Showing posts with label obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label obama. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 23, 2010

Obama, Democrats Begin Reaping Political Benefits Of Reform


Obama, Democrats Begin Reaping Political Benefits Of Reform

Only hours after the president signed health care reform legislation into law on Tuesday, the immediate political benefits for the Democratic Party are already coming into focus.

According to a Gallup/USA Today poll conducted the day after health care legislation passed the House of Representatives, 49 percent of the respondents think the passage of reform is a "good thing," compared to the 40 percent who think it is bad. The numbers are a welcome relief for a party and a presidency that had been bleeding popular support over the course of the past six months.

Democrats didn't just get a health-care-related boost in the realm of public opinion. The Democratic National Committee reported raising more than $1 million in donations on Tuesday even without making a direct ask. The money is expected to pour in for other campaign committees as well.

Responding to the growing GOP effort to get the legislation repealed, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee launched a new fundraising toolbar on its website, pointing out which Republican senatorial candidates are ready to take away what particular benefits of reform.

Meanwhile, over at the White House the mood was downright jubilant. Days before health care reform passed, the consensus among top officials was that the president could survive a legislative defeat but the party would crumble around him. The polling numbers had risen a bit since Obama confronted House Republicans during their retreat at Baltimore in January. But they were still lethargic and a cause for concern.

More than anything else, a GOP victory would have crystallized the perception that the administration had squandered a historic opportunity to get business done; that Waterloo -- as Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) threatened -- had indeed happened.

And in that sense, Tuesday's signing ceremony was as much a celebration of the past year as a chance for the administration to breathe a bit easier. Speaking just hours after the president made health care reform the law of the land, David Axelrod -- Obama's closest senior strategist -- was asked about the edge of the precipice upon which this White House once stood.

Story continues below

"Someone said this might be your Waterloo," PBS's Charlie Rose asked. "What happened? You were Wellington and not Napoleon."

"Exactly," Axelrod replied. "I think it all worked out better than anyone anticipated. But way back in the spring, Senator DeMint said if we can just defeat Obama on health care, his presidency will be crippled, and that we'll benefit from that. We don't think that way. We want to move this country forward, and we're willing to work with them to do it."

Thursday, February 11, 2010

SnowMageddon Vets Storm Capital!



Paul Reickhoff, executive director of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, explains why President Barack Obama’s pledge to bring the troops home is not enough and why more focus needs to be placed on how to help them after they’re back in the U.S.


Washington (CNN) -- The blizzard that hit Washington couldn't have come at a worse time for a leading veterans group -- but the name for its legislative push this week is certainly fitting.
Despite the monster snowstorm, the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America organization is taking its Storm the Hill campaign directly to members of Congress and administration officials to push for veterans' rights.
Because of a fresh round of snowfall Tuesday night -- and the federal government being closed much of this week -- many of their meetings have been canceled or postponed.
Group founder and Executive Director Paul Rieckhoff, an Army veteran, said that despite "snowmageddon," they've been cracking away at the meetings that are still on.
He added that members are beyond determined to show up.
"We have a guy who came in from Michigan, who took four different planes to get here," he said. "Most of our folks have been through much worse than a blizzard, so they're able to handle this and keep driving on."

Thursday, November 12, 2009

Veterans Day / US Indirectly Funding the Taliban - Afghanistan

First off I want to take a moment to recognize Veterans Day, a day to remember all of our Troops. To remember them for their heroics, and their bravery to support our country!

The American Hero always comes through
To capture our hearts with a spirit so true Some proudly are soldiers who march in harm’s way
Insuring our freedom, courageous they stay While others come forth as civilians so brave
Determined in purpose, so steadfast to save We should always keep clear a place in our heart
For each has a value beyond precious art Their duty to country will not be surpassed
Please honor their courage, for some it’s their last We live in a world which can be hard to bear
Thank God for these people, how greatly they care Do ponder new heroes and what they will face
And pray for their safety no matter their place Our heritage brings out the best, we all know
Our great book of heroes is destined to grow. ©2003Roger J. Robicheau


Now onto the question: Should we be sending our brave troops into a war that may not have a victory to attain?


