealing with national security and technology involved therein so just $20M smells like an ornament to me, so fine cut it.

Collins and Nelson went on to cut 50% of almost every justice portion of the bill.  That is probably not stimulative, so that I agree belongs in a different bill.

A lot of green technology was cut that I disagree with strongly.  To spend $100M on alternative vehicles for the Department of Defense so long as we buy them from Ford and GM (or Chrysler, but I don't think they'll make it through the recession anyway) will create jobs for a reason that has nothing to do with corporate welfare.  They cut under 50% of two titles on energy including DOE renewable energy initiative and a great deal of money from a fund for technology loan guarantees.  And millions from a few other programs were cut.  Look...we need to create a whole new industry in green technology, it escapes me why Collins and Nelson think these programs ought to be cut.

They cut some unnecessary homeland security measures that belong in other bills.  I agree with their idea that we need to get a stimulus bill passed without these snuck in programs, so I agree with this cut.  They also cut several Department of Interior programs that I doubt will create jobs...not the CCC or anything, just various funds.

Okay now here is a serious problem with the Nelson-Collins amendment.  The entire $40B originally going to states was cut because it will not create jobs.  But wait...didn't Governor Rendell (D-PA) just explicitly state that the state might have to start cutting jobs including in education?  And wasn't he echoed by others?  Not only will this state bailout save jobs it will save lives...we can't start cutting police officer jobs!

Billions to education were cut by half.  This is something that can be dealt with later.  So I don't agree with cutting those programs forever but to deal with them later is fine.

Now, as for the State Department, this agency is very underfunded as I stated in my article on this a couple days ago.  That creates jobs...almost all of the money given to Secy. Clinton would go to salaries for new jobs.  This money has to be appropriated later if not right now.

In order to get the Maine Senators on board along with Arlen Specter (although only two of those three were needed) some cuts had to be made.  And I think that the group looked at this with an unbiased eye, for example, Senator Collins was willing to cut a lot of money towards aquaculture when such may have benefited "the lobster state" greatly.  Ben Nelson implied on the Rachel Maddow Show that many cuts especially those to education were just to get the three Republicans who will allow this bill to pass on board.

Susan Collins has maintained that most of these programs are good programs and she would support them.  If she holds to that and helps these pass in the future, this is fine.

To be continued tomorrow...

Midterm Watch

Another edition of Midterm Watch.  This week we revisit Kansas where Kathleen Sebelius's name is being tossed around as "Secretary of Health and Human Services".  And what about Harry Reid who's already the target of an ad in Nevada?  And Mel Martinez, another retiree.

Before she was Governor, Kathleen Sebelius was the Insurance Commisioner of Kansas.  She made a point of discussing healthcare in her Democratic Response to President Bush's last State of the Union address saying that all Americans have the right to affordable healthcare.  A woman who has been in the public sector most of her life and has a Masters degree in Public Administration is well qualified to head a department that can so easily become corrupt with money from insurance companies and PACs.  Nonetheless, if she does not run for Senate this is a solid Republican seat.

When Jeb Bush was floated as a name for Florida Senator in 2010, this was a leaning Republican seat.  Jeb Bush is popular in Florida and Floridians have no problem separating him and his brother, the latter whom they do not particularly support.  Without Jeb Bush in the running this is too early to call.

Harry Reid has been the target of a new ad in Nevada about the economic stimulus package.  However, most people support the package, even if they do not support is as is.  Harry Reid almost lost his seat in 1998 only winning by .1% (just like he almost became Senator in 1976 but lost by .3%), but then in 2004 he won by 26 points.  Now, he has name recognition being all over the news with the recent crises.  This is a solid Democratic seat.

So to recap:

Evan Bayh is sitting in a solid Democratic seat

Barbara Boxer is sitting in a solid Democratic seat

Kansas's to-be-vacated Senate seat is too early to call

Harry Reid is sitting in a solid Democratic seat

Florida's to-be-vacated Senate seat is too early to call

Thanks for the Crises, Condie

Hillary Clinton was sworn in as the 67th Secretary of State on January 21st.  The only thing more important to the State Department than that number, 67, is the number 66.  Because number 67 is going to be spending the next 4-8 years cleaning up her predecessor's mess.

When NBC News' Andrea Mitchell first broke the Hillary Clinton story, Chris Matthews said that next to President of the United States, Secretary of State is likely to be the greatest job of our time.  The reason is, one of Secy. Clinton's greatest challenge will be dealing with half a world that hates this country right now, two wars (although she won't have much involvement in the military affairs) and nuclear threats from at least half a dozen countries.

Remember when Secy. Clinton showed up to work on January 22nd?  The entire department was screaming as if it were a Hillary campaign rally.  Jon Stewart said, "Hillary Clinton is liberating the State Department!"  That warm welcome of change was largely symbolic of the state of disrepair the department is in right now thanks to Pres. Bush and Condie Rice.

