VOX: How To Talk To A Conservative About Climate Change

Debbie Dooley, one of the founders of the Tea Party movement and a Donald Trump supporter, has some advice for talking to conservatives about climate change.



Read More at VOX

NJDSC: REP. SCOTT GARRETT TURNS TO OTHER EXTREMISTS FOR FUNDING AS HIS ANTI-LGBT VIEWS REPEL CORPORATE DONORS

(Trenton) -- According to the latest campaign finance records, the hateful anti-LGBT views of North Jersey's resident Tea Party extremist, Rep. Scott Garrett, have made him toxic to the corporations that previously supported his campaign.

Garrett raised one-fourth of the amount he took in from businesses at this time in the previous election cycle, reports show. And, Garrett’s First Quarter fundraising from businesses plummeted from an average of nearly $64,500* over the last three election cycles to just $15,500 raised from businesses this quarter. To fund his campaign, Garrett is now relying more heavily on donations from far-right Tea Party groups and members of Congress who share his long track record of hostility to equal rights for the LGBT community.

Garrett became radioactive to corporate donors after Politico reported this summer that the Tea Partier refused to contribute to the House Republicans’ fundraising arm because it supported gay candidates. Soon after, BusinessWeek dubbed Garrett "Wall Street’s Bigot in Washington."

Many companies have corporate policies that explicitly require LGBT equality. These and others have publicly distanced themselves from Garrett and announced that they will no longer write checks to him. These companies include Goldman Sachs, Capital One, BBCA Compass, U.S. Bancorp, Nomura Holdings, PNC Bank and State Farm. A recent Star-Ledger editorial noted the similarities in Garrett’s fundraising failures to the wave of companies speaking out against anti-LGBT laws in places like North Carolina and Mississippi.

State Senate Majority Leader Loretta Weinberg (D-Teaneck) said Garrett’s stalled fundraising is proof that corporations are standing with their LGBT customers and employees against Garrett’s hate and bigotry.

"Scott Garrett is way out of step with New Jersey's values, and I'm glad that businesses are joining the fight against bigotry by withholding campaign funds from him. Public officials should stand up for tolerance and decency, not against them. Clearly, corporate interests are recognizing that funding anti-LGBT extremism tarnishes their respective brands, and hurts their bottom lines," Weinberg said.

With his corporate wells drying up, a desperate Garrett has turned to national Tea Party groups to fill his depleted coffers. In the first three months of 2016, the proportion of contributions Garrett received from anti-LGBT Tea Party groups increased six-fold compared to the three previous election cycles.

Notably, Garrett received $5,000 from FRC, a Radical Right group with a long history of disparaging the LGBT community. Last week, an FRC spokesperson called LGBT rights activists "un-American" for opposing laws that permit discrimination of LGBT individuals.

Similarly, Garrett’s reliance on checks from his fellow anti-LGBT Tea Party members increased nearly 30-fold, from only $1,000 or 0.5% of his contributions this time last Congressional cycle to $29,795 or 11% in the first quarter of 2016. For example, this year, he took money from the likes of Rep. Jody Hice of Georgia, who has claimed that the LGBT movement wants to "eliminate free speech", compared being gay to alcoholism and drug addiction, and fallaciously stated that LGBT people have "tendencies to lie" and "tendencies to be violent."

A sampling of Garrett’s anti-LGBT cronies follows:

• Family Research Council (FRC) – According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, “FRC often makes false claims about the LGBT community based on discredited research and junk science.” FRC gave Garrett $5,000.
• Rep. Jody Hice (R-GA) – Hice claimed the LGBT movement wants to “eliminate free speech,” compared being gay to alcoholism and drug addiction, and asserted that LGBT people have “tendencies to lie” and “tendencies to be violent.” He gave $1,000.
• Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) – In the 113th congress, Meadows earned a 30% rating from the HRC. He gave $8,795.
• Rep. Reid Ribble (R-WI) – Congressman Ribble has earned 0% ratings from the Human Rights Campaign for his votes during the 112th and 113th Congresses. He gave $1,000.
• Rep. Stephen Fincher (R-TN) – Rep. Fincher earned a 30% rating from HRC during the 113th Congress and a 0% rating in the 112th Congress. He gave $2,000.
• Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-AL) – Rep. Aderholt earned a 0% rating from HRC in the previous three Congressional terms. He gave $1,000.
• Rep. Brian Babin (R-TX) – Rep. Babin is co-sponsor of a bill that would undermine the government’s ability to combat anti-LGBT discrimination. He gave $1,000.
• Rep. Scott Rigell (R-VA) – In the 112th and 113th Congresses, Rep. Rigell earned a 0% rating from HRC. He gave $2,000.
• Rep. Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) - In the 111th, 112th, and 113th Congresses, Rep. Lummis earned a 0% rating from HRC. She gave $1,000.
• Rep. Kevin Brady (R-TX) – In the 111th, 112th, and 113th Congresses, Brady earned a 0% rating from the HRC. He gave $1,000.
• Rep. Michael Burgess (R-TX) - In the 111th, 112th, and 113th Congresses, Burgess earned a 0% rating from HRC. He gave $1,000.