As US Ambassador Casts Doubt on Troop Increase in Afghanistan, New Report Reveals US Indirectly Funding the Taliban

In a last-minute dissent ahead of a critical war cabinet meeting on escalating the Afghan war, US Ambassador Karl Eikenberry has cast doubt on a troop escalation until the Afghan government can address corruption and other internal problems. Meanwhile, a report reveals how the US government is financing the very same insurgent forces in Afghanistan that American and NATO soldiers are fighting. Investigative journalist Aram Roston traces how the Pentagon’s civilian contractors in Afghanistan end up paying insurgent groups to protect American supply routes from attack.


The U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan is warning against sending more troops to fight in the Afghan war. In a last-minute dissent, Ambassador Karl Eikenberry sent two cables this week casting doubt on a troop escalation until the Afghan government can address corruption and other internal problems.

Well today we turn to a new report that reveals how the US government is financing the very same insurgent forces in Afghanistan that American and NATO soldiers are fighting.
“How the US Funds the Taliban” is the cover story of the latest issue of the Nation magazine.

Investigative journalist Aram Roston traces how the Pentagon’s civilian contractors in Afghanistan end up paying insurgent groups to protect American supply routes from attack. The practice of buying the Taliban’s protection is not a secret. US military officials in Kabul told Roston that a minimum of 10 percent of the Pentagon"s logistics contracts consists of payments to the Taliban.

That translates into millions of dollars being funneled to the Taliban. This summer, anticipating a surge of US troops, the military expanded its trucking contracts in Afghanistan by 600 percent to a total of over two billion dollars.

Well, Aram Roston joins us now here in the firehouse studio. He"s the author of the book “The man who pushed America to War: The Life, Adventures, and Obsessions of Ahmad Chalabi.” His latest piece “How the US Funds the Taliban” was supported by the investigative fund at the Nation institute.


Aram Roston, Investigative journalist and author of The Man Who Pushed America to War: The Life, Adventures, and Obsessions of Ahmad Chalabi. He’s written the cover story in the latest issue of The Nation magazine, “How the US Funds the Taliban.”

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

CIA Paying off Afghan Drug Dealer....


WASHINGTON Ahmed Wali Karzai, the brother of the president of Afghanistan, gets regular payments from the CIA and has for much of the past eight years, The New York Times reported Tuesday.

The newspaper said that according to current and former American officials, the CIA pays Karzai for a variety of services, including helping to recruit an Afghan paramilitary force that operates at the CIA's direction in and around Kandahar.

The CIA's ties to Karzai, who is a suspected player in the country's illegal opium trade, have created deep divisions within the Obama administration, the Times said.

Allegations that Karzai is involved in the drug trade have circulated in Kabul for months. He denies them.

Critics say the ties with Karzai complicate the United States' increasingly tense relationship with his older brother, President Hamid Karzai. The CIA's practices also suggest that the United States is not doing everything in its power to stamp out the lucrative Afghan drug trade, a major source of revenue for the Taliban.

Some American officials argue that the reliance on Ahmed Wali Karzai, a central figure in the south of the country where the Taliban is dominant, undermines the U.S. push to develop an effective central government that can maintain law and order and eventually allow the United States to withdraw.

"If we are going to conduct a population-centric strategy in Afghanistan, and we are perceived as backing thugs, then we are just undermining ourselves," Maj. Gen. Michael T. Flynn, the senior American military intelligence official in Afghanistan, was quoted by the Times in an article published on its Web site.

Ahmed Wali Karzai told the Times that he cooperates with American civilian and military officials but does not engage in the drug trade and does not receive payments from the CIA.

Karzai helps the CIA operate a paramilitary group, the Kandahar Strike Force, that is used for raids against suspected insurgents and terrorists, according to several American officials. Karzai also is paid for allowing the CIA and American Special Operations troops to rent a large compound outside the city, which also is the base of the Kandahar Strike Force, the Times said.

Karzai also helps the CIA communicate with and sometimes meet with Afghans loyal to the Taliban, the newspaper reported.

CIA spokesman George Little declined to comment on the report.



Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/27/karzais-brother-on-cia-pa_n_336279.html

Sunday, October 11, 2009

SickForProfit Insurance!



