I Love Republicans Because They Are Pro Small Government and are Fiscally Conservative

Republican Legacy Of Squandering Taxpayer Money Sep 21st, 2008

Yesterday, President Bush announced his $700 billion plan to buy out troubled financial institutions. Demanding enormous faith in his administration’s stewardship, the plan “would place no restrictions on the administration other than requiring semiannual reports to Congress, granting the Treasury secretary unprecedented power to buy and resell mortgage debt,” and to hire outside firms “to help manage its purchases.” Further, the proposal provides no oversight mechanism:

Sec. 8. Review: Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.

Bush is demanding unprecedented control over billions of dollars — with no oversight. His history of mismanaging taxpayer dollars should make Americans skeptical of his buyout plan:

IRAQ RECONSTRUCTION

-$142 million wasted on reconstruction projects that were either terminated or canceled. [Special Inspector General for Iraq, 7/28/08]

-“Significant” amount of U.S. funds for Iraq funneled to Sunni and Shiite militias. [GAO Comptroller, 3/11/08]

-$180 million payed to construction company Bechtel for projects it never finished. [Federal audit, 7/25/07]

-$5.1 billion in expenses for Iraq reconstruction charged without documentation. [Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction report, 3/19/07]

-$10 billion in spending on Iraq reconstruction was wasteful or poorly tracked. [GAO, 2/15/07]

-Halliburton overcharged the government $100 million for one day’s work in 2004. [Project on Government Oversight, 10/8/04]

KATRINA

-Millions wasted on four no-bid contracts, including paying $20 million for an unusable camp for evacuees. [Homeland Security Department Inspector General, 9/10/08]

-$2.4 billion in contracts doled out by FEMA that guaranteed profits for big companies. [Center for Public Integrity investigation, 6/25/07]

-An estimated $2 billion in fraud and waste — nearly 11 percent of the $19 billion spent by FEMA on Hurricanes Katrina and Rita as of mid-June. [New York Times tally, 6/27/06]

-“Widespread” waste and mismanagement on millions for Katrina recovery, including at least $3 million for 4,000 beds that were never used. [GAO, 3/16/06]

DEFENSE CONTRACTS

-A $50 million Air Force contract awarded to a company with close ties to senior Air Force officers, in a process “fraught with improper influence, irregular procedures, glaring conflicts of interest.” [Project on Government Oversight, 4/18/08]

-$1.7 billion in excessive fees and waste paid by the Pentagon to the Interior Department to manage federal lands. [Defense Department and Interior Department Inspectors General audit, 12/25/06]

-$1 trillion unaccounted for by the Pentagon, including 56 airplanes, 32 tanks, and 36 Javelin missile command launch-units. [GAO, 5/18/03]

As of today (April 29, 2010)- of the Republicans currently in the Senate, 99% were in office when all of this fiscally conservative spending occured - including the original $700 billion bail-out called TARP. Most will be running for re-election in 2012. Their plan is to bring back the good old days of 2000-2008. You know the days when they spent like they were using someone else's credit card and didn't care about rising revenue or regulating the shenanigans on Wall St. It took these thugs in $2,000 dollar suits 8 years to cripple the economy, yet have the gall to blame president Obama for not undoing their damage in 4 years. Vote for insanity, vote for Republican - tea baggers - conservatives, or what ever they're calling themselves to avoid responsibility.

Conservatives Refuse to Give Obama Any Credit for Jobs and Economic Recovery

Judging Stimulus by Job Data Reveals Success

The case against the stimulus revolves around the idea that the economy would be no worse off without it. As a Wall Street Journal opinion piece put it last year, “The resilience of the private sector following the fall 2008 panic — not the fiscal stimulus program — deserves the lion’s share of the credit for the impressive growth improvement.” In a touch of unintended irony, two of article’s three authors were listed as working at a research institution named for Herbert Hoover.

Of course, no one can be certain about what would have happened in an alternate universe without a $787 billion stimulus. But there are two main reasons to think the hard-core skeptics are misguided — above and beyond those complicated, independent economic analyses.

The first is the basic narrative that the data offer. Pick just about any area of the economy and you come across the stimulus bill’s footprints.

In the early months of last year, spending by state and local governments was falling rapidly, as was tax revenue. In the spring, tax revenue continued to drop, yet spending jumped — during the very time when state and local officials were finding out roughly how much stimulus money they would be receiving. This is the money that has kept teachers, police officers, health care workers and firefighters employed.

Then there is corporate spending. It surged in the final months of last year. Mark Zandi of Economy.com (who has advised the McCain campaign and Congressional Democrats) says that the Dec. 31 expiration of a tax credit for corporate investment, which was part of the stimulus, is a big reason.

The story isn’t quite as clear-cut with consumer spending, as skeptics note. Its sharp plunge stopped before President Obama signed the stimulus into law exactly one year ago. But the billions of dollars in tax cuts, food stamps and jobless benefits in the stimulus have still made a difference. Since February, aggregate wages and salaries have fallen, while consumer spending has risen. The difference between the two — some $100 billion — has essentially come from stimulus checks.

