Skip to main content

We lost. Get over it. Move on.

Lets talk JOBS.

All the ideas out there that would actually put people back to work and bring real, robust economic growth immediately are off the table. Both the White House and the Congress have made sure of that. Trade deals are only going to make things worse. Tax cuts have not and will not work. I don't know who came up with the silly idea that reforming intellectual property law will make any difference. Those things are all half-measures or no-measures that wont do a thing for the average American.

The one good idea I see circulating around Washington is the American Infrastructure Bank. The idea is simple. We set up a bank. It could be a government agency or a government sponsored corporation. We allow companies that have over $1 trillion in profits parked offshore to bring those profits home as long as they deposit them in the bank. For doing so, they get a tax deferment. We can require them to keep the money in the bank for a minimum of five years or ten years. The bank pays them an interest rate based on how long they agree to keep the funds in the bank. Sort of like a certificate of deposit. Foreign sovereign wealth funds, pension funds, the wealthy, or companies just sitting on a mountain of cash (like Google that had $30 Billion last year) can put all that cash sitting around in the bank. Interest-earning, tax deferred accounts.

Corporate America will love it because it will allow them to book profits without paying any taxes. It will give them time to get Congress to eliminate the tax on those profits, which they will probably get anyway of the past is prologue. Wall Street will like it because the Bank could also issue bonds against its deposits. Bankers will be able to trade the bonds and make all sorts of new crazy derivatives. Unions will like it because it will put their membership back to work. You will like it because it will mean our crumbling infrastructure will finally get some attention.

The bank can then loan that money to private companies, government agencies, and local and state governments for infrastructure projects. Water, transportation, high speed rail. You name it. Some of these projects must pay revenues of some sort over time. Toll roads. A percentage of electricity sales, perhaps, on rebuilding the electrical grid. Or utilities that want to upgrade the electric grid. We direct the bank to accept taking losses on some projects and making it up in profits on others. The idea is that we direct the bank to break even, effectively non-profit.

The good thing here is that there are already bills on the table. Sen. John Kerry and Sen. Kay Baily Hutchinson have introduced a bipartisan bill in the Senate. Rep. Rosa de Lauro has introduced a similar measure in the House. Both these measure have been endorse by both the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the AFL-CIO.

This wont get done without presidential leadership. For that, we need President Obama to stop the muddled process message and just focus on this. Make this idea the centerpiece of a jobs strategy. It meets the Obama test of being bipartisan and it meets the Tea Party test because no government revenues will be used to finance it. But only a president can go out and sell it to the public in a simple, easy to understand way that will make the public understand it. Only a president can build support for it and push it through Congress. But to do it, the White House and the Obama Campaign, and the DNC, and Congressional Democrats have to be on message, selling it every single day.

There will be Republicans who oppose it because its a good idea. Remember, their goal is to destroy President Obama, no matter what. So what. That's no reason not to try. If we win, we get a good idea that puts people back to work. If we lose, the public knows exactly where everyone stands. The bottom line is that we can't accept the Plouffe strategy of simply shrugging our shoulders and going "What can we do?" We need a proactive, politically engaged President who is fighting for something more than a bipartisan process.

Lets put our engineers and construction workers back to work building and rebuilding America. This is a good idea. I support it. If the President gets behind and really pushes for it...and I don't mean in backroom negotiations or throwaway Saturday morning videos...I mean REALLY PUSHES FOR IT, I'll be behind him all the way. Will you?

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (327+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kestrel9000, PhilK, icebergslim, Bensonola, beltane, Sydserious, Involuntary Exile, slksfca, blue jersey mom, Geekesque, pat bunny, nzanne, andgarden, chicating, kathny, oortdust, Helena Handbag, A Runner, malharden, kerflooey, jfromga, LaurenMonica, boadicea, Therapy, dmhlt 66, AnnCetera, copymark, American Zapatista, Dallasdoc, greenbastard, oysterface, Clarknt67, where4art, nervousnellie, DRo, IndieGuy, pengiep, gramofsam1, AAMOM, nupstateny, OregonOak, pateTX, deha, Corporate Dog, bsmechanic, roses, dark daze, teknofyl, gulfgal98, mconvente, billlaurelMD, khereva, loblolly, Renee, FG, dle2GA, scottdc, anafreeka, seanwright, slampros, zbbrox, cslewis, Jeff Simpson, frsbdg, jhecht, doroma, J M F, eeff, NoMoreLies, Snud, DontTaseMeBro, satrap, SharonColeman, Jackson L Haveck, fou, DixieDishrag, TooFolkGR, peterj911, bnasley, Satya1, Timothy J, Thumb, dotsright, MartyM, jennyp, DavidHeart, NoFortunateSon, Blue Boy Red State, zerelda, fiddlingnero, Odysseus, pucklady, drmah, Larry Bailey, Atilla the Honey Bunny, Julie Gulden, SwedishJewfish, Texknight, GrogInOhio, stegro, Tango Uniform, Ghost of NY, gecko, LaughingPlanet, smartdemmg, Son of a Cat, anagram, vicki, rscopes, Dave in AZ, clarknyc, bwren, huttotex, freesia, Actbriniel, KibbutzAmiad, DruidQueen, mn humanist, fat old man, Portlaw, Ian Reifowitz, leonard145b, banger, Dem Beans, GoGoGoEverton, RenaRF, Front Toward Enemy, Geenius at Wrok, sandav, babeuf, maxomai, juliesie, hyperstation, Sybil Liberty, Xapulin, bythesea, reginahny, Glic, janosnation, citizen dan, Loquatrix, not4morewars, jobobo, your neighbor, bwintx, Anne Elk, Oh Mary Oh, absdoggy, Hey BB, wagdog, PeterHug, CamillesDad1, NYFM, polecat, filby, Stephen Daugherty, Jantman, wishingwell, CA Nana, asterkitty, therehastobeaway, Joe Bob, Catte Nappe, Mighty Ike, California06, CTDemoFarmer, jayden, MinistryOfTruth, Fury, niteskolar, strangedemocracy, raboof, drnononono, johanus, itzik shpitzik, victoria2dc, buckstop, Black Knight, Ellinorianne, deePA, Inventor, MJ via Chicago, Diogenes2008, Osiris, coolbreeze, Gustogirl, Mr MadAsHell, MKinTN, PerpetualMind, TiaRachel, TealTerror, Nulwee, kevinpdx, Debby, Ginger1, unspeakable, jeannew, Wildthumb, jimreyn, davis90, christine20, legendmn, poe, NWTerriD, cv lurking gf, SpecialKinFlag, Trevin, JanetT in MD, Bluesee, 88kathy, We Won, jdmorg, Brooke In Seattle, Dretutz, clone12, 2laneIA, blueintheface, DefendOurConstitution, itskevin, Diana in NoVa, Lujane, Russgirl, dejavu, Railfan, sleipner, Vermonter, FogCityJohn, 417els, millwood, CrissieP, 3goldens, La Gitane, SottoVoce, tin woodswoman, BrowniesAreGood, East Village Blue, Goobergunch, Blue Dream, Tamar, ferment, Fish in Illinois, FreeTradeIsYourEpitaph, royce, smoothnmellow, Debbie in ME, chuckvw, PittsburghPete, PBen, True North, middleagedhousewife, concernedamerican, Oye Sancho, katesmom, nomandates, Bill in Portland Maine, BradyB, UnionDaughter, newpioneer, cpresley, LABobsterofAnaheim, LaFeminista, whaddaya, aunt blabby, plf515, hardart, ricklewsive, Jake Williams, Book of Hearts, deviant24x, LSmith, Hawkjt, newfie, TofG, MBNYC, Element 61, fumie, BMarshall, Tasini, lineatus, poligirl, deeproots, never forget 2000, evergreen2, addisnana, emal, Pam from Calif, mudslide, dinotrac, erratic, nswalls, Virago, Got a Grip, BachFan, begone, Gowrie Gal, HCKAD, VA Breeze, renbear, Pinko Elephant, Outrider, musing85, LucyandByron, roadbear, gtghawaii, Turbonerd, Bendra, Free Jazz at High Noon, YucatanMan, Leftcandid, science nerd, MKSinSA, Angie in WA State, Time Waits for no Woman, ErinW43, roubs, bluesheep, m00finsan, brown and blue all over, Anne was here, annetteboardman, joedemocrat, artebella, MikePhoenix, Trotskyrepublican, JVolvo, RosyFinch, highacidity
  •  I like the idea of the bank, (43+ / 0-)

    but your most important statement is that is must come from POTUS and he must show leadership.

    All this debt talk and POTUS ineffectiveness has just muddled him and any message from him.  He failed the leadership test 101 on the debt.  Now he must talk jobs and he must fucking MEAN IT.

    The tepid talk from the White House about the economy is their major problem and you can look at it from every poll.  Obama stinks on the economy and jobs front, the task is harder now but he has to make the connection with the public and make them believe he means it.

    It really does take leadership and it will take him calling the Republicans OUT for any obstruction.  Now if he can not do that, he really is in trouble next year because you and I both have been harping for 2 years that this is about JOBS and the White House finally found that clue.

    •  They've effectively weakened the Executive Branch (16+ / 0-)

      through their Congressional stranglehold on the purse strings.  It was unfortunate that this President was all to happy to help them do it.

      He now has no leverage to do ANYTHING but TALK about jobs.  There are no programs he can create to make jobs or to create job incentives.  

      He's got nothing left.

      We're screwed.

      •  Must all roads lead to helplessness & POTUSbashing (25+ / 0-)

        ?

        This seemed like a good, constructive diary to exchange proactive ideas.

        Just sayin.

        " 'You Rock?!?' (But been through less gravel.) My mystique suggests battle. And, what have You?" -Common

        by malharden on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 06:43:56 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Bashing the Pres is a religion with some, it must (6+ / 0-)

          be practiced daily.

        •  Agreed- let's keep it constructive (5+ / 0-)

          I had to come all the way up here, because the down-thread is so negative.

          Folks, we lose battles all the time as progressives. It sucks, it stings, and then we shake it off and get back to work.

          Here is a group that just got started this morning to reverse the Stafford subsidy cut: http://www.facebook.com/...

          http://livingthedream.org

          by janosnation on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 08:16:26 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Agreed, this is a well written, well thought (5+ / 0-)

          out diary that does not bash the POTUS and shows a desire to move on to the Jobs issue and discuss ideas and possibilities.  In fact, this is a very good diary and I was hoping for discussion that did not bash the POTUS but instead talked about the ideas put forth in the diary.

        •  POTUS needs as much bashing as John Boehner (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          out of left field, moira

          We are about to lose everything we understand as America. Wait until the budget cut shit hits the fan.
          Right now it is easy to be in denial.

          "How I hate those who are dedicated to producing conformity." William S Burroughs

          by shmuelman on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 08:51:40 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Out organized and lack of passion (0+ / 0-)

          On any given Sunday, I see at least 4 ReThugs on the news shows, championing the same phrases, playing from the same play book. Name me one--just one--articulate, on point, go to the mat on message Democrat? OK Wasserman-Schultz. Name someone else? Not Nancy, or Harry or Dick. Why aren't we out there? Is the message so hard to articulate to regular Americans? This shouldn't be hard.

          People derided Obama when he asked people to call, but I do think it made a difference in establishment Thugs being willing to vote for the bill.

          We should be in every townhall in every red thuglican district. We didn't go to Washington because..folks got stuff to do. Now is the time to out Tea Party the Tea Party. I want MY country back, but not in the way the TPers do (like 1850).

          So right now, I guess we are still where we were, shouting at each other in the liberal echo chamber.

          You want stuff to change, you got to change it yourself. Forget Obama being some magical 3 wish genie. If we are not out there, no one will hear you.

          Never underestimate the ability of the Right to overreach.

          by never forget 2000 on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 12:29:41 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Re: Out organized and lack of passion (0+ / 0-)

            1. You forget who owns the media.  They invite on who they want to hear.  That's a major reason why "we aren't out there".

            2. Both parties compete for the same campaign dollars.  Of course Democrats hold back from an all out confrontation with the Republicans.  Their donors wouldn't like it.

            I agree that ordinary people have to organize independently and protest, flood the media when possible, and--did I mention--organize for social justice.  

      •  They didn't weaken anything (21+ / 0-)

        It's how the system was set up.

        Congress has ALWAYS held the purse strings. From day one. That's how it was designed.

        The president has always had limited leverage. Always. You're right - all he can do is talk about things. That's all he's ever been able to do.

        If the Congress agrees with him, things get done. If they don't, nothing happens.

        This Congress will do ANYTHING, up to and including destroying the country, to keep this President (and probably any Dem) from looking like they 'win' on any point.

        They don't care what they have to do, how much it costs (and the FAA shutdown has been getting a lot of press lately, that's likely to bite the GOP in the ass soon), who it hurts, how much damage it does.

        They don't care. They just want to make the DEMS in general look bad.

        This is our campaign for next year. The GOP doesn't want to do ANYTHING but make Dems look bad. Period. They don't want to help ANYBODY. If the Dems are for it, they're against it.

        So I really want all Dems to come out in favor of families, aid to families, marriage, all children should be wanted, families should be stable, etc., etc. Things the GOP can't be against.

        And show everything they do as hurting FAMILIES and seniors. EVERYTHING. Doesn't matter what it is, make it look like it hurts families, seniors, and especially poor WHITE families and seniors.

        Racist? You bet. Pandering? Definitely. Skirting the truth? Nah - it's about as truthful as you can get. But unless we make a habit of pointing it out, we'll lose.

      •  All he has left David, (18+ / 0-)

        is to show leadership and follow through what he says.  He found the bully pulpit during the debt mess, but used it ineffectively.  The elephant in the room and has been since he walked into the Oval Office was JOBS and sadly, the Obama Administration miscalculated EVERYTHING on that front.  They must do something, show something or next year will be hard as hell for them.  He has to run on his record and it is WEAK when it comes to jobs/economy.

        •  You have been going on and on and on about the (8+ / 0-)

          President "not focusing on jobs." You are in a diary which is discussing the President "moving on" to jobs and yet, all you can do is proclaim how "weak" the President is.... Will wonders ever cease....

          •  Yes, and.... (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            icebergslim, LucyandByron

            this weakness has to be addressed. Why has the President taken the positions he has taken? What are the dynamics involved? I'm no sure it's "weakness" but it needs looking into rather than hurling accusations.

            Having said that, yes, this diary ought to be about finding a way to invest in this society something that neither party appears interested in. And you can't blame people for being utterly distrustful of the President and his agenda.

            •  What weakness has to be addressed? You people (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              malharden, Beetwasher

              are sitting around on your home computers bellyaching at a President who has done more for progressive causes than any other Democratic Presidents in decades... IN DECADES, and you are pointing fingers at this individual as weak? I'll retire to bedlam.

              •  "You people" ???? (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                icebergslim, LucyandByron

                You don't know what you're talking about addressing me in that way. I didn't say he was "weak." I said I wasn't sure at all. Actually, I don't believe he is weak as a person--I believe, at this time in history, the Presidency is a weaker institutions because of lot's of other political dynamics that I'm not going to address here. I think the President is doing a decent job considering the situation--and I don't support his policies. But he has done very little for progressive causes nor is he a progressive. But I don't want to argue that.

                He did one good thing--that was the stimulus--I'll grant him that. The rest, very mediocre....

              •  Jerk sauce for bogus "lazy" charge (0+ / 0-)

                http://www.ramela.com/...

                It. Is. Not. About. You. Or. This. President.  

                The system is so corrupted by Big Money that there's no way for anyone to go off-script in any meaningful way, no matter what their nominal position or personal capacities or articles of faith. The Founders themselves, plus FDR, LBJ, Gandhi, Mandela, Buddha, Moshe, Muhammad, Jesus, Hastur, Cthulhu and Azathoth together couldn't do it now.  And that is far more disturbing than anything that could conceivably be down to this President.

                BTW, in fact Nixon did rather more for domestic progressive causes.  You could look it up.  Rick Perlstein, Nixonland.   I suppose I must say that the foregoing is a sad irony, and I loathed Nixon even then as a schoolgirl living with the results of his regrettable foreign policy.

                "A city for sale and doomed to speedy destruction if it finds a purchaser!" -King Jugurtha of Numidia

                by LucyandByron on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 01:24:58 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  Obama Didn't Just Start Talking Jobs (0+ / 0-)

            this week--

            Prior to the hideous twelve weeks of pathetic kabuki theater we just went thru, Obama has addressed the unemployment problem, more than once, and stated something to the effect, "I wake up every morning thinking about it".

            icebergslim is correct.

            Obama's record on this is weak. they're grasping at straws-- look at the number of his economic advisors who have come and gone already, in less than three years.

            http://dealbook.nytimes.com/...

            "I don't feel the change yet". Velma Hart

            by Superpole on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 11:01:24 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  You've been whinging about criticism, Jonny 1-Note (0+ / 0-)

            It. Is. Not. About. You.  It. Is. Not. Even. About. Him.    Psst!  It's about the oligarchy, as MinistryofTruth says.  