Netting $2.5 billion in profits last year wasn't enough for WellPoint, the nation's largest insurance company.
Now, WellPoint's affiliate, Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield, is suing the state of Maine for refusing to guarantee it a profit margin in the midst of a painful recession.

Bernie Sanders Keeps it Real on Afghanistan



Sen. Bernie Sanders: President Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts to reduce nuclear arms, ease tensions with the non-Western world and stress diplomacy. Americans should be proud that we have a president who is restoring respect for our country around the globe. This well-deserved prize is an inspiration for the president and for rest of us to do some really hard thinking about how we create a more peaceful and just world -- including our role in Afghanistan. We are now in our ninth year in Afghanistan -- twice as long as were engaged in World War II. We have lost more than 800 troops. We have spent more than $200 billion. What do we hope to accomplish in Afghanistan? What is our exit strategy?

Tuesday, September 22, 2009

Protect Insurance Companies??




In a satiric video from Funny or Die, Will Ferrell, Jon Hamm, Olivia Wilde, and other celebs band together to "protect" insurance company profits from the evils of health care reform.

"People are saying a lot of mean things about health insurance companies and their executives and it's gotta stop," pleads Thomas Lennon.

"These great business men are American heroes," says Linda Cardellini.

"So why is Obama trying to reform health care when insurance companies are doing just fine making billions of dollars in profit?" Will Ferrell asks.

Funny or Die has history of using celebrities and humor to take a stance on political issues. Last year they released "Prop 8: The Musical" starring Jack Black, Neil Patrick Harris, Margaret Cho, and more satirizing the push for a ban on gay marriage in California.

This "Insurance PSA," paid for by and produced with MoveOn.org, ends with a call to action, asking people to call their congressmen and tell them we need a strong public option.




Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/22/protect-insurance-compani_n_294406.html

Wednesday, September 16, 2009

Joe Wilson Voted for Illegal coverage!


On Wednesday night, Rep. Joe Wilson [R, SC-2], shouted “You lie!” at President Obama when he said that the healthcare bill would not cover illegal immigrants. “The supporters of the government takeover of healthcare and liberals who want to give healthcare to illegals are using my opposition as an excuse to distract from the critical questions being raised about this poorly conceived plan,” Wilson said the next day in a campaign fundraising video.

However, in 2003, Wilson voted to provide federal funds for illegal immigrants’ healthcare. The vote came on the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003, which contained Sec. 1011 authorizing $250,000 annually between 2003 and 2008 for government reimbursements to hospitals who provide treatment for uninsured illegal immigrants. The program has been extended through 2009 and there is currently a bipartisan bill in Congress to make it permanent.


Hospitals have a legal obligation to treat everyone who comes in seeking care, regardless of citizenship status, insurance or other characteristics. This means that hospitals treat millions of people every year who don’t have the means to pay. Obviously, this drives up the nation’s healthcare costs overall. Section 1011 helps cushion the costs for hospitals, but it’s not nearly enough to cover the actual costs in most areas.


To be fair, Section 1011 is just a small part of a much larger bill that contained many Republican priorities. Still, Wilson’s protest against the current healthcare reform proposal giving coverage to illegal immigrants (which is false), is in direct contradiction to his 2003 vote. Allowing illegal immigrants to purchase unsubsidized healthcare through the Exchange that would be set up under the current proposal wouldn’t cost taxpayers a cent, and it would be a step towards fixing the problem that Section 1011 was designed to throw federal money at.

Monday, August 31, 2009

George Will calls for pull-out


George Will calls for pull-out
By: Mike Allen
August 31, 2009 04:46 PM EST

George F. Will, the elite conservative commentator, will call in his next column for U.S. ground troops to leave Afghanistan, according to publishing sources.

“[F]orces should be substantially reduced to serve a comprehensively revised policy: America should do only what can be done from offshore, using intelligence, drones, cruise missiles, airstrikes and small, potent special forces units, concentrating on the porous 1,500-mile border with Pakistan, a nation that actually matters,” Will writes in the column, scheduled for publication later this week.

President Obama ordered a total of 21,000 more U.S. troops into Afghanistan in February and March, and casualties have mounted as the forces began confronting the Taliban more aggressively. August saw the highest monthly death toll for the U.S. since the invasion in 2001, the second record month in a row.