First of all, the department itself was mismanaged.  When a man named Robert Zoellick left the post of U.S. Trade Representative to become Deputy Secy. of State, Condie Rice didn't bother filling the position (nothing to do with the economic crisis I'm sure).  Moreover, the department is so under funded that even some other secretaries have said that they would be willing to give up funding to help fund the deteriorating State Dept.  Of course, given the complete and utter lack of diplomacy we've had for eight years, it's not surprise that the department is such a mess.

Clinton's greatest challenge will be restoring this nation's standing in the world.  Dick Cheney recently said that the Bush administration's goal was not to have America be loved but respected.  First of all, neither happened, and second of all, both can happen at once.  Clinton will have to convince people around the world that after a much hated war in Iraq and allegations of torture, America is back and ready to lead the world again.  If she can do that, it will do wonders for our national security since most of our problems stem from our shortcomings in foreign policy and lack of diplomacy.

For eight long years, President Bush gave an uncalled for amount of support to Israel and villainized Palestine not even calling Israel out on its civilian killings recently.  Secretary Clinton needs to take a much more unbiased stand towards this situation.  The problem is, of course, that Florida has been the key to winning elections in America for quite some time now and older Jews and Cubans make up much of its electorate.  That's why politicians with Presidential aspirations won't denounce Israel or suggest we shouldn't grant asylum to Cuban refugees (I think we should do the latter, but at any rate).  Nonetheless, I believe the Secretary will be able to ignore the number 2016 and be unbiased in her work in that area brokering a deal that Rice was unwilling to be any part of.

Next stop, India and Pakistan.  Here's a touchy situation...isn't there a reason we need Pakistan to like us...oh right we're at war with their neighbor and half of our enemy is in their country.  Pakistan just needs to cooperate with India should a tragedy like Mumbai ever happen again.  If they do, we can continue our relations with them and hopefully bring some Al Qaeda scum from the mountains of Pakistan to the courts of the United States.

Speaking of Pakistan...ever heard of AQ Khan?  He's the guy that's been under house arrest in Pakistan for years now for admitting he sold Pakistan's nuclear secrets to Iran, North Korea and Libya.  In America, that's got a name...starts with a t...treason!  But apparently in Pakistan, it's grounds to put you under house arrest in a mansion for a slap-in-the-wrist amount of time.  The reason for our nuclear problems now is a free man.

And to the nuclear crisis we have...that's one of the greatest threats to this country and it's probably Clinton's number one inherited problem.

So from Palestine to Pakistan and Iraq to Iran, Clinton's got her job cut out for her.  But after her display in the Senate that shocked almost every Senator (except the two that voted not to confirm her), what was described as an incredible depth of knowledge about the world, will help.  But at any rate, I still have to say...you sure you want this job, Hillary?

Your Term Expired, Dick

It's been the distraction of the week from the papers to the evening news to Keith Olbermann's "Special Comment".  Nobody told Fmr. Vice President Dick Cheney that his term expired at noon on January 20th.  He's back...and he's armed with some of the most divisive, unpatriotic comments I've ever heard.

He told Politico that he believes some in the Obama administration believe that, "if we just go talk nice to these folks, everything's going to be okay".  I ask the VP to find one person who believes that if we talk friendly to Al Qaeda everything will be okay.  Especially considering Pres. Obama is deploying more troops to Afghanistan as we speak.

Cheney believes that this country has to give up some of its values at times of national security.  That's simply not true, especially when doing so violates international law, federal law and the Constitution which requires the President to uphold all treaties.  If we give up our rights and our values because the going got tough, what does that say about us as people?

Besides, neither Cheney nor Bush should be criticizing anyone on national security considering that they allowed 9/11 to happen.  In 2001, President-elect Bush's transition team was told by the Clinton administration that (well he didn't have to be told if he just read the New York Times but anyway) Al Qaeda was linked to the USS Cole bombing.  This came after Bin Laden said he was "satisfied" with the attack.  

They were told that several other attacks were thwarted and that Al Qaeda was the biggest threat coming into the new millenium.  And then of course, on August 6th, 2001, President Bush received (and perhaps read?) the infamous daily briefing that was entitled, "Bin Laden Determined to Strike Within US".  The briefing warned of attacks on airports so if we had only heightened airport security, perhaps men with box cutters would have been thwarted.  Or perhaps if President Bush did not spend a third of his Presidency away from the White House, we could have found out more before the attacks.

Condolezza Rice admitted a breakdown on 9/11 but also said the breakdown was tied to the Clinton administration.  Except Bill Clinton found out more information about the USS Cole between October 2000 and the end of his Presidency than George Bush found out about 9/11 between September 11th, 2001 and this past January.  If Clinton had been President for a third term, for all we know Bin Laden would have been captured and killed even if the 9/11 attacks never happened.