            The diarist and most here are talking about constructive action (literally and figuratively) to rebuild America.  So why must you focus on attacking perceived adversaries in a sort of preemptive strike to pre-avenge what you apparently foresee as criticism of the President's future action (or inaction)?  Don't you even have faith yourself?  A real true-Blue believer would affirmatively predict an optimal outcome, and serenely ignore the doubters.  

            Like the diarist and the original 'Doubting Thomas', "we the people" (not "you people," please) are ready to accept a resurrection once we see our guy stand up.  
            Bob Marley says:  http://www.youtube.com/...

            "A city for sale and doomed to speedy destruction if it finds a purchaser!" -King Jugurtha of Numidia

            by LucyandByron on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 01:54:26 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Not true (26+ / 0-)

        He can push ideas and frame the debate for 2012.  He can't help but do this, in fact, and it would help the country if he'd stop framing the debate in neo-liberal, Republican terms.

        I'd like to see more of these proposals, even if Republicans won't let them pass.  Such proposals help draw a bright line between the parties that far too many voters no longer see.  And the president has been responsible for a lot of that line-blurring.

        It would also help if he'd stop making the problem worse, as with his continued advocacy of free-trade deals.  These are exactly the wrong thing to do, and he should be promoting American jobs right now, not South Korean or Colombian ones.

        DC politicians don't realize they're corrupt for the same reason fish don't realize they're wet.

        by Dallasdoc on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 06:53:34 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Agree with this completely: (0+ / 0-)
          He can push ideas and frame the debate for 2012.  He can't help but do this, in fact, and it would help the country if he'd stop framing the debate in neo-liberal, Republican terms.

          I'd like to see more of these proposals, even if Republicans won't let them pass.  Such proposals help draw a bright line between the parties that far too many voters no longer see.


          There needs to be a constant drumbeat, with concrete jobs proposals, coming out of the White House.  He needs to push and push and WE HAVE TO HELP HIM.  

          If our energy is devoted to getting rid of him in 2012, not only will we have a Republican in the White House, no one will have any jobs before long.

          Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it. --Mark Twain

          by SottoVoce on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 10:16:42 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Yep, we're still losing. (0+ / 0-)

          b3 makes it sound like the loss is in the past.

          They didn't take away my Medicaid. I gotta say it was a good day.

          by just some lurker guy on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 10:54:27 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Ok true. So we work around it. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      malharden, Sychotic1, evergreen2

      we have to create a movement strong enough that any pop who ignores it ends up being embarrassed to do so.

      I agree I think it's foolish to rely on leadership from the top. Especially strong leadership. So let's not rely on it. Let's plan something without relying on Obama or congress, at least early on.

    •  Turns out it did... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      wishingwell, Onomastic, evergreen2

      This very idea came from Obama's February budget proposal -- part of the much maligned "Win the Future".

      It wasn't a congressional idea, it wasn't Kerry or KBH's idea -- it came from Obama's budget!.

      KBH and Kerry were just the Senate sponsors of it in March, a month after the WH made the proposal.

      But, you know... this is a Democratic blog, so why would anyone expect to read news of a "National Infrastructure Bank" proposed by a Democratic President on a Democratic blog...

      We should wait until Politico runs a story before talking about it, much less championing it.

      Full Disclosure: I am an unpaid shill for every paranoid delusion that lurks under your bed - but more than willing to cash any checks sent my way

      by zonk on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:05:23 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I believe they stated above that it was (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        cslewis, Timothy J, Onomastic

        Clinton's idea but got bogged down in impeachment proceedings.

        If you think education is expensive, wait until you see how much stupid costs

        by Sychotic1 on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:19:20 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Hey - fine (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          wishingwell

          No problem giving credit to Clinton.

          I'm merely pointing it out that this current iteration had its seed planted in the 2011 budget proposal from February... and simple web searches reveal that plenty of media and special interest outlets did note the program... and that the WH did talk about it then.

          Hey - sure - I'm being a dick about pointing that out... but my being a dick about pointing that out doesn't change the fundamental fact, does it?

          Full Disclosure: I am an unpaid shill for every paranoid delusion that lurks under your bed - but more than willing to cash any checks sent my way

          by zonk on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:31:21 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Words - Mouth - Putting in (0+ / 0-)

            but don't worry, it is the internet.  I expect people to stuff words in my mouth, create straw men and beat me with them.

            If you think education is expensive, wait until you see how much stupid costs

            by Sychotic1 on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 08:00:52 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Wasn't trying to put words in your mouth (0+ / 0-)

              I'm being flatly honest and upfront that I'm being a dick about it... and I'm not excusing myself for it, either.

              There's a reason I don't work in marketing or communications, and while improving upon that would probably be wise, I tend to prefer the liberating feeling of just knowing my limitations -- wasn't at all trying to insinuate otherwise.

              Full Disclosure: I am an unpaid shill for every paranoid delusion that lurks under your bed - but more than willing to cash any checks sent my way

              by zonk on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 09:34:53 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  Republicans ain't lettin' it happen... (25+ / 0-)

    This should have been about JOBS since the 2010 election.

    They know that economic ruin is their best path to taking back power and reclaiming the White House.

    All the better if they can fleece the American people at the same time.

    They have assured with this budget deal that unemployment will continue to rise as they shrink the military and throw more people out into an economy that is already unable to absorb them.

    Grapes of Wrath times are a comin'

    •  This is where LEADERSHIP from POTUS (25+ / 0-)

      is critical.  He has to make the case to the public and put pressure on the Republicans.  He has to do it and Triple B is right, he has to go around the country and tout this.  People will get this if he present it correct.  No one will get trade agreements, more tax cuts that is Republican talking points and we all know jobs are NOT CREATED by tax cuts.  But the vision of this bank if forward thinking, but it must be sold by POTUS and again not in a throw away Saturday video that no one watches.

      •  See my comment above... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Beelzebud
      •  The President will have to do more than (15+ / 0-)

        get out there on the campaign trail and push for this. No one is listening to him any more. He would need to work this sucker through Congress, line up with the unions to ensure wage protections, and play some real hardball. I want to believe that could happen, but I'm pretty confident it won't.

        "Whenever a fellow tells me he's bipartisan, I know he's going to vote against me."-- Harry S. Truman

        by irmaly on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 06:35:30 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

          •  It's too late (3+ / 0-)

            to try and do anything through Obama and the Democratic establishment. They've blown whatever credibility they ever might have had. They've shown themselves for what they are. Just now I heard some NPR playing Harry Reid talking about how the SuperCongress needs to be "bipartisan". It's nauseating.

            I clicked on this diary because I thought that by "moving on" you were referring to moving on away from and without the shattered wreckage of the Democratic party.

            What a disappointment.

            Al Qeada is a faith-based initiative.

            by drewfromct on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:15:51 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Not sure if it's too late. But they sure wasted (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              drewfromct, vigilant meerkat

              one incredible opportunity. In January 2009, the Dems had the presidency, majorities in both houses of congress, the momentum of a smashing mandate to make huge changes and the wind at their backs. And now, two and a half years later?

              The Republican motto: "There's been a lot of progress in this country over the last 75 years, and we've been against all of it."

              by Hillbilly Dem on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 08:06:33 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  And the galling part (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Hillbilly Dem, vigilant meerkat
                And now, two and a half years later?
                is how some people want to blame voters for not turning out in 2010 for the party that gave up it's mandate without a fight.

                How many people voted for "bipartisanship" in 2008?

                Al Qeada is a faith-based initiative.

                by drewfromct on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 08:14:22 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Look... (4+ / 0-)

                  until kos declares this to be an anti-Democratic blog, this will be a Democratic blog committed to the Democratic party.

                  You need to start backing off the sorts of comments calling for people to leave the Democratic party because that will get you banned.

                  I realize anger is high. Im pissed off too. But I am still committed to reforming and improving the Democratic Party and what it stands for, even if our leaders aren't. If you aren't down with that, I suggest you go to a blog that fits where you are coming from.

                  •  Thank you. (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    evergreen2

                    I was seriously beginning to wonder if in fact we still were a "Democratic blog committed to the Democratic Party."

                    "I want us to live up to her expectations. I want our democracy to be as good as she imagined it." President Obama

                    by Onomastic on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 09:34:18 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Question: (0+ / 0-)

                      did you vote for the Democratics in 2008, or did you vote for bipartisanship with radical regressives of the Republican party?

                      What were you hoping for in voting for Obama? Did you get it? Are you happy with the results we've gotten by sticking with our "only" alternative?

                      Al Qeada is a faith-based initiative.

                      by drewfromct on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 09:43:02 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  You're almost funny, the way you reduce (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        jennybravo

                        everything to simplistic thinking.

                        Either/or, for or against, with me or against me.

                        Hating labels as I do, along with slavish party loyalties, I've always described myself, if forced too, as a liberal and an Independent.

                        I want, as I always have, what is best for the people of this country, this world and this beautiful blued planet. That has always been to my thinking far more important than Party.

                        That has led me to voting Democratic most of the time, and when possible, and it made sense to so, Independent. For example a Green candidate on a state level.  

                        I got from the 2008 election exactly what I expected. A man in the White House who would please me some times and displease me at other times. I also got what I expected from the Republicans, racists Tea Partiers, MSM, their corporate overlords and the American voters who gave us a House controlled by know nothing Teahadists.

                        I did not expect this fight to be fast or easy. Nor did I expect the President to be able to full fill all of my hopes. I grew out of that kind of wishful thinking a very long time ago.

                        I am now a registered Democrat and will be actively supporting the re-election of President Obama and more Democrats to the Congress.

                        Not doing so risks the creation of a future I would not wish on anyone.

                        "I want us to live up to her expectations. I want our democracy to be as good as she imagined it." President Obama

                        by Onomastic on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 10:10:50 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                  •  The only way (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    irmaly

                    I, you, Kos, or anybody else who cares about Progressive values should be having anything to do with the Democratic party at this point is to take it over from the inside and re-direct it away from its slavish compliance with the desires of Wall St and the ultra-wealthy.

                    The President and the party leadership have shown themselves to be utterly out of touch with the desires and  needs of the lower 98%. They are incompetent at best, but more likely complicit with Republicans, at worst.

                    If Progressives can be successful in taking the party leadership away from those who capitulate and/or collaborate, then there's still hope for the party. But if it can't be re-captured and redirected, then it must be bypassed as the obstacle it has become.

                    Al Qeada is a faith-based initiative.

                    by drewfromct on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 09:39:02 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

            •  so you're withdrawing from politics since (0+ / 0-)

              it's too late?   Between now and 2012, will your energy be used in complaining?  This is a serious question, not being snotty.

              Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it. --Mark Twain

              by SottoVoce on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 10:19:59 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  And how do you propose (5+ / 0-)

          he do that?

          Nothing he wants will get through the house. Nothing.

          And if it doesn't pass the House, there's not a lot he can do about it. The GOP has the majority there, and they WILL NOT VOTE FOR ANYTHING HE WANTS.

          •  Thats not the point. (0+ / 0-)

            He has to FIGHT for something.

            And be seen FIGHTING for it.

            So he can have SOMETHING to talk about when he is campaigning.  something.  anything.

            And its his idea to it seems.. even better.

            •  Fight how? (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              jennybravo, Southside

              I love that word - 'fight' for something. How do you propose he do that?

              I really would like to know.

              I'd also like it to be something that might have a chance of HELPING accomplish something of value. Ranting at the GOP and insulting them isn't going to do that.

              Might make you (and him, probably) feel better, but it won't get us  anything tangible.

              •  Scream, yell, whine, moan, call everyone you (0+ / 0-)

                disagree with names, don't negotiate with anyone let alone the majority party in the House, don't make deals, invoke obscure Amendments to give him miraculous powers, hold your breath until you get your way, refused to eat your dinner, blah blah blah.

                I am sure I am missing a few Dkos tips on how to get your way but you are right, I am not sure any this accomplishes anything.

                More democrats, less republicans.  

          •  Strongly agree with that, but it is time (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            mmacdDE, jennybravo

            for the Pres to treat that little GOP obstruction/hate issue as a MAJOR problem that he needs the help of the American people to overcome.

            And, apparently, the American people like it when he asks for their help and NOW kinda is the moment to say, hey, ok, wow, that was bloody, thank god they didn't shoot you! so, back to work, and let's make this great idea happen, and hey, wtf, why would the GOP block this right after trying to destroy the economy? Woah, hey, ya'll think you could help me convince them that they need to help out around here?!

            He did just extract a pound of flesh, he truly did, but he needs to follow up on the message the public just received about the GOP with some action items, and yeah, he needs to confront that they are keeping him from initiating with their Badness.

            The GOP holding the narrative on what problems need  to be solved is a bad idea - the President needs to present his problems, his solutions and retake the narrative.

            He just set the stage for blasting GOP ass, now I want him to take that stage and hold onto it via action.

            "In all chaos there is a cosmos, in all disorder, a secret order." Carl Jung

            by Unduna on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 10:07:02 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  What we need is (0+ / 0-)

        a climate that attracts business.

        you just can not pretend like spitting in the face of some progress, because it is 'not enough ' is going to get you more progress

        by missliberties on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 06:39:25 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  (scratching head) (10+ / 0-)

          Tell me more about why you think this climate does not attract business.

          I have my own ideas -- Public companies have used the economy as an excuse to buy their own stock (increasing share price) in the face of a demand downturn.

          This is the private sector mirroring the Grover Norquist strategy of cyclically cutting revenues then claiming you must cut social spending to close the resulting deficits. But, that's just a theory.

          I'm curious as to why you see a negative climate for business.

          " 'You Rock?!?' (But been through less gravel.) My mystique suggests battle. And, what have You?" -Common

          by malharden on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 06:47:10 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  The economy is changing (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            malharden

            we need to understand that love it or hate it globalism is here to stay.

            Our policies need to adapt and they should embrace sustainable values that help people and business.

            Business is not the big evil, when it operates ethically. I don't see why progressives recoil in horror at the word business.... because businesses provide jobs.

            you just can not pretend like spitting in the face of some progress, because it is 'not enough ' is going to get you more progress

            by missliberties on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:16:30 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  asdf (17+ / 0-)
              Business is not the big evil, when it operates ethically. I don't see why progressives recoil in horror at the word business.... because businesses provide jobs. Emphasis mine

              Business, especially big business, has exhibited an extraordinary ability to operate unethically, amorally, and so on.  The ones that do so, I think (please feel free to prove me wrong) tend to be at a short-term competitive disadvantage because being ethical in the short-term probably results in lower profits.

              I remember when Elliot Spitzer was Attorney General in NY State, he said Wall Street guys were telling him something to the effect that he needed to enforce the laws and successfully prosecute those bankers et al. that break them, otherwise those who obey the laws are at a competitive disadvantage. I don't think there are many businesses that will CHOOSE to act ethically unless they fear enforcement of the law.  And the mechanism to enforce the law is government regulators, who are now being defunded.

              "Without viable unions to serve as a counterweight to corporate power, America's working people and their families are at the mercy of the largest and most powerful economic organizations on the planet."

              by billlaurelMD on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:27:00 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Hear, hear. (0+ / 0-)

                The Republican motto: "There's been a lot of progress in this country over the last 75 years, and we've been against all of it."

                by Hillbilly Dem on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 08:07:31 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  There are isolated examples of exceptions. (0+ / 0-)

                Some businesses get a short-term boost from being (or being perceived as being) good citizens.

                Remember when online micro-investment was hot? The www.kiva.org people had a hot valuation until their website was copied a dozen times over. People love the idea of driving a Tesla (despite affordability issues), which led to unlimited VC funding offers to support the Tesla company.

                There are some examples which work, as long as there is enough barrier to entry to keep the idea from being copied and commoditized.

                " 'You Rock?!?' (But been through less gravel.) My mystique suggests battle. And, what have You?" -Common

                by malharden on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 08:42:50 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  Please name a single big business (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              malharden, Brooke In Seattle

              that operates 100% ethically on a voluntary basis in an environment of no/low regulation.

              The only reason any business operates with any regard for ethics is because of well-enforced regulations. Take those away (which is what we do when we embrace the Global Race To The Bottom) and ethics go right out the window.

              Globalism is not here to stay, not if we decide it's detrimental. Global trade should raise standards, not lower them. Exporting good-paying jobs in a safe and regulated environment to one where workers are ruthlessly exploited helps no one but CEOs and stock manipulators.

              What we need is a return to tariffs. We need massive, punitive tariffs on goods and services imported from nations that refuse to meet our standards for the protection of workers, consumers, and the environment. That's in the short term. In the long term, we need to develop and practice a new economics that is not based on perpetual growth of consumption of the natural resources of a single finite planet.

              Al Qeada is a faith-based initiative.

              by drewfromct on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:59:57 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Well the idea of free market (0+ / 0-)

                Means that greed can't really be apart of it.  But being human those guys are greedy which leads free market to be a wet dream of Republicans.

                I agree whole heartedly on tariffs.  The US is to big of a market to ignore so in order to make it cheaper they'd have to move some production back to our shores.

                If at first you don't succeed, vote Teapublicans out and try again. You have to be persistent if you want anything out of life.

                by Final Frame on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 09:59:32 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  I agree with both you and drew... (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Onomastic, evergreen2

              ..and I think that you do not disagree with each other.

