Western Progressive

(Video) Gregory spews GOP talking points to a giggling Gingrich

Nothing drives me over the edge than people like David Gregory spewing right-wing talking points to the giggling pleasure of Newt Gingrich.  This weekend on Meet the Press David Gregory used the dumbed down rhetoric of labeling anyone supporting infrastructure investments as being pro-government spending.  Democratic Governor Martin O'Malley gave a weak response as Gingrich, the other guest, chuckled happily.

Granted, it was two versus one.  But O'Malley failed to state the case the way Democrats should.

There is a difference between government spending and government investments.  Nobody is for throwing money at something without getting a return.  But when the government invests in itself (i.e. a bridge or a school) our country gets something in return.  We get jobs, greater efficiency and a strengthened middle class that can buy homes, send kids to college and have money to invest back in our economy.

But at its heart, Gregory and Gingrich are trying to promote a failed Reagan idea of top-down economics.  They believe in few government investments, leaving local communities out to dry and relying solely on the stock market to create jobs.  It's an approach that Bush tried for eight years and the Republicans in Congress have been successful at forcing down our throats.  But if that top-down idea worked then how come our economy isn't just showered with jobs right now?

Progressive base must lead the way -- no sitting this one out!

OK.  So I've been on the sidelines for the last few months.  Found out I got into graduate school and will be studying public policy, which no duh is relevant to this site.  Been working a lot.  Still, those aren't good excuses for not keeping this site updated on a daily basis.  I need to get the ball rolling again.

There might not be the same excitement as 2008.  But that shouldn't make us lose sight of the fact that if we lose the progressive cause will suffer a huge blow for four, maybe eight years.  The presidency does matter.  Yes, making inroads on the local level is extremely important.  But unless we fix the problems on the national level, all these local efforts could be overturned by the US Congress, Supreme Court and the Executive.  Let us not forget that Supreme Court justices are picked by presidents.  With the health care law hanging in the balance, we are reminded of how much it all matters.

More than anything though, by sitting on the side I've rediscovered how pathetic the Democrats are at framing the message on their own, and the importance of having the progressive blogosphere lead the way.  So let's get this show on the road!

(Video) Romney's advises kids to borrow from parents to pay for school

Sure, if every child had rich parents like you.  For everyone else, Republicans are trying to slash the student loan and pell grant programs.  Plutocracy here we come!

Wealthy Americans would be stupid not to vote for this guy.  He really understands your lives.

(Chart) How the GOP's own inability to govern actually helped promote their government-cutting ideology

Since 1981 the GOP budget strategy has been to get rid of government programs.  Federal aide to students, the elderly, the unemployed -- eliminate it all.

So how do you accomplish that?  when you mismanage the budget so much that various programs have a shortfall, it helps make the case for you that these programs ought to be cut.  It's as if the GOP's own inability to govern has helped them make the case for the cuts they prefer.

One current example: the student loan program.  Republicans don't want to subsidize low interest government loans and grants to benefit the next generation of Americans.  And they will get their way if the Paul Ryan budget plan is adopted.  According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, it would create a huge shortfall in the federal pell grant program.  With such a large shortfall, the GOP would then make the case it needs to be cut.

More passing the buck to the next generation

The Club for Growth is one of those groups concerned with keeping the current hierarchy of white collar baby-boomers in place.  The Club for Growth believes in trickle-down economics, which is why they have come out against lowering government interest rates on student loans.  

In their view, who the hell cares about whether the next generation will be in debt, when none of us corrupt right-wing advocates will be around in 30 years to deal with it?

(Video) Why Romney wouldn't have ordered the strike on Osama

Ordering the raid on Osama bin Laden was a risk.  A risk that even the Vice President and other members of the President's staff disagreed with.  President Obama knew there was a margin for error, but decided to go for it because it was part of an overall strategy to pursue al Qaeda -- even if it meant going into Pakistan.

The latest Obama web video ad, featuring Bill Clinton, asks whether Romney would have done the same?

Jimmy Carter would be "comfortable" with Romney as president

Oh, Jimmy:

Said Carter: "I'd rather have a Democrat but I would be comfortable -- I think Romney has shown in the past, in his previous years as a moderate or progressive... that he was fairly competent as a governor and also running the Olympics as you know. He's a good solid family man and so forth, he's gone to the extreme right wing positions on some very important issues in order to get the nomination. What he'll do in the general election, what he'll do as president I think is different."

Way to give FOX News a talking point of the day.  Maybe they caught former President Carter on a good day.  I don't know how any progressive would be alright with the former Massachusetts Governor.  He thinks corporations are people.  That regressive tax rates of the Paul Ryan plan are the way to go.  That the answer to immigration is self-deportation.  And he attacks the President on foreign policy, even though Romney has yet to form an actual position on Afghanistan, a war that has been going on for more than ten years.  And the list goes on.

Would you be comfortable with Romney?

The hypocrisy of GOP deficit outrage

Republicans only care about the national debt when it's caused by someone else other than their own.  Bush's war of choice in Iraq and his tax cuts for the rich both significantly added to the red ink.  And any Democrat criticizing those deficit inducing policies was branded as unpatriotic.

So when Newt Gingrich continues to get Secret Service protection even though he is no longer a candidate, costing taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars each day, no one on the right seems to care.  Cheers to consistency.