Will’s prescription – in which he urges Obama to remember Bismarck’s decision to halt German forces short of Paris in 1870 - seems certain to split Republicans. He is a favorite of fiscal conservatives. The more hawkish right can be expected to attack his conclusion as foolhardy, short-sighted and naïve, potentially making the U.S. more vulnerable to terrorist attack.

The columnist’s startling recommendation surfaced on the same day that Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, sent an assessment up his chain of command recommending what he called “a revised implementation strategy.” In a statement, McChrystal also called for “commitment and resolve, and increased unity of effort.”

In the column, Will warns that any nation-building strategy could be impossible to execute given the Taliban’s ability to seemingly disappear into the rugged mountain terrain and the lack of economic development in the war-plagued nation.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates was asked Monday by Peter Cook of Bloomberg TV: “Are we winning in Afghanistan?”

“I think it's a mixed picture in Afghanistan,” Gates replied. “I think that there aren’t too many people with too rosy a view of what's going on in Afghanistan. I think there are many challenges. But I think some of the gloom and doom is somewhat overdrawn as well. … I think that there are some positive developments. But there is no question our casualties are up and there's no question we have a very tough fight in front of us, a lot of challenges.”

Monday, August 24, 2009

Monday, June 15, 2009

Republican calls Michelle Obama an APE!


COLUMBIA, S.C. -- A Republican activist in South Carolina is under fire for comments he made on Facebook about First Lady Michelle Obama.

The story first hit the blog FitsNews.com Saturday night with a headline reading "SCGOP Activist Posts Remark Disparaging First Lady."

Rusty Depass is a former state Senate candidate and a former State Election Commission chairman.

The article showed an entry Depass posted on Facebook commenting on a gorilla that escaped from Riverbanks Zoo.

It said, "I'm sure it's just one of Michelle's ancestors -- probably harmless."

Depass said he was talking about the first lady.

Bob Coble, mayor of Columbia and one of Depass' political rivals, condemned the comment.

"You know, I think the comment is inappropriate," Coble said. "It's a racist comment. I think Mr. Depass should apologize."

Depass spoke with WYFF News 4 over the phone Saturday night.

"I am as sorry as I can be if I offended anyone," he said. "The comment was clearly in jest."

"I don't think there's anything funny about that comment," Coble said. "That is the first lady of the United States. We've had a long tradition of wonderful first ladies, and I don't think any of them deserve that type of comment."

Depass took his apology a bit further.

"The comment was hers, not mine," he said.

He said the first lady made statements in the media recently, saying humans are all descendants of apes. A Google search WYFF made on the topic turned up no news articles of the like.

"I don't know of any," Coble said.

The mayor said he wants a clear-cut apology.

"Rusty Depass is well-known in the community, and I know he's done very good things in addition to his political work," Coble said. "I don't want a comment like that coming out of Columbia, S.C., for the world to comment on."

So far, the White House has not commented on Depass' posting.

Monday, June 1, 2009

Obama's 736 Million Dollar Embassy





Ah, good thing the US quest for violent global domination was brought to a screeching halt with the November presidential election. Without Obama’s election, we’d still have an occupation of Iraq, mercenaries on the US payroll, torture of prisoners, an unending and worsening war that kills civilians in Afghanistan, regular airstrikes in Pakistan, killing civilians and an embassy the size of Vatican city in Baghdad, which was built in part on slave labor. Not to mention those crazy “Bush/Cheney” neocons running around trying to become the “CEOs” of foreign nations. Wow, glad that’s all over. Whew! And, it’s a really good thing Bush is no longer in power or else the US would come up with some crazy idea like building a colonial fortress in Pakistan to defend “US interests” in the region.



From McClatchy:


The White House has asked Congress for — and seems likely to receive — $736 million to build a new U.S. embassy in Islamabad, along with permanent housing for U.S. government civilians and new office space in the Pakistani capital.


The scale of the projects rivals the giant U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, which was completed last year after construction delays at a cost of $740 million.