              Within a given industry, I think big business operate as a herd of cattle. You can guide them in the direction(s) you want, but you definitely need a cattle prod. Left to their own devices they will eat every bit of available grass on a plot of land, without  regard for whether that is an appropriate action on a given plot of land (a given market sector, a given consumer base, a given workforce...)

              As Government, you need to hit them with the cattle prod.

              Cattle prods sting. The cattle don't like it. But, it's necessary. drew (below) is 100% right on that.

              drew's point is about corrective behaviors, but I agree with your point as well about rewarding proactively positive behaviors, like investment in emerging, economically friendly market segments like green energy and technology.

              The administration agrees with this as well. If this community were better educated on the topic, we could discuss how the last round of republican cuts to the 2012 budget, down at the program level, specifically slashed the administration's planned investments in those areas.

              But when comments/diaries try to discuss those detailed concrete things they get drowned out in this forum by "he needs to fight!" platitudes and talk about how "weak" he must be.

              " 'You Rock?!?' (But been through less gravel.) My mystique suggests battle. And, what have You?" -Common

              by malharden on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 08:38:30 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  what we need is (0+ / 0-)

          a climate that attracts jobs........

          Businesses follow sales. Sales come from customers. Customers have no money without........wait for it.......JOBS!

          If you want an economy based on consumers, you have to have consumers with the money to go out and consume.

          Less "WAAAAH!", more progress.

          by IndyGlenn on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:15:33 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Go ahead and finish the logic: (6+ / 0-)
            Businesses follow sales. Sales come from customers. Customers have no money without........wait for it.......JOBS!

            Businesses follow sales. Sales come from customers. Customers have no money without........wait for it.......JOBS! BUT: Jobs come from businesses hiring. But businesses follow sales. So businesses don't hire. So customers don't have jobs. So customers don't have money.  So businesses don't hire. So customers don't have jobs. So customers don't have money. Et cetera.

            Want to break out of the infinite loop?  When business is trapped in a negative cycle such as this, the only one with money is government.  So:

            Government pushes lots and lots of money out to customers.  Customers have money.  Businesses have sales. So businesses hire.  JOBS! So customers now have nongovernment money. So now we have a positive cycle instead of a negative one and people start paying TAXES on their new income and the government can afford to pay up their deficit.  

            This is not new.  This is the supposedly discredited Keynesian economics that got the country out of the Great Depression.

            We are the principled ones, remember? We don't get to use the black hats' tricks even when it would benefit us. Political Compass: -6.88, -6.41

            by bmcphail on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:57:42 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I support Keynesian economics ....... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              bmcphail

              My reply was a simple rebuttal of the "climate that attracts business".

              Since business cannot provide consumers with the means to consume, the government can (in the relative short term) provide the means through infrastructure building jobs, unemployment support, and so on. Which is basically what you're saying as well.

              Less "WAAAAH!", more progress.

              by IndyGlenn on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 05:41:09 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  By that you mean (5+ / 0-)

          lower wages for workers, no taxes at all for corporations, and more deregulation, right?

          The way to "compete" with third world sweatshops is to have them here, is that what your'e saying?

          Fuck you and your Race To The Bottom.

          You're not fooling anybody here.

          Al Qeada is a faith-based initiative.

          by drewfromct on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:18:39 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  These are the kneejerk reactions (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            malharden

            that are not helpful.

             All business is not evil. To say so is ludicrous.

            you just can not pretend like spitting in the face of some progress, because it is 'not enough ' is going to get you more progress

            by missliberties on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:20:21 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  see my comment above (7+ / 0-)

              only some need to be "evil" (e.g. ignoring regulations that make the businesses internalize social costs) to put pressure on the rest.  And without effective and well-funded regulation, it's a tall order to fill.

              "Without viable unions to serve as a counterweight to corporate power, America's working people and their families are at the mercy of the largest and most powerful economic organizations on the planet."

              by billlaurelMD on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:29:54 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Explain yourself, then. (4+ / 0-)

              What exactly do you mean by Business friendly" if not lower wages, etc and all of that Race To The Bottom "competitiveness" bullshit?

              As for business being evil, the fact is that the market is completely amoral. History has shown over and over that the majority of businessmen would step over their grandmother's fresh warm corpse for another percent of profit, and those that do have scruples must abandon them in order to "compete" with those who don't.

              Al Qeada is a faith-based initiative.

              by drewfromct on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:41:41 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Here's one look at it (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                drewfromct, malharden

                Be small-business friendly, and enable more people not to need jobs because they've created their own jobs, and maybe some for a moderate number of other people.

                It's the only way forward in this new global economy -- even if all those good jobs were coming back, it's also the only way to break down the power of the big companies, by just not needing them anymore.

            •  Very few businesses are evil. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              malharden, imfunnytoo

              What they are is amoral.  A CEO can be sued by the stockholders for not maximizing stock value.  This does not encourage the long view.  

              It is in the essential nature of business to be socially irresponsible.  Business NEEDS regulation in order to be able to behave morally.

              Baz

              We are the principled ones, remember? We don't get to use the black hats' tricks even when it would benefit us. Political Compass: -6.88, -6.41

              by bmcphail on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 08:01:21 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  We cannot repeat this enough. (0+ / 0-)

                Corporations are amoral machines to generate profit. They don't care how they generate it! An immoral, illegal profit is just as good as a moral, legal profit to a corporation. The immoral approach is usually more efficient, so it is damn near required by the corp's stockholders.

                Less "WAAAAH!", more progress.

                by IndyGlenn on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 05:45:49 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  your doing the strawman thing it seems (0+ / 0-)
      •  A problem as I see it (0+ / 0-)

        even if he does endorse, lead and tour, creation of a new BANK is a difficult populous sell. I am not confident it is an item that will or can catch fire.

        Although it sounds like a good idea.

        "New York was a big win for gay-marriage advocates, no question." -- Maggie Gallagher, Wall Street Journal

        by Scott Wooledge on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 06:52:40 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  WE all know that. (0+ / 0-)

        The President does not appear to agree, though.

        You're talking as if President Obama is inclined to do something about jobs. As if he and his advisors believed in Keynesian, and not Supply-Side economics, or listen to anyone who does. As if he would ever support such a bank, an institution that would ask the corporate donor class to pitch in.

        But you can't show me a shred of evidence that that is the case, that it has ever been the case.

        We need to stop deluding ourselves about what the President is going to do for us "any minute now" and start pounding the pavement to win House seats. The President is not going to help, he's going to do what he always does, which is see which way the wind is blowing.

        Dance like no one is watching with one fist in the air... We are stronger than everything they have taught us that we should fear.

        by Surly Cracker on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:52:25 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I am afraid you are right in part (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          bluehen96, jennybravo, Surly Cracker

          But there was the stimulus which I believe did make a difference. I also believe that the President is faced with political issues that are unreported in the media, to be precise, you have to understand that where there are very, very, very high stakes in government operations there are going to be some very, very, very heavy characters floating around wanting a piece of the action--this has been true at all periods in the history of civilization and the U.S. is still the richest country in the world.

          To put it simply, the nation state, not just in this country but everywhere, is losing power rapidly in the face of what Loretta Napoleoni called "rogue economics" which, in my view, goes beyond economics (since I don't believe economics is ever separate from politics) into society as a whole. The reason our economy and our political system has bogged down is the rise of what I can only call a criminal element colonizing every one of our major institutions. This is nothing new except that, since at least 2000-1, this criminal oligarchy really came into its own. I don't think any President has the power we think he or she has. Our President is faced with a real and powerful oligarchy that will stop at NOTHING to get its way--if you haven't hung around criminals, con-artists and gangsters (I have in my youth) you're not going to understand what I'm talking about. But just remember one thing--the kind of money that we're talking about here attracts a lot of hustlers and, like on the street, many of the cops are on the take.

          •  Yup. I'm not a believer that he WANTS (0+ / 0-)

            to do any of this stuff, though. It's not that I don't understand the power dynamic, it's that I'm annoyed that other people persist in insisting that ANY DAY NOW the President is going to become a champion of Progressive causes and policy, we just have to keep waiting for the "right moment." Bullshit.

            See, I don't have much faith anymore that he's "faced with a real and powerful oligarchy," I believe he's PART of that oligarchy.

            The whole situation makes a hell of a lot more sense when you look at it that way. And even if it's not true, I can't see how acting as if we're enraged with Obama for being a tool of a Corpratocracy and demanding change on that count is an inappropriate reaction to the fact that the majority of policy actions he's taken support that view.

            If he's NOT that guy, shouldn't he be trying to prove it?

            Dance like no one is watching with one fist in the air... We are stronger than everything they have taught us that we should fear.

            by Surly Cracker on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 12:03:41 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  To put it simply, those that are progressives... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Surly Cracker

              don't have the juice to insist on anything. Obama can't do much for them if they aren't willing to, basically, force him to act in the way they want him too. Believe it or not complaining doesn't count for much in the halls of power. Force is what causes politicians to move in one direction or the other. The left in America needs to understand that it needs to get much hipper about politics. That means getting serious about organizing (and I don't mean for elections) and be in a position to hurt on somebody.

        •  Too bad it started as his proposal (0+ / 0-)

          But don't let me interrupt...

          Full Disclosure: I am an unpaid shill for every paranoid delusion that lurks under your bed - but more than willing to cash any checks sent my way

          by zonk on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 09:37:47 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Would need to provide strong wage protection (13+ / 0-)

    for workers. If not, I see the bank as a way for private companies to use the US government to get cheap labor.

    "Whenever a fellow tells me he's bipartisan, I know he's going to vote against me."-- Harry S. Truman

    by irmaly on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 06:32:23 AM PDT

    •  I agree. We could add provisions (7+ / 0-)

      to the issuing of loans that companies or government agencies must use union labor. There will probably be a fight over this provision, but only Presidential leadership can make it happen.

      •  Have to make that puppy strong. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        AnnCetera, evergreen2

        For example, the Buy America act is full of loopholes. They'd need to get someone (Solis?) to help write it that was not immediately susceptible to accusations of letting union heads write the thing.

        And we need to keep the green card employee levels right where they are (or decreasing the permissible numbers of those kind of hires).

        " 'You Rock?!?' (But been through less gravel.) My mystique suggests battle. And, what have You?" -Common

        by malharden on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 06:49:32 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  You have just discovered (3+ / 0-)

        The way it will be killed. The Democrats will (rightly) insist on protections for labor, and for the Republicans that will be a bridge too far.  There will already be a good number of Republicans who would fight it simply because Obama proposed it, and more who would kill it because it might work and make him look good for 2012 but need an excuse. The labor protections give them that cover.
        They've already established their position that organized labor is equal to communism, so they can oppose it to keep us free from the communist takeover, lead by that famous socialist, Obama

      •  That is, at this time, a non-starter (0+ / 0-)

        No Republican and most blue-dogs cannot support that. There are other ways.

        Unions need to get their act together and work the PR better than they have and spend more time at the grass-roots organizing for the long term--but that's another story.

      •  Elizabeth Warren as head of it? n/t (0+ / 0-)
    •  Rethugs will invent... (4+ / 0-)

      ...a reason to oppose it, or insist on adding "poison pills" to any proposed bill(s) to make it impossible for POTUS to sign.  Can't you see Sir John of Orange adding a provision exempting ALL Infrastructure Bank projects from Davis-Bacon...or just trying to abolish D-B entirely?  Or, instead of Davis-Bacon, include exemptions from existing Environmental Impact Statements or Endangered Species regulations?  Can't you see Boehner crying on the House floor and struggling to explain how HE, John Boeher of Ohio, REALLY wanted to help create new jobs, but the President chose the (take your pick) snail darter/desert mouse/spotted owl instead?  Even if EVERY economist and development expert in the country agreed that an Infrastructure Bank was the way to go, these BASTARDS would think of one thing and one thing only--how to use the issue to destroy Barack Obama and the Democratic Party.  

  •  How about pension plans for the jobs that exist? (9+ / 0-)

    Those of us in the Military Community are fighting to keep pensions off the chopping block.

    SallyCat mentioned that her state is considering chopping pensions as well.

    Check out MilitaryTracy's current diary.

  •  Obama has a chance to redeem himself in a lot (18+ / 0-)

    of people's eyes if he steps up and really walks the talk.  After all that's gone down, I'm skeptical but I will be happy to change my opinion anytime he changes his behavior.

    "Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth". Albert Einstein

    by Sydserious on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 06:34:29 AM PDT

    •  Then, it's just talk.... (9+ / 0-)

      because he's got not one fucking dime to do anything.  The Republicans asked for the purse, and he gave it to them like a smart old granny being jacked up by some thugs.

      •  I know....I have this optimistic side of me that (3+ / 0-)

        creeps up when I think things can't get any worse.  Of course they can and so basically this is all I've got right now.  : (

        "Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth". Albert Einstein

        by Sydserious on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 06:40:34 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  HE did not give them ANYTHING (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        banger, wishingwell

        the VOTERS did that, not him.

        If the GOP didn't have control of the House, he would have a much better shot at getting things he wants.

        •  Is this President EVER responsible for anything? (9+ / 0-)

          In your universe?

          •  Of course he is (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Jeff Simpson, wishingwell, Onomastic

            He's responsible for his cabinet appointments. For some foreign policy (which has to be funded by Congress, remember). For judicial appointments (which also have to be approved by the Senate). For signing or vetoing legislation.

            But he doesn't MAKE that legislation. And depending on the make up of Congress, he may not have much influence on what does get made. Sometimes he has to sign things because they include rather important pieces - like the debt ceiling bill.

            Remember, he can't pick and choose which parts of the bill he signs. He has to sign ALL of it, or NONE of it.

            •  POTUS main problem is this, (7+ / 0-)

              he has not had his footprint on most of the legislation that has passed congress.  He has shown very little leadership.  Even his HCR he just threw it and gave it to congress, with his admins doing backroom deals.  We know how that turned out, the public hated it and it stunk of all those deals many that he campaigned against but did a 180.  He showed little leadership in this debt debate.  Sure he said that the bill must have tax hikes, revenues even tepid response came from the WH about veto.  But when push came to shove, he blinked, could not stare down the GOP and caved.  That is what happened.  Now he is in a pickle because people have seen him do this repeatedly and his talk is that to many, TALK.  Now he has to do something and this is on him.  If he can not figure out how to lead and call the Republicans out and I mean like 24/7 then he has a massive problem next year.  We all better PRAY we get a bat shit teabagger for the GOP nominee.  The thing of he does not make legislation is true, but the public does not view it that way.  When you allow the GOP to malign HCR and you sit in the WH and watch it with no response, what do you expect to happen?  The man has to show some fight and that comes along with leadership.

              •  You are buying into Republican framing. (5+ / 0-)

                You sound like Michael Steele asking Morning Joe where the POTUS' plan is.

                It's a trap, and is disingenuous.

                The President's Budget is right where it always is, EVERY year under EVERY POTUS. It's right here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/...

                But, it's a trick question, because POTUS can't make it legislation. It's a budget REQUEST, like it is under EVERY POTUS. Things that create jobs and reduce the deficit are embedded in it. So Steele then gets to say he didn't LEAD, which is not and can't be his role, since spending bills originate in the House.

                And then Progressives who should know better swallow this stuff and repeat it.

                " 'You Rock?!?' (But been through less gravel.) My mystique suggests battle. And, what have You?" -Common

                by malharden on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:22:09 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I am not falling into a damn Republican frame.. (6+ / 0-)

                  why don't you start with Obama, himself touting more TAX CUTS for job creation?  He did that shit AGAIN yesterday in his newser and if that is not a Republican talking point I don't know what is.  Can we get on him for that?  He is shooting himself in the foot sounding absolutely silly talking about more tax cuts.  When everyone around here knows that cutting taxes don't create jobs.

                  •  You JUST parroted a Republican frame. (4+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    wishingwell, matrix, Onomastic, mmacdDE
                    he has not had his footprint on most of the legislation that has passed congress.  He has shown very little leadership.

                    You can pretend otherwise if you like, but that is a Republican frame.

                    You have NO idea what meetings he has with lawmakers and how/if his fingerPRINTS appear on legislation.

                    And the "very little leadership" stuff ignores hundreds of years of precedent on how our budgets and laws get made, which I demonstrated for you in the post above.

                    But yeah, keep thinking that if you change the subject to Tax Cuts (which I freely admit is the wrong approach) that means that your post about his footprint (sic) and leadership aren't Republican frames.

                    " 'You Rock?!?' (But been through less gravel.) My mystique suggests battle. And, what have You?" -Common

                    by malharden on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 08:30:12 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  There's always a bit of (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      jennybravo, malharden, evergreen2

                      psychological ju-jitsu in how the Presidency works when the other party controls the House.

                      Especially when they're so virulently against the President as this House is.

                      If he wants to have any input AT ALL he has to accept at least some of their ideas. He can push for the least objectionable ones, and hope that they can control the real idiots and keep even worse things from getting into the final bill.

                      Depending on how much they like him (and yes, I think it really does come down to that), they will or will not go along with anything he proposes.