Mad Hatter Charity Event, Sunday December 7th

MAD HATTER TEA PARTY AND CHARITY FASHION SHOW
PROCEEDS TO GO TO 'ALL FUR LOVE ANIMAL RESCUE' AND 'DANIELA'S WISH'

Heavenly Touch Cosmetics is proud to be hosting the "Mad Hatter Tea Party and Charity Fashion Show" on Sunday, December 7th from 2-6pm. The event will take place at Pure Event Space in South Amboy. All the money raise from the event will go to benefit “All Fur Love Animal Rescue” and “Daniela’s Wish'.

'All Fur Love' is located in Freehold, NJ. It is a volunteer organization dedicated to helping animals by rescuing those in need, proper veterinary care, adoption and low cost spay/neutering.

'Daniela’s Wish' is also a non-profit which helps ill children, and kids who have suffered tragedy, recover by granting wishes, creating smiles and making memories.

"Daniela Olt, for which Daniela's Wish is named, is a 12-year old resident of Colts Neck I am blessed to call my little angel!", says organizer Jennifer Chlebowski "And through her charity we continue to grant more and more wishes for children in our community. With your generosity we can do even more."

One hundred percent of all the net proceeds at the event will go equally to both charities.

The “Alice in Winter-Wonderland” theme fashion show will consist of characters from the beloved movie, models (children & adults), musical guests, a variety of vendors with unique gifts for holiday shopping and even a visit from Santa

The Charity event is scheduled for Sunday, December 7th from 2-6pm.

For more information contact:
Jennifer Chlebowski at 732-915-0580

Caroline Casagrande Highlights Support for Tea Party Agenda

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

Touts Bill that Prevented Planned Parenthood from Receiving Funding

In a mail piece paid for by the New Jersey Republican State Committee, Assemblywoman Caroline Casagrande touted support for a failed resolution she wrote that would have prevented Planned Parenthood from receiving funding.

This was in response to the 11th District Democratic team pointing out that she voted against nearly $20 million in funding for women's health clinics, clinics that perform preventive screenings, mammograms, and prenatal care, and against expanding health care for 240,000 children.

Casagrande, however, never explains why she opposed these vital services. Instead, she points to this failed resolution. In announcing the resolution, Casagrande went so far as to suggest that Planned Parenthood was an illegitimate source of health care, saying she would only send money to "legitimate clinics that perform actual health services."

While Casagrande continues to follow the lead of the Tea Party Republicans in Congress who have also attempted to defund Planned Parenthood, 6 of these clinics have closed, leaving 40,000 fewer patients without these health care services in New Jersey.

"Not only is this a desperate attempt by extremist Caroline Casagrande to cloud her embarrassing record but touting the Tea Party's agenda of defunding women's health care shows how out of touch she is with the voters of this district" said Tony Coppola, 11th District Democrats' spokesperson. "And, if it up were up to her, 240,000 less children would have access to health care in New Jersey.

See the mail piece below.

Background:

• Planned Parenthood performs nearly 50,000 breast exams and more than 44,000 cervical cancer screenings annually in New Jersey.
• Caroline Casagrande voted against bill numbers S2139 (2010), A3274 (2010), and S788 (2012), resolutions that would have restored $7.45 million, $5 million, and $7.45 million to women's health funding respectively.
• Caroline Casagrande voted against bill number S-1557 (2008), which gave access to affordable health care to 240,000 children.
• Caroline Casagrande told the the Associated Press that FY 2012, Resolution #3003 would only send money to "legitimate clinics that perform actual health services" [AP 6/24/11].

Working Together

Dear Friends and Supporters:

Members of Congress, like myself, are elected to make sure our government functions. It is our job, our responsibility to those who elect us. However, right now I am sure that you and your fellow citizens are questioning how we have come to this point, and how this impasse will be resolved.

The fact is that right-wing, Tea Party Republicans have forced the shutdown of the government for one simple reason - because they disagree with the Affordable Care Act; a statute that passed by both houses of Congress, was upheld by the Supreme Court, and was validated in the 2012 Presidential election. They have shut down the government because they opposed a law that will protect healthcare consumers and provide affordable coverage to millions of Americans. They lost the vote in Congress, in the Supreme Court, and the popular vote of the nation, but they will not relent.

The Republican agenda is focused on dividing our country, and crippling our economy which is finally showing true signs of recovery, unless the Democrats bend to their will. I find this to be a truly despicable tactic, and I have spoken out about it on the House floor repeatedly this week, and will continue to do so until this matter is resolved.

This time it’s the Affordable Care Act, but who knows what next week will bring.

One thing is clear - we must work together. There are moderate Republicans who are speaking out and are willing to cast their vote to reopen the government, without any partisan strings attached.

We are a nation recovering from a major economic recession. We are a state with record unemployment, still struggling from Hurricane Sandy. I am writing to you today to let you know: I’m on your side. Along with my Democratic colleagues in the House, I will not cave to extreme tactics put in place by Republicans more interested in ideology than action. We have important work to do in Washington, and that will always remain my focus.



Sincerely,

Frank Pallone, Jr.

