Disqus - Latest Comments for btchakir

Re: Crist's Law Firm Gives to Obama Super PAC

btchakir — Mon, 23 Apr 2012 14:41:21 -0000

I agree with you about Lieberman... he is an asshole.

Re: What About the Economy, Stupid?

btchakir — Tue, 14 Jun 2011 09:32:52 -0000

Tinkle Down Theory... I like that. Very descriptive.

Re: The Devolution of Mankind

btchakir — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 08:56:24 -0000

Absolutely Brilliant! My admiration for you and your blog knows no (or very few) bounds. I have extracted a paragraph for my Quote of the Day and I hope the whole world reads this one, since it is RIGHT ON!
Under The LobsterScope

Re: Monday Morning Open Thread

btchakir — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 08:40:55 -0000

What we're up against in Health Care legislation...

When you wake up in the morning and rub the sleep out of your eyes are you surprised to find a great shadowy figure in the room? We are past the Fourth and the "let's celebrate America" holiday feeling only to find that the lobbyists continued to move forward while we were distracted by fireworks and speeches.

The Wapo points out this morning that a large number of former inner-office employees of Max Baucus and Charles Grassley and other active Congressional committee members are being snatched up by lobbying organizations:

The hirings are part of a record-breaking influence campaign by the health-care industry, which is spending more than $1.4 million a day on lobbying in the current fight, according to disclosure records. And even in a city where lobbying is a part of life, the scale of the effort has drawn attention. For example, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) doubled its spending to nearly $7 million in the first quarter of 2009, followed by Pfizer, with more than $6 million.

This is quickly distorting the Health Care debate, and, instead of researching the values of the Single-Payer system, or finding a way to extend a public option of any sort to fulfill Obama's campaign promise, we are finding the focus shifting to how much power the large corporate interests will retain and, indeed, expand into.

Public interest groups can scream all they like about how

the concentration of former government aides on K Street has distorted the health-care debate, and that it further illustrates the problem posed by the "revolving door" between government and private firms.

"The revolving door offers a short cut to a member of Congress to the highest bidder," said Sheila Krumholz, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics, which compiled some of the data used in The Post's analysis. "It's a small cost of doing business relative to the profits they can garner."

And what is the level of discussion that is aimed at the common taxpayer? We are targeted with phrases like "socialized medicine" (read "Communism triumphs over Freedom") "government takeover" (making medicine the new GM.) It is clear that we are supposed to be kept riled up over the meaningless extremities of the argument, while the actual benefits of plans that the majority of countries in the civilized world use for lower cost and highly adequate health care for entire populations are totally ignored ... unless, of course, you are a Senator or Congressperson yourself, in which case your government health program is damn near close to "socialized medicine." (That brings up this gem from Iowa Republican Senator Grassley from Think Progress:

During a townhall in Waukon, IA Tuesday, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) was asked by a constituent of his: “Why is your insurance so much cheaper than my insurance and so better than my insurance?” When Grassley struggled to explain the details of his own health care plan, the elderly man followed up, “Okay, so how come I can’t have the same thing you have?” Grassley said, “You can. Just go work for the federal government.”

Well... I would submit that we DO all work for the Federal Government. Out of our incomes we generate the taxes that the government uses to operate. We follow its regulations and we select its highest ranking employees through elections. Why shouldn't we have access to Grassley's less expensive health care?

The next months will be a challenge to all of us. I would submit however that, during the summer while legislators take vacations and during which time they cannot resist making speeches, attending fundraisers, and keeping generally visible (there's an election next year), we have the opportunity to be the PUBLIC LOBBYISTS and stay on them wherever they go.

Let's carry out our First Amendment rights to address our grievances, especially when it comes to the need for Public Health care, from Martha's Vineyard to the beaches of California!

Under The LobsterScope

Re: Gordon Brown to bask in the glow of Obama

btchakir — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 07:38:21 -0000

And the budget grows...

As Obama bails out AIG and Citicorp and probably all the automobile companies, we are still not sure where the new jobs will come from... or if they will come at all. We wait to see the massive hirings to fix bridges and highways or the "shovel ready" projects from the states get started.