The second argument in the bill’s favor is the history of financial crises. They have wreaked terrible damage on economies. Indeed, the damage tended to be even worse than what we have suffered.

Around the world over the last century, the typical financial crisis caused the jobless rate to rise for almost five years, according to work by the economists Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff. On that timeline, our rate would still be rising in early 2012. Even that may be optimistic, given that the recent crisis was so bad. As Ben Bernanke, Henry Paulson (Republicans both) and many others warned in 2008, this recession had the potential to become a depression.

Yet the jobless rate is now expected to begin falling consistently by the end of this year.

For that, the stimulus package, flaws and all, deserves a big heaping of credit. “It prevented things from getting much worse than they otherwise would have been,” Nariman Behravesh, Global Insight’s chief economist, says. “I think everyone would have to acknowledge that’s a good thing.”

Conservative Playbook Rule 4 Mix Hyporisy and Unhinged Whining

This week in crazy: Scott Baio
What's the one thing the former teen idol hates more than paying taxes? Those mean "lesbians" from Jezebel!

We suspected Scott Baio had the makings of a great Twitter meltdown back in January, when the former teen star and staunch conservative posted an unflattering photo of Michelle Obama along with the comment, "WOW He wakes up to this every morning." We were impressed when he followed up by posting a photo of himself with an actual black lady to prove he wasn't racist. And he got our attention when he tweeted, on April 12, "Taxes are done. That should feed, house & provide medical for quite a few lazy non working people at my expense."

Like most conservatives Scott like to make up reality as he pleases and exaggerate his contribution to the public treasury. We are even left to assume he means federal income tax and not the total of his payroll taxes - most of which are returned to him or his family in benefits. Out of his federal income tax less than 3% goes to social programs like aid to poor children and food stamps ( most recipients of food stamps are either low paid workers or seniors who are living off social security). He would literally have to be paying in the hundreds of thousands of dollars to support a family - and that is if such a welfare program existed - which it doesn't. Should we mention that Scott belongs to a union that looks out for his interests like making sure he gets a minimum wage when he works ( when is the last time he worked? so he is living off residuals from shows he made years ago and investments. he literally has not not a day's labor in his life.) A bitter delusional little man who seems deeply unappreciative of his good luck.

And so much for the ability of this Hollywood right-wing christianist ability to be self supporting - Christians come to Stephen Baldwin's

A Christian group has come to the aid of bankrupt actor Stephen Baldwin -- a website has been set up to allow fans to donate money to restore his wealth.

The born-again Christian filed for bankruptcy last year after he racked up more than $2.3 million worth of debt, stemming from several mortgages, tax bills and credit card accounts.

It's the wing-nut welfare system. he do not have to worry about working or paying for your poor judgment and laziness your right-wing pals will do that for you.

John flip-flopper- McCain, Arizona Law Exposes McCain's Serial Flip-Flops on Immigration

Eric Cantor and John Boehner Revive Republican Culture of Corruption

VIDEO: Bank Lobbyists Huddle For Another Secret Meeting With GOP Senators

Earlier today, President Obama traveled to New York to tell the nation’s most influential bankers to call off their “battalions of financial industry lobbyists” and embrace a new regulatory structure meant to avert another economic crisis. But around the same time back in Washington, D.C., bank lobbyists hosted a fundraiser for Senate Republicans, including Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), who has become the Republican liaison for Wall Street fundraising.

The invitation to the fundraiser, obtained by the Party Time blog of the Sunlight Foundation, shows that the it was hosted by lobbyists Wendy Grubb, Kirsten Chadwick, Scott Reed, and a variety of corporate PACs. Grubb is a top lobbyist for Citigroup, a bank that took taxpayer TARP funds and has yet to repay them. Chadwick, a former staffer to Rep. Roy Blunt (R-MO), is a lobbyist for Zurich Financial Group, a financial services conglomerate.

ThinkProgress, along with several other journalists, waited outside of the fundraiser at the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) building. Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC) walked quickly past reporters into his car, refusing to take questions. Both Sens. Cornyn and George Lemieux (R-FL) dodged reporters by driving into the NRSC’s underground lot.

Gosh how did this happen. Republicans are expecting voters to rush to the polls in 2010 and 2012 to return them to power so they can look out for the interests of the average American. Yet they are already acting like the good old corrupt conservatives of 2000-2008. The party largely responsible for the biggest economic collapse since the Great Depression. John Boehner slams Goldman Sachs' clout -- but pockets its cash The minority leader accuses Democrats of dancing to the big bank's tune -- but Goldman is giving more money to GOP

Did Republican senators forget to send a memo to their comrades in the other chamber? While Republican leaders in the Senate contemplate a bipartisan compromise on financial reform legislation -- evidently because they have realized that protecting the big banks is unpopular -- nobody seems to have provided such wise guidance to the House Republican leadership. Minority Whip Eric Cantor is still warning that his caucus will oppose the Obama administration’s proposals, while Minority Leader John Boehner has published an angry partisan screed in Investors Business Daily, echoing the same exaggerations and distortions lately disowned by his party’s senators.

