Home Blog Page 2425

Video: Bush Communications Director Says Romney “wreaks” of “bitterness”; “hard to watch”

By
lowkell
-
1

Other than the fact that Romney “wreaks” of “bitterness,” he also wreaks of more substantive things as well. For instance, he continues to insidiously blame “minorities” – and specifically those “minorities”‘ supposed love of getting government handouts – for his crushing loss to Barack Obama in November. Willard also continues the pathological lying we saw throughout his campaign, in this case denying that he said…exactly what he said, or that he meant what he clearly meant, about the “47%.”

The problem for Republicans, and more distressingly for the country, is that this isn’t just about Romney’s failings as a human being and as a presidential candidate, but also about fundamental problems with the entire Republican ideology, approach, attitude, party dynamics, etc.  Basically, this GOP once was a reasonable, mainstream, middle-of-the-road party that believed in freedom and personal responsibility, but also a strong if limited government (of course, we all believe in a “limited government,” unless we’re Kim Jong Un or whatever). Today, in stark contrast, it’s an angry, bitter, John Birch Society-style party of people unable and/or unwilling to deal with reality, or with the fact that America is changing – demographics, economics, attitudes, etc. – and not in their direction. It’s also a party filled with no-compromise absolutists and extremists, who’d rather tear the whole country down rather than compromise one inch on any of their hard-right-wing principles.

You can see all that here in Virginia, with the livid, over-the-top, almost crazed reaction by the teahadists at Bob McDonnell, Bill Howell, etc. on the recently-passed transportation tax hike/Medicaid expansion compromise. We see it in the exclusion of mainstream, traditional conservatives like Bill Bolling (and Tom Davis, plus anyone resembling a John Chichester or Russ Potts) from the Virginia Republican Party. And, of course in the rise of loony-tunes like Ken Kookinelli, Mark Obenshain, and most of the LG candidates (Jeannemarie Davis is just pretending to be hard right, as she was always a liberal/moderate Republican to her core). It’s people like this who have brought us “trans-vaginal ultrasounds,” opposition to contraception and women’s rights, hostility towards LGBT Virginians (e.g., the rejection last year of Tracy Thorne-Begland for a judgeship), the war on voting rights, an extreme anti-environment and pro-fossil-fuels stance, an agenda on guns that is wildly different from what the vast majority of Americans want, and on and on. If you want more of this, then by all means vote Republican next November. If you want the current version of the Republican Party to ditch the extremists, cranks, and lunatics and return to its once-great roots, then send them a message in November by voting Democratic. Then do that again in 2014, 2016, and thereafter until they get the message. It’s that simple.

Virginia News Headlines: Monday Morning

By
lowkell
-
0

Here are a few Virginia (and national) news headlines, political and otherwise, for Monday, March 4. Also, watch out for the storm they’re calling “Snowquester.” I know…lame!

*Sequester: 3 scenarios for what’s next

*Mitt Romney: ‘It kills me’ not to be president (Fortunately, it makes the majority of the country VERY happy!)

*Romney: I Lost Because Minorities Love Obamacare (And it’s headlines like this one that help explain WHY we’re so happy Willard lost.)

*GOP’s Largest Campaign Contributor Admits To Bribing Foreign Officials (Shocker, huh?)

*After roads deal, Virginia Gov. McDonnell faces Republican identity crisis (It’s a sign of how much the Republicans have lurched to the right that McDonnell faces an “identity crisis,” given that their hero, Ronald Reagan, raised taxes repeatedly, signed a mass amnesty for “illegal immigrants,” exploded federal spending and the budget deficit, “cut and run” from Lebanon, etc, etc.)

*Can Climate-Change Denier Ken Cuccinelli Win a Swing State? (“In storm-battered Virginia, the Republican candidate for governor still doubts the science.”)

*Bill Bolling’s Bubble May Burst

*Pragmatism needed on health care reform (“Virginia has been a leader in Medicaid reform, but it will fall behind if it resists a proposed expansion  of the insurance program.”)

*McAuliffe among top Obama fundraisers

*Fairfax County’s global offices help lure hundreds of foreign companies

*Virginia seeks to become test site for drones, but also may ban them

*VDOT announces $34 million technology upgrade for I-66

*Friar accused of molestation taught at Norfolk school

*D.C. area forecast: A calm Monday, big winter storm possible Wednesday, weekend warm-up

A Few Elements of a Progressive “Grand Bargain” on the Budget

By
lowkell
-
2

Multiple news reports, as well as comments on this morning’s talk shows, are indicating the potential exists for a bipartisan “grand bargain” on a long-term deficit reduction deal. Reuters quotes White House senior economic official Gene Sperling that President Obama is “reaching out to Democrats who understand we have to make serious progress on long-term entitlement reform and Republicans who realize that if we had that type of entitlement reform, they’d be willing to have tax reform that raises revenues to lower the deficit.” For its part, Roll Call reports that a long-term deficit reduction bargain “could blunt the effects of the $85 billion in automatic spending cuts now in place.”