                      This House has shown that they DO NOT LIKE OBAMA. Not just 'meh', but to the point to absolute disrespect. That's pretty much unheard of.

                      So he tries to get them to like him. Just like anybody you're stuck working with who can't stand your guts (and for no damn reason at all), you try to get them to at least work with you, rather than try to undercut every little thing you attempt to do.

                      You do that by being NICE to them. Hence the golf outing, the phone calls, the invitations to the WH. I'm sure the Pres is pretty used to this type of thing - a black man in this country who isn't a pro athlete or born into wealth doesn't get to a position of power without having to do at least some of that.

                      It wears on him though - it has to. And it comes out - in the putdown of Cantor, the jabs at the GOP, the amazing display of knowledge when he talked to their caucus that one (and only one) time. He's supposedly the most powerful man in the WORLD, and these idiots in the House treat him like dirt. It has to drive him CRAZY.

              •  The real political situation in Washington (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                mmacdDE, Onomastic, jennybravo

                just doesn't give Mr. Obama any room to operate. Things are much worse than you imagine here (I've lived inside the beltway for decades) and we are coming close to a decade that could see major breakdown in everything. The whole system is gummed-up. It would take a legion of committed people to clean it up.

                The President is doing, in my view, the best he can under the constraints of real power. Most people at DKOS are politically naive because, even if they don't admit it they believe in American Exceptionalism and don't believe that our institutions could be dominated by gangsters who operate under the MSM radar. BTW, if you want to blame any sector of our political hierarchy the first to blame is the MSM which has become a PR conglomerate for the oligarchy which, in my view, has moved from C. Wright Mills "power elite" to the aforementioned gangsters.

            •  Im confused (as is usual) (6+ / 0-)

              So all the debt limit negotations between Boehner and Obama and McConnel and Obama of which the Democrats in the Senate said they were left out of...the President has no say in the writing of that legislation?

              What was he negotiating then? Shoul I bring you cheeses puffs or yodels while you write the bill?

              Can you show me a single pro Bush post you made where you instructed angry Democrats to lay off him, he is not to blame for the policies that came out when he was President? I hope you can. Consistency is important in validating an argument.

            •  Presidents Do Make Legislation (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              David Kroning II, Sydserious

              Heck, even unelected First Ladies make legislation - doesn't anyone remember Hilarycare where she was criticized for being too secretive with the bill she was writing...and she wasn't even the President!? Presidents can make legislation until the cows come how, then they need someone in Congress to introduce it.

              If Presidents are are powerless in constructing legislation, why was Boehner negotiating with Obama without Reid even being invited to attend?

              •  You said it yourself (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Onomastic
                Presidents can make legislation until the cows come how, then they need someone in Congress to introduce it.

                And if nobody introduces it, OR it gets introduced and chopped up all to hell, is that the PRESIDENT'S fault?

                Because that's what happens all the time. The President says 'here's what I'd like' and Congress says 'we don't like that, we want THIS' and Congress GETS IT.

                Because CONGRESS makes the laws. NOT the President. His ONLY option is to sign or veto it. Period.

                •  You're Going Around In Circles (0+ / 0-)

                  You denied that Presidents make legislation and now you're somehow trying to go after me because I'm right while completely dodging why Boehner was negotiating with Obama and Reid was completely excluded...clearly the negotiation that happened proves that Obama had more than the two options you claim Obama had.

                  •  Read the Constitution (0+ / 0-)

                    You might be surprised. The deck is totally stacked for Congress. Totally.

                    And those ARE his only options. He can make his views known and ASK for what he wants, but there's no requirement that Congress give it to him.

        •  Where was he (4+ / 0-)

          when the Dems controlled the House, then?

          Obama and Pelosi lost the House because they pissed it away on passing a law that forces us to buy expensive private insurance from the companies that make billions in profits by denying access to care. At that point, their credibility was gone, and they lost. And it's not as if a lot of us here did not accurately predict that that would be the outcome of passing the Mandate without the Public Option.

          Face facts: The writing was on the wall when Obama retained Bush men in the cabinet, and in his early fruitless quest for "bipartisan" solutions. What Obama and the House Democrats lost last November was everyone who
          voted for Democratic policies in 2008 and are now rightfully bitter at having been lied to and backstabbed.

          Al Qeada is a faith-based initiative.

          by drewfromct on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:26:35 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  You're buying into what the media (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            jennybravo

            puts out there.

            The only way anything was going to get done with healthcare was to do the absolute minimum, and get at least a little Republican support. That was the ONLY way. There are plenty of good things in the health care bill, and the bad parts (and I don't like the mandate either) don't kick in for a while.

            That gives time to change them. Hopefully we'll be able to do that. I think people and corporations (the real drivers) will push for changes. And again - things like this often start very small and grow.

            You have to start somewhere. This is a start. The media pressure AGAINST it was HUGE. It's a miracle we got what we did.

            It's like anything else that's a huge change - once one place does it (and you know some states are going to do some kind of single payer, or regulate insurers pretty strictly) and it works (which is mostly the world doesn't end), others will.

            Look at gay marriage. When DOMA passed in 1996, did ANYBODY think that states would be allowing gay marriage less than 10 yrs later? Or that 15 yrs later that 6 states would allow same-sex marriage and more would either recognize those marriages or have civil unions?

            I can understand why people are disappointed. But put your real disappointment where it belongs - on CONGRESS. And work to change it.

    •  It's too late (3+ / 0-)

      Even if he tried to now, his credibility is gone.

      He gave it all away and now has nothing left.

      Al Qeada is a faith-based initiative.

      by drewfromct on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:20:11 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Nope, see? (9+ / 0-)

    People aren't ready to move on...

    Slim - hell, even you -- apparently didn't bother to read the very first paragraph of the article you cited:

    President Barack Obama talked at his news conference Monday about creating a national infrastructure bank that could help rebuild and repair America’s roads, bridges and ports and also address our serious unemployment problem. He cited the bank as one crucial way to stimulate the economy.

    I would urge the president to move forward on this so we can begin to restore America’s infrastructure and strengthen our economy for the long term.

    But yes, yes -- the President needs to show leadership and use the bully pulpit to talk about this wonderful idea... you know, like he already did.

    Full Disclosure: I am an unpaid shill for every paranoid delusion that lurks under your bed - but more than willing to cash any checks sent my way

    by zonk on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 06:35:03 AM PDT

    •  Look, I get it, (5+ / 0-)

      but in the end if POTUS does not show leadership and the reason I am touting this word, as well as Triple B is because in the polling that will be coming out, the phrase, "is the President showing strong leadership" will be a question asked and watch the numbers.  Obama screwed himself on this debt fight, when he could have scared the shit out of the GOP with the using of the 14th amendment.  If the GOP wanted to stare him down, he should have used it instead of taking it off the table from the beginning.  Obama was part of the problem in the debt battle because he said one thing to the public but caved completely to the teabaggers.  He showed no leadership.   The debt battled scarred Obama and congress, but watch the polling in the next 6 weeks Obama's numbers are dropping.  At this point, everyone is right, the congress won't allow him to do anything but all he has left is to FIGHT and if he can't do that, he might as well pack his bags to leave January 2013.

    •  One mention isn't enough (10+ / 0-)

      He has to carry it to the people.  He needs to use all the means at his disposal to say it over and over and promote it at every level.  VP Gore literally begged him to do it last night on Olbermann - the one thing that unites us ALL on this site is that we are BEGGING him to get out in front at frame the discussion, tell us where the country should be going and keep hammering at it.

      When Al Gore is telling you you're way too standoffish and aloof, man, you better listen!

      "We have to remain constantly vigilant to prevent raids by those who would selfishly exploit our common heritage for their private gain." Harry Truman

      by Helena Handbag on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 06:43:37 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Exactly. Mentioning something in a speech (6+ / 0-)

        from the Rose Garden isn't using the bully pulpit. He's got to be out there, pushing. He's got to have all his surrogates out there pushing. He's got to have his allies in Congress out there pushing.

        This has to be a centerpiece of a stump speech that's got some humor in it, a bit of sparkle, and some salesmanship.

        Just mentioning it on the side in a speech about process is NOT leadership. Pushing for it in backroom negotiations is NOT leadership. He's got to be in the arena, engaged, and fighting for it.

      •  Funny thing is-- (4+ / 0-)

        I went back and checked my archived OFA e-mails and also checked out the WH archives...

        Guess what... This isn't a new idea:

        From February --

        Build a leading 21st century infrastructure. President Obama has made a renewed commitment to investing in the roads, rails, and runways that America’s businesses need to be efficient and innovative.  Building on historic investments through the Recovery Act, the Administration continues to address transportation challenges through investment in high-speed rail, the next generation of air traffic control, and a new proposal for a National Infrastructure Bank, which will promote competition and innovation to maximize the return on our infrastructure investments.

        and from his budget proposal earlier this year

        As part of a six-year, comprehensive surface transportation bill at $35 billion per year, the Budget creates hundreds of thousands of jobs in the short term with a $50 billon up-front investment; establishes a National Infrastructure Bank to support projects of national importance; and brings access to high-speed rail to 80 percent of Americans within 25 years.

        In fact -- apparently -- the President was talking about this very idea back in February...

        ...and no one listened -- maybe we were all busy doing something else.

        Full Disclosure: I am an unpaid shill for every paranoid delusion that lurks under your bed - but more than willing to cash any checks sent my way

        by zonk on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 06:54:46 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  We ARE listening (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          wishingwell, Onomastic, evergreen2

          It's getting it out there to the giant, busy non-politics geeks that matters.  They aren't reading OFA emails.  He told people to call congress and they crashed the phone lines.  We know he can do it!

          "We have to remain constantly vigilant to prevent raids by those who would selfishly exploit our common heritage for their private gain." Harry Truman

          by Helena Handbag on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 08:12:51 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  He's 'pivoted' to jobs using rhetoric 7 different (10+ / 0-)

      times since taking office.

      During the previous six, he lost interest and failed to perform even de minimis follow up.

      He needs to actually PUSH this.  Raise it every day.  

      Honestly, he should have included it as part of the debt negotations, when he was still considered relevant.

      "[R]ather high-minded, if not a bit self-referential"--The Washington Post.

      by Geekesque on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 06:48:29 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Hmmm... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        smartdemmg, evergreen2

        Obama Proposes Infra Bank...:

        Includes $30 billion over six years for a pioneering National Infrastructure Bank to invest in projects of regional or national significance to the economy.

        White House Seeks 4B for National Infrastructure Bank:

        President Obama's proposed fiscal 2011 budget would create a national infrastructure bank to fund major transportation projects and provide an additional $1 billion for high-speed rail projects.

        Amtrack noticed, too...

        It was silly of me to expect that a Democratic blog would have picked up on this -- I mean, why would it?

        Full Disclosure: I am an unpaid shill for every paranoid delusion that lurks under your bed - but more than willing to cash any checks sent my way

        by zonk on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:01:28 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Geek, I don't know about you, but... (0+ / 0-)

        ...I don't have that much confidence in PBO anymore -- as an executive or a Democratic standard-bearer.   I think the longer we wait, the more we seal his inevitability as the '12 candidate and prevent other options from bubbling up within the party.  I'm not talking "primary him".  I'm talking asking him to withdraw from '12 consideration. I know he won't do that now, but he's very bright and he might in 3 months, after Q3 GDP continues to languish around 1.0 (or worse) and unemployment continues above 9 (and very likely worse).  The GOP is going to nominate a Romney or a Huntsman, not a nut-case, and they're going to plaster PBO with a "misery index" -- one that will probably include the still skyrocketing cost of health care insurance.  He got only 53% when the bloom was new on the rose.  He may not lose that many Democrats, but he will lose too many Indies, and the GOPers are going to be in full warpaint. What are the chances of him getting even 45-46% in '12?

        •  No, we're stuck with the loser. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Larry Bailey, icebergslim

          Romney is the sanest R we can hope for.  Huntsman is a joke, vanity candidate along the lines of Kucinich of Gravel.

          His biggest problem isn't ideology or embracing the security state.

          It's being a failure.

          "[R]ather high-minded, if not a bit self-referential"--The Washington Post.

          by Geekesque on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:36:38 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  They're all jokes and have no chance of winning (0+ / 0-)

            barring a major economic downturn.

            •  "barring a major economic downturn" (0+ / 0-)

              That's like saying "barring the calendar changing from 2011 to 2012."

              "[R]ather high-minded, if not a bit self-referential"--The Washington Post.

              by Geekesque on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 09:06:27 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I wouldn't go that far (0+ / 0-)

                It's not for sure... I think we are going into another recession but I don't believe it will be much worse than what we've already faced. This sort of see-sawing back and forth is the future for the next few years. There will be no sustained growth and the trend is basically down. I don't see a "major" downturn as very likely but it is a definite risk--maybe 10%, something like that.

                A Republican President, at this time, would be a disaster and we all know it. Neo-feudalism would be upon us within a couple of years. With Obama maybe five to ten years--it will happen either way. I think, ultimately, that's what the American people want.

        •  LB. We are stuck with Obama. (5+ / 0-)

          You need to swallow that just like you had to swallow George W. Bush defeating Al Gore. It sucks, but you gotta live with it.

          We need to start doing something about jobs. No matter if Obama goes or stays, he and his family will be fine. Our concern has to be over the people out here going broke and we have to do whatever we can.

        •  He's doing the best he can (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Larry Bailey, jennybravo

          I'm radically opposed to his politics and believe he is a center-right politician, more or less and has been for a long time. But considering the real political situation in Washington and the country, I don't see how anyone could do any differently.

          Look at it realistically, the left is, essentially dead politically, it has little influence anywhere in this society except in a few universities and the usual enclaves. The average American is stupified if not stupid but certainly willfully ignorant of the most essential aspects of modern life. The people of this country have entered into a phase where they crave fantasy and denial above all else. Frankly, I think we are lucky to have President Obama and I think he and others in government know this country is headed on a straight line straight to dissolution and neo-feudalism. Personally I blame the culture of narcissism created by the entertainment media (I include the "news" and mainstream journalism in this). We are totally fucked and ruled over by an oligarchy we are too blind to see. What we "see" and comment about are shadows on the wall of the cave--if anyone steps outside the cave and comes back we exclude that person automatically thus we are doomed to not see anything close to the truth. This is far more true today than in any time in our history.

  •  Agreed. But we all know that this (20+ / 0-)

    latest pivot will likely follow the example of his 6 previous pivots to "focusing on jobs."

    I'll have his back if he actually fights for job creation this time.  But, this guy can no longer be taken at his word.

    "[R]ather high-minded, if not a bit self-referential"--The Washington Post.

    by Geekesque on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 06:35:30 AM PDT

  •  I think what we need (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    evergreen2

    is several more internet lynch mobs with donuts...... and an infrastructure bank.

    If you want to focus on something that has support from both sides that has a chance of actually passing..... an infrastructure bank is it.

    you just can not pretend like spitting in the face of some progress, because it is 'not enough ' is going to get you more progress

    by missliberties on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 06:37:22 AM PDT

  •  The worst of this is (6+ / 0-)

    is this whole incident illustrates the supply sider inmates get what they want. I can't see any hope for good economic policy coming out of DC in the next two years.

    Even if they wanted it, and I am not convinced they do, they seem to incompetent to strategize how to get it down.

    The time to end the Bush tax cuts for the rich was before midterms when the Dems had the votes. But they pissed that window away.

    "New York was a big win for gay-marriage advocates, no question." -- Maggie Gallagher, Wall Street Journal

    by Scott Wooledge on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 06:39:31 AM PDT

  •  Manhattan Projects..Infrastructure Banks.. (0+ / 0-)

    crickets.

  •  So the prez is in the unenviable position (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sychotic1

    of having to talk about two bad things: jobs and the economy. Both are political losers.

    Yes, something should have been done/needs to be done to improve the job situation and the economy.

    The gop has tied up Obama in knots over a nonsense crisis. Obama allowed that to happen.

    Now, any legislation targeted at jobs will not have enough time to effectively kick in and show results before the 2012 election. Its too late for that.

    Also, the quick pivot to jobs is designed to make us forget about the horrific debt deal just passed.

    I thought a prez up for reelection would want to discuss positive things that have occurred during his presidency.

    The executioner sneered as the young queen ascended the stairs to the guillotine; in the old days, he thought, at least there was some buildup, a little time on the rack or some disemboweling, but nowadays everyone wants instant gratification. - Rossi

    by A Runner on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 06:40:57 AM PDT

    •  He may have some political capital right now. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      A Runner, wishingwell, evergreen2

      To the extent that he and his political guys believe that he came out looking like the adult after this debt ceiling thing, it seems likely they would also believe he needs to spend some of this capital on "leadership" to strengthen the re-election campaign.

      Assuming things proceeded according to their plan, there is every reason to believe that he will make a strong move on SOMETHING in the coming months, even if you believe it is just for craven political reasons.