Not surprisingly, Boehner's Op-Ed distorts the Democratic legislation to advance propaganda points. Sticking to the discredited "bailout" meme, he insists that "the largest Wall Street firms would become eligible for special treatment" including "exclusive access to a pre-existing bailout fund, a Treasury-backed line of credit and a government guarantee for any debt." But the bill creates no "bailout fund" -- only an industry-funded $50 billion resolution fund that would be used to shut down any major financial firm that becomes insolvent. Boehner also fails to note that the assets of such firms would be sold off, their equity wiped out, and their creditors likely reimbursed no more than would be available via bankruptcy.

Republicans are quick to point out that over the last few years Democrats have gotten more in total contributions from Goldman Sachs. True enough, but they still decided to pass meaningful financial reform and prosecute Goldman Sachs. This as Republicans climb in bed with G.S. and do their bidding. Republicans learned nothing from the Bush years and the Conservative Culture of Corruption.

You don't know Orwellian until you know Frank Luntz. Who Is the Guy That Tells Senate Republicans What To Think and Say

The guy who told the GOP to brand financial reform a "bailout"? Every word he speaks seems to be a lie

Fools these days just fling around the word "Orwellian" like it doesn’t mean anything. Please, guys. Despite what some people would have you think, not everyone out there is some budding totalitarian. Let's try to keep the word meaningful and useful for later.

But that doesn't mean we can never take note of modern practitioners of Newspeak. I'm thinking here of pollster and GOP image guru Frank Luntz. If we're holding on to "Orwellian" for when we really need it, well, this guy represents a downright special occasion, so let's splurge.

It was Luntz who suggested, in a now-infamous memo, that Republicans mask their assiduous service of Wall Street in the fight over financial reform by accusing the Democrats of assiduously serving Wall Street. The ceaseless claims that the proposed bill would authorize a new "bailout" come directly from Luntz’s playbook. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, for example, warned, "We cannot allow endless taxpayer-funded bailouts for big Wall Street banks."

[ ]...Of course, the proposed bill doesn’t create a permanent bailout. The measure that Republicans have criticized, borrowing language from Luntz, in fact levies a tax on banks, and would use the money to dismantle -- not reward -- companies under financial duress. But I guess that still fits under Luntz’s rubric of "any legislation."

Senate Republicans and right-wing fascist-lite web sites like Big Government are the puppets and Luntz is the puppeteer pulling the strings. So please America vote Republican in 2010 so we can have more bought and paid for Republican rule that works for Wall St at the expense of the average American worker. More on financial reform for Wall St here - Credit default swaps: What are they good for?

Right-wing media furious Obama "mock[ed]" tea partiers by correctly pointing out he lowered taxes

Right-wing media furious Obama "mock[ed]" tea partiers by correctly pointing out he lowered taxes

The right-wing media has attacked President Obama for "mocking average citizens"after he said "you'd think [the tea partiers] would be saying thank you," because he has lowered taxes. Indeed, absent from the right-wing media's outrage is the fact that Obama is correct; as the AP wrote, "[y]ou wouldn't know it by the Tax Day rhetoric, but Americans are paying lower taxes this year."

This would be the same media that helped sell Bush's lies to the public.

Oh Boy, Yahoo, Bring Back Good Old Republican Government

Remember Republicans or Conservatives or Tea baggers - whatever they're calling themselves these days. You know the self described "patriots" that brought us the Great Recession and made American tax payers pay a trillion dollars to invade and rebuild Iraq and lots of other fun stuff that undermined our freedom and financial security. They're determined to stop new Wall St regulation that would stop another recession by too big to fail banks and financial institutions. The Battle Lines by Matthew Yglesias,
http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2010/04/the-battle-lines.php

Back in January, Frank Luntz wrote a memo saying that the best way to defend Wall Street from any new regulation was to spuriously characterize efforts at regulatory reform as leading to “endless bailouts.” Then earlier this week, GOP Senate leaders Mitch McConnell and John Cornyn met with leading bankers and promised to defend their interests, asking only for huge sums of cash in exchange. Today, all 41 Senate Republicans have signed a letter promising to oppose the Democrats’ Wall Street reform bill with none of them offering any alternative proposals of their own.

They claim that the bill “allows for endless taxpayer bailouts of Wall Street and establishes new and unlimited regulatory powers that will stifle small businesses and community banks.”

Of course the status quo already allows for endless taxpayer bailouts. The point of the new regulatory powers it to (a) prevent the need for bailouts and (b) provide an alternative process to bailouts. The banks aren’t paying McConnell to put a stop to bailouts, they’re paying him to prevent the regulations that might stop bailouts.

