We are the most powerful and stupid nation on the planet and will probably go
broke proving it.

I would vote for a liberal independent for president, if that person is
truly a liberal, instead of one of those liberals that treat the American
Populace as children.

E.J., in Washington speak jobs are always cast in terms of political reelection.  That is pure bullshyt!  Jobs, or lack of them, is about the long term suffering of working class people.  Get it?

Yesterday I received an email from Biden saying that he has a plan to take idle government real-estate and stop wasting money on it.  Does that mean that he is going to put this real-estate on the market where there is already a glut of real estate?

Today I hear that the Veep is aiming toward a bipartisan deal to cut $1 trillion in spending.

Meanwhile corporations are withholding $2 trillion of their cash from investing in new plants, equipment, and jobs.  Why? Because there is not enough demand (i.e. spending) in the economy to warrant further investment.

So now both Republicans and Democrats are going to solve the lack of spending in the economy by cutting spending.  I suppose they might also cut taxes to raise tax revenue.

We need a law to make English at least one of the languages spoken in this country.  I mean dictionary English, not political double speak.

For Obama to change the direction of the national conversation on the economy, he first has to know where that direction is.

Why are the Democrats worried about passing legislation?

They should be worried about getting their message out. 

What is their message?

Hmmm, what is their message?

Hi, worm.  I really can’t argue with your logic about not voting ‘for’ someone of whom you disapprove but rather voting ‘against’ someone of whom you disapprove even more, since I did exactly that for the first time since reaching voting age in 1968 by voting for a Republican for national office last year against an incumbent Democrat who failed to pass muster.  My logic was that reelecting the Democrat would be useless, whereas evicting her would open up the possibility that someone more progressive would run next time around (unfortunately, she’s running again unopposed in the 2012 primary for her old seat, so if the general election seems at all tight I’ll have to vote against her again then and until such time as a better candidate appears).

I’ll do the same with Obama in 2012 assuming that he wins the nomination (I’d LOVE to see him face a progressive primary opponent, but that seems unlikely).  Tough to stomach, but the prospect of letting the national Democratic party continue is the Republican-lite vein it has adopted is even tougher.  With one over-optimistic exception in 2006 I stopped voting for national Democrats after their near-complete capitulation to the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and either voted progressive third-party or left ballot slots blank, but their behavior during the first two years of the Obama administration convinced me that more active opposition was required.

Mike,
This is the worm. Thanks for the note.
As for the ‘but Im going to vote for Obama’, I think the operative word here is
‘for’. Most people I know are going to vote ‘against’ the Republican, who ever it
is.
But that’s different than voting ‘for’ Obama.

The ‘for’ implies that I will send campaign contributions, talk it up, maybe go
door to door, etc.  The ‘against’ means when voting day comes, I’ll trudge to the
machine and punch something other than Mitt Romney.

There will likely be a lot of ‘other than Mitt Romney’ around .... i.e. there will be
other ways to vote ‘against’ the Republicans.

That’s were Obama will feel it. Fewer campaign funds, fewer people talking him
up, fewer volunteers, .... There will for sure be fewer youth, fewer Latinos,
fewer working class folks, etc coming out for Obama, because they’ve been
confronted with such disappointment and rebuke by the person they voted for.

Yes, I agree some will say ‘but Im voting for him anyway’. An increasing number
will simply do nothing or find other ways to vote ‘against’ the Republicans.
Foolish though some will say it is to vote third party, you have to concede that
proved to be foolish to vote for Obama.

mrfreeze - I happen to live (by a fortunate fluke) in
a wealthy Southern California beach community filled
with very rich people the majority of whom are no
where close to financial insolvency. The only
“political power” they need to maintain/grow their
wealth is for the political power base to keep doing
what it’s doing - which, as you imply for different
reasons, is hardly an impetus for revolution.

(If it’s any consolation to the have-nots, I’ve never
lived among so many unhappy, nasty, miserable, angry,
belligerent people as most of those who presently
live around me.)

Sen. Charles E. Schumer of New York said, “The voters gave us two mandates in 2010, not one,” he said in an interview. “They told us we should reduce the deficit and get rid of wasteful spending.’

No rational voter I know of said to reduce the deficit as a number one goal. That is a fantasy created by Republicans.

Here’s what Obama actually has done:

1. TARP & Financial Bailout: Over 70% of us opposed the bailout. Obama
accelerated it with Geithner and Bernanke - both Bush carryovers Obama
embraced.

2 . Health Care: 72% of us supported “a government-administered insurance ?
plan—something like Medicare for those under 65—that would compete for ?
customers with private insurers.” Obama blocked hearings on single payer and
chocked off true health care reform.

3. The Debt and Fair Taxes: Washington Post-ABC poll Washington Post-ABC
poll, Spring 2011: 72 percent support raising taxes on the rich - including 68
percent of Independents and 54 percent of Republicans. Obama twice
‘bargained’ to extend the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy.

4. Afghanistan: 64% of us opposed expanding the war in Afghanistan and ?
wanted to disentangle from Bush-era ‘War on Terror’ and ‘preventive war’
policies. Today, over 60% of Americans oppose the war. Obama continues it.

