Rise and Shine; It’s Sunday…And There’s News

*****

Obama Compliment Sexist? I Call It A Compliment

Roxanne Jones: “Thank you, Mr. President, you’re not such a bad-looking guy yourself.”

 That would have been my response if I were California Attorney General Kamala Harris, who finds herself in the middle of a media dustup after President Obama introduced her as: “by far the best-looking attorney general in the country,” at a fundraiser earlier this week. Harris is a beautiful woman. She’s also super intelligent and accomplished, which the president also noted. In fact, he lauded her professional merits first. So, I say take the compliment and move on. Or, if you’re slightly embarrassed by the comment, give it back and move on. President Obama’s observation is not a major offense to women around the globe. Ridiculous flaps such as this one have always made me uncomfortable with calling myself a feminist, especially if that means I have to fly into a fit each time a man makes an awkward comment about a woman.

Clearly, the president realized in hindsight that his comment didn’t go over very well, and he has apologized. But I don’t believe an apology was necessary. It’s impossible to believe that anyone could seriously call President Obama a chauvinist over this banter between friends. No matter your politics, you will have a hard time finding a president who has included women more in his agenda. What has he done for us lately? Let me recall just a few things: Appointed two female Supreme Court justices, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor. Appointed Hillary Clinton as secretary of state. Signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which restored worker protections against pay discrimination. The bill had failed in the Senate in 2007.

Read more here

*****

*****

Reid Epstein: President Barack Obama’s got a volunteer army — and all their marching orders come from carefully organized paid generals back at headquarters.

Obama won two terms by harnessing a grassroots movement through a tightly controlled, top-down campaign organization. Now the group formed out of Organizing for America is now bringing that approach to Organizing for Action.

It’s what differentiates OFA from other grassroots groups, and even the Democratic National Committee: they’re combining large-dollar donations and unpaid local leaders for a carefully built, lasting structure that they believe will be just as effective in supporting the president as it was in electing him.

So far, OFA has alternated its agenda – a week on gun control, then a week on immigration, with some connection to Obama’s White House schedule. Starting next week, OFA will for the first time run concurrent national campaigns on gun control and immigration, blasting emails to supporters and holding local events

Read more here

*****

Surrounded by members of Congress, signing the Lilly Ledbetter Bill, Jan, 2009

*****

In Defense Of Barack Obama’s Kamala Harris ‘Best Looking’ Comment

Angela Rye: I have never labeled myself as a feminist, but I wholeheartedly support the parity of the sexes particularly as it relates to justice, and fairness. The values listed are those shared very clearly by President Barack Obama—as evidenced by his words and more importantly, his actions. Let’s start with the very first piece of legislation ever signed into law by the 44^th president—the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009. He went on to establish the White House Council on Women and Girls.  Most recently, the president signed a re-authorization of the Violence Against Women Act. And remember, the president’s two appointments to the Supreme Court of the United States were also women.

The president was inspired to ensure parity in the health care system because of the challenges his motherfaced with ovarian cancer. The president lovingly called his wife the “closer” during the 2008 campaign because of the critical role she played and now, as first lady, she continues to address some of the most important policy issues of our time.  The president has openly stated that his daughters have everything to do with his evolution on gay marriage. The president has a cabinet full (not just binders, but actual appointments) of women and one of his closest advisors is Valerie Jarrett, among many other key White House personnel. Needless to say, the president is influenced by women personally, professionally and politically.

Read more here

*****

 *****

Ambassador Susan Rice conducted an interview with Andrea Mitchell and she was great. She discussed North Korea, the Middle East, and Women’s Rights. She was wonderful in pushing back against Mitchell’s erroneous claims about President Obama and his white house being hostile towards women. This is a must watch interview.

It can be viewed here

*****

*****

For  The Ideologue Left, Social Security Concern Trolling Is A Racket

The People’s View: Dejavu. Once again, both the Republican right and the inconsolable whiny Left have found common ground over just how much they hate President Obama. Neither like the president’s upcoming budget – or at least the reporting on the upcoming budget. Why not? Well, because it looks like the President is going to propose a compromise that neither side’s ideologues are going to like (surprise!).