DGA: Christie To Jersey: Drop Dead

It's about time the Democratic Governors Association (DGA) started showing some support for Barbara Buono by hammering Chris Christie on his record instead of letting him get by on his rhetoric -MM  



WASHINGTON, DC—Less than 24 hours after Chris Christie endorsed Tea Party radical Steve Lonegan for the U.S. Senate and only days after he vetoed a gun safety package that he in part proposed, the Democratic Governors Association today released a new graphic calling Chris Christie out for leaving the people of New Jersey behind in favor of his personal presidential ambition. Christie’s decision to ignore New Jersey is reminiscent of yet another iconic newspaper front page.

PALLONE STATEMENT ON SUPREME COURT DECISION

LONG BRANCH - Following the New Jersey Supreme Court’s refusal to hear a challenge to Governor Christie’s decision to move the special election for United States Senator to October, Congressman Frank Pallone released the following statement:

“The Supreme Court’s refusal today to even hear a challenge to the Governor’s decision to move the special election to October is simply astounding. The waste associated with Governor Christie’s political maneuver that will be taxed upon New Jerseyeans is significant. The Governor’s aggressively partisan decision reeks of the same voter suppression tactics employed by Tea Party Republicans across the country and is the type of action I have spent my entire career fighting. In a democracy, we should all be striving to increase voter participation and civic engagement. Like many in New Jersey, I had hoped the Supreme Court would at least allow a fair and just hearing on this matter which clearly holds great import for people across the state. Their decision to not even provide the opportunity to be heard is unfortunate, and a disservice to New Jersey’s voters."

D'Amico: "Does the Tea Party Understand the Constitution?"

This past weekend former Monmouth County Freeholder John D'Amico, wrote an outstanding article for  Salon.com titled, "Does the Tea Party understand the Constitution?". It's a wonderfully reasoned column that draws from western traditions as prescribed by the likes of  Plato, the New Testament, founding fathers John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, the Declaration of Independence and the U.S.Constitution, to belittle members of the Congressional Tea Party Caucus and those from the far right of the Republican party, that urge their members and supporters to respect the "individual" and the "principals" outlined in the Declaration of Independence and the U.S.Constitution, without knowing the true meaning or history behind those documents and principals.

For those that don't know former Freeholder John D'Amico, is a graduate of Harvard College and Havard Law School, he is a retired Judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, is a former State Senator and also served as the Chairman of the New Jersey State Parole Board. D'Amico is a thoughtful and learned person who I respect

Here is a little of what Judge D'Amico had to say:

Last month, 20 House Republicans, along with staffers from nearly 40 congressional offices attended the first meeting of the Congressional Tea Party Caucus. The three premises behind the Caucus, according to Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), who emceed the event, are “we’re taxed enough, we spend less than we take in, and we follow the Constitution.” This purported devotion to the founding documents echoes the themes reverberated at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in March, where Sarah Palin and former Rick Santorum declared that the Declaration of Independence has given America “a set of principles and values” — and Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) urged his party to respect the individual “by going forward to the classical and timeless ideas enshrined in our Constitution.”

Naturally, these pronouncements raise a fundamental question — namely, which governmental policies and programs are consistent with the core values and ideals of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution? Are they the ones proposed by the Tea Party and conservatives? The Declaration of Independence proclaims that: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights governments are instituted among men …” Slavery having been abolished and women enfranchised, Thomas Jefferson’s powerful words should be read to mean that all human beings are by nature equal as persons.

A student of classic Greek philosophy, Jefferson may have derived this insight from Plato: “All men are by nature equal, made all of the same earth by the same Workman, and however we deceive ourselves, as dear to God is the poor peasant as the mighty prince.” All people have rights inherent in their human nature including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. We all have bodies and brains. Although some people are smarter, better looking or more physically fit than others, we all need food, water, clothing and shelter to survive. But the mere satisfaction of our physical needs is not our ultimate goal. Our founding fathers learned from Aristotle that “happiness is the meaning and purpose of life, the whole aim and end of human existence.” It is a whole life well-lived and enriched by the cumulative possession of all the goods — health, sufficient wealth, knowledge, friendship and virtue — that a moral and ethical human being ought to desire.

Accordingly, John Adams believed “the happiness of society is the end of government.” Jefferson agreed, declaring that “the care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government.” The pursuit of happiness is dependent on, and calls for, governmental protection of our life and health. Viewed through the prism of the Declaration, then, universal background checks for gun purchases, health care reform legislation to cover the uninsured, child care, workplace safety, laws and regulations protecting the air we breathe and the water we drink, and measures to slow or reverse global warming that science tells us is threatening the health of our planet and its human inhabitants, are essential to protect our right to life and abet our pursuit of happiness....

Read more

Rep. Pallone: Boehner doesn't care about blue states NY, NJ

Early this morning Frank Pallone appeared on CNN's Early Start show to talk about why a comprehensive Sandy relief bill is needed now.

From the  CNN Pressroom blog

Rep. Frank Pallone (D-NJ) criticizes Speaker John Boehner for not bringing a Hurricane Sandy relief bill up for a vote on Tuesday because he thinks Boehner wanted to avoid too much spending at one time, opting for a more “obscure” piecemeal plan of lesser payments.