[…]


Other major projects are planned for Kabul, Afghanistan; and for the Pakistani cities of Lahore and Peshawar. In Peshawar, the U.S. government is negotiating the purchase of a five-star hotel that would house a new U.S. consulate.


[…]


In Pakistan, however, large parts of the population are hostile to the U.S. presence in the region — despite receiving billions of dollars in aid from Washington since 2001 — and anti-American groups and politicians are likely to seize on the expanded diplomatic presence in Islamabad as evidence of American “imperial designs.”


“This is a replay of Baghdad,” said Khurshid Ahmad, a member of Pakistan’s upper house of parliament for Jamaat-e-Islami, one of the country’s two main religious political parties. “This (Islamabad embassy) is more (space) than they should need. It’s for the micro and macro management of Pakistan, and using Pakistan for pushing the American agenda in Central Asia.”


(Also on Rebel Reports)

Wednesday, April 29, 2009

100 Day's completed..... 63% grade


I have to say I'm extremely happy that the first 100 days are done, hopefully now people can do a little less scrutinizing of every move. There are still alot of things up in the air, but with so many open issues I think a 63% approval rating is pretty good..... Economy, Mexico Borders, Pandemic, Missiles being launched, Israel & Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan Nuclear issues, Iran, Cuba bans, housing markets.....etc.


WASHINGTON (CNN) – As Barack Obama marks his 100th day in office, an average of
the most recent national polls indicates that more than six in ten Americans
approve of the job Obama's doing as president.

According to a CNN Poll
of Polls compiled early Wednesday, 63 percent say they approve of how Obama's
handling his duties as president. Twenty nine percent disapprove. The 63 percent
figure is down three points from CNN's previous Poll of Polls, which was
compiled Sunday.

The president's approval rating stood at 64 percent in
a CNN poll of polls in January, just after his inauguration

"The number
of Americans who think Obama has the right personal qualities to be president
has gone up since the campaign last fall," says CNN Polling Director Keating
Holland. "That wasn't true for George W. Bush eight years ago, and it may be one
reason why Obama's approval rating is still in the 60s."

So how does
Obama compare to his predecessors in the White House around the first 100 days
mark?


George W. Bush stood at 62 percent in a CNN/USA Today/Gallup
poll in April 2001, Bill Clinton was at 55 percent in a CNN/USA Today/Gallup
poll in April 1993, George H.W. Bush stood at 58 percent in a Gallup poll from
April 1989, and Ronald Reagan was at 67 percent in a Gallup poll taken in April
1981.

"The hundred-day mark tends to fall during a period when Americans
are still evaluating a new president. The danger period for most presidents
comes later in their first year in office," Holland says. "Bill Clinton, for
example, still had good marks after his first hundred days, but his approval
rating had tanked by June of 1993. Ronald Reagan's approval rating stayed over
50 percent until November of his first year in office, but once it slipped below
that mark, it stayed under 50 percent for two years. So Obama's current rating
certainly does not indicate that he is out of the woods yet."

The most
recent edition of the CNN Poll of Polls is an average of seven national surveys
taken over the past week: CNN/Opinion Research Corporation (April 23-26),
ABC/Washington Post (April 21-24), Fox/Opinion Dynamics (April 22-23), CBS/New
York Times (April 22-26), Marist (April 21-23), Quinnipiac (April 21-27) and the
Gallup tracking poll (April 25-27).

The Poll of Polls does not have a
sampling error.

Tuesday, April 21, 2009

With All Due Respect...Get the F@cK Outta here!

With All Due Respect (Now Remember I said that first) Can we please stop with the pettiness of who blames who for what and have a Damn Meeting about stuff that's important.....

I mean OK so now we don't go to a racism conference because the wording implies that somehow and someway Israel might be wrong for what again....

OH BOMBING THE HOLY CRAP OUT OF PALESTINE....

But we can have a president shake Russia's leader hand right after an altercation, or we can talk about peacing it up with all of our enemies, but Israel's skin isn't thick enough to take a sentence in a document, as criticism....

Isn't that the damn point of the meeting...how can you talk about racism if you won't show and we won't go because the criteria may put you in that category, fucking come and clear the shit up if your not wrong...... Obama, and administration, please untuck your tails from between your legs and go Represent...AMERICA! Now remember I did say with all due respect......