The president’s budget, it’s being reported, will include both revenue increases by closing tax loopholes for the rich and the use of Chained CPI to calculate the cost of living adjustments under Social Security. John Boehner seems to be grasping for a drink and complaining loudly that the president is being a meanie by asking the super rich and the corporate behemoths to pay their fair share. And the Left? They can barely contain the traitor-drum:

I have explained this before. The President’s proposal would create a minimum baseline for Social Security benefits so that no one who works their whole life has to live in poverty in retirement. The minimum benefit would be above the poverty line, for the first time fulfilling the promise of Social Security to end elderly poverty and actually boosting benefits for the lowest wage workers, which the protectors of the Entitlement Status Quo are effectively against. The president’s proposal would also boost benefits at age 85, making sure the people most at risk of running out of their savings are taken care of. Let me say that again: for those in the greatest need, the president’s proposal would increase benefits.

Read more here

*****

 *****

The Left’s Math Problem: The Truth About “Cumulative” Social Security Benefits

The People’s View: Yes, yes, this will be another post on Chained CPI. But a little more dry. This is about the math. Previously, we have discussed why Chained CPI isn’t actually a cut in benefits, what different it makes in the calculations of the cost of living adjustments, and why in the context of broader reforms and progressive social investments, it’s worth doing. But what we haven’t talked about in very explicit terms is what the minor reductions in COLA will end up adding up to. The scaremongerers are  very interested in exploiting this. They arevery interested in scaring people with numbers about how much they will lose.

Take the AARP’s “How much you will lose calculator,” for example. Did you know that if you are a retiree with an average $15,190 in benefit today, over the next 30 years you will lose $20,000 in benefits? Wow. Talk about catfood, right? Somebody stop that conniving bastard Obama! I mean, right?

Giving context to scary numbers: Actually, there’s a lot of funny math going on here. First, the 30-year math completely ignores that President Obama is proposing to boost benefits for the oldest beneficiaries, at age 85. But let’s play along. $20,000 out of how much? The context is to define this “cut” they are talking about with respect to currently scheduled benefits. We can use total benefits in nominal dollars under current methods of COLA. So let’s work out those numbers. Let’s use AARP’s own calculations

Read more here 

*****

It’s Sunday….let the Crooner-In-Chief serenade you.

*****

afternoon all

Iowa Democratic Party

Last week at Firebaggerlake:

😳

****

USA Today: President Obama announced a new military strategy on Thursday that will cut the Pentagon budget by hundreds of billions of dollars over the next decade.

Speaking from the Pentagon, Obama said the plan is “smart, strategic” and sets priorities.

…. The new military strategy includes $487 billion in cuts over the next decade. An additional $500 billion in cuts could be coming if Congress follows through on plans for deeper reductions. The announcement comes weeks after the U.S. officially ended the Iraq War and after a decade of increased defense spending in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States.

More here

****

President Barack Obama and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta after the president spoke on the Defense Strategic Review at the Pentagon

****

Washington Post

****

Dana Milbank: If this is Mitt Romney’s idea of a victory rally, one shudders to think what would have happened if he had lost the Iowa caucuses. The day after his impossibly thin eight-vote victory …. he flew here for a town hall meeting at Manchester Central High School, where he was to bask in the endorsement of his 2008 arch rival, John McCain.

But the senator grimaced when he was introduced, and as Romney delivered his own stump speech, an increasingly impatient McCain pulled up his sleeve and checked his watch. McCain gave his endorsement address without mentioning Romney’s Iowa win until the end. “By the way, we forgot to congratulate him on his landslide victory last night,” he said, laughing. Romney ignored him.

….. Romney continued to wrestle with words when he took the stage … “What a, uh, big night we had last night, or what a big morning we had, uh, last morning, this morning, in, uh, Iowa,” he began…..

Full article here

****

Randall Enos

****

Ah, the Firebaggers just keep on embarrassing themselves …. from Firebaggerlake:

****

Raw Story

****

Washington Monthly: What If Obama Loses? … there’s a widespread assumption that extreme positions taken in the (GOP) primaries will fade in the general election as candidates “move to the center,” and will disappear entirely once the serious business of governing begins. Surely President Newt Gingrich would not get rid of child labor laws. Surely President Perry would not seek to eliminate three cabinet departments.

