First of all let me tell you all that I fully support the proposal by the Progressive Democrats of America and their sane and fair plan, (that is amazing in its breath and depth) to the current frenzied so called 'Austerity' movement that simply keeps allowing our own party, further and further to the Right, and to cave, and cave and cave.
If you do not know about this fantastic budget proposal, then I will highlight it down below the fold and I would urge all of you to fully support it.
But on with the story: Yesterday, President Obama was chided by our own Democrats, for not using the 'Bully Pulpit,' to his full advantage. (Duh). Apparently President Obama became rather 'testy' during the exchange when confronted by Rep. Henry Waxman and other lawmakers as they pressed him to 'put the petal to the metal,' (as my dad used say). This is not the first time many of our leading Democrats have had this kind of confrontation with President Obama, but I for one welcome it. Good for them, keep it up Democrats.
Obama Rebuffs Democratic Plea To Be More Forceful
Attendees said other key meeting topics included raising taxes on the wealthy, new highway and jobs bills, withdrawing from Afghanistan and protecting domestic social programs in ongoing budget talks with the Republicans. The president has heard the complaint before. Democrats have accused Obama repeatedly of ceding too much ground to the GOP, especially on health care and the extension of the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy. But attendees said the critique appeared to rub him the wrong way on Thursday.
snip...
Obama also told the assembled Democrats not to count on more fiery rhetoric from the Oval Office. "He said, 'There's a difference between me and a member of Congress,'" another lawmaker said, paraphrasing the president as saying: "When I say something the markets react, all of society reacts, other countries react. I've got to be careful with what I say. I can't just say it for brinkmanship. I've got to say it in a way so that I get what I want said, but I don't upset markets and so on."
But Obama responded that he has to be more careful and more considered than that, and that he is executing an existing plan.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...
Well, if President Obama is actually 'executing an existing plan,' I sure as hell wish he would share it with the rest of us. Oh, wait....what is the matter with me? This is the same 11th dimensional chess game, and the 'I got it covered,' 'PLAN,' that I'm just too stooooooooopid to see.
Got it.
Don't get me wrong, I know exactly what President Obama is up against with these ruthless, scorch and burn Rethugs, and I detest all of them. These heartless sociopathic liars will do everything and anything they can to destroy our party and President Obama.
On the other hand, I fully support those Democrats who held President Obama's fire to the feet on Thursday because of exactly what occurred in 2010 when the House was taken over by the Cry Baby Orange Tan Man, Boehner. But I'm fully full of glee that the Rethugs are getting raked over the coals for their bullshit tactics to end Medicare and destroy Social Security in their own town meetings throughout our nation.
But the fight is just beginning as we find out that the most horrifying 'used car salesman' in the entire world, Rep. Darrell Issa who now heads up the House Oversight Committee is moving into place to make absolutely certain that not only our own fellow Democrats are shut out of the process, by any 'minority,' witnesses.
Darrell Issa is trying to stop House Oversight Committee Democrats from calling minority witnesses for hearings, and if successful this could become a more widespread Congressional practice.
Last week, Issa instituted a new policy, which designates Administration officials testifying before the Oversight Committee – most of whom are usually invited by the majority – as “minority witnesses.” This knocks out the amount of witnesses available to the minority. The Committee’s rules allow for “witnesses whom the minority may request” as requested by the minority rather than designated by Issa. In addition, under the new rule, the minority must make its request for witnesses before discovering who the majority invited to hearings.
Today, Ranking member Elijah Cummings (D-MD) raised a point of order on the new rule at a Subcommittee hearing. The minority was denied the opportunity for a witness at that hearing, on project labor agreements, because an Administration member was designated as their witness. Cummings said, “No previous Chairman has ever designated who the minority witnesses would be. Chairman Issa’s policy is an extreme edict, and I am aware of no other House or Senate Committee with a similar policy.” He added that often the committee members object to the position of the Administration, so having them as minority witnesses makes it difficult for them to get their side of the story out. The Democrats on the Committee sent a letter to this effect as well.
http://news.firedoglake.com/...
This is the full letter to 'asshole of century, Issa from our fellow Democrats:
June 3, 2011
The Honorable Darrell E. Issa
Chairman
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515
Dear Mr. Chairman:
We are writing to request that you immediately withdraw your misguided new policy on minority witness requests. This policy was conveyed by your staff via email for the first time on May 25, 2011. The email states:
It is the policy of the Committee, once the weekly schedule is officially posted, for the Minority to have 24 hours to recommend their witness for the hearing(s) posted. If there is an Administration witness then that witness is the designated minority witness. It is up to the Chairman to accept an additional witness but that witness must be recommended within the 24 hour period. Email from Majority Staff, House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, to Minority Staff, House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform (May 25, 2011) (emphasis in original).
This unprecedented new policy undermines the integrity of our Committee by impairing the ability of minority Members to participate in its important work. No previous Chairman of this Committee has ever issued such an extreme edict, and we are aware of no other House or Senate Committee with a similar policy.