      " 'You Rock?!?' (But been through less gravel.) My mystique suggests battle. And, what have You?" -Common

      by malharden on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 06:56:47 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Look at the poll numbers in the coming weeks (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        A Runner, The Moonlit Knight

        then revisit the statement.  Obama and Congress got scarred from this.  Obama for a lack of leadership, for congress looking dysfunctional.  Obama was ready to move on from this and I am sure his internal poll numbers show the erosion.  What political capital?  Political Capital is what you use to get what you want, Obama got NOTHING from this but the Teabaggers got everything.  When you have John Boehner touting he got 98% of what he wanted and the President says NOTHING in that effect?  Who do you think won this?

        •  You aren't looking at them yourself. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          evergreen2

          Those poll numbers arent available yet per your own post, and yet you're sure he's lost.

          I don't necessarily disagree. You may be confusing me with someone who liked this deal. I don't.

          My statement was

          To the extent that he and his political guys believe that he came out looking like the adult after this debt ceiling thing, it seems likely they would also believe he needs to spend some of this capital on "leadership" to strengthen the re-election campaign.

          So, IF his team negotiated what THEY THINK was a win, they logically should go out and spend that Capital to bolster his re-election bid.

          " 'You Rock?!?' (But been through less gravel.) My mystique suggests battle. And, what have You?" -Common

          by malharden on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 08:46:05 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Perception is insight. (0+ / 0-)

            Barack Obama wanted out of this deal BAD.  Hell, he was not jumping up and down like he won.  The current polling shows the public blames both congress and POTUS.  That is across the board.  He can't use this debt debacle to bolster his re-election bid.  It was a nasty sausage made and the public don't want to be reminded of it.  I expect Obama to take a hit on this and I am sure their internal polling shows it, which is why he is quickly pivoting to jobs.  The biggest question is why it has taken the Obama Administration so long to put the total focus on this?  POTUS was easily derailed by the GOP for any petty thing, he needs to learn how to handle them and I mean PUBLICLY so it looks like he is in charge, meaning showing leadership.  This manufactured debt drama did no politician any good.  For this POTUS should have drawn a line and stood on it even if it meant using the 14th amendment.  He needed to make sure the public knew that their services were not going to be interrupted under his watch because of a small group who wants to shut down the government.  But, that did not happen and we have to deal with what we got and going forward on jobs, it is not much.

      •  I question Obama looking like the adult. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        icebergslim, malharden, jayden

        He did comport himself well, as did others in the fray.

        Maybe the villagers think he gained capital. Saw a CBS poll where 77% of responders said something like "all parties in the debt ceiling debate acted like children."

        17% said the parties acted grown up.

        Hope you are correct about the strong stand that may be coming. Love to see it.

        The executioner sneered as the young queen ascended the stairs to the guillotine; in the old days, he thought, at least there was some buildup, a little time on the rack or some disemboweling, but nowadays everyone wants instant gratification. - Rossi

        by A Runner on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:44:09 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  OMG . . . I like a brooklynbadboy diary! :o) (6+ / 0-)

    Thanks for this constructive diary . . . much appreciated.

  •  There's nothing that can be passed (9+ / 0-)

    By siding with the austerity crowd, Obama has taken fiscal measures off the table.  Interest rates can't get any lower.  If there are things the executive can do without the need for congressional approval, that's all that's left.

  •  Call me when Obama PROVES (8+ / 0-)

    he is willing to go to the wall for workers/Main Street by protecting them and not Wall Street corporations with a bank designed to make the wealthy more wealthy.  Obama is in show me territory, he no longer has my faith he will do the right thing when faced with a choice that involves jettisoning his bipartisanship fetish.

    Every time history repeats itself, the price goes up...East Wing Rules

    by Pithy Cherub on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 06:44:18 AM PDT

  •  I fear creation of a private Fed-style bank (8+ / 0-)

    that will result in more private tollroads, toll bridges, water systems, etc.  I can easily envision a World Bank model where we truly end up like a third world nation with our infrastructure in private hands.  I have absolutely no faith in Democrats keeping what should be public projects public.  There is no political will to prevent corporate interests from finding a way to suck the last bit of economic life's blood from us.

    "I believe that ignorance is the root of all evil. And that no one knows the truth." - Molly Ivins

    by Involuntary Exile on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 06:47:02 AM PDT

    •  Yes, another financial Trojan Horse (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      The Moonlit Knight
      The idea is simple. We set up a bank. It could be a government agency or a government sponsored corporation.
      Who runs it? Who is accountable? This administration was more than useless against the banksters, it was an active participant in protecting them and ensuring the setup and continuation of their precious bubble cycles (cf. ongoing speculation on food and water resources, now that so much else of value has collapsed). They should not be trusted with creation of any "infrastructure" bank or be in any proximity to such an entity at all.
      We allow companies that have over $1 trillion in profits parked offshore to bring those profits home as long as they deposit them in the bank. For doing so, they get a tax deferment.
      This is offensive on a number of levels, but the primary one is that these companies have already shirked the fiduciary responsibilities to their ostensible country of origin that the rest of us are forced to bear. They sure as hell shouldn't get yet another tax-free haven.
    •  Credit Mobilier II (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      The Moonlit Knight, Eric Blair

      The Chamber Of Commerce is for it, so that makes me think it would just be another Credit Mobilier to fleece taxpayers.

    •  I think that is a real fear (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      The Moonlit Knight

      but I don't want it to be written off until I see the details.

      I'm truly sorry Man's dominion Has broken Nature's social union--Robert Burns

      by Eric Blair on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 09:43:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  There won't be any job legislation (0+ / 0-)

    because we are entering the remainder of this lame duck congress. It actually started right after the Republicans took over...didn't ya know?

    We are all atheists about most of the gods that societies have ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further. ~Richard Dawkins

    by Therapy on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 06:49:42 AM PDT

  •  I suspect you may be right but... (0+ / 0-)

    ...honestly I'm having trouble moving on.  Where are we gonna' get the money to pay for jobs programs?  Any possibility for that kind of thing just got sunk.  With no new revenue coming in to the government it's just impossible.  It's pretty clear to me that we can't expect any significantly large new government programs in the near future.

    What do I know?  Not much, really.  But it certainly feels that way.  Moreover, it seems to be what all the bright guys we like (like Paul Krugman) are saying.  I know my sentiment isn't constructive, but I worry that it's correct.

    "Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." -J.S. Mill

    by Bradlaugh on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 06:50:04 AM PDT

  •  Sounds like a scheme cooked up by a crooked (3+ / 0-)

    accountant to me.

  •  excellent diary (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    evergreen2

    it is time to pick new battles,  we don't need to forget or fail to learn from what has gone before, but we have to remember that we still have much to lose or potentially gain.  

  •  Check your premises. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    maryabein, drewfromct

    We didn't lose.  We're losING.

    I didn't care for math, but when I first understood the concept of finding the slope of a curve at a point, I wanted to grab the first girl I saw and kiss her with wild abandon, just like in that WW II photo.

    by dov12348 on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 06:54:09 AM PDT

  •  Now THIS is a classic DKos diary. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wishingwell, evergreen2

    Stuff is broken, how do we fix it?

    This is why I come here.

    " 'You Rock?!?' (But been through less gravel.) My mystique suggests battle. And, what have You?" -Common

    by malharden on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 06:54:35 AM PDT

  •  Local and state government can already (0+ / 0-)

    sell tax free bonds for projects.

    •  That's the problem. (4+ / 0-)

      Right now they really can't. I know. I work in this are of municipal bond financing.

      They've literally almost tapped out their revenue sources and munis are getting killed right now. Their interest rates and statewide balanced budget amendments are just killing them. Not to mention the weak economy has just killed local and state tax revenue.

      An infrastructure bank backed by the federal government, however, can make 100, 200 year loans at low interest rates. That's something the muni market would never sign on to.

  •  Seems like a good thing to move on to (4+ / 0-)

    Jobs should be priority one.

    The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government. - Thomas Jefferson

    by ctexrep on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 06:58:15 AM PDT

  •  Great idea. Some questions: (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    malharden, evergreen2

    can this bank be set up without congressional involvement? Perhaps the fed?

    Can approprations from it be made without congressional involvement?

    Is there any way around congressional involvement?

    Next questions:
    Strategy for getting the word out and pressuring Obama (and congress if necessary). We need a strategy and frankly I think it needs to start at the grassroots level. Waiting for the DNC et al to do it and deliver a message has been proven to be futile. I think looking at the tea party movement would be instructive. I also think tapping into local and state organizations that serve the unemployed might be good too. Waiting for Washington is a losing strategy. Pressuring Obama is iffy at best. Congress is broken almost beyond repair. They're not listening to us. We know this. So we need to devise ways and strategize about how to make our demands unignorable. We can/should use the media's known appetite for drama, if possible. Come up with something cohesive, pervasive, ongoing and impossible to ignore.

    •  We will definitely have to have a law (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mdmslle, evergreen2

      to create it and that means Congress.

      However, I can't see anything for Wall Street and Corporate America to complain about here. They own the place and this actually benefits them.

      •  I think its worth a shot. I also think (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        brooklynbadboy, evergreen2

        we might want to come up with a plan B. I think we'll see a lot more intransigence and cohesiveness on the part of the GOP this time around. They will "try" to say that its bad for business. I know, I know. It's not true but nothing they say ever is. They will also try to demonize the "establishment of another government agency". Again, a lie. But the GOP is nothing if not predictable.

        Is there anyway the Fed can set this up?

  •  Interest rates in the US are just about (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wishingwell

    the lowest in the world except for Japan and Switzerland.

  •  yes (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wishingwell, evergreen2

    Who do we contact?  Or can we campaign for it?

    For those of you who prefer Bartlett to Obama, re-watch the West Wing. For those who prefer Clinton, re-watch old news videos.

    by Ptolemy on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 06:59:12 AM PDT

  •  Ready to move on (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wishingwell, evergreen2

    but..to go back I found another excellent Post.
    http://www.editedforclarity.com/...

    I am one of the few folks on this site that strongly believed in the face of economic terrorists and outright racists, Obama got the best deal he could get.

    "This country was founded on compromise. I couldn't go through the front door at this country's founding" - President Barack Obama

    by AAMOM on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:02:32 AM PDT

  •  I need another day or two and possibly some (5+ / 0-)

    diversion before I can completely shake this off.

    This wound has opened other wounds that weren't completely healed, so I'm not just dealing with this but my head is spinning with "we have to look forward, not backward", and Rahm's statements to the effect that we should shut up and sit down.  It may take more than a day or two, come to think of it..


    The religious fanatics didn't buy the republican party because it was virtuous, they bought it because it was for sale

    by nupstateny on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:03:55 AM PDT

    •  I understand. Believe me, I do. (5+ / 0-)

      If youre a maxed out donor to Obama like I was, the suck hurts even more.

      But we can't just sit around in a funk. We've got to get up and dust ourselves off and push this President.

      •  You're right. It's not easy though. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        nupstateny

        We need a few more hours to feel pissed. Then I'll join you.

        Spray tons of carcinogens into the ocean to hide petroleum spewed from a hastily-drilled hole from a greedy corporation, but don't smoke pot. -xxdr zombiexx

        by DontTaseMeBro on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:40:14 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  The best revenge is success! (0+ / 0-)

        I like your diary. Tipped and recced.  I like this idea.  I'm sick of all the negativity and defeatism. I wish there was a way to do this without Congress.  But that would go against Obama's principle of Making Congress Do Its Job.

        Maybe, since the Repugs will oppose anything the Prez wants, the last thing that should be done is have Obama stump for it.  Just sayin.

        Namaste!

    •  yeah I'm pretty pissed off too. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      nupstateny

      I'm still gonna vote for Obama and I think we're still way better off than with a Rethuglican president, but I'm really, really pissed that the Democratic leadership SUCKS. Including Obama.  The debt bill SUCKS.  

      Did I mention I'm pissed?

      Spray tons of carcinogens into the ocean to hide petroleum spewed from a hastily-drilled hole from a greedy corporation, but don't smoke pot. -xxdr zombiexx

      by DontTaseMeBro on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:39:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Replace the air conditioners (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    The Moonlit Knight

    not the grid.

    It's better to have air conditioners using about half the electricity on a daily basis.

  •  The problem is how to fund anything (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    evergreen2

    The Republicans will block anything that has been tried in the past an is known to work because it involves spending money we don't currently have.  Sure it would make sense from an investment point of view but it would be politically disastrous for the Republicans if they allowed Obama to accomplished anything.

    This is a fairly good idea with a novel source of funding. I can't see the Republicans supporting it because they prefer to talk about jobs rather than creating them. The worst thing that an happen is the Democrats get to beat up the Republicans rhetorically because they have a workable plan and the Republicans don't. Who knows maybe something will even be worked out.

  •  I'd good with this (0+ / 0-)

    I do have a sneaky suspicion that someone's going to have to put Geithner on ice before Obama will go all in.

  •  It's an "okay" idea. (0+ / 0-)

    My concern is that it does nothing to rebuild American manufacturing, and in fact, encourages the opposite. If corporations know they can bring their money back, they have little incentive to keep it here in the first place.

    That said, it does create jobs.

    Regards,
    Corporate Dog

    -----
    We didn't elect Obama to be an expedient president. We elected him to be a great one. -- Eugene Robinson

    by Corporate Dog on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:10:11 AM PDT

  •  NOPE not yet (0+ / 0-)

    Gore Vidal: "Our Only Political Party Has Two Right Wings, One Called Republican, The Other Democrat"

    CLAP LOUDER

    I wonder how many WH aids/ workers are paid to troll sites where the base congregate to berate us to CLAP LOUDER

    •  BBB has been a front page (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      evergreen2

      rec'd up, time and time again diarist criticizing the President, so save that for the Air Force, okay?

      "The bottom line is, we've got to wake up. We can't allow our disappointment in Obama to lull us into allowing a truly dangerous strain of conservative philosophy to gain any more traction than it already has." --ObamOcala 4/5/11

      by smoothnmellow on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 11:17:58 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I have moved on. I'm post-Obama. (0+ / 0-)

    I'm also post-America.

    The former has made sure of the latter.

    grieving citizen of the murdered Republic, unrepentant rebel against the Empire.

    by khereva on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:11:13 AM PDT

    •  Okay. Buh-bye. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      evergreen2

      "The bottom line is, we've got to wake up. We can't allow our disappointment in Obama to lull us into allowing a truly dangerous strain of conservative philosophy to gain any more traction than it already has." --ObamOcala 4/5/11

      by smoothnmellow on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 11:16:37 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I am not, however, post watching clowns, (0+ / 0-)

        pointing, or laughing at them.

        Which is why your effort to shoot this particular messenger will go unfulfilled.

        grieving citizen of the murdered Republic, unrepentant rebel against the Empire.

        by khereva on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 01:57:44 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Uh, take a semi good to good idea (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    The Moonlit Knight

    and put it in the hands of these politicians right now?  LMAO  

  •  I like this proposal. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    brooklynbadboy, anagram

    I'm definitely 'sore' about... oh, let's just say pretty much the entire Obama administration up to this point. I can support this idea though.

    So we know what Obama and high-profile Democrats can do, should they decide to do something. Apart from the obvious (call, LTE, yada yada) what can we do? SuperPAC? Some kind of infrastructure-based activist group? Googlebomb?

    I agree that it's not particularly courageous to solve a problem on the backs of people who are poor, or people who are powerless, or don't have lobbyists, or don't have clout.

    by teknofyl on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:14:02 AM PDT

    •  Exactly (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      teknofyl

      We the people can't rely on POTUS for anything anymore. So how do we get this thing rolling? How to we build the groundswell so Congress has to listen because we're not asking anymore?

      Do we start with leaning on CPC to draft the legislation?

      "So do not try to one-up me because I will one-up yours." Peggy Hill

      by anagram on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 08:02:13 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Where was the jobs talk over the last year (0+ / 0-)

    Now that they have ensured it will only get worse they want to sweet talk the voters on the HOPE of job creation.
     sorry for the grumpy frustration.

  •  FHA Title I loans (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    evergreen2
    Title I loans may be used to finance permanent property improvements that protect or improve the basic livability or utility of the property--including manufactured homes, single-family and multifamily homes, nonresidential structures, and the preservation of historic homes. The loans can also be used for fire safety equipment.
    The Title I program insures loans to finance the light or moderate rehabilitation of properties, as well as the construction of nonresidential buildings on the property. This program may be used to insure such loans for up to 20 years on either single- or multifamily properties. The maximum loan amount is $25,000 for improving a single-family home or for improving or building a nonresidential structure.

    For improving a multifamily structure, the maximum loan amount is $12,000 per family unit, not to exceed a total of $60,000 for the structure. These are fixed-rate loans, for which lenders charge interest at market rates. The interest rates are not subsidized by HUD, although some communities participate in local housing rehabilitation programs that provide reduced-rate property improvement loans through Title I lenders.

    FHA insures private lenders against the risk of default for up to 90 percent of any single loan. The annual premium for this insurance is $1 per $100 of the amount advanced; although this fee may be charged to the borrower separately, it is sometimes covered by a higher interest charge.