We don’t think that this year, with this GOP, those assumptions are warranted. And so we asked a distinguished group of reporters and scholars to think through the hitherto unthinkable: What if one of these people actually wins?

Full post here

Thanks BWD

****

Chart of the Century:

Steve Benen (thanks Meta)

rise and shine

****

****

Steve Benen: It was easy to imagine Mitt Romney winning the Iowa caucuses. It was harder to imagine Romney winning Iowa and looking weaker at the same time.

And yet, that seems to be a fairly reasonable assessment of the race for the Republican presidential nomination this morning….

….. there’s not much for Romney to boast about here. After five years of near-constant campaigning, Romney managed to get fewer votes in Iowa last night than he did in his first campaign. He also picked up the dubious honor of the weakest win in the history of the caucuses – no victor has ever managed to finish first with less than 25% of the vote until last night.

After spending nearly $4.7 million, most of it towards the very end of the contest, these are not results Romney should be proud of.

Full post here

****

10:05: PBO departs the White House en route to Joint Base Andrews.

11:35: PBO arrives in Cleveland, Ohio.

12:05: PBO participates in a discussion with a family at a private residence.

1:15: PBO delivers remarks on the economy.

2:35: PBO departs Cleveland, Ohio, en route to Joint Base Andrews.

4:05: PBO Obama arrives at the White House

****

****

****

Hey, who’s the quarterback?

TMZ

****

Morning everyone 😉

interesting….

Gavin Polone: One of the many things that bug me about the industry in which I work is the large population of phonies who claim to be liberal, caring, green and unaffected by their wealth and fame but in reality are just as self-centered and addicted to their huge, over-air-conditioned living spaces and private planes as those at whom they point their fingers. And none is more phony and finger-pointing than Michael Moore.

Moore seems to be everywhere of late, talking about the “occupy” movement and fashioning himself its spokesmodel …. this protest would be better served if those speaking on its behalf were of cleaner hands and less hypocritical than Moore, who has suckled mightily at the teat of “those who do well.”

In 2005, the Weinstein Co. set up financing of about $500 million to fund production and distribution. The investment vehicle was created and syndicated by a little firm called Goldman Sachs. One of the films that was produced by TWC using funds from that investment was Moore’s documentary Sicko….

By 2010, TWC had burned through the capital raised in the Goldman Sachs deal. Investors were forced to restructure their arrangement, meaning some suffered a devaluation of their investment … One of those who did quite well using the TWC funds was Moore.

…. If Moore really wants to be seen as someone outside the circle of those he is protesting, it would be great if he would disclose how much he has made off his TWC-backed movies and why he was willing to associate himself with financing set up by Goldman Sachs. Further, journalists should start showing more backbone in testing the veracity of statements made by those who use the media to disseminate a holier-than-though message…..

Full article here

Thank you Dorothy

****

ABC (2009): Michael Moore used some non-union crewmembers when union workers were available in the production of his latest film “Capitalism: A Love Story,” a documentary that argues the capitalist system allows for greedy corporations to exploit working-class people.

…. In a statement issued to ABCNews.com, Moore’s agent Ari Emanuel 😯 said the filmmaker wished the union included more documentary crew people – but he did not deny that IATSE members were snubbed in favor of non-union employees.

…. As a result of Moore’s decision not to use IATSE workers, at least one other national union, the American Federation of Teachers has refused free tickets offered to them from Moore.

…. An internal AFT memo, obtained by ABCNews.com, added that the non-union workers hired for the film did not receive health insurance.

Full article here

****

Grover Norquist’s best buddy Jane Hamsher is asking people to donate money to buy winter gear for the OWS protestors –

She’s promising that 100% of the money will go to the protestors.

That’s excellent.

But she’s using the very same OWS donation appeal to look for funds for herself:

Oh boy.

Thanks Linda.

****

Oh, let’s not forget OWS’s other self-appointed spokesman – you know, the guy who’s associated with Charles Koch’s Cato Institute:

****

The OWS movement is magnificent, it just can’t allow itself be hijacked by these self-promoting frauds.

****

Statement from the President on Senate Republicans Blocking the Infrastructure Bill:

For the third time in recent weeks, every single Republican in the United States Senate has chosen to obstruct a jobs bill that independent economists said would boost our economy and put Americans back to work. At a time when more than a million construction workers are looking for a job, they voted “no” to putting them back to work doing the work America needs done – rebuilding our roads, bridges, airports and transit systems. That makes no sense.