Despite efforts to rephrase the language in a rough draft conference
document, the Obama administration has confirmed its decision to boycott "with
regret" this week's World Conference Against Racism in Geneva. The
administration believes the final text draft could potentially isolate Israel
and that it compromises free speech, the State Department said Saturday.

The World Conference Against Racism, also known as Durban II, ignited a
firestorm of controversy when the Obama administration initially said it would
boycott the event in February of this year, after the original conference essay
was released. As reported by The Washington Post, the document was 45 pages and
is believed by White House officials to be instigating racial hatred and
perpetuating anti-Semitism. The text contained the term,
"validation of Islamophobia" alleging Israel's treatment of
the Palestinians is racially motivated and also calls for reparations for
slavery.

As a result of the Obama administrations disapproval, the
preliminary content had been edited to remove negative statements towards
Israel, condensed and revised. Despite the language compromises the
administration remained hesitant to attend, sparking fury among civil advocacy
groups who believe the first black U.S. president should make a point to be
present.

Imani Countess, Senior Director for public
affairs at TransAfrica Forum, an advocacy group whose
focal point is U.S. foreign policy, said "for his administration not to be
present at this global conversation is a disappointment. For President Bush not
to participate, that would have been expected. For Barack Obama's administration not
to participate sends a disappointing signal. It says these issues are not
important."

Department spokesman Robert Wood said the administration was
"deeply grateful" for the revisions that were made, however, the document is
still believed to contain problematic language and references.

"Unfortunately, it now seems certain these remaining concerns will not
be addressed in the document to be adopted by the conference next week," Wood
said. "Therefore, with regret, the United States will not join the review
conference."

In spite of the decision, Wood emphasized that the U.S. "is
profoundly committed to ending racism and racial discrimination" and "will work
with all people and nations to build greater resolve and enduring political will
to halt racism and discrimination wherever it occurs."

Conversely,
Democratic State Representative of California Barbara Lee, who is a chair member
of the Black caucus said the group is "deeply dismayed."

"This decision
is inconsistent with the administration's policy of engaging with those we agree
with and those we disagree with," Lee said. "By boycotting Durban, the U.S. is
making it more difficult for it to play a leadership role on U.N. Human Rights
Council as it states it plans to do. This is a missed opportunity, plain and
simple."

The new draft was created to reverse the administrations
decision not to attend and was believed to have appeased the president's
objections. However, the changes were inadequate and failed to gain Obama's approval.

"This is a big blow," Countess said. "Given the high priority the
administration places on international engagement and multilateralism, this is just a little bit
baffling."

Friday, February 13, 2009

Stimulus: How it may affect your wallet


http://money.cnn.com/2009/02/13/news/economy/stimulus_individuals/index.htm
By Jeanne Sahadi, CNNMoney.com senior writer
Last Updated: February 13, 2009: 9:20 AM ET

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Key lawmakers in the Senate and House have reached a compromise on a final economic recovery package.

The new stated topline price tag: $789.5 billion. That's below both the $820 billion House-passed version and the $838 billion Senate-passed version.

The compromises that the House, Senate and White House made have changed the scope of a number of provisions, including those affecting individuals directly. In some cases, they either reduced or expanded a benefit relative to what appeared in the Senate or House versions of the bill.

Here's a look at some of the provisions that will have a direct effect on individuals in their paychecks, on their tax returns, and with regard to their unemployment benefits and health insurance if they've lost a job.

The information below is based on materials put out by the key committees in the House and Senate as well as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.

Making Work Pay Credit: The bill provides a $400 credit per worker and a $800 credit per dual-earner couple. The full credit would be paid to people making $75,000 or less ($150,000 per dual-earner couple). A partial credit would be paid to those making above those amounts but no more than $100,000 ($200,000 for couples).

The credit would also be refundable, which means that even very low-income families who don't make enough to owe income tax would be able to claim it.

For most working individuals, the credit will be paid over time at roughly $15 per period, assuming 26 pay periods in a year. Estimated cost: $116 billion.

One-time payments to those who don't work: For retirees, disabled individuals and others who don't work, the bill provides a one-time $250 payment. Estimated cost: $14.2 billion.