* Another conservative gift that keeps on giving - giving America the shaft - the Right-wing Republican Media - About those 25 tax increases... http://mediamatters.org/blog/201004160049

Faced with the uncomfortable fact that President Obama lowered federal taxes for the vast majority of Americans this year, conservative media are looking to Congressional Republicans for talking points that harmonize better than reality with all those "Taxed Enough Already" people demonstrating on the mall this week. Fortunately, Michigan Republican Dave Camp released a document listing 25 "tax increases" signed into law by Obama since January 2009 "totaling more than $670 billion, or more than $2,100 for every man, woman and child in the United States." The next day, the "25 tax increases" claim appeared in the Wall Street Journal via Karl Rove. It jumped from there to Fox News, where Fox & Friends co-host Brian Kilmeade referenced Rove's column and said, "According to these statistics, there's been 25 tax increases since Barack Obama took office in 2008, so when people say wow, I feel overtaxed, they're pointing right to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue." Kilmeade repeated the statement on today's show, this time dropping the citation to Rove, let alone to the House GOP.

Camp's document does list 25 provisions from 5 pieces of legislation that taken all together, raise $670 billion over ten years. Most of these provisions won't go into effect for years and won't directly affect most of us. As the document itself notes, it is a list of "gross tax increases," not net tax increases, so it's really only a useful source of information for people like, well, Republican politicians and their media tools. It appears to count as a "tax increase" any provision that raises revenue relative to what would have otherwise occurred. And since it doesn't provide any information about provisions that reduce revenue -- such as the small business tax credits and exchange subsidies in the health care reform law or the tax cuts from the stimulus package -- it doesn't tell us much about how Obama is changing the country's tax bill overall. Nor does it attempt to weigh the merits of the revenue-raising provisions, which is something you'd think those concerned about the budget deficit would want to do.

Notably, several of the provisions listed would not be characterized as "tax increases" by most people. For example:

Eliminating the deduction for expense allocable to Medicare Part D subsidy. Camp lists this provision in the health care reform law as a "tax increase" that will raise revenue by $4.5 billion over ten years. The provision eliminates a loophole that allowed companies to take a tax deduction on a tax-free government subsidy. So not only does this not impose a new tax on businesses, it doesn't touch the chunk of taxpayer cash we give tax-free to companies for providing Medicare Part D benefits for their retirees. All it does is say that businesses can't then count that subsidy as an expense and deduct it from their taxable income. Funny I didn't see any signs demanding Congress reinstate corporate "double-dipping" at the tea party rallies.

Making "black liquor" ineligible for cellulosic biofuel producer credit. Camp has this down as a $23.6 billion tax increase over ten years. "Black liquor" is a wood byproduct burned by paper companies to generate electricity. In recent years, papermakers realized that they could get a hold of some taxpayer handouts by mixing diesel fuel into the black liquor, rendering themselves eligible for an alternative fuels tax credit. This provision ensures that papermakers using black liquor do not get tax breaks that were never meant for them. I can almost feel my freedom shrinking.

Codifying economic substance doctrine and imposing penalties for underpayments. This provision raises $4.5 billion over ten years. According to the Tax Policy Center, codifying the "economic substance" doctrine is part of an effort "to address the problem of abusive tax shelters." The measure aims to make it easier for courts to judge when a company is involved in a bogus transaction designed to reduce their tax bill. I think most would dispute the claim that encouraging companies to pay their fair share of taxes amounts to a "tax increase."

Repealing guidance allowing certain taxpayers to claim losses of an acquired corporation. This provision raises around $7 billion and has a complicated history. Presumably in order to encourage mergers, in the midst of the financial crisis the Bush administration issued a "sweeping change to two decades of tax policy" that gave "banks a windfall of as much as $140 billion," according to The Washington Post. The change allowed firms acquiring failing banks to use the acquired company's losses to reduce their taxes. The Post reported that Republican senator Charles Grassley was "particularly outraged" about the change. The stimulus bill Obama signed last year prospectively repealed that taxpayer giveaway to the financial industry.

* And Rush Limbaugh stopped taking hillbilly heroin long enough to tell some lies over the gaves of the recently killed mine workers. Rush Lies Again: ‘There Were Union Workers’ At Non-Union Mine Explosion

Last Friday, Rush Limbaugh demanded to know why a coal miner union didn’t protect the 29 miners who were killed in one of Massey CEO Don Blankenship’s mines. After ThinkProgress reported that there was no union at the mine, Limbaugh claimed yesterday that it was a “fact” that “there were union workers there.” Limbaugh cited a news article that the “National Labor Relations Board has affirmed a decision that Massey Energy must rehire 85 coal miners who alleged they were illegally discriminated against because of their union affiliation.” Limbaugh concluded that “the left” who “are trying to blame the Massey disaster on its union busting” were wrong:

So there were union workers there, and so the United Mine Workers should have been overseeing their safety. United Mine Workers of America. There were union workers at that mine, and the left is trying to say, “You can’t say that, Limbaugh! Why it’s a nonunion shop. That SOB CEO got rid of all the unions!” No, no. He agreed to bring back 85 of them. You people, it’s been 21 years. At some point you are going to learn: If you go up against me on a challenge of fact, you are going to be wrong. It’s just that simple.