It makes no sense when you consider that this bill was made up of the same kinds of common-sense proposals that many of these Senators have fought for in the past. It was fully paid for. And even though it was supported by more than 70 percent of the American people – Republicans, Democrats, and independents – 100 percent of Senate Republicans said no. It’s more clear than ever that Republicans in Washington are out of touch with Americans from all ends of the political spectrum.

The American people deserve to know why their Republican representatives in Washington refuse to put some of the workers hit hardest by the economic downturn back on the job rebuilding America. They deserve an explanation as to why Republicans refuse to step up to the plate and do what’s necessary to create jobs and grow the economy right now. It’s time for Republicans in Congress to put country ahead of party and listen to the people they were elected to serve. It’s time for them to do their job and focus on Americans’ jobs. And until they do, I will continue to do everything in my power to move this country forward.

****

President Barack Obama participates in the G20 Family Photo, White House Photo, Pete Souza, 11/3/11

****

Beyond funny – from ChristiMtl:

Quick note here

I want to thank you guys for the lovely birthday wishes for my mom….she loved it!

I was on the phone with her and she read each ones. I translated for her the words she didn’t understand but for the most part, she could read it herself, her english is even better than I thought.

She LOVED the picture of President Obama with the birthday cake….

It was funny because in between the birthday wishes, there was a conversation with Tally, Chips and a few other TOD’ers.

So my mom said…”Oh I see a picture of a soccer player without his shirt on”

”And now it’s a picture of a shower, what does it mean?”

I could read sentences like ”My DNA wants to breed with Gerry Butler”

lol I didn’t know how to tell her that some TOD’ers needed a cold shower this morning.

I was cracking up.

So it was fun and lovely……

You guys are the best.

****

Thanks Riblets 😉

****

Emilia (Osborneink): Chris Matthews has written a book. So has Michael Moore. So have Bill Maher, Glenn Greenwald, Katrina vanden Heuvel and Joan Walsh.

Yes, folks, the pimping season has arrived, just in time for the Christmas sales.

This is why you see Michael Moore appropriating Occupy Wall Street, even though pimping his latest Forrest Ga-hu-hu-hump fantasy is pure capitalism. That’s why Joan Walsh appears twice daily on MSNBC opinion programs for no fee at all and out of the goodness of her heart. This is why Greenwald is here, there and everywhere, unfortunately. Maher plugs his book weekly on his show. Self-publicizing is too much for vanden Heuvel’s impeccable Fifth Avenue breeding. She sticks to Twitter.

Full post here

Thanks Hopefruit

****

‘night people

Helloooo people,

Just a few things:

First, like desertflower today and amk yesterday I’ve been having major problems viewing and updating the blog, a lot of the time that Mac spinning beachball has been in my face – honest, if I had a gun I’d have shot it.

I’m using the latest version of Firefox, 7.0.1, and judging by the support section on their site it is causing huge problems for a lot of users.

And Firefox is the browser WordPress (the host of this blog) recommends we use 😦

Are there any of you Firefox 7.0.1 people out there who haven’t been having problems??

And what other browsers aren’t causing trouble at the moment?

Please share your techy expertise!

****

Second, I used to be in the habit of updating the blog each day with lots and lots and lots of new posts, but reckoned that wasn’t good because (a) it disrupted the chat between you all in a thread, you kept having to move on to the new posts to try to continue your conversation, and (b) it stuffed your email inbox with TOD new-post-alerts.

So, instead, I’ve just been posting three or four new threads each day (more when big stuff is happening), and adding to each post as the day goes on. Are you okay with that? I know you don’t get ‘alerted’ when I update a post, but I just think it’s working better because it allows good, long conversations to develop in each post – but let me know what you think.

****

Third, it’s probably a sign that we’re building something good together, but there’s been a very large increase in the number of Tea/Firebagger trolls trying to post abuse here recently.

Most try to comment under ‘anonymous’, but some – brilliantly! – use regulars’ names in the belief that will get their comments through. It doesn’t.

So, again, even though it’s a complete pain, please sign in when you’re commenting here, and always use a name (and stick with that name) – it doesn’t, needless to say, have to be your real name, any one will do, but just remember anonymous comments are not accepted here. Thanks.