Break for higher income families: The bill includes a one-year provision to protect middle- and upper-middle-income families from having to pay the Alternative Minimum Tax. The AMT was intended primarily for high-income taxpayers but has in recent years threatened to engulf those lower down the income scale. Estimated cost: $70 billion.

Temporary deduction for car buyers: The bill would let those who buy a new car, light vehicle, recreational vehicle or motorcycle in 2009 deduct state and local sales taxes as well as any excise tax charged in the purchase. The deduction would be available to those earning less than $125,000 ($250,000 for joint filers). It will be an above-the-line deduction, meaning even taxpayers who don't itemize may take it in addition to the standard deduction. Estimated cost:$1.7 billion.

Temporary credit for home buyers: The bill increases the size of an existing temporary and refundable first-time home buyer credit to $8,000, up from $7,500. It also removes the requirement under current law that the credit be paid back if the buyer stays in the home for at least three years. And it would extend the credit's expiration date to Dec. 1, 2009, from July 1. Those eligible for this credit must have purchased a home after Jan. 1, 2009, and before Dec. 1, 2009.

The full credit is available to those making $75,000 or less ($150,000 for joint filers). Estimated cost: $6.6 billion.

New temporary college credit: The bill introduces the American Opportunity Tax Credit, which would be in effect for 2009 and 2010. It expands the existing Hope Scholarship tax credit and would be worth as much as $2,500 for higher education expenses, up from $1,800 currently.

The full credit would be available to those making less than $80,000 ($160,000 for joint filers). Those making between those amounts and $90,000 ($180,000 for joint filers) would get a partial credit. And the break would also be partially refundable, meaning lower income families with little or no tax liability could now claim some of the credit. Estimated cost: $13.9 billion.

Temporary Pell Grant increase: The bill increases the maximum Pell Grant by $500 to $5,350 in 2009 and $5,550 in 2010. Estimated cost: $15.6 billion.

Temporary expansion of child tax credit: The bill increases eligibility for the child tax credit by lowering the income threshold that must be met for the credit to be refundable. The threshold would be lowered to$3,000 for this year and next. That will allow lower income families to claim more of the credit than under current law. Estimated cost: $14.8 billion.

Temporary increase in earned income tax credit: The credit will be temporarily increased to 45% from 40% of qualifying earnings for low-income families with three or more children. It also includes a marriage penalty relief provision for couples who qualify for at least a portion of the credit. Estimated cost: $4.6 billion.

Direct lifeline benefits
Health insurance help for the jobless: The bill includes provisions to help eligible jobless workers pay for health insurance under Cobra. Cobra coverage allows newly unemployed workers to keep health insurance provided by their former employers for a period of time.

For workers who have been laid off between Sept. 1, 2008, and Dec. 31, 2009, the government will subsidize 65% of their premiums under Cobra for up to 9 months.

Those people laid off between Sept. 1, 2008, and the day the stimulus law goes into effect, and who did not sign up for Cobra, will get an additional 60 days to do so and receive the subsidy.

The subsidy will be limited to those whose income for the year is $125,000 or less ($250,000 for couples filing jointly). Estimated cost: $24.7 billion.

Another provision provides states funding to help pay for expanded Medicaid rolls for workers who've lost their jobs and can't afford health care on their own or can't get Cobra coverage because their former employer doesn't offer a health care plan. Estimated cost: $87 billion.

Unemployment benefits: The bill provides jobless workers with an additional 20 weeks in unemployment benefits, and 13 weeks on top of that if they live in what's deemed a high unemployment state, of which there are now about 30. Estimated cost: $27 billion.

In addition, the weekly unemployment benefit will temporarily increase by $25 on top of the roughly $300 jobless workers currently receive. Estimated cost: $8.8 billion.

Plus, the first $2,400 of benefits in 2009 would be exempt from federal income taxes. Estimated cost: $4.7 billion.

Food stamp payments: The bill includes a provision would increase food stamp payments by 13.6%, so a family of four would see an additional $80 on top of the $588 per month they receive currently. Estimated cost: $19.9 billion.

The bill also provides assistance to help local groups providing food and shelter, elderly nutrition services such as Meals on Wheels, and a program to help food banks re-stock their shelves. Estimated cost: $350 million.