Watch video at link of this disgusting bag of Republican slime at work.

On this “challenge of fact,” Limbaugh is wrong once again. The 85 union coal miners were actually at a different Massey subsidiary at a different mine in a different county than the one where the disaster occurred. The coal miners that Limbaugh references were located at Mammoth Coal’s Mammoth (formerly Cannelton) mine in Kannawha County, WV, while the tragedy occurred in Performance Coal’s Upper Big Branch-South mine in Raleigh County, WV.

In fact, Blankenship successfully fought three different attempts by the United Mine Workers of America to unionize Upper Big Branch in the 1990s. After the last union drive failed, Blankenship cut bonuses in half and increased hours by fifty percent.
Update Andrew Tyndall observed the network nightly news coverage of the disaster and notes:

Not once, in all five days of coverage, did a single reporter mention the organization that has worked hardest over the decades to make sure that mining management does not cut safety corners and that miners can monitor their own working conditions with impunity. The union went unmentioned, as did the fact that the Upper Big Branch workforce went unorganized.

However, MSNBC's Ed Schultz has dedicated significant coverage to the lack of union representation at the mines.

Update Phil Smith, Communications Director for the United Mine Workers of America, tells ThinkProgress that Massey Energy is still appealing the NLRB decision, and that the 85 union miners have not been rehired. In fact, Massey Energy has not employed any union miners for over a decade. There are only about 80 UMWA members working for Massey, not in the mines but at two preparation plants in West Virginia.

Tea party Struggles to Find Something Real to Protest

The tea baggers are literally struggling to define what it is they are so angry about - according to this survey of tea baggers most are doing well economically - hey they have the time and money to attend allies rather than work. They support government programs such as the government run health insurance program known as Medicare. They support the government run social safety net insurance program know as Social Security. Most do not even think their federal income taxes are too far out of line. So what are the tea baggers really - just another branch of the far right conservative movement - GOP operatives crash the tea party. No doubt some of the tea baggers are sincere, but those are the ones that are useful idiots to the Republican Party that drove the economy into a ditch and now find it convenient to blame Democrats.

More on the lobbyists and special interests funneling money and misinformation into the tea nut movement - More on the Fox-pushed Tea Party Express scam

I noted a few months back TPM Media's report that the PAC that organized the Tea Party Express, a series of right-wing nationwide bus tours and rallies, had sent nearly two thirds of its spending during a recent reporting period right back to the GOP consulting firm that spawned it. Today, Politico's Ken Vogel provides more details of the Tea Party Express' operations, including the original memo from a consultant with the firm, Russo Marsh + Rogers, proposing its creation.

Vogel also reports that a substantial percentage of spending from the PAC, Our Country Deserves Better PAC, continues to flow directly into the coffers of Russo Marsh + Rogers. That appears to have been the intent from the beginning; Vogel reports that the firm's operative, Joe Wierzbicki, stated in proposing the Express that it could "give a boost to our PAC and position us as a growing force/leading force as the 2010 elections come into focus."

Vote Republican They're Crazier Than Ever

Question for Blogger admin - how does a spam blog use Photoshop and upload original wallpapers and graphics. Blogger really needs to work on filtering out the people that complain about a blog simply because they do not like the content. The content here is for educational purposes and a way for me to persevere and bookmark articles that I find interesting.

The tea party and conservative move further and further to the far Right fascist-lite extreme. Than run around telling anyone who will listen they are mainstream. Yea, sure - Oklahoma conservatives and tea party, lawmakers plot anti-federal militia

Bush and a Republican Congress crashed the economy. So what does one conservative do. Punishes an employee that voted for a Democratic president - Purported doctor on Texas A&M message board claims he ‘laid off my first Obama voting employee.’ Remember among the first rules of conservatism is to never take responsibility for your failures or the misery you caused others.

Sarah Palin keeps referring to Saint Ronnie, but its obvious she knows nothing about his actual polices - What Sarah Palin forgets (or never knew) about Ronald Reagan - She warbles a macho fantasy about our 40th president. But the real Reagan wanted a world free of nuclear arms

Is America Becoming Socialist Under Obama

Nine Myths about Socialism in the US

Glenn Beck and other far right multi-millionaires are claiming that the US is hot on the path towards socialism. Part of their claim is that the US is much more generous and supportive of our working and poor people than other countries. People may wish it was so, but it is not.

As Senator Patrick Moynihan used to say “Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. But everyone is not entitled to their own facts.”

The fact is that the US is not really all that generous to our working and poor people compared to other countries.

Consider the US in comparison to the rest of the 30 countries that join the US in making up the OECD – the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. These 30 countries include Canada and most comparable European countries but also include some struggling countries like Czech Republic, Greece, Hungary, Korea, Mexico, Poland, Slovak Republic, and Turkey. See www.oecd.org

When you look at how the US compares to these 30 countries, the hot air myths about the US government going all out towards socialism sort of disappear into thin air. Here are some examples of myths that do not hold up.