    Eligible Lenders:

    Only lenders approved by HUD specifically for this program can make loans covered by Title I insurance. Title I loans can be disbursed directly to the borrower or, if the loan is made through a dealer, the disbursement will be made jointly to the dealer and the borrower. While most lenders and dealers/contractors use this program responsibly, HUD urges consumers to use caution in choosing and supervising home repair dealers/contractors conducting Title I repair/renovation work.

    http://www.hud.gov/...

  •  agreed. (5+ / 0-)

    "I'm Black and I'm proud, I'm ready, I'm hype, plus I'm amped/ most of my heroes don't appear on no stamp!" ~Carlton Ridenhour

    by mallyroyal on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:16:49 AM PDT

  •  Do it NOW. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    evergreen2

    So it is at least functioning by November 2012. Republicans will try to stall it, but the Wall St. momentum for 'repatriating' offshore profits will be very, very hard for them to resist.

    We have only just begun and none too soon.

    by global citizen on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:21:00 AM PDT

  •  We can sit around here talking jobs until (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KnotIookin, Brooke In Seattle

    we're blue in the face, but until someone from D.C. actually gives a shit, I don't see the point.  

    The Patriot Act: IOKIYAD!

    by Beelzebud on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:22:50 AM PDT

    •  It is not in the Republicans best interest to (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      josephcwhite, Brooke In Seattle

      create jobs.  Every job created lessens public displeasure with Obama, and thus might increase his chances for re-election.

      They are not going to budge on any program that might actually lessen unemployment.

      I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that his justice cannot sleep forever. ~Thomas Jefferson

      by bobdevo on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:43:52 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Oh sure... (0+ / 0-)

      Then when the WH pushes for jobs and the GOP dumps it or demands more outrageous stuff in exchange for it, then you get to gripe some more.

      Great idea.

      "The bottom line is, we've got to wake up. We can't allow our disappointment in Obama to lull us into allowing a truly dangerous strain of conservative philosophy to gain any more traction than it already has." --ObamOcala 4/5/11

      by smoothnmellow on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 11:15:25 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I'm ready to move on (0+ / 0-)

    to a different president

    JOBS? You must be INSANE.  Do you not learn? Jobs will never never happen under this POTUS.  Move on.

  •  Job! I'd like one helping (0+ / 0-)

    to rebuild America.
    I'm a decent welder/fabricator & like what I do.
    there just isn't any of those types of jobs left.

  •  What about starting up a DK micro-lending (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    shanikka, brooklynbadboy, evergreen2

    bank?  Someone floated that idea in a comment or diary recently, and I think it's brilliant.  Since DC's not interested in circulating more $$, why not circulate our own?

    No need to squabble girls. There's plenty of me to go around. - Pam from True Blood

    by fou on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:32:25 AM PDT

    •  There are Some Non-Profits (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      fou, evergreen2

      Who have begun trying to replicate the Grameen Bank's original microlending approach in poor communities here in the US.  (Setting aside for a moment that the Grameen Bank's for-profit approach ultimately has led it to have some serious controversy right now).  The impediment has been that the amounts of money don't translate well US-side (a $250 loan that could be life-transforming in India can't even buy a month's groceries in the US.)  It definitely would take large infusions of capital (or at least, access to a large stream of capital) to get off the ground here.  But it's an idea that's definitely worth trying to take mainstream IF IMO (a) the profit motive is suppressed as much as possible, i.e. folks are investing with an understanding that returns will be suppressed, much the way that permanently affordable housing has covenants running with the land preventing the "owner" who buys in at the affordable price from taking all but a couple of percent of the increased equity with them when they sell and (b) a lot of care is taken to really think through:  what is the minimum amount of capital required to truly allow someone to create a foundation for success such that they eventually can access the primary lending markets on their own on fair terms?

      If you don't stand for something, you will go for anything. Visit Maat's Feather

      by shanikka on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:41:14 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I want to move on. Still hurting though. (4+ / 0-)

    Jobs? The only thing I want to see as our next focus is a WPA for a new century. It's the only thing that will work.

    WPA for the USA.  I'm damned serious.

    And I want to see the freaking Dems get a spine and call out Rethugs more.  The state we're in as Democrats is beyond ridiculous.

    I'm pissed.

    Spray tons of carcinogens into the ocean to hide petroleum spewed from a hastily-drilled hole from a greedy corporation, but don't smoke pot. -xxdr zombiexx

    by DontTaseMeBro on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:34:05 AM PDT

  •  Time to move on (0+ / 0-)

    from the biggest Democratic obstacle to growing the economy and job creation:  Obama.  He's so yesterday.

    •  Blech. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      malharden

      Don't go electing a Republican, though, okay? Then we'll be worse off.

      Obama could still surprise us. I'm waiting. I had so much hope in him.

      Spray tons of carcinogens into the ocean to hide petroleum spewed from a hastily-drilled hole from a greedy corporation, but don't smoke pot. -xxdr zombiexx

      by DontTaseMeBro on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:42:01 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  There's an argument to be made (0+ / 0-)

        that had there been a REpublican president he would have never proposed cutting SS, Medicare and Medicaid (which are coming as a result of the second Cat Food Commission) as Obama wanted because the Dems in the Senate would have nothing to do with it.  George Bush tried to privatize SS with a Republican Congress and could not get it done over Democratic opposition.

        The risk is that the Dems in the Senate are worthless for the most part (i.e. authorized endless war and the Patriot Act) and would not have stood up to a REpublican president just as they didn't stand up to Obama.  

        What we need is better Democrats in the HOuse and SEnate to constitute a majority and we need to dump Obama.  He's toxic.

        •  No. The Tea Party is toxic. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          evergreen2

          And I don't buy that argument.  The mere fact that the Bush boys was so far up the butts of the bankers should have given you a clue then.  The Corporations wants total deregulation and they want your SS monies so they can fukk it up too -- they were far ahead on this and a Republican President would have just handed it over, no questions asked.

          Maybe that scenario is more acceptable to you.

          "The bottom line is, we've got to wake up. We can't allow our disappointment in Obama to lull us into allowing a truly dangerous strain of conservative philosophy to gain any more traction than it already has." --ObamOcala 4/5/11

          by smoothnmellow on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 11:12:42 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Just recognizing history (0+ / 0-)

            The Dems had the republicans on the run when Ryan's budget proposal was made because it included cuts to Medicare and SS.   The same thing would have happened had president McCain proposed it.

            It's impossible for a Republican president to hand over anything with no questions asked, assuming of course that there was strong Democratic opposition in the Senate.  Maybe that's not a valid assumption given the Iraq War and the Patriot Act, but I think it valid because up until Obama refusing to cut SS and Medicare was the "third rail" of American politics.  The Dems have used the rethugs desire to make those cuts against them for decades.  Now, they can't use it because their fearless leader (I mean that in the most pejorative sense) has proposed the cuts.  I guarantee you that the Repubs will be beat Obama over the head with that time after time in the run-up to the 2012 election.

  •  This is precisely why the stimulus package (4+ / 0-)

    should have been much, MUCH larger, per Krugman and others.

    While I agree with brooklynbadboy that the American Infrastucture Agreement makes a lot of sense and might even work . . . . the Republicans have already made it clear that destroying Obama's chances for re-election are their prime concern . . . much higher priority than fixing the economy or putting working folks back to work.

    The Republicans will NOT lift one finger to do anything that might help with jobs because it might lessen their chances in 2012.

    So unless Obama is prepared to do a Harry Truman, and call these bastards out by name in a real street fight to create jobs, any such proposal is DOA . . . or at best in a chronic vegetative state . . .

    I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that his justice cannot sleep forever. ~Thomas Jefferson

    by bobdevo on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:42:26 AM PDT

  •  tipped and rec'ed for the title and sentiment (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    smoothnmellow, evergreen2

    Remember how many comments and diaries one read here in recent years condemning the capitulation of the narrative to Repubs?  Well the Repubs devised a phony crisis, the corporate media created a phony sideshow to cover the phony crisis and DK largely stirred up phony poutrage to react to the media and political circus.

    WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT JOBS AT DK ABOUT 60% OF THE TIME ALL ALONG.  WHY DO WE EXPECT POLITICIANS OR NEWS OUTLETS TO CHANGE THE NARRATIVE IF WE DON'T ATTEMPT TO DO IT HERE?

    What are our priorities at DK anyway?  80% or more seems to be about merely reacting to corporate news.

    Thanks for moving on.

    I'm not liberal. I'm actually just anti-evil, OK? - Elon James White

    by Satya1 on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:42:50 AM PDT

  •  I'm Ready (6+ / 0-)

    I don't know as much about the American Infrastructure Bank as I should; I knew the President had created this idea and it is a bold one.  (It's sort of sad he hasn't pushed this more, but it is what it is)  I don't know whether it could successfully be funded using offshore funds, however, without running into 5th Amendment  takings issues (i.e. private funds taken for a public purpose without "just compensation"); a lot of care would have to be put into precisely how to effectuate the idea you have.

    If you don't stand for something, you will go for anything. Visit Maat's Feather

    by shanikka on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:43:44 AM PDT

  •  Amen, brother. Jobs. (0+ / 0-)

    When the rose lies withered by the roadside don't try to negotiate the bloom.

    by Atilla the Honey Bunny on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:46:54 AM PDT

  •  How about we talk Wisconsin? (0+ / 0-)

    The meat of the recalls are six days away.

    Don't panic. Demonstrate.

    by Quicklund on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:47:45 AM PDT

  •  No, I am NOT ready to move on. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Larry Bailey, StevenJoseph

    All this talk about "Wait and see what is in the debt ceiling bill", well, now I want to SEE what is in the bill, I want to analyze what is in the bill, I want to know exactly how it is going to effect We the People.

    I want to be able to use cold, hard facts when the Defenders try to shove it down our throats as a GOOD bill.  I don't want to gloss over the fact that The Defenders kept telling us it will all be OK, Obama has our back, you just need to trust him, so I can prove without any doubt that we just had our moment when any hope of an economic recovery was thrown to the Wolves.

    If beginning a Great Depression is what Certain People want me to laud as a victory for the Democratic Party, I want to have a very good explanation of how this is a win.

    NOT ready to move on.

    "Take away paradox from the thinker and you have a professor." Soren Kierkegaard

    by ohmyheck on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:48:08 AM PDT

    •  More internal fighting, yay! nt (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      evergreen2

      " 'You Rock?!?' (But been through less gravel.) My mystique suggests battle. And, what have You?" -Common

      by malharden on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 09:11:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The bill is available to read... (0+ / 0-)

      I agree it's an unmitigated disaster, regardless of whatever motivations were involved.  But you're not going to convince those who don't think that's the case until after the effects play out, and even then, you'll probably hear from some that it was still the very best possible deal and that whatever would have happened otherwise would have been even worse, and that's an impossible argument to win.  If you want to bang your head against that wall, have at it.  

      I've finished my own process of grieving and anger, accepted that the White House is gone in 2012 and that we'll have to rebuild the party once again.  If there is one thing that virtually everybody agrees on, although not necessarily for the same reasons, it is that we need control of the House again.  The tea party is awful, but one of its tactics was correct:  They found a strong organizing message and pushed for it.  The message we need to coalesce around, push for, and hold Democratic politicians' feet to the fire over, is JOBS.  Legislation and policies that will create real jobs, not this "tax cuts create jobs" b.s.  Make Democratic candidates understand that in every primary, the Democrat who talks about real job creation is the Democrat who will win the primary, and if when in office the Democrat goes the other way, then that Democrat will be primaried.  This is much more productive, and ultimately will be more satisfying, than trying to win arguments on the Internet.

    •  Okay, you ani't ready to move on. (0+ / 0-)

      Have a nice day.

      "The bottom line is, we've got to wake up. We can't allow our disappointment in Obama to lull us into allowing a truly dangerous strain of conservative philosophy to gain any more traction than it already has." --ObamOcala 4/5/11

      by smoothnmellow on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 11:06:58 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Wonderful idea (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    evergreen2
    Remember, their goal is to destroy President Obama, no matter what.

    I have a friend that estimates that 20% of the American populace is blatantly racist and will therefore oppose any and everything President Obama proposes, even if it directly benefits the haters themselves.

    I HOPE that 20% estimate is high, but there is little doubt that some portion hates "your boy" so much that they would cut off their noses to spite their faces.

    I like this idea a great deal and hope they haters opposed to it are a minority.

    In 2010, I paid more taxes than General Electric.

    by GrogInOhio on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:51:12 AM PDT

  •  Why don't we just tax the corporations? (2+ / 0-)

    Everyone is always trying to come up with this gimmicks to try and get money out of the corporations. We need to just make them pay the taxes they owe. Corporations exist by law not by birth. It's time we get them under control. We need to revoke corporate charters for wrong doing and tax dodging, and start locking up the principle officers. After a few go down I bet corporations will start paying their fair share in a hurry.

  •  Four bites at the apple (9+ / 0-)

    No, I'm not ready to move on. Yes, I'm ready (as I have been all along) to push for jobs, but this austerity assault thing is not even close to being over.

    Initially they had three bites at the apple. This dangerous super congress thing gives them one more.  So we still have to get through the budget bill in the fall and the catfood commission in Nov/Dec.

    No, not ready to move on.  I've seen this kind of push before, meant to tamp down the anger and dissent.  I don't like it.  In fact, I think it's ridiculous to ask for it one day after such a disastrous bill was passed.  I think you lose voters over and over when you tell them to just get over it.  I'm not saying that is exactly what you are doing in this diary, but it's close.  And it will get louder and louder if history is any gauge.  It will escalate into "stop whining!" and "shut up" and "you're going to lose the election for us".

    No, this isn't even close to being over.  We need to rise up, not sit down.

  •  There are so many things... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    The Moonlit Knight

    ..wrong with this diary.

    1) "Let it go?"  That's so typical Democrat of you to say "let it go."
    I noticed nyceve recently  wrote a diary about how she can't let the public option fiasco go, then she tied it to the debt fiasco.  

    So here's my question:  Why isn't nyceve a front page poster & you are relegated to regular posting status?  Because nyceve has an intuitive grasp of how to win policy fights.  You don't.

    2) The right wing anarchists currently inundating our government have moved on from wanting to destroy Barack Obama exclusively.  They are a bunch of self-loathing misanthropes who are now hellbent on destroying the country.  If they were still focused on Obama exclusively, they would still be pimping the birth certificate bullshit.  But Obama's appeasement has enboldened them:  Now they want to see mass destruction on a biblical scale (fucking with the FAA is merely a test run).

    I'm getting tired of typing, so I'll stop here.

    But please don't play the "We lost. Get over it. Move on" card. That sounds like some crap straight from Jay Carney's podium.

     

    When Fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in excess body fat and carrying a misspelled sign.

    by wyvern on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 07:57:41 AM PDT

    •  Well, there is one main thing wrong with your (0+ / 0-)

      reply.  

      It's not helpful.

      Have a nice day.

      "The bottom line is, we've got to wake up. We can't allow our disappointment in Obama to lull us into allowing a truly dangerous strain of conservative philosophy to gain any more traction than it already has." --ObamOcala 4/5/11

      by smoothnmellow on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 11:04:45 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  A lot more complicated than (6+ / 0-)

    most on the left seem to appreciate.

    The corporate right (which means MOST corporations) are having a hissy fit.

    Sit in on a conference call and you'll hear people whining that they won't open a factory here because they don't know what their costs will be when "Obamacare" kicks in.

    I mean, I call them on their baloney, because if that were really their problem, then why aren't THEY pushing for single-payer? Truth is, many of the real biggies hate "Obamacare" because it pulled away their little treasury-raiding Medicare scam.

    Listen to hedge fund guys, who have a tremendous amount of power, whether you like it or not, and they'll scream about "uncertainty!" What they really hate is that their tremendous loopholes are endangered.

    But the fact of the matter is that President Obama can say anything he wants and bang that bully pulpit until his hands are bruised...that won't make businesses expand, and many won't hire simply because they want the "certainty" of a controllable hard right Congress and president.

    When people get to suck off the teat for so long, they actually believe they are entitled to it.

    The Democrats, yes, should beat the GOP over the head with JOBS! JOBS! JOBS! Won't accomplish much in actual policy, but will in politics - and if Americans REALLY want change, they need to do two things:

    Get strong Democratic majorities in both houses AND a Democratic President.

    And two, do what people in Wisconsin are doing: stop taking it. Unionize. Fight and scream. This kind of change HAS TO come from the bottom up. To expect a President Obama or a President Sanders to structurally change the entrenched powers is a fool's fantasy. These entrenched powers can, will and do fight back, and their battle plans include misery on American workers, to whom they believe they owe nothing.

    Start with that.

  •  Trade deals (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tardis10, Brooke In Seattle

    Also, this is an interesting read by emptywheel:

    The “Pivot to Jobs” Will Be an Attempt to Sell Trade Deals

    The next act of deceit coming down the road.

  •  Move on (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JTinDC, malharden, wishingwell, evergreen2

    Great diary, and terrific suggestion. Just as Obama is pivoting to jobs, so must we. Time to come together.

    My forthcoming book (as yet untitled) on Barack Obama and American national identity will be published in Summer/Fall 2012 by Potomac Books. Look for it online and in bookstores.

    by Ian Reifowitz on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 08:05:20 AM PDT

  •  This is CHANGE I can get behind ... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    evergreen2

    And corporate America will as well ... the question is ... will the House GOP oppose it simply b/c Obama is for it?