On September 12th, 2001 he stood atop the still burning rubble saying "the people who knocked down these buildings will hear from all of us soon!"  But eight years later Bin Laden is still a free man and an unknown number of conspirators were released from Gitmo under Bush that Cheney admitted went right back to terrorism.  He let the dead down, he let their families down and he let our country down by breaking that promise.

And speaking of that, Cheney asked who's fault it would be if someone released were to attack us again.  Well, Mr. Private Citizen...if someone released under George Bush attacks us...that's George Bush's fault.  If any of the people who the Justice Department under the incompetent Mukasey, Gonzalez or Ashcroft should have convicted and killed as opposed to release attack us, history will not blame Barack Obama no matter how condescendingly you, Mr. VP, ask it to.  It'll blame you, Pres. Bush and your Atty. Generals.

The fact that President Bush's Justice system is an embarrassment to this country is of the least importance compared with the fact that it has so angered Al Qaeda's followers that an untold number of Al Qaeda members only became terrorists as a result of President Bush's system.  If we had not alienated our allies and destroyed our principles, Al Qaeda would not have been able to rally so much support.  

It has been said that even the insurgency in Iraq is partly the fault of torture in that it rallied an untold number of people into fighting against this nation killing a number of U.S. men and women that we will never know for sure.

And, Mr. VP, just because you have kept American soil safe since 9/11 does not mean you kept us safe.  There are still over 4,000 men and women dead in Iraq and Afghanistan, English friends dead in London after the mass transit bombings and Americans abroad killed in terrorist attacks around the world.  Are  you really willing to tell the mother of a dead soldier that you kept us safe?

Mr. Cheney, if you do not believe in the basic values of all Americans, then maybe you should just leave.  And if you're going to wish failure upon the President of the United States, then you should definiately leave.  We're not talking of Rush wishing death to our economy...we're talking about a former Vice President wishing for something that would kill untold numbers of Americans on our soil.  When did Al Gore, Dan Quayle, Walter Mondale or any other Vice President ever do something so destructive?

The Bush Legacy: President Bush kept us safe*

*Except 9/11 & Iraq & Afghanistan

Do not be suckered into Cheney's same old intellectual fear mongering.  Read the fine print.

Economic Stimulus We Can Believe In

Hours before he announced that the Senate would not be voting on the package last night, Senator Harry Reid said that if Wall Street wakes up to news that there is no stimulus, nobody knows what the market would do.  Perhaps that fear is why he did not run the risk of losing the vote and sending the DOW to the low end of 7,000.  Reid claims he has sixty votes but that is doubtful.

Thursday, Senator Collins (R-ME) and Nelson (D-NE) headed a group of centrist Republicans and Democrats looking to slash about $100B worth of spending from the bill including education spending, state aid, Amtrak and green technology spending.  Meanwhile, Senator McCain (R-AZ) argued that FDR extended the Depression by spending and we cannot let it happen again...except the one time FDR cut spending in 1936 was the only time the recession came back during the 1930s.

Collins and Nelson are wrong.  Ed Rendell admitted that if the Senators get their way, Pennsylvania will have to begin to cut jobs including education jobs (perhaps law enforcement jobs?).  Paying people $30-$40 per hour to greenify the Federal Government's buildings cannot fail.  Amtrak is a mess...they can use that money immediately to lower their prices and/or fix their infrastructure.  And of course paying teachers to teach people to do stuff cannot possibly be stimulative.

First, let's keep the $275B in tax cuts but let's change the way we award them.  Let's say you're entitled to a $600 cut.  Divide that by three and you get $200.  So give Americans getting tax cuts that amount (a third of their cut) strategically right now (while we're all hurting), mid-May (so people travel) and mid-November (for Black Friday).  The alternative of course is adding $11 to people's paychecks per week for 52 weeks...is that going to change anybody's spending habits?  And to those who say this did not work last time...there's one huge difference: last time people spent it all on $4 gas that only benefited Arab tycoons, this time gas is $1.50.

Second, let's spend at least $200B on infrastructure (including education upgrades), a down payment on the $2.2T that the Corp of Engineers believe we need to fix this country's infrastructure.  Start spending on all the projects that have been halted due to the economy and are ready to go and continue with everything else.

Third, can we start firing police officers in a time when many mayors can brag about falling crime rates like Newark, NJ Mayor Cory Booker (D) and NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg (I)?  Keep the $40B in state aid in the bill, Senators.  It'll save jobs and it'll save lives.

Research should account for about $100B of this package.  Let's research green technology and convert federal buildings and fleets of Government cars to zero-emissions.  Let's help the impoverished fix their homes to be more energy efficient.  Many of these jobs are going to be paying between $50,000 and $100,000 per year for years to come.

Finally, extending entitlements must happen here...Medicare, food stamps and unemployment.  The House estimated that'd be around $100B.

So that's only $715 billion.  And it'll work.  Reminds me of that "what if firefighters ran the world?" commercial where the Congressman firefighter said "this is the easiest job I've ever had".