Rep. Pallone says, “I really think that the speaker doesn't care about New York and New Jersey. In other words, we're blue states. The fact of the matter is that he was afraid to bring this up yesterday, in my opinion, because the Tea Party and the right wing did not want to vote for the spending bill for New York or primarily for New York and New Jersey.”

One Term More

"... Jefferson wrote, "The greatest good we can do our country is to heal its party divisions and make them one people." The Founding Fathers wouldn't have tolerated 21st century Tea Party polemics. No matter the nation's crushing ills or deep political divide, the framers chose to govern, not obstruct. 

Having brought forth a nation conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal, you've got to wonder:

Are there any levelheaded Republicans left to remind untethered Tea Party apostles – notably those washed up on the shores of the Potomac – that incendiary rhetoric, hysterical white populism and a reckless disregard for the unalienable rights of others is not a government of, by or for the people?

Misogynistic, homophobic, radically regressive and ideologically unhinged with little apparent interest in governing and no appetite for compromise or common ground, that Grand Old Party's out-of-order, a consequence of preposterous partisan pandering, legislative belligerence…and all that tea. 

To the extent any nominal independent expenditure can underscore the titanic distinctions between candidates, parties and platforms – from ALEC-influenced legislatures codifying colossally misguided stand-your-ground laws to muddleheaded McCarthy-mimicking Members of the House calling colleagues Communists – ours will, we hope, attract the attention of an inquisitive electorate and contribute to a more reasoned electoral outcome.

At the end of the day will unruly Republicans simply be too tone-deaf to hear the people sing? We'll know when tomorrow comes." - Don DeMesquita

for more info go to www.onetermmore.com

MENENDEZ: AMERICANS WIN A HUGE HEALTH CARE REFORM VICTORY; JOE KYRILLOS IS ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE ISSUE

For Immediate Release
June 28th, 2012

NEW BRUNSWICK – Following today’s U.S. Supreme Court historic affirmation of the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act, U.S. Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ) called out his opponent for advocating for the repeal of the landmark law that provides access to quality, affordable health care for thousands of New Jersey residents. 

“Today a tremendous victory was won by the American people who have lived far too long with a broken health care system,” said Menendez. “It is a victory for the 73,000 New Jersey residents under 26 who will remain covered through their parents’ policies. It is a victory for families who have been subjected to a health care system in which the size of a person’s wallet determined the level of care they received.  The health care law is not perfect, and I intend to help fix what needs work, but this is good news for families and seniors all across New Jersey.

“Whenever the question of health care reform has come up, Joe Kyrillos has been on the wrong side of the issue. He called for the Affordable Care Act’s repeal even though he understands very little about the Affordable Care Act. By calling for the law’s repeal, he stood alongside insurance companies that would see fit to deny a person coverage due to a pre-existing condition.  But, Joe Kyrillos is frequently on the wrong side of what matters to New Jersey residents. Time after time, he voted against funding for women’s health and family planning services and to limit health care coverage for public employees. Joe Kyrillos and the Tea Party Republicans have been consistent and reliable opponents of access to health care for middle class New Jersey families.  I am proud to have been part of the fight to provide quality, affordable health care to thousands of New Jersey families who desperately needed it and could not afford it. New Jersey residents will always be able to count on me to fight back against the special interests that would deny what they need."

"There is a sharp and clear difference between Senator Joe Kyrillos and me on this issue.  I stand with New Jersey's families and seniors to make health care stronger and more affordable.  My opponent stands with insurance companies and the Washington Republicans who would prefer a failed status quo and continued health care gridlock while patients are left behind.”

"If Senator Kyrillos continues to call for repeal – despite this majority decision from the Supreme Court – then he is willing to let businesses and consumers continue to face uncertainty and ever-increasing costs with no real hope of a solution.  That position would cost people and businesses more and provide less coverage. That is wrong for New Jersey's families, young people and seniors."

Leg Up for New Jersey Workers

From the E-Newsletter of Congressman Rush Holt: 

Many of the federal government’s most useful tools to address the needs of people who have lost their jobs come from the Workforce Investment Act (WIA), the primary federal program that supports job training. Last week I invited our nation’s top WIA official, Assistant Secretary of Labor Jane Oates, to meet with more than a dozen officials from New Jersey’s county job training boards to find ways to put more people back to work.

Congressman Rush Holt

Enacted in 1998, WIA created a single, universal employment and job training system – the one-stop career system – to serve the needs of all job seekers and employers. Today there are roughly 3,000 one-stop centers operating nationwide, serving millions of U.S. workers every year. Unfortunately, although WIA’s initial passage was bipartisan, its much-needed reauthorization has come under partisan attack in Washington.

The WIA bill put forth by the Tea Party majority, which could be debated in the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce as early as next week, slashes workforce investment under the guise of improving it. The bill would effectively eliminate many programs, and it would freeze WIA funding at a time when unemployment remains far too high. The result would be reduced services to the lowest-skilled adults, English language learners, people with disabilities, youth, women, and other individuals with barriers to employment.

We should be modernizing and WIA for the 21st century. I am a cosponsor of an alternative bill that would streamline and improve workforce investment system programs, strengthen workforce investment system accountability, and promote innovation and best practices within the workforce investment system. The bill also includes provisions I wrote to support online job training and to recognize and enhance the job training services that libraries provide.