Yes, It's been about a month and only a couple of weeks with the legislation in place. However, saving AIG seems to be much more important than employment, and maybe it is.

The huge budget doesn't bother me... budgets and expenditures (yes, and debt, too) have grown before... and it always seems like it's much more than we can afford. But we seem to get through it and create a whole new world with a new economy as a point of accomplishment. If, this time, we adjust the startling differences between the extreme upper class and the society supporting middle class then we will probably not be so worried a decade from now.

Meanwhile, we have to listen to the outrages blared out by Rush Limbaugh (who, as I said to my wife, gives fat men a bad name). To hear him insult everyone from John Kerry, to Harry Reid, to Nancy Pelosi, to Barack Obama is to wonder how the Republic Party (which, of course, is the opponent to Limbaugh's tacit insult, the "Democrat" party) ever achieved power in the first place. As a symbol, he shows them to be, well, just not nice people.

And when times are hard, nice people score big.

But, back to the creation of jobs... we are wondering where employment will go. This piece by Devilstower in the Daily Kos proves prescient, I think:

What does it show? Under Democratic presidencies, job creation goes up. Every Democrat who followed a Republican did better than the Republican who preceded them. Every Republican who followed a Democrat produced fewer jobs than their predecessor.

And before anyone jumps on the "but that was because they got all the jobs that were started up under the previous administration," notice that where Republican followed Republican, the second administration came out worse than the first. When Democrat followed Democrat (for which we don't have nearly enough examples) job creation improved in the second administration.

I have no doubt that Obama will carry on the Democratic tradition.

Under The LobsterScope

Re: Sunday Talk Shows Open Thread

btchakir — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 09:56:27 -0000

I was devastated watching CBS News Sunday Morning as they led off s story on historic houses/museums being in financial trouble. With the price of gas keeping tourism down, with the loss of income keeping corporate donations from flowing in, and with state and local money drying up...plus a history during the economic boom of the 90s of new construction and expensive renovation... these National Landmarks are deeply in debt (The Twain House is a whopping 4.9 million, due to the building of a visitor's center that is now considered too expensive for the organization.)

I spent many years in the non-profit arts industry, working for the Jamaica (NY) Arts center, as Director of The Fine Arts Work Center in Provincetown (MA), as a founder of the Marlborough (CT) Arts Center and Museum, and as an interviewer of grant applicants for the Massachusetts Council on the Arts. Life was tough then (I got out after Reagan was elected when one of his first targets was the national Endowment for the Arts, and went into the Photography and then the Computer businesses.) It is much, much harder now. To be in the non-profit fundraising grind now is something I am no longer young enough to deal with effectively. I feel for those who are there now.

When I owned with my wife the first computer-aided graphic design studio east of the Mississippi (U-Design, Inc.), we established our shop in another Hartford, CT, gothic house... smaller than the Twain house, but only a couple of blocks away. The Twain house was one of my clients in the 90s, and I always considered it one of the great historic buildings in the country. If it were forced to close now... forced to sell off collections (like the failed mechanical typesetting machine that Twain went broke on that is displayed in the House's basement - something I do a complete lecture on in the Typography class I teach at Hagerstown Community College) and, even worse, forced to fall into disrepair... America would lose.

We are heading into dark times.
Under The LobsterScope

Re: The Real Deal

btchakir — Sat, 27 Sep 2008 07:46:03 -0000

I don't think McCain is really listening to Petraeus...

John McCain made such a point last night that we don't get out of Iraq without "victory" and said that Obama would know that had he been listening to General Petraeus. McCain repeatedly made Petraeus the clear definer of our military activities in Iraq.

It never was brought up, however, that this very month, in an interview with the BBC as he was changing his assignments in the Middle East, Petraeus stated that he will "Never declare victory" in Iraq. He further stated that "this is not the sort of struggle where you take a hill, plant the flag and go home to a victory parade..."

To hear it in Petraeus' own voice go here. To read his words and review the whole interview go to "No victory in Iraq, says Petraeus."