    Which side are YOU on?

    by ryanmcleod on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 08:21:21 AM PDT

  •  Great idea (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wishingwell, evergreen2

    I would like to write my Congressional representatives today about this. Perhaps a letter-writing campaign would be useful?

  •  I think I'm on board with this bank (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wishingwell, evergreen2

    I'm not sure I love it, but it seems to be the only helpful part of the jobs talk. Really unhappy about the trade deals being included in this though. If that's the price for the bank, then I'm not sure I'm still on board. I still don't see how this is going to make up for all the jobs we flushed away with the grand bargain though.

    So, um, I guess let's see.

  •  Clarification, please.. (0+ / 0-)

    ..you mention that the money would come from 'offshore profits', and then add in Google's $30 billion cash on hand.

    Wouldn't most of that cash have come from stock sales, or have been already taxed as income?  

    "To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well." Justice Robert Jackson, Chief Prosecutor, Nuremberg.

    by Wayward Son on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 08:26:14 AM PDT

  •  "It Meets The Tea Party Test Because No Government (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jayden, Brooke In Seattle, evergreen2

    revenues will be used to fund it."  Is this infrastructure bank going to allow the Teabaggers to manufacture a fake crisis, allow them to hold the economy hostage, and possibly cause a government shutdown? If the answer is no to those questions, then it doesn't meet the Tea Party test. Also, who is going to be paying the "interest" on the funds deposited into this infrastructure bank?

  •  If Obama were a leader, he'd call Congress back (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    The Moonlit Knight, puakev

    from vacation to solve the FAA thing.

    He'd have done any number of recess appointments at the first blush of Senate resistance.

    Heck, the DoJ might have been reformed by now.

    Sigh.  Won't happen without leadership, and Mr. "Leads-from-behind" isn't that sort.

    Happy little moron, Lucky little man.
    I wish I was a moron, MY GOD, Perhaps I am!
    -Spike Milligan

    by polecat on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 08:31:31 AM PDT

  •  Let's talk Wisconsin. (0+ / 0-)

    Next challenge here.

    Ideology is an excuse to ignore common sense.

    by Bush Bites on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 08:33:18 AM PDT

  •  Repubs would probably like that. (0+ / 0-)

    I know Kirk was one of the co-sponsors.

    Will be too late to help the economy in 2012, though.

    Ideology is an excuse to ignore common sense.

    by Bush Bites on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 08:36:09 AM PDT

  •  Infrastruc­ture Bank (4+ / 0-)

    Last year when President Obama introduced his job creation package, he proposed the creation of a permanent Infrastruc­ture Bank which would leverage public money with private funds, creating much more bang for the taxpayer buck and eliminate the political projects of Bridges to Nowhere.

    This would be an important departure from the federal government­’s traditiona­l way of spending on infrastruc­ture through earmarks and formula-ba­sed grants that are allocated more by geography and politics than demonstrat­ed value. Rather than relying on Congress to decide what projects are funded, the Infrastruc­ture Bank would base its investment decisions on clear analytical measures of performanc­e, competing projects against each other to determine which will produce the greatest return for American taxpayers.

    The proposal would immediatel­y inject $50 billion into infrastruc­ture projects across the country, focusing on mass transit systems, housing properties­­, roads, bridges, drinking water systems, and wastewater systems. The proposal would address our need to rebuild our infrastruc­­ture while putting people back to work. The plan has widespread support from economists on all sides, as well as support from business and manufactur­ing groups and labor. Even the Chamber of Commerce offered their support.  

    As President Obama pointed out during the June 29th press conference­, there are a number of bills sitting in congress that historical­­ly have had bipartisan support and that would help put more Americans back to work right now.  The president has been pushing this proposal and others at every campaign stop.  He has repeatedly brought it up during press conferences.  And there are a number of posts at the White House website discussing this very issue of an Infrastucture Bank.  Just because cable news and certain blogs aren't following this story doesn't mean that the president, his administration, and Democrats aren't constantly pushing it.

    •  Repubs have no interest in helping the economy (0+ / 0-)

      .They'll probably slow-walk this until after the election.

      In fact, I wouldnt' be surprised if their nominee pushed this as a "new and exciting" idea to get the country moving again.

      Ideology is an excuse to ignore common sense.

      by Bush Bites on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 08:43:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  This guy explains it well.. (0+ / 0-)

  •  Unfortunately, The Shit Sandwich Debt Ceiling Bill (3+ / 0-)

    that just passed ties Obama's hands even more, and makes it harder to jumpstart the sagging economy, because the spending cuts in the bill take money out of the economy. The only solution is to tie the noose of this toxic bill around Boehner and the RepubliCONS necks - which shouldn't be too hard for the Democrats to do, given that Boehner bragged on camera that "I got 98% of what I wanted." If the economy tanks even further (which I am guessing it will) - let the Rethugs OWN the bill that tanked the economy.

    •  I hope you're right (0+ / 0-)

      I've been thinking about this a lot lately... I'm sure GOP will continue to blame nobody by Obama for the state of the economy.  And the snoozemedia will blather about how "both sides are partly responsible...."  But is it possible for an energized, organized Democratic response (I know, I know....) to overcome these two and get the message out??

      In the sea, Biscayne, there prinks
      The young emerald evening star,
      Good light for drunkards, poets, widows,
      And ladies soon to be married.

      by looty on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 08:51:50 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  That's exactly what needs to be done. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      evergreen2

      I don't know why anyone wants to accept the GOPs narrative of blaming Obama for their own dirty tricks.  It's high time to call a spade a spade.

      This is the GOPs doing.  

      They are DELIBERATELY TANKING THE ECONOMY FOR POLITICAL GAIN.

      They are DELIBERATELY HURTING AMERICANS FOR POLITICAL GAIN.

      This needs to be our mantra from now to November, 2012.

      "The bottom line is, we've got to wake up. We can't allow our disappointment in Obama to lull us into allowing a truly dangerous strain of conservative philosophy to gain any more traction than it already has." --ObamOcala 4/5/11

      by smoothnmellow on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 10:59:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  So THIS (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    evergreen2

    I think this is a great idea.  How do we get it through the House, though?

    In the sea, Biscayne, there prinks
    The young emerald evening star,
    Good light for drunkards, poets, widows,
    And ladies soon to be married.

    by looty on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 08:46:30 AM PDT

    •  Repubs like the idea. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      looty

      In fact, I think it is a Repub idea.

      But, you know, they have no interest in helping the economy until after the next election.

      I'd be shocked if it went anywhere.

      Ideology is an excuse to ignore common sense.

      by Bush Bites on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 08:50:17 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Are you nuts? (0+ / 0-)

    Boehner has been working for DECADES to get this deal. This is a CONTINUOUS STRUGGLE. Class warfare has been going on for a millennium. And this loss is indicative of all the future losses. A politically adrift and ideologically bereft president who will not seemingly stand up for anything.

    It seems the majority at DKOS have no fundamental understanding of the struggle that America is now engaged in. We are engaged in a virtual civil war.

    "How I hate those who are dedicated to producing conformity." William S Burroughs

    by shmuelman on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 08:49:43 AM PDT

    •  So when are you going to start (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      evergreen2

      virtually revolting?

    •  It would seem that you have no fundamental (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      evergreen2

      understanding on how to read a diary.  

      You have sealed your doom by saying that we have lost the future.

      What BBB is saying is to stop with licking the wounds of this debt matter and move on to position ourselves for the next battle.

      "The bottom line is, we've got to wake up. We can't allow our disappointment in Obama to lull us into allowing a truly dangerous strain of conservative philosophy to gain any more traction than it already has." --ObamOcala 4/5/11

      by smoothnmellow on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 10:54:42 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  We also need to look at 2012 (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jayden, evergreen2

    The Republicans have done exactly what they wanted to do which is bruise Obama and make him even more vulnerable for re-election while depressing his base. We are playing right into their hands and if we don't get over this loss and fast, we are going to be faced with teabaggers taking over all branches of government. President Obama could not let our economy go over a cliff so he lost this round but their are more rounds of fight left. The DCCC chairperson said during the August break the GOP will be getting what they got coming during their town halls. He said they will hearing from their constiuents and it will not be a pretty sight. We have to rally around him right now and get more progressives/democrats in congress or he will continue to have to capitulate to these extremist who are in our congress. A pretty scary thought. Next week will be our first test which is WISCONSIN. If we sweep those seats that will send a clear message that the democrats are coming back to take our "COUNTRY" back from these assholes.

    •  Here is something Progressives can do right now (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      evergreen2

      in August.  If you are represented by ANYONE, Democrat or Republican who voted for this messy bill, then you need to attend their town hall meetings this month and let them know how unhappy you are about it.  Especially if you are represented by a Tea Party GOPer (just take cameras and mics and record up in case they try to stop you from exercising your first amendment rights).  

      You need to also tell them plainly and simply that if they don't work on a bill to promote jobs, then you will  be shopping for a new Representative.

      "The bottom line is, we've got to wake up. We can't allow our disappointment in Obama to lull us into allowing a truly dangerous strain of conservative philosophy to gain any more traction than it already has." --ObamOcala 4/5/11

      by smoothnmellow on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 10:49:37 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  If I had a hint that Obama had learned (0+ / 0-)

    anything from this fiasco, I could agree. Sorry, at this point I don't have any trust and I'm not sure what to move on to. Are you talking about their promise of further discussions regarding deficit reductions? No thanks.

    You talk about Democratic bills that have been proposed that will require Presidential leadership. When have you ever seen leadership from Obama?

    Admit the defeat we just suffered and stop harping about it? Sure, I can do that. But I really would like to know why you think anything will be different the next time this President gets involved in any legislation.

    "I will be happy to see the Republicans test whether or not I'm itching for a fight on a whole range of issues," President Obama - Liar

    by jec on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 08:56:34 AM PDT

    •  Don't know. We may fail completely. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jec, evergreen2

      Don't you think we ought to try?

      •  It probably appears this way but I'm really not (0+ / 0-)

        trying to be hardheaded about this bbb. I am just at a loss as to what we need to try. We've lobbied fiercely with what little ammo we have. Phone calls, letters and emails and on every occasion it has either fallen on deaf ears or has been scoffed at as a bunch of professional leftists wanting their pony. I really do admire your fortitude and am sorry that mine is lacking.

        "I will be happy to see the Republicans test whether or not I'm itching for a fight on a whole range of issues," President Obama - Liar

        by jec on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 09:47:04 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Well, standing still and complaining about (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          evergreen2

          the debt deal is a none starter for sure.

          "The bottom line is, we've got to wake up. We can't allow our disappointment in Obama to lull us into allowing a truly dangerous strain of conservative philosophy to gain any more traction than it already has." --ObamOcala 4/5/11

          by smoothnmellow on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 10:44:01 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  There is no such thing as (0+ / 0-)

    a company with a trillion dollars in profits offshore or otherwise. No one company has that much money floating around.

    The wealthiest companies measure their cash in billions, maybe double digit billions at best. None even have 100 billion much less ten times that figure.

    Or are you speaking about collective figures across multiple companies?

    "crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government" -Thomas Jefferson

    by Phil In Denver on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 09:00:58 AM PDT

  •  Oh thank you (0+ / 0-)

    so glad to hear I'm not the only one.

    I think the one thing that we can celebrate about the "satan sandwich" is that it is not the only thing people need to talk about, or feel the need to talk about.

    Jobs, jobs, jobs.

    Are the Republicans ready to move is the question?  And it doesn't matter because we need to keep our focus on the right fucking issue and they can kick and scream all they want.   They've shown what their priorities are and will continue to do so and if they want to keep blocking what the American people have said their number one priority is, which as far as I know isn't DEBT, then so be it.

    But we have to tie their resistance around their necks like the albatross that it should be.

    The fought every damn issue related to jobs and wanted to spend more time on debt.

    Oh and a woman's uterus.

    It is an unfortunate human failing that a full pocketbook often groans more loudly than an empty stomach. Franklin D. Roosevelt

    by Ellinorianne on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 09:00:59 AM PDT

  •  No. Make that Hell No! (0+ / 0-)

    The Hostage Crisis Continues: Why Obama Can’t Pivot to Jobs and Growth

    Fine, but the new deal he just signed may not let him do this either – if the infrastructure bank relies on federal funds or even federal loan guarantees to attract private money. The only way he could create an infrastructure bank without sweetening the pot would be by privatizing all the new infrastructure. That means toll roads and toll bridges, user-fee airports, and entry fees everywhere else.

    Apart from its potential unfairness to lower-income people, such a privatized infrastructure would have the same effect as a tax increase. After paying more for roads and bridges and all other infrastructure, Americans would have less cash for to spend on goods and services. That means no boost to the economy.

    AND

    Repatriation is the Last Refuge of Scoundrels

    ... the idea of granting a tax holiday for corporations that repatriate income they’ve kept overseas, and on which they have avoided taxes, is one of the worst ideas I’ve heard in a long time. (And that’s saying something in these days and times).

    The Costs Exceed the benefits

    The benefits are small, but what about the costs? First, if we grant a second tax holiday in less than ten years, what type of incentives does that set up? Firms will be more likely than before to shift income overseas and then wait for Congress to do this again. Thus, a second tax holiday so close to the first sends firms the wrong message about this behavior

    Second, and this is one of the main points of Jesse Drucker’s article noted above, the largest beneficiaries of this holiday would be the firms who were most successful at shifting income offshore to avoid US taxes.
    And this brings up a final problem with the proposal. Though it does increase government revenue in the short-run, it’s unlikely to help the unemployed and it’s a loser over a longer time frame. At a time when we are struggling to bring the long-run budget into balance, why would we consider a proposal that makes the long-run budget picture worse?
    •  (sigh) (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      evergreen2

      Once again, I'm not calling for another tax holiday here. I agree that would be a very bad idea. All im saying is this would be a good way to pump a trillion dollars that is currently helping other nations around the world get directed right at our infrastructure problem. Not to just pocket and go on a jet and yacht buying spree.

      And again, im calling for the tax to be deferred, not exempted.

      Considering we aren't going to get shit in the way of fiscal stimulus from Obama or the GOP, this is a way to be a trillion or more dollars right into the pockets of our carpenters, bricklayers, steelworkers and general laborers. not to mentions tons of civil engineers and architects, as well as suppliers and truckers.

      •  And what of Robert Reich's point? (0+ / 0-)
        Apart from its potential unfairness to lower-income people, such a privatized infrastructure would have the same effect as a tax increase. After paying more for roads and bridges and all other infrastructure, Americans would have less cash for to spend on goods and services. That means no boost to the economy.

        It is an idea that sounds good on the surface, but when you dig deeper it is a very bad idea.  A very very bad idea.

        Infrastructure is one of the core roles of government.  Let's not jump on the Republican privitization bandwagon.

  •  Albert Einstein Quotes... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jayden, Brooke In Seattle

    Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results...

    OVER HERE: AN AMERICAN EXPAT IN THE SOUTH OF FRANCE, is now available on Amazon US

    by Lupin on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 09:15:03 AM PDT

  •  No. (0+ / 0-)

    I feel like a spouse who's been cheated on one time too many.

    By the time I get to Phoenix she'll be rising
    She'll find the note I left hangin' on her door
    She'll laugh when she reads the part that says I'm leavin'
    'Cause I've left that girl so many times before

    By the time I make Albuquerque she'll be working
    She'll prob'ly stop at lunch and give me a call
    But she'll just hear that phone keep on ringin'
    Off the wall that's all

    By the time I make Oklahoma she'll be sleepin'
    She'll turn softly and call my name out loud
    And she'll cry just to think I'd really leave her
    Tho' time and time I try to tell her so
    She just didn't know I would really go.

        - Jimmy Webb

    Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. John Fitzgerald Kennedy

    by penguins4peace on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 09:21:19 AM PDT

  •  Do we have any unallocated TARP (0+ / 0-)

    money left around? Can we, without congress, reassign (or assign) it to something like this?

  •  I love it. But Obama is wounded, severly wounded (0+ / 0-)

    I think.  TeaHatters will hate it because it will strengthen the President's hand a little and the Dems too.
    TeaHatters will continue to obstruct and blow up America for the next year.
    I guess we can all Tweet Obama and Boehner and McConnell, "where are the jobs?"

    Republicans only care about themselves, their money, & their power.

    by jdmorg on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 09:41:49 AM PDT

  •  Absolutely. And about time, too. (0+ / 0-)

    These trade deals are a giant FU to labor and to the cause of creating jobs.  What they are doing in a "jobs program" is beyond me.  Thanks, Jeff Immelt.

    And patent reform?  WTF?

  •  What I'm doing today (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    evergreen2

    1) Calling Barney Frank to help DeLauro reintroduce it.  We lost a co-sponsor of the original bill (Weiner)

    2) Calling John Kerry to thank him for the proposal and to keep pushing it and the President, along with our friends in labor who support it.

    3) Calling Scott Brown, to push that limp dishrag to help his senior Senator, since Hutchinson already made it bipartisan.  I'll point out that the Chamber and the AFL-CIO all like it.