I have no idea how serious any of this is, but it’s certainly sounding live a live possibility. With that in mind, I’ve got a few thoughts on what might constitute a progressive “grand bargain,” one that would not just reduce the long-term, structural deficit, but also move our country forward and allow us to move on to other, pressing issues.

1. Far from slashing non-defense discretionary spending, we need to be drastically increasing our investment in America – both its physical capital and “human capital.” That means restoring full funding to programs which help educate our people (not just kids, but lifetime learning), massively upgrade our transportation and power grids, kick-start the transition to a clean energy economy, invest in cutting-edge research and development, and basically put money into anything that provides a positive ROI (return on investment) to our nation. It’s important to emphasize that although many people confuse “spending” and “investment,” they’re actually quite different, as “investment” results in stronger economic growth and, in many/most cases, more revenue into the system than has gone out for the investments.

2. We need to raise revenues. Badly (note: current tax revenues are the lowest as a share of GDP “in more than 60 years). To do this, we don’t have to raise tax rates (although I would have gotten rid of the Bush tax cuts for anyone who’s not truly “middle class” or below). Instead, we can do it by slashing tax expenditures. As David Brooks writes, “[t]hese tax expenditures are hidden but huge…in 2007, they amounted to $600 billion.” These expenditures include the exclusion for employer-sponsored health care ($171 billion a year), the mortgage interest deduction ($87 billion), and preferential treatment of capital gains ($66 billion). Then there are all the wasteful subsidies, on things like corn-based ethanol and fossil fuels, which add up to tens of billions of dollars per year. It goes on and on, and basically blows a huge hole in the budget, while making the tax code overly complicated, and also wildly unfair. So…simply the tax code, eliminate, or at least pare back, a lot of these tax expenditures – especially for wealthy corporations and individuals. This idea should have appeal to both Democrats and Republicans.

3. A truly progressive “grand bargain” would shift the tax code so that we are making the things we want to have less of (e.g, pollution) more expensive, while making the things we want to have more of (e.g., productive investment) less expensive. On this front, the Washington Post (of all people) nailed it this morning in its editorial calling for a carbon tax. As the Post points out, this would accomplish multiple goals: reducing carbon emissions, reducing the deficit, allowing for cuts in taxes that discourage investment in the US, etc. This one’s a no brainer.

4. There’s no doubt in my mind that we need to reform entitlements, which increasingly are taking over our entire budget (turning us into an “insurance company with an army,” as the quip goes). Clearly, we need to maintain a social safety net, and clearly we need to protect benefits for people who really need them. But we also need a lot more stringent “means testing” on entitlements so that we’re not essentially transferring money from young people (and the future) to well-to-do/rich retired people who really don’t need all that money. While we’re at it, we need to raise the cap on the payroll tax, which exempts wages over $110,000 from the tax. Why someone making $100 million a year should only be subject to the payroll tax on the first $110,000 of their income, while the remaining $99,890,000 is not subject to the payroll tax, makes no sense to me.

Anyway, those are just a few ideas, not a comprehensive plan. That’s nuts. Still, it seems to me that if we did these things, we’d slash and/or completely eliminate the deficit, simplify our tax code, strengthen our nation’s future, protect our environment, and reduce the massive inter-generational inequities in our current system. We also would be able to move on from this debilitating debate/self-generated crises over the deficit, and get back to a focus on creating jobs, building a 21st century economy that’s “built to last,” and dealing with the many other issues – immigration reform, guns, you name it – that have languished over the past few years.

P.S. It should go without saying that we should NOT be doing brain-dead, across-the-board cuts to the tiny slice of the budget known as non-defense discretionary spending. We also should do nothing that would hurt anyone who is truly in need, or that shreds our social safety net (we should be strengthening that for decades to come).

Virginia News Headlines: Sunday Morning

By
lowkell
-
5

Here are a few Virginia (and national) news headlines, political and otherwise, for Sunday, March 3. Also check out the Saturday Night Live skit on the Voting Rights Act, and how Justice Scalia et al don’t “get to say what’s outdated when you’re a small council of old people in robes who decide our laws and can’t be fired.””