****

Speaking of, eh, anonymity.

For a whole bunch of reasons, I decided from the start not to provide personal information when I started this blog. To be honest, if it was a money-making venture I would feel obliged to give my name and (not very exciting) personal details, but it’s purely a non-profit labor of love. And always will be.

At the risk of sounding over-dramatic, you attract some seriously deranged haters when you run a pro-President Obama blog – as BWD experienced, way way worse than me. Like the guy who followed me from a ‘Dem’ site I used to frequent to wish me “head cancer” – for the sole reason that I argued the President wasn’t, actually, a homophobe. Funny, I haven’t heard from him since the repeal of DADT.

I’ve also had a few Teabagger white supremacist types send me delightful threatening messages, promising to hunt me down. Yee haw!

So, in light of the fact that I have a life and a family outside all of this, I’ve opted not to provide these Fire/Teabagers with enough personal information to allow them arrive on my doorstep, or get my phone number/personal email address, etc. Life’s just way too short.

There are personal reasons here too, which I can’t go in to, but let’s just say this blog has a few enemies.

So, I’m genuinely sorry that I don’t provide personal info when some of you seek it, I hope you understand. I won’t ever pretend to be anything I’m not, I’m just Chipsticks – your host. 😉

Thanks everyone, see you tomorrow.

‘believe it or not, the left is still behind obama’

Adam Sorensen: …. one can understand why California Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom might have thought his recent venting session at a gathering of fellow Democrats in Half Moon Bay would be met with approving clucks or, at very least, silent nods. Not so much.

“Among the Newsom jabs: Obama should have pushed his agenda harder when the Democrats still controlled both houses of Congress,” recounted the San Francisco Chronicle, “a remark that drew a handful of boos from the audience.” … Newsom ran smack into what seems to be a common misconception about the Obama presidency: Though many of the left’s opinion makers have turned away from Obama, broader liberal flight is a phenomenon that simply doesn’t exist.

Real Clear Politics’ latest data crunching pegs the President’s average approval among Democrats at a robust 76.8%. (For comparison, in October of 1995, soon-to-be-re-elected Bill Clinton’s Democratic support was a near-identical 77%, according to Gallup.) And what of the real left? The ones whose disappointment has been given voice by people like Drew Westen to Paul Krugman? It turns out self-identified liberals’ support for Obama isn’t far behind at 72% in Gallup’s latest tracking data. (The same group gave Clinton 65% approval in 1995)….

…. Gavin Newsom, who rumor has it might run for Congress next year when Rep. Lynn Woolsey is likely to retire, should know that in the liberal bastion of San Francisco, there’s little political upside in breaking with Obama.

Full article here

The Firebaggers just make the most noise 😉

keep pressing on…

****

I know it can be a complete pain in the butt to have to sign in on the site to post a comment, but, just to repeat, because of past, well, difficulties, anonymous comments are no longer accepted here.

Apologies to those who tried to post anonymously today, but please understand it’s all part of the effort to keep out the bigots and nutjobs, ie the Fire/Teabaggers. As I always say, they have lots of other places to play and post their bile – but they won’t post it here.

So, all I ask is that you choose a name when you post – any name – and stick with it. Just let everyone else know who they’re ‘talking’ to.

I know, it all sounds very Big Brother-ish, but WordPress provides a way for blog owners to identify those who use multiple names when they post on their blogs, so if you were blocked after posting bile here before, you’ll still be blocked even if you use a shiny new name. Just letting you know, to save you all that time and effort.

Sorry about this, but it’s the only way of keeping out those eaten up with hate.

See you tomorrow 😉

87%

So, how many articles have we read recently that claimed the President is losing African American support? No, not the support of Maxine Waters, Cornel West and Tavis Smiley – African Americans living in the real world.

I know, too many to count.

Take GOPolitico. For months they’ve promoted the line that the President is disproportionately losing Jewish support, much to the amusement of serious commentators – because the polls repeatedly contradicted their claims. (See here, here and here)

That didn’t work too well, so now they’re pushing the ‘African Americans Desert Obama’ line.

In a piece today they talk about the President’s “relationship with African-Americans (being) complicated from the beginning by questions about whether a mixed-race senator born in Hawaii was “authentically black” enough to win their support”.