Myth #1. The US government is involved in class warfare attacking the rich to lift up the poor.

There is a class war going on all right. But it is the rich against the rest of us and the rich are winning. The gap between the rich and everyone else is wider in the US than any of the 30 other countries surveyed. In fact, the top 10% in the US have a higher annual income than any other country. And the poorest 10% in the US are below the average of the other OECD countries. The rich in the U.S. have been rapidly leaving the middle class and poor behind since the 1980s.

Myth #2. The US already has the greatest health care system in the world.

Infant mortality in the US is 4th worst among OECD countries – better only than Mexico, Turkey and the Slovak Republic.

Myth #3. There is less poverty in the US than anywhere.

Child poverty in the US, at over 20% or one out of every five kids, is double the average of the 30 OECD countries.

Myth #4. The US is generous in its treatment of families with children.

The US ranks in the bottom half of countries in terms of financial benefits for families with children. Over half of the 30 OECD countries pay families with children cash benefits regardless of the income of the family. Some among those countries (e.g. Austria, France and Germany) pay additional benefits if the family is low-income, or one of the parents is unemployed.

Myth #5. The US is very supportive of its workers.

The US gives no paid leave for working mothers having children. Every single one of the other 30 OECD countries has some form of paid leave. The US ranks dead last in this. Over two thirds of the countries give some form of paid paternity leave. The US also gives no paid leave for fathers.

In fact, it is only workers in the US who have no guaranteed days of paid leave at all. Korea is the next lowest to the US and it has a minimum of 8 paid annual days of leave. Most of the other 30 countries require a minimum of 20 days of annual paid leave for their workers.

Myth #6. Poor people have more chance of becoming rich in the US than anywhere else.

Social mobility (how children move up or down the economic ladder in comparison with their parents) in earnings, wages and education tends to be easier in Australia, Canada and Nordic countries like Denmark, Norway, and Finland, than in the US. That means more of the rich stay rich and more of the poor stay poor here in the US.

Myth #7. The US spends generously on public education.

In terms of spending for public education, the US is just about average among the 30 countries of the OECD. Educational achievement of US children, however, is 7th worst in the OECD. On public spending for childcare and early education, the US is in the bottom third.

Myth #8. The US government is redistributing income from the rich to the poor.

There is little redistribution of income by government in the U.S. in part because spending on social benefits like unemployment and family benefits is so low. Of the 30 countries in the OECD, only in Korea is the impact of governmental spending lower.

Myth #9. The US generously gives foreign aid to countries across the world.

The US gives the smallest percentage of aid of any of the developed countries in the OECD. In 2007 the US was tied for last with Greece. In 2008, we were tied for last with Japan.

Despite the opinions of right wing folks, the facts say the US is not on the path towards socialism.

But if socialism means the US would go down the path of being more generous with our babies, our children, our working families, our pregnant mothers, and our sisters and brothers across the world, I think we could all appreciate it.

Bill Quigley is Legal Director at the Center for Constitutional Rights and law professor at Loyola University New Orleans.

Beck admits he doesn’t give ‘a flying crap about the political process. … We’re an entertainment company.’

In February he told USA Weekend that “you’d have to be an idiot” to “not notice the temperature change” caused by global warming, and that he thinks mankind may play a signficant role in the phenomenon. Beck has previously described himself as “a rodeo clown” and conceded, “If you take what I say as gospel, you’re an idiot.”

Many Americans And Tea Baggers Are Ignorant About Issues. Right-wing Pundits Might Be the Reason

Voters want to cut spending, but only if we keep it vague - Sure, the public thinks the budget's too big, but nobody wants us to cut any of its line items

Over at Mother Jones, Kevin Drum yesterday ran a Chart of the Day from the Economist, which polled and found (again) just how little Americans want to cut spending on specific items, notwithstanding an abstract preference for cutting spending in general. And no such story is complete without ridiculing the usual finding that the one thing that Americans are closest to approving cuts in is foreign aid, which of course takes up only a tiny portion of the budget. Hey, I do the same thing! And Drum's version is just fine.

Just to pile on a bit, however: It's even worse! Not just because it turns out that the ideal point people pick for foreign aid turns out to be (if I remember correctly) something like 3 percent of the budget, which is far higher than the U.S. actually spends. But because if you break the category down, the same thing happens: The overall category (foreign aid) is unpopular, but the specifics are generally popular. By far the biggest item is Israel, and Americans most love Israel, and think that the U.S. should send them aid (the only poll I could find -- bottom of the page -- on this showed about half of respondents approved of current levels of military and economic aid, with a somewhat larger minority approving of cuts than the minority supporting increased levels). I do suspect that voters probably would support cuts in aid to Egypt and Jordan, but the big increase in foreign aid in recent years is for fighting HIV in Africa, and (while I don't have any numbers on it) I'm confident that voters are all for that spending.