An America for the lobbying few

A study finds that the more corporations spent on lobbying, the more their tax rates declined:

The top eight companies that spent the most on lobbying were Exxon Mobil, Verizon Communications, General Electric, AT&T, Altria, Amgen, Northrop Grumman and Boeing. Exxon Mobil spent the most, some $81.92 million from 2007 to 2009.

AT&T recorded the largest tax reduction, with its tax rate falling from 34.0 percent to negative 6.4 percent from 2007 to 2010, or an estimated reduction of more than $7.3 billion. Altria, the parent company of Philip Morris, had the smallest decline from 2007 to 2010, with its rate declining from 28.9 percent to 27.4 percent. Six of the top eight companies saw declines of at least 7 percentage points.

Legislators will never put the needs of the many before the needs of the few until there is election reform.

(Video) FOX News only thinks there's a war on CONSERVATIVE women

According to FOX, America is fighting about 18 different wars.  i.e. the war on terror, the war on Christmas, the war on fisherman -- and so forth.  But a war on women?  Apparently not.  Only conservative women.  Jon Stewart on the hilarious hypocrisy on FOX.

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

The Obama Campaign is slow in defining Mitt Romney

Instead of playing Mitt Romney's game of tit-for-tat, Democrats need to define Mitt Romney soon before he reboots into the moderate that he will pretend to be.  In 2004, the Bush Campaign began their assault on John Kerry around March and were successful.  On the flip-side, in 2008 Republicans waited until July to attack Obama -- a time of the year when hardly anyone pays attention to politics.  People had already formed their own view of the current president, and it was too late for McCain to mount a comeback.

Amid high gas prices and a slow recovery, polls show that voters have warmed to Romney in recent weeks.  We all know the Obama Campaign is playing the long game.  But as far as defining Mitt Romney goes, they are behind.  If they don't go on the offensive now, they won't be able to define Romney until the Democratic Convention -- just 90 days before the election.  And that would be a huge mistake.

Republicans have pretty much nominated Ann Romney

Ann Romney may as well be running for president.  After all, she is the GOP's only hope in making her husband look like a non-robot.  So when Democrats attack Mitt, Ann can rush to his defense and make them look like a good ol' American couple.  And most importantly for Romney, he can say he understands women's issues -- because he lives with one.

One problem with that claim, as CNN's Hilary Rosen notes:

"What you have is Mitt Romney running around the country, saying, 'Well, you know, my wife tells me that what women really care about are economic issues, and when I listen to my wife, that's what I'm hearing.' Guess what? His wife has actually never worked a day in her life," Rosen said.

I wonder if that was true before Mitt and Ann had children.  I'm sure that with this becoming a firestorm we will find out soon enough.

Why Romney should consider himself lucky

Obviously the nomination has been winding down for some time.  But when you look at the primary schedule Mitt Romney should consider himself quite lucky the May states didn't vote in April or March instead.  If in March Romney had to face Santorum in Indiana, North Carolina, West Virginia, Nebraska, Oregon, Arkansas, Kentucky or Texas, this thing would be far from over.  I could see Santorum winning all of those contests except for maybe Oregon.

However, barrage of northern states around the end sealed Santorum's fate.  With Romney being crowned the defacto nominee, all Santorum can do is think about a possible 2016 run.  And sources indicate that he already is.

Bush admits he still isn't popular

Former president George W. Bush doesn't want us calling his tax cuts 'the Bush tax cuts' by name.  One reason: it makes them less popular.  It must be depressing to know that your name will always be used to rally the other side.

Here was what Bush said:

“I wish they weren’t called the Bush tax cuts,” the former president said as he kicked off the Bush Institute Conference on Taxes and Economic Growth in New York City. “If they’re called some other body’s tax cuts, they’re probably less likely to be raised.”

He added: “If you raise taxes, you’re taking money out of the pockets of consumers.”

Bush continues the tactic of not differentiating tax cuts for the middle class with tax cuts for the rich.  President Obama has proposed the 'Buffet Rule,' which would only raise taxes on the rich.  That analysis is for another post.

The fact that Bush admits his name hurts his own side underscores that he is well aware that his presidency hurt the conservative movement.  It might be why he has remained hidden throughout the Obama presidency.  Bush left the country in worse shape than when he took office, and only gives us reason to pursue a different path than the usual right-wing formula of supply side economics.

The GOP's anti-Obama super PAC slime fest about to begin

Karl Rove's super-PAC American Crossroads is set to begin its advertising campaign against the President and progressive interests.  Get ready for slime!

Combined with expected activity from a pro-Romney super PAC, Restore Our Future, and a Republican National Committee with better finances than expected, Crossroads is helping to ease fears among some Republicans that Mr. Obama’s projected financial advantage — with more than $80 million on hand and expectations to have raised at least $750 million all told — would overwhelm Mr. Romney, who had $7.3 million on hand in his last filing report from February, especially at the start.

The depressing part is we shouldn't even be having this conversation.  If the right-wing Supreme Court didn't rule that corporations were people, the legislative branch could have continued its push for more campaign finance reform legislation that would have limited these super PACs.  Ordinary people won't have lobbying power in elections until we get the money out of politics.

So what kind of super PAC slime will we see from the GOP?  It's kind of like that old Nickelodeon show You Can't Do That On Television.  Everyone knows there will be slime.  They just don't know when or what it will look like: