Friday News Roundup - Hour 1
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2011-04-08/friday-news-roundup-hour-1
Federal budget battles pose challenges for both political parties. President Obama begins his 2012 re-election campaign. And in a policy reversal, suspects in the September 11th attacks will be tried before a military commission. A panel of journalists joins Diane for analysis of the week's top national news stories.
Guests
Jeanne Cummings
Politico's assistant managing editor in charge of Enterprise.
Laura Meckler
White House correspondent, The Wall Street Journal.
Ron Elving
Washington editor for NPR.
Friday News Roundup Video
Diane and the panelists discuss the possibility of an impending government shutdown and the various sticking points between Congressional Republicans and Democrats:
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
Silvie F wrote:
What bothers me more than anything at this point, is the fact that the absurd behavior in the government is now bleeding into the rest of the country. The callers lately have been passionate and rightly so, but why all the insults thrown back and forth? Do we really have to listen to people sneak back-handed insults into their questions?
Right on Silvie! I would go further and say these "back-handed" comments are welcomed by Diane since they come from the left.
The trillion-dollar military budget is given the blank, historic tax breaks for the very rich are sacred, and womens' health is now a critical budget issue. Of course it's a power grab.
I see the midterms not so much a referendum on the Obama administration as an election trend and Chicken Little deficit hysteria brought on by the soundbite/cable blowhards (an observation under-represented in months of programming with Boehner et. al.). I don't recall one (maybe one) serious economist arguing that debt reduction is as important in the short-term as a recovery that we should have been spending more on.
Domestic spending is already skin and bones; maybe the sole beneficiaries of record worker productivity could lose a few pounds?
But it matters little what bracket dishonest people are "in" when they have every means and loophole to get out of it.
Did I not hear something about a video being posted "an hour after" the show aired? I'm curious to see what everyone looks like. Maybe I misheard.
Oh, so the media has decided what will and won't pass (whatever happened to "no one knows what will happen"?) it's free to ignore further evidence that the Republi-Con proposal is not just about the deficit (where have we heard that one before?), but is actually about ideological and cultural issues (something Republi-Cons piously denied they were interested in during the last election)?
For me the tip-off is the fact that one proposal would have funded the military entirely for the rest of the year, while leaving everything else vulnerable to further cuts. Why is the military sacrosanct? Because that's one area where Republi-Cons feel the bigger the government the better!
And what about Ryan's 2012 budget? Marching us back to the 19th Century are we? What ever happened to "shared sacrifice"? All I see is the wealthiest and corporations getting breaks, and everyone else getting the shaft!
Two points about his Medicare ideas:
1) Isn't government vouchers to pay for health insurance a form of the dreaded "wealth redistribution"?
2) Guess what happens as health costs continue to rise, and those subsidies don't? Hope the elderly can find a handy iceberg to throw themselves on and float away!
Hey hainc, maybe this time you'll get a chance to see this, and provide an answer. Just what does "hainc" mean or stand for anyway? Where did you get that "web name" from?
(No "hidden agenda" or "trick question" here. I'm just curious.)
hainc on April 8, 2011 @ 8:04 am wrote: “Americans everywhere are tightening their belts in a time of economic uncertainty and after years of living above their means.”
Except, of course, the wealthiest, who are “sacrificing” by taking further cuts in their taxes, and voting themselves huge bonuses while driving their companies into the ground.
And by the way, “living above their means” has been going on for decades, not just years. And part of the reason the government has been living beyond its means is the failed policy of “voodoo economics” - which Republi-Cons are still following as if it were a great success!
“the same misguided priorities that got consumers into such a bad position financially.”
- Like I said: “voodoo economics” is one of those “misguided priorities”.
“That will certainly be the case if we are lucky enough to get a shutdown.”
- That’s funny, I thought the Republi-Cons (and their supporters) were piously telling us they didn’t want a shutdown, and it’s all those nasty Democrats’ fault!
DPavlovich on April 8, 2011 @ 8:38 am wrote: “I am puzzled why no one asks if congress persons and senators will still get pay checks if the government is shut down.”
Excellent question. According to an interview on CNN (with a Republican Congressman) the answer may be they will. He was saying that he couldn’t refuse to take his paycheck (even if the government was shutdown), so he would donate the money to charity. (Good for him, by the way.) So, assuming he was correct, the answer is they will “still get pay checks”.
As for the word "party", it has many different meanings. Only political junkies like us think a political party is a "good time"!
;-)
Viva la France?
It was mentioned that France backed the US during the Revolutionary War. Didn't they also back the confederacy during the US Civil War? Further, was not their involvement in both conflicts due to political and financial interests and not due to some greater commitment to democracy?
Just thought I would throw that out there.
jim.swearingen@... on April 8, 2011 @ 8:49 am wrote: “President Obama should receive none of the blame for this potential government shut down.”
I’m afraid I can’t agree with that. While it’s true that since the 2008 election the Republi-Cons have put hurting him at the top of their agenda, that doesn’t excuse his failure of leadership.