Even now, 12.5 million Americans are striving to find work but proving unable to do so – often for no fault of their own. Our economy’s future depends upon us doing everything we can to help.

Extended Opportunity to Comment on Seismic Surveys near New Jersey’s Coast

The Interior Department announced this week that, because of concerns that I and others raised at a recent Congressional hearing, it has extended the comment period for its proposal to conduct seismic surveys in the mid- and south Atlantic.

Seismic surveys, which are the first step toward offshore drilling, involve using airguns to blast the ocean with extremely loud sound waves – potentially loud enough to damage wildlife and disrupt the local fishing and tourism economies.

The original, brief comment period seemed to be a form of box-checking, a way to say that public opinion had been sought without providing stakeholders enough time to comment intelligently. This extension demonstrates that the Interior Department is being more responsive to the concerns of the public. I will continue to oppose drilling off of our coast.

Free Annual Pass to National Parks for Military Personnel

One of many ways that the U.S. recognizes the service of our soldiers is by offering free admission to many of our nation’s most extraordinary parks and wilderness areas.

Active-duty U.S. military personnel and their dependents are eligible for a free annual pass that covers entrance and standard amenity fees to lands managed by the National Park Service, the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, and the Bureau of Reclamation.

You can acquire your pass by presenting your U.S. military ID or Dependent ID Form at most federal lands that charge an entrance fee. A list of these sites is available online, as is further information on the free military annual pass program.

Sincerely,

Rush Holt
Member of Congress

80 Reasons Why It’s Time To Take These Republican/Tea Party ‘Sons Of Bitches’ Down

Here's another gem that I found on AddictingInfo.com today that I thought I would pass along titled "80 Reasons Why It’s Time To Take These Republican/Tea Party ‘Sons Of Bitches’ Down". I think it touches upon all the points as to why the Tea Party and its members are so wrong, on so many issues , I hope you agree and feel free to comment:



At a Labor Day event yesterday, Teamsters President Jimmy Hoffa gave a fiery speech about the tea party, telling the American people that “It’s time to take these sons of bitches out.” And each and every one of us should listen. For the last thirty years, the American people have been under assault from the right-wing and their corporate overlords. Everything that makes America strong is being weakened and the American people are suffering. So if you need a reason why we should end the Republican/Tea Party, here are 80 of them.

1. They want to take away your Social Security.
2. They want to end Medicare.
3. They want to wipe out labor unions.
4. They want to send every last American job overseas.
5. They want to pollute the air we breathe.
6. They want pollute the water we drink.
7. They want to persecute non-Christians.
8. They want declare a state religion.
9. They took America hostage during the debt ceiling debate.
10. They want to take America hostage in every debate from now on.
11. The want to make it legal for businesses to discriminate.
12. They want to segregate our schools.
13. They want to allow oil companies to rape America’s environmental treasures for any trace amount of oil.
14. They refuse to give aid to the American people who go through natural disasters.
15. They want to end funding for natural disaster warning systems.
16. They want to take away the right to vote.
17. They want to make abortion illegal, even in cases of rape.
18. They want to abolish the corporate income tax.
19. They want to raise YOUR taxes but not taxes on the wealthy.
20. They want to end workplace safety regulations.
21. They ARE racists.
22. They disrespect the President at every opportunity.
23. They don’t support health care for every American citizen.
24. They want to allow health insurance companies to drop people.
25. They want to abolish the Environmental Protection Agency.
26. They want to illegally spy on American citizens.
27. They want more wars.
28. They want to indoctrinate our kids.
29. They want to make laws requiring every person to own a gun whether you like guns or not.
30. They want kill Planned Parenthood and end critical health care services for women.
31. They want to ban contraceptives and condoms.
32. They want to kill homosexuals.
33. They want to end unemployment benefits.
34. They want our infrastructure to crumble.
35. They want to end the independent judiciary branch, and turn it into a strictly conservative branch.
36. They want to keep women from earning equal pay for equal work.
37. They want President Obama to fail at all costs.
38. They want to continue the same failed economic policies that put us into a recession.
39. They rewrite and distort history.
40. They want to end public education for all.
41. They want to repeal the Voting Rights Act.
42. They care more about Wall Street than they do about Main Street.
43. They have voted to end 1.9 million jobs and have created zero.
44. They want to make it legal to kill doctors who provide abortions.
45. They want to reinstate ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.
46. They encourage gun violence.
47. They refuse to vote for cleaner, more efficient energy sources.
48. They want to deport hispanics, whether they were born here or not.
49. They support Israel’s President over our own.
50. They want to abolish minimum wage laws.
51. They think corporations are people.
52. They want to repeal portions of the Constitution.
53. They want to pull America out of the United Nations.
54. They support torture.
55. They want to teach creationism in schools.
56. They reject science.
57. They want to make cohabitation before marriage a crime.
58. They want to allow health insurance companies to not cover sick children.
59. They want to end food stamps.
60. They make government ineffective.
61. They want to take away your pensions.
62. They want to privatize prisons to put more people in jail.
63. They want to end your right to collectively bargain with your employer.
64. They want to ban the unemployed from being considered for employment.
65. They want end funding for legal services for the poor.
66. They want to end Miranda Rights.
67. They think all liberals are un-American.
68. They refuse to give any credit to President Obama for ordering the killing of Osama Bin Laden.
69. They refuse to acknowledge that 9/11 occurred during the Bush Administration.
70. They declared fiscal martial law in a Michigan town and fired the legally elected local government.
71. They called President Obama a liar during his State Of The Union Address.
72. They refuse to cut the Defense budget, which if cut in half would still be the largest defense budget in the world.
73. They apologize to foreign oil companies when they take heat for oil spills.
74. They take orders from the Koch brothers.
75. They sign pledges drawn up by conservative activists, and ignore their pledge to serve the constituents who voted for them.
76. They use conservative media to push the right wing agenda even if it means distorting the news or flat out lying.
77. They want to cut nutrition programs for children.
78. They want to cut housing and energy assistance programs that help poor people.
79. They want to slash job training programs that help the unemployed.
80. They think teachers are thugs.