Other help for needy families: The bill provides funding to states to create a contingency fund through 2010 for the welfare program called Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, which provides cash assistance to the needy. Estimated cost: $2.4 billion.

First Published: February 13, 2009: 5:38 AM ET

Monday, December 22, 2008

Smart People in Charge of Science....now that's Novel....


Picking the best people for the tech and science positions, seems almost too smart for a President of the United States to do.... But that's what's happening under an Obama administration...



(CNN) — President-elect Barack Obama named his science and technology team Saturday with a pledge to ensure that “facts and evidence are never twisted or obscured by politics or ideology.”



“It’s time we once again put science at the top of our agenda and worked to restore America’s place as the world leader in science and technology,” he said in his Saturday radio address, in an apparent offhand swipe at President Bush.



“It’s about listening to what our scientists have to say, even when it’s inconvenient – especially when it’s inconvenient,” Obama said, adding that government support had been essential for the greatest scientific breakthroughs of recent history, like the development of the Internet.


“Because the highest purpose of science is the search for knowledge, truth and a greater understanding of the world around us."



Obama announced that Harvard University professor John Holdren will serve as assistant to the President for Science and Technology and Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. Environmental scientist and marine ecologist Jane Lubchenco of Oregon State University was his pick for administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.



The president-elect also named Nobel Prize-winning Harold Varmus, a former Director of the National Institutes of Health, and Eric Lander of MIT and Harvard, a leader of the Human Genome Project, as co-chairs of the Council of Advisors on Science and Technology.

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

Terrorist Fist Jab yo Ass outta here!



TV Newser has learned that Fox News anchor E.D. Hill is leaving the channel after her contract was not renewed:



TVNewser has learned veteran Fox News Channel anchor E.D. Hill will not be renewed when her current contract expires. Hill, who has been with Fox News for more than 10 years, will continue with the network for the next few months until her current deal expires.



SVP of Programming Bill Shine tells TVNewser that he "chose not to renew E.D.'s latest contract" but noted that "Hill has been a valued contributor to the success of FNC over the years, and we wish her all the best."



Hill gained notoriety several months ago when she referred to the "pound," "fist bump," or whatever you want to call the handshake that Barack Obama exchanged with his wife Michelle as a "terrorist fist jab."

Wednesday, November 5, 2008

Monday, November 3, 2008

One More Day.....8 Years in the making....




A letter from Michael Moore....




Friends,



Tomorrow.



All of us.



You, me, and everyone we know.



Eight years is enough. Eight weeks was enough.



We have a chance to redeem this country, to prove we're better than this, that which Bush has made of us.



McCain is right about one thing: Barack Obama is the most liberal senator in the United States Senate. More liberal than Ted Kennedy. When was the last time you had a chance to send the MOST liberal senator to the White House? Trust me, it won't happen again in our lifetime.
Every vote is critical -- even in hard red states like Texas and Alabama; and true blue ones like New York, California and Michigan. Tomorrow, we need to create a massive popular vote that will give Obama a stunning mandate to return this country to we, the people. Let's write one for the history books and rocket Obama into the White House.





Expect trouble tomorrow. Stand your ground. Don't let some clerk turn you away. Make noise. Call the media if they won't let you vote. Let the Obama camp know. Check out his Voter Protection Center. Know where your polling place is.




Be careful inside the voting booth. The ballot still reads like a Sudoku puzzle. Be prepared for long lines. That's ok, you know how to bring the party with you! Make new friends. Plot your local revolution. The 28-year rule of Republicans (and Democrats who act like Republicans) is over. The Reagan Era dies tomorrow night. My God, I truly thought it would never end.



There are over a million of you on my list. Each of you know 5 or 10 people who may not vote. Offer to drive them to the polls. If they live across the country, call them and tell them how much it means to you that they go vote for Obama. Take your co-workers to lunch -- and to vote. Be creative. Come up with ways to convince the undecided to get their decided on and go vote. Make it fun. Lead the horse to water.



60 seats in the Senate!
30-seat increase in the House!
President Obama!



It's in your hands.




The Promised Land.


Yours,


Michael Moore