*Stymied by GOP House, Obama looks to 2014 (“Exasperation with an opposition party that blocks even the most politically popular elements of his agenda is behind efforts to help flip the House of Representatives back to Democratic control.”)

*Breaking the logjam (“WHAT IF THERE were a policy that could cut future deficits, slash taxes, eliminate wasteful government spending and reduce climate change? As sequestration kicks in, you’d think every politician in Washington would be desperate to embrace such a win-win-win-win.” Carbon tax now!)

*Virginia’s Feast on U.S. Funds Nears an End (“The Center for Regional Analysis estimates that federal spending drives 37 percent of the Northern Virginia economy, largely spending on contractors that soared in the past decade.”)

*Cuts to Achieve Goal for U.S. Deficit, but the Toll Is High (Thank you Teapublicans!!! Not.)

*Democratic Governors: The States Must Lead On Climate Change (That certainly won’t happen  here in Virginia if Ken Kookinelli’s elected our governor. Go T-Mac!)

*Jeff E. Schapiro: Va. lawmakers indulge themselves through budget

*The governor’s legislative success

*Virginia Supreme Court’s ruling helps define ‘mootness’

*Property taxes set to rise all across Northern Virginia, possibly Maryland

*Enforcing Virginia text ban might be complicated

*Sequestration is Coming. How Will it Impact Fairfax County? (“Tighter budgets, diminished real estate values and more.”)

*Legislators who seem to like being stuck in traffic

*Chances increasing for at least an inch of snow on Tuesday and Wednesday

Why Did Bolling’s Campaign Manipulate His Poll Results?

By
Goldmanusa
-
5

(Interesting, although I’ve got a simpler explanation: see comments section. – promoted by lowkell)

by Paul Goldman

According to the poll results released by Bill Bolling (and allegedly the result of a poll of Virginia voters taken by his campaign’s pollster, John McLaughlin), the Lt. Governor is wildly popular in the Commonwealth. Anyone who knows anything about politics should be bowled over by Bolling’s bald-faced claim of having a 44% favorable, only 11% unfavorable rating, with the rest either undecided or unable to provide an opinion for various reasons.

Fact: There is no way Bolling is known well enough to have 55% offer a definite opinion, must less have a 44-11 positive/negative split, which is 4-1, an amazing number. NO WAY. It is a totally manipulated number either due to the poll question, or to outright data manipulation.

Anyone who has ever done polling on Virginia statewide races generally knows this is not possible. What’s even more puzzling: after claiming a sky-high 4:1 favorable to unfavorable rating, with incredible name ID for an LG, the poll then says that Bolling is only getting in the low teens in a three-way horse race.

Given the profile numbers in the poll for T-Mac and K-Man, there is no way Bolling would be so low if he had actually had a 44-11 image! Unless roughly 70% of the electorate was basically locked into a partisan vise so tightly that no independent could ever break through.

Meanwhile, the same Bolling polls claims that upwards of 70% of the electorate is open to considering an independent. However, if that is true, then why aren’t more of them supporting a super-popular LG over what the polls claims are two not-so-well-regarded major party candidates? Even after a campaign, Bolling isn’t going to have a better image among what he claims is already a big chunk of the electorate.

Thus, my question: Why did Bolling’s Boys manipulate the poll this way, with results that raise real questions among political experts? The reason I ask this: If they really want this poll to be taken seriously by serious students of the game, then the poll results suggest he has NO WAY TO WIN despite his using the poll to claim the precise opposite.

Most importantly: The normal thing to do with a poll of this kind is to hold a hypothetical three-way horse race, after you give all those voters being interviewed certain facts about three candidates. In a sense, you run the campaign in the “laboratory”; you give those being interviewed the kinds of facts on the candidates and positions which your campaign would hope to be able to get across to voters during the campaign.

Call it a simulation, a computer game that plays out the campaign to see how the mathematical model would predict the outcome if everything goes as programmed. All the pollsters did, apparently, was to ask a question, based on what people know now, as to their choice in a three-way race. That makes no sense at all.

Fact: Again, the purpose of a poll at this point is to test the best Bolling case in terms of how a campaign would go from their point of view.  They would lay out the Cuccinelli case, the McAuliffe case, and their Bolling case. They would tell the pluses and minuses of the candidates as the Bolling camp would hope the campaign would go.

Then, after you run the simulation, you ask the same interviewees the horse race question a second time, to see how their minds changed if at all. This is called the re-vote. Bolling either didn’t do that – unlikely – or the results were such that even he didn’t have the nerve to put out pretend numbers.

