Skip to main content

Here is a link to a 3 minute video of Friday's public demonstration called for in this article, published on blog last week.   This powerful action in Chicago is just of taste of what is called for to prevent draconian cuts that will detrroy peoples lives.

And here's the original article:

Mitt Romney’s choice of Paul Ryan as his running mate was a defining issue in last week's  national election. Because of that selection, and subsequent events that started unfolding immediately thereafter: the nuns on a bus tour against the Ryan austerity budget, the leaked tape of Romney dismissing 47% of Americans for taking part in our safety net (i.e. commonwealth) and Romney’s stark words about privatizing FEMA flying straight into the face of Hurricane Sandy, all defined the campaign to be a clear choice about the role of government.

The results of that national conversation was a choice to re-elect what had become a fairly unpopular president, in the time of a lingering near-depression, and despite staggering and incomprehensible amounts of corporate money marshaled against him. The President won the popular vote and a blow-out in the electoral college, the Senate not only stayed blue but picked up a seat or two despite defending twice as many seats, and some notable right wing congressmen such as Allen West were thrown out on their ear. The choice of the American people should have been heard as a clarion call, a loud and clear rejection of austerity cuts and trickle down economics.

But sisters and brothers, be very afraid that Democrats have not heard that message.  In his acceptance speech, the President again referred to budget deals, deficit reduction and “reforming” entitlements. This is the kind of deafness that got the President in trouble in the first place, and got the democrats trounced in the 2010 elections.  It is the kind of deafness that has our Senator, Dick Durbin on the verge of cutting a “grand bargain” that will “reform”, meaning CUT Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid while lowering corporate tax rates (in exchange for the always allusive closing of loopholes).  I don’t mind that this will be a disaster for the Democrats for they will deserve to lose big again if they accept such a bargain. But the American people will mind very much and suffer the consequences when these cuts devastate the old, the young, the poor and the vulnerable, create more unemployment and sink us into deeper depression.

Our answer is clear: There is no fiscal cliff! There is no immediate crisis! Deficits are fine in the short run if they are used to put people to work, stimulate demand and create jobs and benefits for the American people. Investments– in our crumbling and decrepit infrastructure, greening our energy system and economy to stave off global warming, relieving student debt and investing in education at all levels, bailing out homeowners and state and local governments—these investments will result in a healthy economy, economic returns, and a shrinking deficit over time as well.  We’ve already seen the results of trickle down policies and austerity. They brought us to this economic depression.

There is one important issue on the table with regard to the “fiscal cliff” that should be attended to, and that is REVENUE!  Ending the Bush tax cuts for the top 2%, taxing capital gains at a rate equal to or higher than wage and salary income, and instituting a tiny tax on Wall Street speculation (Robin Hood Tax) are 3 simple policies that would be a great start and by themselves generate enough income to fund all of these investments I spoke of, put America back to work and begin reducing the deficit.

Those solutions are consistent with the results of yesterday’s election and the message of “We The People” who too often stood in lines for hours to send it.  The election was the beginning. Now the real work begins. This time around we want promises kept and we will be in the streets until our voices are heard, and obeyed!

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

  •  I think we have a messaging problem. (7+ / 0-)

    These are all reasonable demands and it's never too early to demonstrate and get arrested about them.  But having "Proletarian" voice them makes them sound like some kind of genuinely radical socialist agenda rather than simple morality.

    You know, I sometimes think if I could see, I'd be kicking a lot of ass. -Stevie Wonder at the Glastonbury Festival, 2010

    by Rich in PA on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 08:56:51 AM PST

  •  Amen, to that. I am not sitting and watching (0+ / 0-)

    this time.  These protests are the end to the messaging problem.

    "Something in the way, yeah." Kurt Cobain

    by The Hamlet on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 09:00:37 AM PST

  •  Can you please separate the paragraphs? (5+ / 0-)

    It's really kind of hard to read your essay.

  •  I agree with you. The President said, "Make me do (5+ / 0-)

    it. We re-elected him, we gave him more Senate seats, it is time for the grassroots to collect. We are 300,000. The time and money spent by Kossacks is not trivial!

    We must pressure the WH, have our congress critters pressure the WH. Don't forget Vice President Biden, either.

    I have already sent an email to the President telling-telling-not asking, that he send out a surrogate to explain there is NO fiscal cliff.

    President Obama will be in the WH because of US. We need to remind him forcefully.

    If i ever get my password straightened out, I'll add my name to the WH petition. Kossacks alone could reach the signature limit.

    2012-2016 President Obama, Vice President Biden, Senator Warren. For a LIFETIME, federal judges. Get the filibuster changed. Steamroll.

    by CuriousBoston on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 09:06:21 AM PST

  •  I thought WE won as obviously (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    The Hamlet, corvo

    so do these protestors!

    They are RIGHT.

    Not only is our ELECTED President not swaggering about like the SELECTED President Bush did, with big talk about spending his rightful mandate--

    instead our guy is talking about how he's going to knuckle under to compromise.