I think the same is true in other categories, as well. "Defense spending" is relatively less popular, but at least when I've asked students about it the only subcategory that wasn't popular was new high-tech weapons, and that's been fairly mixed.

Of course, a lot of this is incredibly soft, and so the results can be easily manipulated by changing question wording. What's more, when public opinion is inconsistent like this both sides are going to say that the public "really" supports them, but in fact what's probably more accurate is to say that the public just doesn't have rational opinions about a lot of things.

If we're going to have an honest national debate about spending and public policy isn't it incumbent on the people shouting the loudest and waving the crazy signs comparing Obama to Hitler to have honest fact based information on which to back their ill defined agenda. Most of these hate mongers and self proclaimed "populists" get their opinions from Fox where Glenn beck is the big star, Beck admits he doesn’t give ‘a flying crap about the political process. … We’re an entertainment company.’

This isn’t the first time Beck has suggested he isn’t as radically conservative as he seems. In February he told USA Weekend that “you’d have to be an idiot” to “not notice the temperature change” caused by global warming, and that he thinks mankind may play a signficant role in the phenomenon. Beck has previously described himself as “a rodeo clown” and conceded, “If you take what I say as gospel, you’re an idiot.”

Republicans Go Beserk Over Sane Nuclear Policy

Experts, military brass reject right-wing media claims about Obama's nuclear policy review

Media conservatives have criticized an Obama administration nuclear policy review provision that would limit the role that nuclear weapons play as a deterrent, claiming that Obama was "undermining our national defense" with a "dangerous" policy. These criticisms have been rejected by nuclear experts, scientists, and military brass, who support a limited and narrow role for nuclear weapons.

* Experts, military brass, support narrow, limited role for nukes

Adm. Mullen reportedly "wholly endorses" plan, which "includes effective deterrents." An April 6 Associated Press article reported: "Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said he 'wholly endorses' the plan and believes it includes effective deterrents." American Forces Press Service stated: "The review has the full support of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Mullen said. 'We believe it provides us and our field commanders the opportunity to better shape our nuclear weapons posture, policies and force structure to meet an ever-changing security environment,' Mullen said. 'This Nuclear Posture Review reaffirms our commitment to defend the vital interests of the United States and those of our partners and allies with a more balanced mix of nuclear and non-nuclear means than we have at our disposal today.'"

Scientists, retired general advocated for policy that would "clearly narrow the purpose of nuclear weapons." In February, nuclear experts and scholars signed a letter addressed to President Obama that explicitly recommended that the "new NPR should clearly narrow the purpose of nuclear weapons to deterring nuclear attacks on the United States and our allies, and it should assure states without nuclear weapons that are parties in good standing to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) that they will not face nuclear threats from the United States." The letter continued:

Ambiguity about the purpose of U.S. nuclear forces provides little deterrent value at a high cost; it undermines the credibility of our conventional deterrent, complicates our nonproliferation diplomacy, and can be used by other countries to justify their pursuit or improvement of nuclear weapons.

It does not really matter to the far right Republicans what policy Obama decides on. They would be against it. If Obama promised every Republican their own personal nuke they'd say they Obama is wrong, they should get two nukes. The same inane and incoherent rage that ruled Republican policy during the Bush years has simply become a larger festering boil.

Conservative Republicans Are Trying to Mainstream Their Domestic Terror

Going To Extremes: The Obama Era's Top Ten Anti-Government Flare-Ups

The charges filed this week against nine members of the Hutaree Christian militia group have re-focused attention on the resurgence over the last year or so of the broader militia movement.

That resurgence has been driven in part, say experts, by the election of President Obama. But during the Obama era, threats of anti-government violence -- and even the real thing -- have become more widespread.

1. The Hutaree: Nine members of the Christian militia group, which says it's preparing for the arrival of the Anti-Christ, were charged this week with plotting to kill law enforcement and "oppose by force the authority of the U.S. government." The Feds acted after one member posted online that the group was "ready for war."

5. John Patrick Bedell: He traveled from California in February, to shoot two Pentagon police officers before being mortally wounded himself. In an online video manifesto posted in 2006, Bedell had railed against the government's ability to "confiscate the resources of their citizens to fund schemes that need only be justified by lies and deception."

The complete list of "values" Republicans are at the link.

With the passage of health care reform which will save hundreds of thousands of American lives there was a spike in violence, but it started before that with the mere election of a Democrat to the presidency, From Republican Rhetoric to Right-Wing Terror

Disturbingly, the paranoia in action of Pittsburgh cop killer Richard Poplawski is hardly an isolated episode. As I've suggested previously, whether concerning guns, abortion, gay Americans, immigration or judicial appointments, the line connecting the rhetoric of the Republican Party and the mainstream conservative movement behind it to right-wing terror is a very short one.