Cut And Grow Fail: CBO Schools Tea Party Freshman In Basic Economics

This little ditty was posted Friday on Talking Points Memo. It should be a wake-up call to all those TEA partiers and other right-wingers out there that think that all will be fine in the world if we only cut spending and do nothing to increase revenue.

Unfortunately though, regardless of economic schooling provided by the CBO, there will those that continue to burry their heads in the sand and refuse to believe anything a socialist government agency has to say:

Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-KS), a Tea Party-backed freshman who voted against the final debt limit bill, recently asked to hear from the Congressional Budget Office about the impact of government spending on economic growth. It's an article of faith on the right that vastly shrinking government will unleash the forces of private enterprise, and faced with CBO's opposing view, Huelskamp wanted to know the answer to two questions:

1). What current federal departments, agencies, programs, or portions thereof do not contribute to economic growth?

2). In the programs that CBO believes do contribute to economic growth, what level of spending cuts would amount to a level you believe would be significant enough to "probably slow the economic recovery"?

But if the newly elected member of the Budget Committee was hoping the non-partisan CBO would buy into his premise, he'll be sorely disappointed.

In a response letter Thursday, CBO-chief Doug Elmendorf gives Huelskamp a layman's lesson in Keynesian economics: Under current economic circumstances, new federal spending would help economic growth, and current and future cuts could stymie it, particularly if they hit key government investment.

"When demand for goods and services falls short of the economy's ability to produce them, as is the case currently, increasing government spending can increase aggregate demand and thereby narrow the gap between the economy's actual and potential levels of output," Elmendorf writes.

The precise details matter. The more robust the economy, the lower the impact. But, according to Elmendorf, "when the Federal Reserve's ability to lower short-run interest rates is constrained because those rates are already near zero, as they are currently, the short-run effects of changes in government spending on output tend to be larger than usual."

To illustrate the point, Elmendorf notes that deficit reduction measures that cut spending by $100 billion next fiscal year, and hundreds of billions more over the coming decade "would decrease real (inflation-adjusted) gross national product (GNP) in 2012, 2013, and 2014 by amounts ranging from roughly 0.1 percent to 0.6 percent depending on the year and the assumptions used." In other words, the GOP's current governing theory is damaging the economy and, by implication, costing jobs. And for those Republicans who want to cut more, " a reduction in primary deficits that followed the same gradual time path but was twice as large would produce macroeconomic effects that were roughly twice as large."


Talking Points Memo on Facebook
There are important growth-related reasons to reduce deficits if and when the economy improves -- it reduces the extent to which government spending "crowds out" private investment, by undertaking functions the private sector can do more efficiently. But we're not there yet and, according to CBO, won't be until the end of the decade. Spending cuts like the ones describe above, "[a]t the turn of the decade, from 2019 through 2021...would increase [GNP] by roughly 0.5 percent to 1.4 percent."

But again the specifics matter, and if the GOP wants to slash across the board, they'll do damage anyhow.

"Some types of spending, such as funding for improvements to roads and highways, may add to the economy's potential output in much the same way that private capital investment does," Elmendorf writes. "Other policies, such as funding for grants to increase access to college education may raise long-term productivity by enhancing people's skills. The positive longer-term impact of deficit reduction on GNP would be smaller if the policies that reduced deficits included cuts in productive government investments."

Huelskamp's original letter is here. Read Elmendorf's response here.

The letters stem from the below exchange between Huelskamp and Elmendorf at a recent Budget committee hearing. Elmendorf and Huelskamp are arguing two different points. Huelskamp would like to see big cuts to federal safety net programs and other spending. Elmendorf argues that while the macroeconomic consequences of slashing some of those programs might be minimal in the long run, the near-term impact would be significant, given the current downturn.

America Thanks The Tea Party? [video]

Actor, voice over artist and Tea Party gadfly, D.C. Douglas, released another video on Friday nght thanking the Tea Party for its contributions to the debt ceiling debate. Immediately upon it's release, his video took on even greater meaning.

Though this video's release occured at roughly the same time that Standard & Poor's credit downgrade for the US became official - it was mere coincidence. Twitterverse, however, picked up on the video's sentiment and began forwarding it to friends as way of expressing their less-than-warm-n-fuzzy feelings reagrding the Tea Party's hand in the credit downgrade.