Seriously, almost three years after he was elected, GOPolitico is still wondering if he’s black enough. (The author, who has written three similar pieces in the last month, is African American, so that’s okay).

The most critical quotes in the piece are from two ‘sources’ “speaking under condition of anonymity”. GOPolitico really do love their anonymous sources, especially when they give them quotes that neatly match their agenda. Whether they are real people or not, hey, who knows?

But if their thesis is true, that African-Americans are rising up against the President, how come they need to quote people anonymously? Surely if there was that much anger out there they could find someone other than Waters willing to lash out publicly?

The problem?

The President isn’t losing the support of African Americans living in the real world – in fact, that support is increasing.

GOPolitico and most other outlets – including supposedly ‘progressive’ ones – love quoting Gallup polls when their findings aren’t good for the President.

The latest Gallup poll? They’re not mentioning that much.

Why?

Because it shows that African American support for the President is up five points to 87%.

Link

Considering how the struggling economy has impacted on his figures across most groups, and bearing in mind how African Americans suffer disproportionately in terms of unemployment, that 87% figure is remarkable.

But still we’re told that Waters, West, Smiley and Co speak for African Americans. Well, clearly they don’t for 87% of them.

Just like that other media darling, Dan Choi, doesn’t speak for the entire gay community, most of whom appreciate the work this administration has done – and is trying to do – to promote equality.

That GOPolitico produces this kind of dishonesty is, of course, no surprise at all – it’s their area of expertise. But, as we all know, the Firebagger crew – especially at Salon – are relentlessly spreading the lie too. Rather than mentioning that 87%, they persist in claiming that Waters, West and Smiley speak for African Americans.

Of course, Salon’s Joan Walsh doesn’t have much time for that 87%:

April 2011

After all, only those who oppose the President represent the base, right?

****

I see Gene Lyons at Salon has described Melissa Harris-Perry as “a left-wing Michele Bachmann, an attractive woman seeking fame and fortune by saying silly things on cable TV”. That was the level of his response to her thoughtful article on white ‘liberal’ racism. “A photo negative of KKK racial thought,” he wrote.

See the Reid Report on the article here

****

And see this post by Flaming Emilia

‘david sirota and the white leftist version of racism’

Deaniac (The People’s View): It’s kind of funny when you think about it, but silver-pen David Sirota thinks he’s got a better grip on race than the founding director of the Project on Gender, Race, and Politics in the South at Tulane University, Melissa Harris-Perry.

After Professor Harris-Perry’s piece in The Nation chiding white Leftist electoral racism of double standards against a black president received acclaim and attention, Sirota, a renowned fantasy-land pretend-Leftist, decided that he was going to take on Professor Harris Perry, by being too cute by half.

Sirota’s argument, on the surface, is that the elite white Leftist class – who overlap with the Professional Left about 90% – is really mad at the president not out of some double standard they set for a black president, but on the basis of policy. Or as David calls it, policy betrayals. Clever. Because we have never seen the attempt to hide denial of race-privilege behind a thin veil of policy criticism ever before, right?

…. the first African American president is not treated with the same level of respect by the white Leftist elite, nor do his accomplishments enjoy among them the same praise had those same accomplishments come from a white president. And this part of the thesis, unfortunately, is not at all difficult to prove, either: See post for detailed examples

… The racist undertone is also present in the latent expectation that once you have elected a black president, he needs to be a magician and magically begin a utopia according to your likings …. The truth of liberal white elitism and racism is based on true observations, and is not much better than that from the Republicans: that the black guy, who’s working day and night to keep the car from slipping back into the ditch and move forward is not pushing it hard enough or the right way, and so on and so forth.

Full post here

bob & chez

Extreme Liberal has a terrific post (which I linked yesterday – here) with a transcript from a recent podcast from The Bob and Chez Show (featuring Bob Cesca and Chez Pazienza).

In case you you don’t listen to podcasts, the video above has an extract from the show (recorded after OFA New Mexico State Director Ray Sandoval sent an email to supporters attacking Firebaggers and Paul Krugman).

It’s the best analysis of the Firebaggers I’ve heard. Be good to yourself, subscribe to The Bob and Chez Show on iTunes. 😉