    Separation of Church and State AND Corporation

    by Einsteinia on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 09:08:05 AM PST

  •  The fiscal cliff is not about deficits. (7+ / 0-)

    It is about a deal that Congress put in place in 2011 in order to get the votes necessary to raise the debt ceiling.  

    Under that deal, taxes will go up significantly on everyone starting January 1, and spending will be cut significantly starting January 1.  THAT -- those results that Congress put in place -- is the "fiscal cliff."  And the layoffs that will likely result from the spending cuts, combined with the reduced take-home pay for every worker starting January 1, could mean sliding into recession, according to the CBO.  THAT is the fiscal cliff -- a deal that Congress put into place.  It is that deal -- not the deficits themselves -- that constitutes the "fiscal cliff" that is projected to cause a possible recession.  

    It makes no sense to say that "deficits don't matter, so we don't have a fiscal cliff coming up."  Yes, it is true that some economists are saying that our annual deficits, and our long-term debt, are not at problematic levels (that is not a universal position).  But that can be true while it is also true that there is a "fiscal cliff" (the combined tax hikes and spending cuts) coming up, because the fiscal cliff was deliberately put there by Congress in 2011.  The "fiscal cliff" is there even if you accept the argument that the deficits and debt we have are just fine.  

    Unfortunately, because Congress put the fiscal cliff there, only Congress can do something to avoid it.  And even more unfortunately, this country elected a divided Congress, so that means that the "doing something to avoid it" will have to be a compromise.  

    •  I'm in general agreement with your (3+ / 0-)

      point of view. However, I think that the Democrats best option may be to lets the tax increases and budget sequesters kick in on Jan 2nd and then ask the Republicans if they'd like to vote to cut taxes for every American, especially those making less than $250,000.

      Patti Murray mentioned that this approach might be the only way to bring the Republicans on-board. Ironically, she was criticized here for acknowledging that the debt and deficit are actual problems, long-term, and aligning herself with the President's plan to invest in jobs, infrastructure and education as the best way to manage our long-term debt problems.

      Here's my take on it - the revolution will not be blogged, it has to be slogged. - Deoliver47

      by OIL GUY on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 09:47:00 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  What makes you think that the House Republicans (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Roger Fox, johnny wurster

        will cave completely after January 1?  Especially since there's another debt ceiling vote coming up after the first of the year -- and that has to get past the House Republicans as well?  

        And is the $80 billion a year in additional revenue worth a recession and 9% unemployment (according to the CBO) that will start in December if it becomes clear a deal will not be reached? It's not like a recession just goes away if, for example, they miraculously reach a deal on January 31.  

        •  I think the House Republican Leadership (0+ / 0-)

          will be in crisis, should it be responsible for raising every Americans taxes. They will need to put together  a plan which is acceptable to Democrats . They will probably need Democratic votes to get it through the House. I trust that the Democrats will push for continuing the Clinton era tax rates on the top 2% and will also demand a resolution of the debt ceiling issue.

          The sequester is another issue which would need to be worked out along with the Medicare 'doc fix' and the AMT. That's a lot of shit hitting a lot of fans, but unlike  last spring, the Republicans are going to have large parts of their base, along with the financial community screaming at them to get shit done.

          Here's my take on it - the revolution will not be blogged, it has to be slogged. - Deoliver47

          by OIL GUY on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 12:38:34 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  I could understand that, we have a jobs problem (0+ / 0-)

        not a deficit problem.

        Trying to improve a balance sheet that is by definition balancing on a double dip recession, and for all practical purposes has been in recession for going on 4 years.... by increasing revenue and reducing spending....

        Is utterly counter intuitive...... and self destructive.

        Ironically, she was criticized here for acknowledging that the debt and deficit are actual problems, long-term, and aligning herself with the President's plan to invest in jobs, infrastructure and education as the best way to manage our long-term debt problems.
        Has someone being paying lip service to the 24-28 million Americans who would take a full time year round job if offered.

        Who has been talking up a 1 trillion jobs stimulus plan that would create between 20 and 25 million jobs?

        Who is actually taking seriously the numbers without jobs in this country. Ok forget seriously, who is at least paying me lipp service?

        FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

        by Roger Fox on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 10:24:43 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Is there a $1 Trillion plan for 20 million jobs? (0+ / 0-)

          Does such a proposal exist from a member of the House, Senate or White House?

          The stimulus bill for $750 billion the White House asserts caused 3 million jobs or $250,000 per job.

          At that rate a stimulus of $5 trillion would be needed to cause 20 million jobs - a more than doubling of Federal spending.

          The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

          by nextstep on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 12:40:13 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  what always seems to be missing is context (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      grollen, ciganka, turn blue, maryabein

      The severe budget shortfall of recent years comes from war, tax cuts, and government bailout and stimulus due to deregulation and the failure of trickle down economics.  Therefore any reasonable solution starts with restoring taxation, military cuts, and regulation of the financial markets.