Apparently this was not without some merit. In S & P's statement, they write "[T]he downgrade reflects our view that the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic challenges to a degree more than we envisioned..."

In essence, Congressman John Boehner chose to move into the far right Tea Party's territory rather than into the Republican mainstream. So, in effect, it seems even more fitting that America should Thank the Tea Party!

Rush Holt; The Debt Ceiling Downer

For the moment we have put the debt crisis behind us. That is small comfort as the economy at large, the job situation, the housing market, and the financial markets continue to suffer. The Tea Party in Congress and its enablers should never have been allowed to threaten America’s good name in order to advance their view of a diminished government and trickle-down economics. They should never have been allowed to force a closed-door, hurried revision of our entire economy. And they certainly should never have been able to get away with a deal that increases inequities in our society and our economy. You, like most Americans, may have watched in dismay—or even in disgust—as Washington fumbled the self-imposed crisis.

Putting aside the distasteful process and the worrisome prospect that government by hostage-taking will continue, this week I had to face the immediate questions: Was the resulting deal going to help the economy? Would it create jobs? Would it reduce the crippling inequities in our economy and society? Would it bring down the deficit, as was the ostensible goal? On all counts my answer was “No,” and I voted against the resolution on the House floor.

I am pleased that we as a country are paying our debts, but I lament the damage done to the institutions of government and the good name of the United States as the most reliable, most creditworthy entity in the entire financial world. I lament especially the damage done to our view of ourselves. The negotiations were based on Tea Party premises: that our deficit is the principal concern facing us, that America is a pitiful debtor nation, that we must lower our sights, that we must end the quest to free our people from want and inequalities, that we cannot afford any longer to be the nation conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all are created equal. Are we no longer the America of the 1940’s that paid for millions of GI’s to go to college and buy homes, while rebuilding ourselves and Europe, when we were faced with a national debt much greater than today?

The deal this week may have the beneficial effect of showing that in the long run the United States intends to bring expenditures more in line with revenues. In the short term, though, the deal is a downer. It not only avoids dealing with today’s principal needs—job creation and economic growth—it actually will cost jobs and preclude any economic stimulation. At a time when clearly the economy is shaky, it is a mistake to declare, as the deal effectively does, that the federal government will have no direct hand in getting the economy moving. To meet next year’s target of spending reductions will require cuts equivalent to the budgets of all the following government operations combined: the EPA, the National Park Service, the Small Business Administration, FEMA emergency and firefighter grants, and the Women-Infants-and-Children food grants. In subsequent years, the cuts would be even ten times larger. Why should we rally to the cry, “No, We Can’t?” Have we forgotten that barely a decade ago we paid down the deficit with strong economic growth, job creation, and budgetary discipline without resorting to gimmicks, triggers, or Balanced Budget Amendments?

I would have liked to vote on a plan that protected the major functions granted to Congress under the Constitution rather than turning them over to an undemocratic, isolated committee of twelve. I would have liked to vote on a plan that would have accelerated withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, saving lives and dollars, and that would have produced savings in our healthcare costs and dealt with the looming loss of 30 percent of doctors’ reimbursement under Medicare. Instead, the plan that was presented was negotiated on the turf of the Tea Party, which seems to think that it is anti-capitalist to ask those individuals and companies doing well in this economy to bear some of the load, even though the one or two percent of people with the highest income have seen their income grow by about 25 percent while everyone else has seen an effective decline and America’s largest corporations have reaped immense profits by using loopholes and offshore tax havens to avoid paying taxes.

Nevertheless, I am making it my job to beat back the pessimistic view in Washington that gave rise to this deal. We must not let this deal be the chart of our country’s future course. It is based on false premises that fail to recognize the inherent fairness that is characteristic of our people, the ingenuity and entrepreneurial energy that have sparked our economy for generations, and the unshakable American meliorism that says we can and must make life better for each succeeding generation. I think that now, more than ever, we must have a realistic view of our situation so that we can strongly defend equality and build a community that reinforces the opportunities for each individual.


Sincerely,

RUSH HOLT
Member of Congress

Senator Menendez Votes Against Debt Deal

August 2, 2011

WASHINGTON – US Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) today voted against the debt deal because it lowers the deficit on the backs of working class Americans, demands no sacrifices from those who can best afford it, and could jeopardize our economy’s fragile recovery.


“I cannot in good conscience support a plan where soldiers, seniors, students, and working families must endure trillions in cuts, but oil companies, billionaires, and corporate jet owners are not asked to pay their fair share” said Senator Menendez. “I supported the Reid plan and previous efforts to reduce the deficit because I believe it’s important to stem our nation’s rising debt, but I believe that we must do so in a balanced way that calls for shared sacrifice, just as the American people have demanded. Such an unbalanced approach is not only unfair, but it could also jeopardize our already fragile economy.”


Senator Menendez took to the Senate floor yesterday to explain his opposition to the plan.