Bottom line: Bolling’s pollster did do the simulation, and he found that no matter what, Bolling can’t possibly win. At best he can be a spoiler. Who would he hurt in the end? From the numbers we were given – and again, they are manipulated so take them for what they are worth – it isn’t all that clear to me what Bolling would mean in the end. Conventional wisdom says he hurts Cuccinelli, probably enough to defeat the K-man in a close race. But that isn’t clear from the Bolling poll.

Thus, I ask again: What the heck is Bolling up to with this poll? Fleece unsuspecting big donors who may want to stop either K-man or T-Man?

My guess: Bolling is taking aim at McAuliffe more than he is claiming publicly. Democrats think Bolling is some kind of magic charm. I am very suspicious of that. Bolling despises Cuccinelli, we know that. But he has been no friend of Democrats for years. In my mind, he is trying to set up a claim that for some reason – to be announced by him at some point in the not to distant future – he believes McAuliffe can’t beat Cuccinelli, or at least that it will be too close.

Bolling isn’t playing straight with anyone right now given these polling stats. By failing to release any re-vote numbers – the logical thing to do to show he could win a three way race if he had the money to get his “message” out both on himself and his opponents – this tells me a lot. It is an omission that could not have been accidental.

Bolling has essentially admitted that the best he can be is a spoiler in three way race. Such an admission makes no sense at this juncture. So precisely why he manipulated the stats the way he did is a mystery to me.  

Video: Tracy Thorne-Begland Sworn In as Virginia’s First Openly Gay Judge

By
lowkell
-
0

Mazel tov; it’s about time!

h/t: WTVR

Video: Meet Ken Kookinelli Part Deux

By
lowkell
-
1

In short, if you liked Ken Kookinelli, you’re going to LOVE Ken Kookinelli Part Deux, aka Mark Obenshain for Attorney General. Like Cuckoo, this guy believes that “the most important role” for Virginia’s Attorney general isn’t fighting crime, or protecting consumers, or making sure that everyone’s rights are protected, or cracking down on fraud, but in “standing up to the federal government.”

So, if (god forbid) Mark Obenshain ever becomes Virginia’s Attorney General, expect a virtual clone of Kookinelli, who Obenshain characterizes as a “great Attorney General” who has done a “very good job standing up for our rights.” You know, rights like…preventing women from having access to contraception or deciding with their doctors what to do regarding their own health care choices; like fighting to make sure that Big Oil can pollute with impunity and make sure we never transition to a clean energy economy; like fighting to deny science and persecute scientists; like persecuting and/or denying equal rights to gays and lesbians; etc, etc.

Sound good? Nope, didn’t think so. What to do about it? A lot – and you can start by volunteering for Mark Herring’s AG campaign. Thanks.

The State Department Plays Early April Fool’s Gag on Environmental Movement: Surprise!

By
Progressive86
-
3

Either the U.S. Department of State is playing an early April fool’s gag or the environmental movement has taken another huge setback in efforts to, well, save the planet (no big deal!). Environmental leaders were clearly left befuddled when the State Department concluded in its report on Friday that the Keystone XL Pipeline is not the environmental threat that concerned citizens of the planet fear. Take the knife out of my back, President Obama (no, John Kerry shouldn’t take the fall if the pipeline is ultimately approved)!

Yes, I was there on that absurdly cold day in February of this year when thousands of concerned citizens of the planet assembled in Washington, D.C. to demonstrate their concern about the earth warming effects of the Keystone XL pipeline. I was there and I saw thousands of individuals of different colors, backgrounds, religions, political beliefs, and choice of footwear clearly state that the Keystone XL Pipeline is not the way forward for America. But the State Department knows best, right?

IF the Keystone XL pipeline is approved, it will not only be a slap in the face to the environmental movement by President Obama, it will more importantly be one more fatal step towards ‘runaway’ climate change. That isn’t exactly the change millions of Americans hoped for when they voted for President Obama.

The final decision on the pipeline hasn’t been made, of course, but the State Department’s recent report makes it even more difficult for President Obama to shun our friends to the north and their dreams of a tarsands-filled future. It makes Democrats in Congress even more reluctant to oppose a pipeline that, according to the State Department, offers no scientific faux pas.

Oh, these are dark days my friends. Hold on to your loved ones, your pets, your nearest pillow. I think we may need something to hold to get through these next few weeks!

P.S. Dear Earth, sorry we let you down.