Compare these things to what Obama is saying.

Obama has said: “Government is not – and should not be – the main engine of
job-creation in this country.”

President Obama has spent $4.3 Trillion in loans to banks and financial
institutions at low rates, then allowed these financial institutions to ‘use’ the
low cost money to buy government debt (bonds) at higher rates - in other
words, Obama supports subsidizing the financial industry for Trillions and
allowing the financial industry to use taxpayers’ money to pay out ‘bonuses’ to
financial industry executives. But nothing for workers, citizens, ordinary voters.
President Obama spent $1.2 Trillions expanding the war in Afghanistan, etc.
(this includes the money to pay for mercenaries, bribe local Afghanies, medical
and other costs for injured American soldiers. But nothing for workers, citizens
and ordinary workers.

Obama’s health care plan will divert $ Trillions of citizens’ money (both
personal and tax money) to private, for profit insurance companies. But nothing
for workers, citizens and ordinary workers.

Obama has twice extended Bush-era tax breaks for billionaires. But can seem
to find resources - or provide the leadership necessary - to help workers
citizens and ordinary workers.

Obama should simply say: “Government’s role is – and should be – the main
bailout source for businesses, as we have demonstrated this the last two-plus
years and will continue to demonstrate. Given our burden of business
subsidies, tax cuts for the rich, un-winable and incomprehensible wars, we will
not enough money to help workers. It’s a question of priorities.”

If the President would simply say that, I could honestly say, “Thank you,
President Obama, for being honest.” Instead, let me say, “President Obama, you
inherited a bad situation and made it worse.”

Our government doesn’t work and neither do the people.

“WAKE UP AMERICA!” - SAVE YOURSELF. Stop waiting for democrats and republicans to save you.

Read “Common Sense 3.1” at ( http://www.revolution2.osixs.org )

We don’t have to live like this anymore.
“Spread the News”

FIGHT THE CAUSE - NOT THE SYMPTOM

The solution is obvious (though there’s very little chance that the Democrats will take it, because most of them are in the pockets of the same interests that own the Republicans and only put up token opposition):

Forget about the deficit - because that’s NOT what last year’s election was about at all.  Don’t give an inch on taxes:  they need to go UP, not down (especially for the rich, but eliminating ALL the Bush tax cuts would be relatively painless given how little they actually gave to so much of the middle class and all below them).  Demand job programs, and pummel the Republican mercilessly every time they prevent such legislation from passing (just as they’re getting pummeled over Medicare and, now, Social Security).

Sure, if the Republicans hold firm that won’t get any good legislation passed before 2013 - but the Republicans have been pretty successful (with lots of tacit cooperation from Democrats) at blocking decent legislation for the past 2-plus years anyway, so what’s to lose?  What it WILL do is sweep Democrats back into power next election, at which point they’ll have one more chance (as they did in 2009, but squandered) to show that they can govern effectively before being thrown onto the trash-heap of history to make room for a REAL second choice.

Government action created what we are facing now. There is lots of things they can but
won’t do. Like tripling payroll taxes for companies that hire foreign workers or move work
off shore. Banning Insurance companies from sending work off shore, as well as
outsourcing clinical and clerical functions. They can also reinstate Glass Stiegal stop
blocking financial reform, stop gutting Elizabeth Warrens consumer agency. But they will
do nothing because they, congress, is benefitting, but selling out their country. I’d call
that treason.

felicity - Tom Brokaw’s blunt-edged observation totally misses what’s going on in his “two Americas.”
Certainly there are a lot of Americans who are openly and obviously living-on-the-economic-edge. They struggle with the basics and, when gas or food prices rise, they’re vulnerable. These folks have ABSOLUTELY NO POLITICAL POWER TO CHANGE THINGS FOR THE BETTER.

But, it’s the other America that he describes as relatively wealthy that’s the real problem. I work in an arena where I see a lot of Americans who, even though they APPEAR WEALTHY are deeply in debt, overspent and are living the “deception of the American Dream. The funny thing is, they’re the same people who would never dream of “revolution” because (for now at least) they’re fat, happy and have all the junk they could ever want. They THINK THEY HAVE political power, but they only have “purchasing” power which will change nothing in this country.

Frank above, at 8:34 is correct, but didn’t say why, so I thought it was
reasonable to comment further. There are basically two types of jobs in any
country. Those offered by government, and those offered by non-government
businesses. Government can do things that facilitate its citizens, but only
through offering an infrastructure to provides citizens with what they need for
each to fulfill her personal potential; examples being air traffic control, libraries,
elementary and secondary education, embassies, coast guard, etc. Each every
citizen can use. Civil servants who work in such jobs can be very effective:
facilitate citizens achieving their potential. In essence, each such government
job offers what everyone can use. When the government gets involved in jobs
that only serve a few; regulations, agriculture payments, specific import
restrictions, military spending that has nothing to do with defending the
country, etc.; than the those efforts create complications and provide no overall
benefit.