Lautenberg Stands Up for Everyday Families, Opposes Unfair Budget Deal

Tuesday, August 02, 2011

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) issued the following statement after voting against a deficit reduction deal that will cut trillions in funding for critical domestic programs:

“This legislation was a shakedown, not a compromise. Tea Party Republicans held our country hostage until their ideological demands were met, with little regard for what it will mean for the average American family. Our debt ceiling had to be raised – as was done 18 times under President Reagan and seven times under President George W. Bush – but it shouldn’t be done in a way that diminishes access to education and health care, a cleaner environment, or homeland security. Our country’s financial future must include a balanced approach of shared sacrifice; taking trillions from programs that help our children, seniors, and middle class, while asking for nothing more from the wealthy or corporations raking in record profits, is not the picture of a fair and democratic society. We must continue to work to reduce our deficits, but countries, like buildings, cannot be built from the top down without injuring the hope and morale of their people and destabilizing the strength of their foundations.”

Holt Statement Opposing Budget Control Act

Monday, 01 August 2011

(Washington, D.C.) – U.S. Rep. Rush Holt (NJ-12) today voted against S. 365, the Budget Control Act of 2011. He released the following statement after his vote:

“The default debate is, at its heart, a debate between two visions for America. One side envisions rebuilding our country, investing in jobs and education and infrastructure, and rising from the Great Recession as a stronger and more resilient nation. The other side accepts a pessimistic vision of a weakened America with a shrunken government – a nation hampered by deep cuts to the safety net and hobbled by a refusal to invest in our future.

“I have no doubt that, in a fair debate, a hopeful vision for America would win out. But the default debate has not been held on fair terms. The Tea Party and their enablers have held America hostage. They have insisted that, unless Congress enacted their radical, ideological agenda, they would force an unprecedented default on America’s obligations and thus trigger an economic collapse.

“From the beginning of this debate, I rejected the notion that America’s creditworthiness should be used as a bargaining chip. Yet I was willing to support a balanced, fair deal if that was what was required to prevent a default. Unfortunately, today’s deal is not balanced. It is not fair. Most of all, it is not right.

“The House has voted for vast cuts in government services that ordinary Americans depend on: student loans, unemployment insurance, food safety inspections, highway safety programs, and more. These cuts will force layoffs among teachers, public safety officers, construction workers, and more. These laid-off workers will, in turn, be forced to pare back their spending at their local grocery stores, drug stores, and small businesses, forcing still more layoffs – a vicious circle that threatens to destabilize our fragile economy. We saw in last week’s economic reports that job growth has been choked back by cuts in state and local governments. This deal does not help the situation. It hurts the economy.

“The deal lays the groundwork for another $1.5 trillion in cuts to come, to be negotiated behind closed doors by an unelected super-committee. Given that the first round of cuts will have decimated discretionary programs, these later cuts will very likely focus on Social Security and Medicare. The citizens who will be hurt most are those who have the least voice in our democracy. After all, when a handful of politicians gather in the proverbial smoke-filled room, the interests of ordinary Americans are nearly always left out.

“Yet although most Americans will sacrifice greatly, the most privileged among us will be immune. Favored corporate interests, millionaires, and billionaires will continue to receive special tax breaks as far as the eye can see. That is not the sort of fair, balanced deal that Americans asked for and expected.

“As poor as this deal is on its merits, I am even more troubled by the precedent it sets. The Tea Party and their enablers have, by taking the American economy hostage, transformed a routine budgetary authorization into the most dramatic reshaping of government in decades. Today’s deal establishes that government-by-hostage-negotiation is a legitimate, effective way to achieve one’s political ends. I am frightened by what this means for the future of our democracy.”

APP Editorial: Obama's stature compromised

The editorial below is from today's Asbury Park Press, needless to say I am in full agreement!

President Barack Obama has revealed himself to be a man unwilling to fight for the principles in which he has said he believed.

The protracted debt ceiling/deficit reduction battle reveals, more starkly than ever, this president’s inability to stand firm. The United States may avoid a default, but the battle will end not with a bang, but with a whimper. Sadly, this is now the defining moment of Obama’s presidency.

How many times during the last six months has Obama capitulated to the 80 unreasoning Tea Party members of the House of Representatives and their right-wing echo chamber on talk radio and cable TV?

First, he allowed the debt ceiling talks to be linked to deficit reduction, then he abandoned even the idea of revenue increases. He gave away the store and alienated his base, and still the radical fringe frames the debate, now by demanding more cuts and an unnecessary constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget, which would hamstring the government in the wake of major events. He could have stood up at any time, holding the 14th Amendment option in his pocket as a last resort. Now he just waits like the rest of us to see what happens next.

The president gave in and gave in, and he has lost whatever good will the great middle had for his attempt to be the rational one in the argument. Americans cannot respect a president who runs up the white flag of surrender.

And this obscene sausage-making is only the latest in a long line of appeasements: on health care, on Guantanamo Bay, on civilian trials for terror suspects.

We teach our children the fine art of compromise, but if you compromise away your values, you’ve lost something you cannot get back by barter.

We don’t want to elect some “philosopher-king” out of Plato. We want a leader with fire in his belly, who at least puts up an honest struggle based on core principles, who, in the words of Theodore Roosevelt, “spends himself in a worthy cause ... and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.”

So many thought that Barack Obama might be just that man. It looks as if we were wrong.