Pro-Gun and Anti-Government

Two other recent cases shed light on the phenomenon of right-wing terror. In a little noticed story, white supremacist James Cummings murdered by his wife last December in Maine had been assembling materials to manufacture a "dirty bomb." And in Tennessee, a follower not of Hitler but conservative hate merchant Bernard Goldberg cited the author's writings as justification for his July shooting at a Unitarian church. In his suicide note, the shooter James Adkisson informed Americans his was a "hate crime" against "damn left-wing liberals":

"This was a symbolic killing. Who I wanted to kill was every Democrat in the Senate & House, the 100 people in Bernard Goldberg's book. I'd like to kill everyone in the mainstream media. But I know those people were inaccessible to me. I couldn't get to the generals & high ranking officers of the Marxist movement so I went after the foot soldiers, the chickenshit liberals that vote in these traitorous people. Someone had to get the ball rolling. I volunteered. I hope others do the same. It's the only way we can rid America of this cancerous pestilence."

Like Poplawski, while Cummings and Adkisson may have existed on the fringes of the conservative movement, some of their rhetoric parrots the words of mainstream Republican politicians and right-wing pundits.

More documentation at the link.

Back to just after the passage of HCR, Vandals hit at least five Dem offices nationwide, threaten to ‘assassinate’ children of pro-reform lawmakers.

Right Wing Reacts With Rage: Health Care Will ‘Do More Damage Than 9/11,’ ‘Freedom Has Been Assaulted’

In the course of the health care debate, right-wing pundits and politicians regularly made use of inflammatory rhetoric to fearmonger about the consequences of passing reform legislation. Now, following the historic vote by the House of Representatives last night that will extend health insurance coverage to tens of millions of Americans, conservative talkers have exploded with rage.

Health Care - Republican Liars and Crazy Miscreants

Conservatism is looking more and more like a mental illness. The IRS Myth Being Spread by Tea baggers/right-wing Republicans:

Q: Will the IRS hire 16,500 new agents to enforce the health care law?

A: No. The law requires the IRS mostly to hand out tax credits, not collect penalties. The claim of 16,500 new agents stems from a partisan analysis based on guesswork and false assumptions, and compounded by outright misrepresentation.

The four best lies about the new health care law.

Microchip in your brain! "The Obama health care bill under Sec. 2521, page 1,000 will establish a National Medical Device Registry," one reader posted March 25 on the Chattanoogan.com. The reader then went on to quote legislative language, from pages, 1,001 to 1,008 of the bill that made reference to "a class II device that is implantable, life-supporting, or life-sustaining." This device, the reader explained, is an "implantable radiofrequency transponder system for patient identification and health information." Lest you think this is just the ravings of one solitary commenter, be advised that the phrase "health care reform microchip" returns 55,500 results on Google.

Like McCaughey, the new Obamacare conspiracy-mongers strive for verisimilitude by citing precise bill sections and page numbers. But in truth the phrases National Medical Device Registry and Class II device appear nowhere in either the health care bill nor in the follow-up reconciliation bill .

There will also not be any $7 billion dollars spent on Jungle Gyms or forced inoculations.

TIMELINE: From Promoting Acid Rain To Climate Denial, Over 20 Years Of Right-wing Republican David Koch’s Polluter Front Groups

The founder and chairman of Americans for Prosperity is oil baron David Koch, who is one of the richest men in the world because of his oil, chemicals, and manufacturing conglomerate Koch Industries. Koch Industries is a major polluter with an atrocious record of sloppy operations. According to the EPA, Koch Industries is responsible for over 300 oil spills in the US and has leaked three million gallons of crude oil into fisheries and drinking waters. They were fined a record $35 million dollars and an additional $8 million in Minnesota for discharging into streams. But AFP’s recent crusade against the EPA is just the latest in Koch’s twenty-year campaign to have unrestricted power to pollute. Some highlights of the timeline:

– David Koch pioneered front groups focused on organizing grassroots opposition to environmental regulations, opposition to climate science. Koch’s flagship organization, Citizens for a Sound Economy, now known as Americans for Prosperity, orchestrated everything from anti-tax protests aimed at opposing President Clinton to the current tea party movement aimed at President Obama.

– The same tactics Koch-funded groups are now using against clean energy reform were employed during the 1990’s against (highly successful) acid rain regulations, other EPA rules against pollution. In the field, Koch’s groups would use conspiracy theories to whip up right-wing hysteria against regulations, while other Koch groups would directly lobby, produce academic reports, and pay for advertisements.

– Koch helped anti-environment Republicans win policy battles and congressional elections in the 1990’s, elect Bush in 2000 and 2004. And how the Bush administration rewarded Koch by adopting his pro-pollution ideas and appointing his operatives to key positions. Koch is the most singular force for the rampant anti-environment, anti-climate science strain popular among the American right, which stands in contrast to conservative parties in Europe and the rest of the world which recognize the threat of manmade climate change.

America doesn't have enough problems trying to repair the damage of eight years of Conservatives policies so by all means vote Republican in 2012 - Republicans feel there is a lot more damage they can do given the chance.