    4) Calling the President, to tell him to talk more about this and less about trade deals.

    5) Writing a (backup) handwritten letter to the President, to talk about the crumbling roads vs. the Stimulus repaired ones, and how my wife and I always cheer when the car is moving smoothly.  I'm emphasizing that he could make stops in favor of this bill at crumbling sites in the country.  He could have a contest: "Fix THIS!" where people send in photos and/or stories, and he reads them on-air every once in a while.

    Five steps, won't take that long, and you repeat every few weeks until it gets traction.  Then, every few days.

    If we all do this, we win.

    For those of you who prefer Bartlett to Obama, re-watch the West Wing. For those who prefer Clinton, re-watch old news videos.

    by Ptolemy on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 09:51:22 AM PDT

  •  The problem with the Infrastructure Bank (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    evergreen2

    is that if we think it's a good idea around here, it probably won't happen.

    The president, too: Whatever he proposes or advocates, the Republicans will rally against.

    This one seems like a sensible solution, built on free markets, so one wouldn't think that Republicans should oppose it. But they've become pure antagonists, creating fierce opposition just for the sake of it.

    So I have an idea: Maybe we should pretend we don't like this proposal and see how that goes? It would probably boost its chances.

  •  Two demerits for writing a constructive diary (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BeerNotWar

    But I'm willing to let go of this GOP Beer Hall Putsch, this Republican World Trade Center airline hijacking, this Right Wing Suicide Vest legislation, this Offer We Couldn't Refuse, this product of Dolores Claiborne Conservatism, this Hey-world-economy-get-into my-car-I-got-a-piece-of-candy-for-you legislative process invented  by fanatical perverts elected by semiliterate racist dittoheads.  I'm willing to let go. I'm willing to think of America as the Titanic, and to get aboard a lifeboat,  and throw Billy Zane overboard.

  •  Great diary. One disagreement (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BeerNotWar, evergreen2
    silly idea that reforming intellectual property law will make any difference.

    As a software developer I can tell you that this is more serious than you probably understand.  Would it make a difference in the next two years?  No, probably not.  5-15?  YOU BET.

    The Economist

    Intellectual Ventures owns a huge portfolio of patents. Quite possibly they also have some sort of patent that covers streaming music over the internet. Intellectual Ventures makes money through a sort of protection racket that helps Spotify defend themselves against companies like PacketVideo. For a considerable fee, a company can access Intellectual Venture's storehouse of patents and use them defensively against companies claiming patent infringement. Julian Sanchez lucidly explains how the very existence of "defensive patents", and of companies in the business of selling them, is proof of a badly broken intellectual property system:
    [T]hink about how defensive patents work. Companies aren’t buying them—or buying into the services of companies like Intellectual Ventures—because they provide otherwise unavailable technical insights. The point, rather, is to acquire (or have access to) a bundle of patents that any potential litigant who sues you is likely to be “infringing” in their own products. ... This only works, however, if other companies are almost certain to have independently come up with the same idea. A patent that is truly so original that somebody else wouldn’t arrive at the same solution by applying normal engineering skill is useless as a defensive patent. ... [E]very patent granted for an idea that any number of suitably skilled engineers could have (and would have, and did) come up with is a patent that probably shouldn’t be granted—a pure deadweight loss that’s actually compounded by the squandering of resources on the “arms race,” with no compensating dynamic gain. Actually, there’s probably a dynamic loss: You end up creating a huge incentive for smart and skilled people to spend their time and energy not coming up with a brilliant idea that nobody else would have, but instead trying to be the first to put on paper ideas that are obvious (to a properly trained and up-to-date person) but haven’t been locked down yet—the solution, again, that almost any professional would have come up with once they were actually trying to implement the relevant technology. A sector where investment in defensive patents is so massive, then, is a sector where—even if some of them do genuinely add value—patents are probably doing more harm than good on net.

    A new paper on "The Myth of the Sole Inventor" by Mark Lemley, a professor of law at Stanford, reinforces Mr Sanchez's point.

    [S]urveys of hundreds of significant new technologies show that almost all of them are invented simultaneously or nearly simultaneously by two or more teams working independently of each other. Invention appears in significant part to be a social, not an individual, phenomenon. Inventors build on the work of those who came before, and new ideas are often "in the air," or result from changes in market demand or the availability of new or cheaper starting materials. ... The result is a real problem for classic theories of patent law. If we are supposed to be encouraging only inventions that others in the field couldn’t have made, we should be paying a lot more attention than we currently do to simultaneous invention. We should be issuing very few patents – surely not the 200,000 per year we do today. And we should be denying patents on the vast majority of the most important inventions, since most seem to involve near-simultaneous invention.
  •  The AIB. (3+ / 0-)

    There has to be hard window on the time frame to allow companies to move their money into the bank otherwise you will create an incentive to move even more operations/profits offshore so that you can bring them back later and avoid taxes.

    There will be Republicans who oppose it because its a good idea. Remember, their goal is to destroy President Obama, no matter what. So what. That's no reason not to try. If we win, we get a good idea that puts people back to work. If we lose, the public knows exactly where everyone stands.

    Yep.  As long as we try, in the end we might be disappointed but we will never be shamed.

  •  Or the bank could play the Wall Street Casino (0+ / 0-)

    As a hardcore Democrat, Obama has shaken my faith. Imagine what he's done for independents.

    by Johnathan Ivan on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 10:12:51 AM PDT

  •  This isn't just for the President to push (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    evergreen2

    The whole Democratic Party needs to get behind it. As a party they need to push for jobs and try to win back Labor before 2012. I'm not sure it isn't already too late. But if the Party goes into next year having done nothing but turn a blind eye to the struggles of unions and working people, the White House, Senate and House will all be red.

  •  Let me fix that for you... (0+ / 0-)
    We all lost. Get over it. Move on.

    Otherwise, tipped and rec'd.

    "The bottom line is, we've got to wake up. We can't allow our disappointment in Obama to lull us into allowing a truly dangerous strain of conservative philosophy to gain any more traction than it already has." --ObamOcala 4/5/11

    by smoothnmellow on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 10:35:15 AM PDT

  •  Don't worry, b3 (3+ / 0-)

    There will be plenty of talk about jobs.

    I agree that the infrastructure bank is a great idea, and the rethugs might even give us permission to have one.

    Whom do you blame more? The rattlesnake, or the bipartisan guy who put it in your sleeping bag?

    by chuckvw on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 10:38:12 AM PDT

  •  Well, we have to do it sometime. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    icebergslim

    I just don't know if now is that time.

    You are correct that Republicans will oppose it just because Obama might say he wants it. If the AFL-CIO want it, you can bet they'll oppose it. At a minimum, they'll want some sweeteners that end up costing too much, probably in the form of additional tax breaks that will have to be paid for out of the pockets of the poor and middle class.

    I would agree that it's worth trying, but will the WH think it's worth fighting for? I haven't seen much fight out them yet, so forgive me for not holding my breath.

    It is better to light one candle than to curse the darkness - Eleanor Roosevelt

    by Fish in Illinois on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 10:40:29 AM PDT

  •  Yeah!! Where's MY bailout?!?!?!?......n/t (0+ / 0-)

    Well, it sure is a mess, ain’t it, Sheriff….
    Yep, and if it ain’t it’ll do ‘til the mess gets here.

    Liberal = We're all in this together
    Conservative = Every man for himself
    Who you gonna call?

  •  Move on? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    evergreen2

    But the circular firing squad hasn't killed everyone yet!

    Founder Math and Statistics Geeks . Statistics for progressives

    by plf515 on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 11:17:32 AM PDT

  •  jobs, yeah whatever (0+ / 0-)

    the republicans were brought into power in the house precisely to put the brakes on the recovery. So what jobs? They won't let there be jobs.

  •  Brilliant plan. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    evergreen2

    No downside that I can see. Let's push for this.

    Fuck me, it's a leprechaun.

    by MBNYC on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 11:28:42 AM PDT

  •  we have a plan btw (0+ / 0-)

    See here:

    Follow me on Twitter @jonathantasini

    Visit Working Life.

    by Tasini on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 11:57:07 AM PDT

  •  So what's the plan? (0+ / 0-)

    Somebody pretty far up the food chain has to get Obama's attention before he starts his train ride.

  •  That sounds like (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    evergreen2

    something worth working for...no doubt in my mind that we need an influx of cash to address infrastructure, education, transportation, energy and job/career concerns.  And you are absolutely right that there would have to be effective leadership. It would have to be a major undertaking that all Americans would support. What a concept: a nation pulling together for the same purpose, so that we can repair our lives, our economy and our future together.

    No unfair trade deals!  No backroom deals! No Capitulation to one-sided satanic deals!

    "In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer."- Albert Camus

    by valadon on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 12:37:28 PM PDT

  •  Opposing good ideas is politically dangerous, but (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    valadon

    only if the people pursuing said good ideas create clear implementations and straightforward presentations.

    Though the DC crew prefers to believe otherwise, people aren't stupid.  We may not have the time, the technical expertise, or the staff to keep up with the details, but we are not stupid.  Create good and clear things and present them in a straightforward way.

    You might be surprised at what it gets you.

    LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

    by dinotrac on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 12:38:08 PM PDT

  •  YES. (0+ / 0-)

    between what i hope are future diaries on JOBS and MB's and the other great environmental/green/clean energy job diaries, i'm right there with you.

    too short on time to scan and read the comments, just wanted to say how much i appreciated reading the diary, bbb.

    we've got the country's attention, it's our turn to focus it on progressive ideas for the country!

    seize the micoophones! or headlines! or initiative! or something, just seize it!   ;-)

    "From single strands of light we build our webs." ~kj

    by kj in missouri on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 02:01:06 PM PDT

  •  It would be too "socialist" for (0+ / 0-)

    Obama...

    He wouldn't like it.  Too much government.

  •  My letter to Barney Frank (0+ / 0-)

    Take what you will from it for your letters and phone calls:

    Dear Representative Frank:
             I am writing today to ask you to co-sponsor an idea to improve infrastructure and help people get back to work, modelled on Senator Kerry's BUILD Act.  Representatives DeLauro and Ellison proposed an infrastructure bank and investment act in 2009, but it was not able to make it to the finish line.  At the time, Representative Weiner stepped forward as the third member of the House Democrats to back the bill strongly, but he is no longer in the body.
           Therefore, Senator Kerry needs help in the House if the BUILD Act is to be more than a pipe dream.  I believe your Banking Committee seat places you in an ideal position to co-sponsor an infrastructure investment bank, fueled by a small amount of Federal seed money and repatriated US Corporate Profits.  It would be good for business and labor, and both the AFL-CIO and the Chamber of Commerce have backed it.  More importantly, Senator Hutchinson of Texas has banded together with the senior Senator from our state to back it, so it might just be able to get past Senate filibuster; I will be writing and calling the junior Senator to get his support, and Daily Kos diarists are backing the idea in a front page diary and would be willing to push less extremist Senators and Representatives to back the idea.
            Please contact Representatives DeLauro and Ellison after the recess and help them bring back a House version to complement Senator Kerry's bill.  I appreciate your time and attention, and I look forward to seeing you again in Brookline on the campaign trail next year.
                                                       Much thanks,
                                                   XXXXXXXX MD/PhD  

    For those of you who prefer Bartlett to Obama, re-watch the West Wing. For those who prefer Clinton, re-watch old news videos.

    by Ptolemy on Wed Aug 03, 2011 at 03:26:50 PM PDT

  •  Better to eliminat the loophole and tax'em. (0+ / 0-)

    Krugman kicked this tax giveaway scheme to the curb for several reasons.

    1. It rewards the tax cheats.
    2. They have no reason to bring money to US since it's tax free right where it is.
    3. Corps are not investing in US so money better for them overseas.

    Best bet is eliminate the tax loophole.  

    Obama's focus should be converting US to green jobs economy, the strategy pursued successfully by Germany, China and Korea.

    US could eliminate oil imports but just getting as energy efficient as Europe is now and that's a $500B year economic boost.  Add to that ability to cut military spending another $500B per year as No. 1 US national security threat of Middle East oil shutoff is eliminated.

    And it cuts US greenhouse gases by 50%

    Jobs.
    Reduced trade deficit
    Reduced greenhouse gases.

    That is the sane and only solution to US problems.

CA Pol Junkie, Egg, claude, Renee, maxomai, Thumb, neil, Angie in WA State, buffalo soldier, Joe Bob, cslewis, Ptolemy, Mimikatz, vicki, Joe Willy, Bill in Portland Maine, PhilK, Upper West, Odysseus, lowkell, copymark, Jackson L Haveck, slinkerwink, Better Days, Jeff Simpson, Geenius at Wrok, musing85, emal, PeterHug, wytcld, billlaurelMD, Goobergunch, hyperstation, waytac, oysterface, eeff, polecat, gecko, concernedamerican, 88kathy, Helena Handbag, pucklady, Loquatrix, Time Waits for no Woman, highacidity, Glic, Vermonter, shanikka, kkbmom, mrblifil, roses, Larry Bailey, superba, itskevin, bwren, poe, fumie, Cedwyn, artebella, jdmorg, Texknight, dejavu, danthrax, American Zapatista, pat bunny, 2laneIA, Virago, TiaRachel, johanus, kj in missouri, NYFM, niteskolar, Catte Nappe, RenaRF, clarknyc, bwintx, Diana in NoVa, nswalls, peterj911, Hillbilly Dem, Virginia Liberal, Armand451, oortdust, Gowrie Gal, Julie Gulden, bobdevo, Bluesee, NoMoreLies, liberalcheesehead, PBen, one of 8, kitchen sink think tank, DoGooderLawyer, juliesie, Brooke In Seattle, ratzo, vulcangrrl, teknofyl, Pam from Calif, Dem Beans, jimreyn, where4art, LABobsterofAnaheim, Fury, Steve in Urbana, LucyandByron, coolbreeze, Unduna, roubs, huttotex, mightymouse, Snud, kathny, Oye Sancho, Jim P, begone, BachFan, Debbie in ME, Pinko Elephant, 417els, koNko, kestrel9000, sleipner, deha, pengiep, Son of a Cat, fou, kck, global citizen, erratic, JVolvo, middleagedhousewife, MBNYC, oakroyd, Turbonerd, TooFolkGR, democracy is coming, CA Nana, Timothy J, chicating, fiddlingnero, blueintheface, slksfca, Nulwee, cpresley, SpecialKinFlag, SharonColeman, Outrider, Sydserious, CTDemoFarmer, anagram, FischFry, Unbozo, newpioneer, bnasley, KPDownes, malharden, HCKAD, jayden, jamesia, mudslide, bobswern, millwood, Sarea, Got a Grip, leonard145b, Mighty Ike, VA Breeze, MKinTN, Corporate Dog, mconvente, ferment, MikePhoenix, poligirl, OleHippieChick, Involuntary Exile, scott jones, bythesea, filby, lineatus, wagdog, Therapy, royce, icebergslim, Jake Williams, Seamus D, banger, sam storm, Hawkjt, Tango Uniform, Abe Frohman, DixieDishrag, punkdavid, dmhlt 66, legendmn, LaFeminista, maggiejean, J M F, Stephen Daugherty, christine20, DontTaseMeBro, Satya1, Scott Wooledge, Anne Elk, seanwright, Dopeman, bsmechanic, dark daze, Sarge in Seattle, Partisan Progressive, CamillesDad1, DefendOurConstitution, unspeakable, aunt blabby, zbbrox, NWTerriD, kevinpdx, mdmslle, babeuf, strangedemocracy, jfromga, Livvy5, PittsburghPete, deviant24x, Leftcandid, Railfan, loper2008, deePA, FogCityJohn, stegro, LaughingPlanet, eXtina, gramofsam1, Sieglinde, your neighbor, TealTerror, gulfgal98, pateTX, addisnana, science nerd, Oh Mary Oh, stevenaxelrod, not4morewars, Actbriniel, Onomastic, BrowniesAreGood, kerflooey, Front Toward Enemy, Dretutz, nervousnellie, nicethugbert, jardin32, cv lurking gf, Mr MadAsHell, freesia, La Gitane, asterkitty, itzik shpitzik, California06, deeproots, GrogInOhio, DruidQueen, dle2GA, smoothnmellow, LSmith, loblolly, Atilla the Honey Bunny, Jantman, Book of Hearts, rscopes, LaurenMonica, jham710, DRo, jaebone, ChiTownDenny, jobobo, Jerry056, JackinStL, A Runner, brown and blue all over, coffeego, AAMOM, James Allen, NoFortunateSon, greenbastard, Mindful Nature, We Won, IndieGuy, Bensonola, ahumbleopinion, Trevin, tb92, Trotskyrepublican, Ginger1, Dave in AZ, drnononono, David Kroning II, Mike RinRI, Halandri, Pilkington, rivercard, MartyM, doroma, ricklewsive, josephcwhite, PerpetualMind, JustinBinFL, Kayjay, evergreen2, UnionDaughter, BradyB, quiet is the new loud, Portlaw, GoGoGoEverton, Blue Dream, blueoldlady, bigkens

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site