Non-government jobs can be beneficial and contribute to a vibrant economy
when they allow people to do work tasks and experience being productive,
skilled, creative and contributing to their customers.

Nothing the government can do can increase these types of non-government
jobs. And the government cannot increase the number of non-government
jobs that benefit society.

So the whole concept of government stimulus; ie government spending that
leads to an increased viable economy; is a delusion, first imagined in the 1920’s
and implemented many times since; never once improving the economy in the
long term; only increasing the size of government and the national debt in the
long term. That such suggestions continue to emanate from our politicians,
major media figures, and leading academicians show how corrupt and utterly
devoid of common sense and wisdom are most people in this country.

In other words, most of the people in this country no longer have any moral
character, no longer have any ability to know what are proper actions and what
are improper actions. And the majority of actions we now take are improper,
leading us away from success and enjoyment into progressively increasing
chaos and destruction.

The critical economic issue right now is aggregate demand, not the debt. 

Throwing in sectarian issues like green energy credits undermines needed action:  Massive stimulus designed to create sustained aggregate demand.

Frank:
Not true, nothing can be done. Obama and congress can begin by doing WPA New Deal style employment- that will jump start the economy by increasing demand. Then legislation can be written to counteract the damage done by the WTO agreements- like sanctioning American coprorations that build and hire overseas. Then there should be an immediate moratorium on the special visas that go to immigrants in high tech industries, And finally empoyers in service jobs such as construction and food service should be sanctioned for hiring undocumented aliens- there’s plenty that could be done

@Salome: “...I think I’ll send half as much, if I send anything at all.”

We should just save our money, period.  He does not deserve it.

Tom Brokaw commented recently that after his travels
across America, he has concluded that there are two
Americas - one either living in relative poverty or
faced with living in relative poverty, and the other
an America where almost everyone is relatively
prosperous.

The population of the former is much larger than the
population of the latter, however it’s the interests
of the latter which Congress supports through
legislation and economic policies.

And, if history is any indication, it’s only when the
prosperous begin to experience a lowering of income
that revolutions occur - because they’re the ones who
start revolutions. Therefore, one might conclude that
Congress, rightly so, feels no threat to business-as-
usual, and there lies the basic problem.

Government does not control greed.  It provides a massive, irresistible instrument for the use of the greedy.

Republican Congressional gridlock was the plan all along.They knew they were going to lose in ‘08 and that’s why they sacrificed crazy man McCain and the nitwit Palin- no Republican was going to win in ‘08 after Bush. They always had their eyes on 2012. They also knew that Bush’s tax cuts and stupid wars would wreck what was left of the economy, leaving the door wide open for a trouncing of Obama in ‘12. I predicted from Obama’s inauguration day 2 years ago what was going to happen- he would be a one term president and the REpublicans would sweep. Not much solace or comfort in being right however- the cost was a wrecked economy that is never coming back.

The best hope for this country economically would be for the senate and congress to
commit suicide en mass. A drug overdose would be a cheap and easy way to it.

Socrates was forced to commit suicide for far less.

The problem is not unemployment, the problems is a failed political system, that is
owned by corporations. Those same corporations are continuing to do the same things
that destroyed this economy, while congress does nothing about it,so they are the
problem.

The continued export of jobs, should be stopped, but won’t be. They just approved a
new NAFTA like treaty with South Korea.

They just spent 3 trillion propping up the banks and we have 17% unemployment and
underemployment. And lots of that money went to propping up foreign banks.

Until we put wall street behind bars there will be no recovery. The best we can hope for
now is a military take over.

“That’s why you’re hearing a lot of talk about
extending the payroll tax cut another year”
~ So how do you explain that payroll taxes went UP
last week?!
I do payroll at a small business in Sedona Az. and
last week I was given a new tax book (digitally)
from the owners and the fed taxation went up across
the board - all 6 employees are now being taxed
about 6% more, but only on the fed side, state is
the same.
~ But heres a good suggestion to help people get back
to work - STOP THROWING HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS OF
DOLLARS TO FOREIGN COUNTRIES FOR THEIR STABILITY AND
QUIT THE LAVASH LIFESTYLE OF BEING POLITICALLY ELITE
AT THE PUBLICS EXPENSE.
Sooner or later the govt has to realize that it
exists at the behest of the populace and not as its
masters.

President Obama is too busy going begging to Wall Street for more campaign donations to deal with the problems of the little people. This president is no FDR by a long-shot.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/13/us/politics/13donor.html?smid=tw-nytimes&seid=auto

The solutions are simple, as I see them—end the stupid wars! End the American Warfare State! Turn this country’s energies to rebuilding itself—not rebuilding other countries. End foreign aid. Abandon interventionism as this country’s foreign policy.

The alternative to the above, I fear, is national collapse and disaster.

Nuff said.

As if the Democrats had any interest in jobs creation.  They lost control of the House because they were perceived as doing squat about jobs as was Obama.  Now the Democrats have the convenience of blaming Republicans for their inability to solve unemployment and jobs creation– how convenient for them.