Under The LobsterScope

Re: John on CNN last night

btchakir — Sat, 27 Sep 2008 07:32:05 -0000

I don't think McCain is really listening to Petraeus...

To hear it in Petraeus' own voice go here. To read his words and review the whole interview go to "No victory in Iraq, says Petraeus."

Under The LobsterScope

Re: A Reminder About What McCain Is Doing

btchakir — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 12:01:39 -0000

McCain Knuckles Under... Surprise! Surprise!

Apparently the old man discovered that his game wasn't working: the press, most of Congress, many of the folks calling in to C-Span didn't buy it. So John McCain is getting on a plane for Oxford, Mississippi and the debate is on... and without a closed deal on the Hill which he said was his requirement.

This really makes it clear that he was playing a little game with us! Oooooh, that McCain. Such a kidder!

Under The LobsterScope

Re: Suffolk Poll: Nevada is Very Tight -- Political Wire

btchakir — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 16:27:55 -0000

Actually, 84% said 'not Democrats"...

Re: Patriarchal Palin

btchakir — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 19:05:31 -0000

You think McCain is going to "Change" our anti-middle-class Government because he says he will? You think Palin isn't tied to Lobbyists as well? Think again, folks and check out this video:

Now visit McLobbyists.com and get the whole story on the John McCain gamble... and after you do, direct the folks you know who need convincing there, too.

Under The LobsterScope

Re: Patriarchal Palin

btchakir — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 10:37:16 -0000

As of today, two days after the close of the RNC, Electoral-Vote.com is shpwing Obama as significantly ahead. Indeed, Ohio and North Dakota, which were leaning Republican at the height of the RNC, are now leaning Democratic.

This is in direct conflict with the McCain campaign's statements, whose web site is using figures from last June and July.

It takes 270 Electoral Votes to win the Presidency, and Obama is now projected as having 301.

With 60 days left in the race, the daily look at these poll figures will be important for the consideration of the campaigns. Couple this with the Republican strategy of keeping Palin away from the press and pushing of personalities instead of issues and it will put the onus right on the intelligence of the American voter to make a choice.

Under The LobsterScope

Re: Patriarchal Palin

btchakir — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 17:08:40 -0000

That great Alaskan blogger Mudflats has a piece out about Sarah Palin and her elationship with "The Bridge To Nowhere" that Ted Stevens tried to get the Federal Government to fund. In fact, Palin's statement in her acceptance speech was:

I championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. In fact, I told Congress — I told Congress, ‘Thanks, but no thanks,’ on that Bridge to Nowhere. ‘If our state wanted a bridge’, I said, ‘we’d build it ourselves’.

But Mudflats gives us this piece from the Ketchikan Daily News:

“People across the nation struggle with the idea of building a bridge because they’ve been under these misperceptions about the bridge and the purpose,’ said Palin, who described the link as the Ketchikan area’s potential for expansion and growth.

Palin said Alaska’s congressional delegation worked hard to obtain funding for the bridge and that she ‘would not stand in the way of the progress toward that bridge’.
8-8-06

‘We need to come to the defense of Southeast Alaska when proposals are on the table like the bridge and not allow the spinmeisters to turn this project or any other into something that’s so negative,’ Palin said.”
Ketchikan Daily News 9-28-06

Looks like she makes things up. Read the whole article.

Under The LobsterScope

Re: It’s official, everybody hates her

btchakir — Thu, 22 May 2008 16:58:53 -0000

To be a Democrat has, for me, always meant to be fair and to recognize the majority vote. In my 62 years I have voted for many Dems who didn't get elected, but were defeated by other voters according to the rules. The crushing of the rules in the election of George W. Bush was a devastating blow to all Democrats, yet I expected all of us to go on following the rules, knowing that being true to our principals will eventually win out.

Now we are confronted with Hillary Clinton and an attempt to break the rules that everyone else was following through the primaries. What is the difference between her actions now and the Bush campaign in Florida in 2000? Not much.

The Superdelegates see what is happening... they must. We have to urge those who haven't stated their endorsement to back our candidate, Barack Obama, now. And those who have endorsed Clinton should, at this point, be encouraged to switch. There is no other way.

Under The LobsterScope