We have two fundamental objections. First, it should go without saying, but minority witness requests, by definition, are requested by the minority. House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Committee Rule 2 (providing for “witnesses whom the minority may request”). Obviously, you are not in the minority, so if you invite an individual to testify, that person is not appearing at the request of the minority. If we have not requested an Administration witness, you may not “designate” an Administration official you invite as a minority witness, unless you are willing to allow the minority to withdraw that invitation as well.
We will reserve the right to request witnesses of our choosing, including individuals who we believe have the ability to enhance the understanding of Committee Members and provide perspectives that are not otherwise represented by the witnesses you invite. As ranking members, we have and will continue to submit minority witness requests to our respective Chairmen, and only those individuals identified and requested as minority witnesses should be considered as such.
Our second objection is to your new 24-hour rule, which you do not appear to be applying even to your own witnesses. During this Congress, you have complied with the minimum requirements necessary under our Committee rules by providing only a single week’s notice prior to Committee hearings. These notices have included nothing more than the title of hearings, with no witnesses identified. It is fundamentally absurd to demand that we identify minority witnesses before you have identified witnesses yourself, yet your new policy does just that.
Apart from these specific objections, we are concerned about the direction of your overall approach. Rather than increasing bipartisan cooperation, as you pledged to do many times, you have adopted this new policy without identifying any legitimate basis or need for it. This leads to the unfortunate conclusion that you are more interested in holding hearings to advance your own personal political agenda rather than objectively gathering facts from a variety of sources to improve public policy.
When you were in the minority in 2007, you said this: “In a Democracy whose lifeblood is fueled by the market place of ideas, Committee practices that stifle or preclude full debate should be avoided at all cost.” Letter from Ranking Member Darrell E. Issa to Chairman Dennis J. Kucinich (June 8, 2007) (online at http://issa.house.gov/...
Itemid=28&Itemid=4). We urge you to heed those words and immediately abandon this unfair and unreasonable policy.
Sincerely,
Here's the video from Rep. Cummings calling the Rethugs out on their new plan to do destroy our own party:
Believe me, these assholes are just getting started, so if President Obama has what he is calling a his own 'existing plan,' that somehow we are just supposed to wait and wait and wait for, as our economy is on DOA (with no jobs, the crashing house market going over the cliff, and more people on food stamps than ever before, as unemployment insurance has already run out for millions of Americans), then hey:
By all means President Obama: Clue us all in on your own secret 'existing plan,' that we are all waiting for because I for one, am a tiny bit tired of waiting for this 'existing plan.' God forbid I should agree with those same Democrats who pushed (and keep pushing President Obama to use the Bully Pulpit). I mean, how dare I?
Finally I urge you all to fully support the by the Progressive Democrats of America (PDA Budget). Sign on to this people and support them, if you will. I have.
Unlike the budgets put forward by the Republican or Democratic leadership or the President, the People's Budget lines up with majority opinion in the United States on a number of key points. The People's budget:
Ends the unpopular wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Taxes the wealthy and corporations.
Protects the social safety net.
Cuts the military.
Eliminates budget deficits.
"We cannot expect to see the budget that Americans want and need enacted in Congress without public pressure," said Tim Carpenter, national director of PDA. "Right now, most Congress members pretend not to even know what we want. They pretend they have no choice but to cut Social Security and Medicare, even though they've already voted down the only budget proposal that balances the budget, a proposal that does so while protecting Social Security and Medicare. It's time they knew that we know."
I agree with that last statement by Tim Carpenter, the national director of the PDA. is saying is yet another essential truth:
"Right now, most Congress members pretend not to even know what we want. They pretend they have no choice but to cut Social Security and Medicare, even though they've already voted down the only budget proposal that balances the budget, a proposal that does so while protecting Social Security and Medicare. It's time they knew that we know."
http://www.pdamerica.org/
It is not that our Congress is 'pretending,' that they don't know what the majority of Americans want (even including the 60 percent across the board in all parties, that are very angry to see both parties trying to dismantle Medicare and Social Security.) This is exactly the same 'repeat and rinse' attitude of our entire government on a real HCR bill and a real Financial Reform bill, and for ending the endless Wars.
It is not that they are pretending, but to keep pretending that our own President has this 'secret existing plan that he is not telling us about,' is just as inane, not to mention insane, when the Middle Class and poor are running on empty and living in their cars and tents and being fully destroyed over and over again by the out of control FRAUD of the Bankstas and Wall Street types, (that AG Holder refuses to prosecute) as are the other Corporate Over Lords who are happy 'as the pigs in shit' that they are, and amassing huge fortunes at our expense.
That is not why we elected President Obama, and we all know that. Good for the Democrats who confronted him, and I hope they keep it up. I really don't give a flying fuck if 'the President's feathers were ruffled,' and he got 'testy.' Too fucking bad.
So, tell me, what do you think President Obama's real 'secret existing plan,' that he has cooking on the back burner is all about?
Just asking.
Thanks as always.
Ms. B.