Virginia News Headlines: Saturday Morning

By
lowkell
-
4

Here are a few Virginia (and national) news headlines, political and otherwise, for Saturday, March 2. Also, see President Obama’s weekly address, in which he says that “Congress must join the President now to replace these cuts with a balanced approach that reduces our deficit while also making smart investments in areas that help our economy grow.”

*As sequestration begins, the questions increase

*The way forward: off another cliff

*State Dept. Keystone report plays down climate fears (“Environmentalists were left sputtering Friday while pro-pipeline forces in Congress and industry insisted that this should leave no doubt that the pipeline can be built safely and provide for jobs and a fresh source of North American energy.”)

*How An Anti-Choice Group Is Trying To Buy Virginia’s Governor’s Mansion

*Cuccinelli says Virginia is the only state where attorneys general resign to run for governor (For once, Cuccinelli’s correct about something.)

*Jim Webb: Congressional Abdication (“Congress was given the power to declare war and appropriate funds, thus eliminating any resemblance to European-style monarchies when it came to the presidential war power.”)

*Moody’s applauds Virginia transportation package

*McDonnell tasks panel to help Va. with sequestration

*Southwest Va. congressmen vote against Violence Against Women Act, citing tribal prosecution provision

*Va. lawmakers challenge DOMA

*Kaine: Bolling a “formidable candidate”

*McDonnell restores rights to 1,000 felons including Young, Hedgepeth, Libby

*At U.Va., tension builds between Dragas, Sullivan (Shocking, huh? Nobody could possibly have seen THAT coming? LOL)

*Amtrak ridership grows, D.C.-Lynchburg route profitable

*Post ombudsman will be replaced by reader representative (If they want to get rid of their independent Ombudsman to save money, instead of let’s say getting rid of the egregiously horrendous Jennifer Rubin, that’s their call, however misguided. But to replace it with a paid flack for the newspaper? That’s just insulting readers’ intelligence.)

*McDonnell plans trade trip to China, Japan

*Region could see $350M in road improvements

Del. Dave Albo (R): “I’ve solved the problem” of transportation in Virginia

By
lowkell
-
3

Last we heard from Dave Albo, he was regaling us with the tale of how his wife wouldn’t have sex with him because he voted for transvaginal ultrasound. Hilarious, huh? I know, it’s a real howler. Ha ha ha. Ha. Whatever.

Anyway, Dave Albo is baaaaack, and now he’s regaling us with yet another story of his amazing exploits. This time, though, he’s not out to protect Virginia women from…themselves, I guess, but to save Virginia motorists from endless gridlock thanks to…people like him, I guess. That’s right, earlier today on the WAMU Politics Hour radio show, Dave Albo claimed the following about the transportation bill:

…the Democrats agreed to do a transfer of $200 million out, which is a lot of money, out of general spending, and we agreed to raise new revenue, that’s how the compromise happened. You know, I mean, I’ve got people on both sides who are mad at me, but bottom line is I’ve solved the problem. Well, I shouldn’t say I…Bob McDonnell, Speaker Howell and others have solved the problem.

Is this guy delusional or what? I mean, first of all the concept that Dave Albo personally negotiated the transportation deal is utterly laughable. At least he quickly corrected himself on that Freudian slip/howler, acknowledging that, oh yeah, Bob McDonnell and Bill Howell might have had something to do with this (not to mention Janet Howell, Dick Saslaw, etc.).

Second, if Albo really believes that the problem of transportation in Virginia is even CLOSE to being “solved” (in fact, we’ll need multiples more money – perhaps $100 billion over 20 years – than this deal provides, if we’re going to ever come close to “solving” the problem), then I’ve got him a nice toll road to sell him! More to the point, if he really believes that, then he certainly shouldn’t be in the General Assembly, because he has no clue what he’s saying or doing.

So, any normal person would try to correct himself as soon as he realize how badly he screwed up. But no, this is Dave Albo we’re talking about, the same guy who joked about his wife not having sex with him because he voted for transvaginal ultrasound, and thought he was just oh-so-clever and oh-so-hilarious in doing so. In this case, the terminally clueless Albo doubles down (see the video clip above) on his idiocy, claiming that “transportation is now done, solved,” so the 2013 gubernatorial candidates “don’t have to argue about it.” I mean, what can you even say about someone like this, except to laugh at him? Oh, and that it would be nice if Democrats could actually defeat this bozo one of these years…

1...2,4242,4252,426...3,276Page 2,425 of 3,276












EVEN MORE NEWS

POPULAR CATEGORY

©