      The Republicans want none of those things because they have seen creating crisis and government shortfall as their main strategy to slash non-military/ prison industrial complex spending.  Shrink it down to size, drown it in the bathtub.  To continue to allow the tweaks needed to ensure benefit programs' future solvency or the unemployment costs in a recession to be conflated with the actual sources of budget trouble--as the fiscal cliff construction did by design--is a grievous error.  They've made that equivelancy the conventional wisdom of mainstream punditry and corporate media.      

      •  Ok. And so? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        johnny wurster

        We still are faced with a situation that means that, unless Congress acts, take home pay for every American goes down January 1 (with a $4000 hit this spring for a family of four with a $75,000 income) as well as significant budget cuts that will mean layoffs (remember the defense contractors that wanted to send layoff notices before the election, and the Obama administration convinced them not to on the basis that they weren't sure the the defense cuts that would cause the layoffs were going to happen -- i.e., they might reach a deal).  And the potential result, according to the CBO, is a recession and 9% unemployment.  

        So here we are.  

        What you are basically saying is "I want Republicans to realize they are wrong and should just cave."  Well, I want to someone to give me a million dollars.  There's about as much chance of that happening.  

        All this talk about whether the Republicans should have taken the positions they did back when the debt ceiling vote was due don't advance the ball.  They took those positions on the deficit and debt.  The Democrats essentially validated those positions by agreeing to a deal that put the fiscal cliff in place.  So here we are.

        The more pressing question is what do we do.  And I see only two options (1) fiscal cliff, possible 9% unemployment  and recession; or (2) real compromise that makes people at RedState really unhappy and that makes people here really unhappy.  

        •  i think you're getting me wrong (0+ / 0-)

          I expect no moment of truth from the Republicans.  

          I'm afraid Democrats and independents begin to see this as something to split down the middle, but some of what the Republicans propose are actually further harmful to the economy.  Raising retirement age for Social Security, leaving those old folks in the job market, will hurt further and not help.  Cutting unemployment programs or privatizing services will harm the economy, not help.  

          •  I think that ship has sailed. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            johnny wurster
            I'm afraid Democrats and independents begin to see this as something to split down the middle,
            Democrats validated the view that the deficit needs to be cut, and the long term debt addressed now, when they allowed the Budget Control Act of 2011 to pass both Houses and be signed into law by the President.  Those cuts and tax increases are the law of the land.  

            The question now is, if you want to change the law of the land so as to avoid the potential of a recession and 9% unemployment, what kind of legislation do you propose that can pass both Houses of Congress?  Certainly, Democrats taking the position, "Wait, we were wrong to pass that Act, and the President was wrong to sign it, let's pretend we didn't agree to all those tax increases and spending cuts" is not something that will do that.  In order to avoid the
            "fiscal cliff," you are going to have to put something substantial in its place, or it won't get through both Houses of Congress. And raising $80  billion a year is not going to do it.  

            •  Durbin wants to cash out. At this point, (0+ / 0-)

              as his Senate career is ending, he is a loose cannon and very dangerous.  He supports raising the retirement age for SS.  Only a, dissociated from reality, millionaire would think like that.
              Do as the President is suggesting.  Pass a middle class cut now and wait for a new Congress before allowing lame ducks to cash out for their future employers interests.

      •  Reagan and GW Bush, 2 terms each (0+ / 0-)

        cut taxes and spent like crazy.

        But now that we're here.... longest economic downturn in 75 years..........

        FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

        by Roger Fox on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 10:27:56 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, this resistance to revenues is just nonsense. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        The media & co. are already starting to message this fiscal cliff talking point toward hysteria, false equivalency, and flawed assumptions.  

        I just really dread having to hear questions phrased, "Since social security is going broke..." and other media set-ups.  

        The billionaire-led battering ram never stops pounding at the door.  Wall Street remains determined to carry as many public resources as possible off to the casino.  

        It gets on my nerves, and you know how I am about my nerves...

        by ciganka on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 10:40:25 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Voting for the enemy (0+ / 0-)

    The Democrats, like the Republicans, are funded by the 1%, so they share the 1%'s commitment to eliminating Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and unemployment insurance.

    Of course, since the Democrats campaign as the champions of the 99%, they have to eliminate these program in stealth, cutting a little at a time, and pretending "other forces" (Republicans, the deficit, the national debt, etc...) are making them do it against their will.

    Why should the Democrats be afraid of any kind of backlash from the peasants?  Clinton eliminated welfare-as-we-know-it, and committed economic treason against American workers with NAFTA, GATT, and the WTO agreements.  And the peasants STILL VOTED FOR HIM!

    Obama has been passing "free-trade" agreements like there's no tomorrow, and is about to pass the TPP (Trans-Pacific Partnership) which is "NAFTA on steroids".  And the peasants STILL VOTED FOR HIM!

    5% of the vote for the Green Party would have shown the Democrats that progressives' support isn't unconditional.

    You Democratic voter have nothing left to threaten the Democrats with.  What are you going to threaten them with if they cut these earned benefits -- Voting for them?!

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site