The Democrats should have passed the budget last year before the election! Instead, they tried to duck the issue and “kick it down the road”. Result, the Republicans got the chance (in December and now) to tear up that road! Obama shouldn’t have let that happen, instead he acquiesced in that irresponsible behavior by his own party, and paid the price last November.
That doesn’t mean the Republi-Cons shouldn’t also be condemned for their irresponsible conduct. It just means there’s plenty of blame to go around!
monte on April 8, 2011 @ 10:18 am wrote: “Even with all the outrage and highly motivated liberal voters they fell short. . . .”
Let me offer you the same advice I gave my liberal friends when the first election results were released: don’t crow until all the votes have been counted and re-counted!
Tell me, monte, if Democratic officials announce today that they’ve just found 10,000 votes for the challenger they “overlooked”, will you quietly accept that, or will you express skepticism at how convenient that sounds?
P.S. - glad to see you realize Walker wasn't interested in "balancing the budget", but merely in union busting. Hope you'll apply that keen insight to other things Republi-Cons are busy doing in the name of "cutting the deficit" that actually have nothing to do with it.
Pegkageleiry on April 8, 2011 @ 10:37 am wrote: “”besides ts NOT the Govt 's money!”
PART ONE
An empty Republi-Con slogan that actually means nothing. Let’s try it on some government spending they (and I presume you) like. Why should the military be funded for the year, but everything else is up for grabs? It’s not the government’s money! Why should funding for the excellent health care the Congress receives continue? It’s not the government’s money! Why should I have to pay taxes for “faith based initiatives” that favor religions I don’t belong to or believe in? It’s not the government’s money!
“We should not be funding ANYTHING that does not directly help the bottom line.”
- Whose “bottom line”, and who decides? Answer: in a democracy “We the People” decide, through our elected representatives (Democrats as well as Republi-Cons), not just a minority of ideological “terrorists” (TeaBaggers) busy trying to extort concessions from their own party (the GOP) with their mantra of “no compromise”!
“Democrats really want to shut down the government over this?”
- No, the Republi-Cons do, but (as usual) the “responsibility party” is doing everything it can to avoid responsibility.
TO BE CONTINUED
PART TWO
“Easy fix: Get private sources of income for planned parenthood and split the company into two entities: one with a completely different name and solely private source of money.”
- Try to pay attention some time. That’s the status quo! By Federal law (the Hyde Amendment, remember?) no taxpayer money can be spent on abortion (except for cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the money). Planned Parenthood uses no taxpayer money for that procedure. (As I understand it, they strictly segregate the money used for abortion from all their other funds. That money comes solely from “private sources”.)
Proposals to “defund Planned Parenthood” is just a sop to people like you who are too busy pursuing ideological purity to bother with reality!
“Apparently there is at least enough people out there to support abortion to fund it.”
- Yes, because unlike the so-called “pro-life” crowd, we actually care whether women live or die, and don’t believe the “right to life” begins at conception and ends at birth! Rule of thumb for “moral issues”: if it costs Republi-Cons nothing (like banning abortion or gay marriage) they support it, if it costs them anything (like health care and other social programs) they oppose it. How very convenient. The spirit of Ebenezar Scrooge is alive and well, and is running the GOP!
To ndelaney47, writing on April 8, 2011 @ 10:57 am:
Good point!
hainc on April 8, 2011 @ 10:58 am wrote: “As of 2008, the top 10% of earners pay 70% of personal income tax collected by the government.”
I’ve always wondered if statistics like those include the payroll taxes (FICA, etc.), which are a completely flat rate, have a cap on the income taxed, and don’t apply to unearned income at all (investments, etc.)?
I also wonder what percentage of the nation’s GDP and wealth that 10% actually own? I suspect it’s far more than 70%, but I’d prefer to know.
(I’d also like to know the source for these statistics.)
P.S. - unless you’re a member of that “top 10%”, I’m touched by your concern for those “poor starving” millionaires and billionaires.
To msanfordepstein, writing on April 8, 2011 @ 11:05 am:
Well said!
Silvie F on April 8, 2011 @ 11:08 am wrote: “I thought it was ridicuilous to discuss where people were going to sit and with whom, at the State of the Union address. Does Pres. Obama have to create assigned seating and a teddy bear-like reward system?”
Obama had nothing to do with that. Congress decides the seating in the Congress. It’s called “separation of powers”.
hainc on April 8, 2011 @ 11:41 am wrote: “Ideology drives every line item in the budget.”
Correction: ideology drives every line item in the Republi-Con budget. True Republicans (those not committed to ideological purity) try to allow reality and facts to determine their budget priorities. TeaBaggers and Republi-Cons (essentially the same thing) do not.
Oh, and as someone has already pointed out: those “top 10%” you’re so concerned about haven’t done much “belt tightening”.
By the way, it’s funny that you’re concerned about China. Why? Because as one guest pointed out in the next hour: China is no democracy, and still has a partially planned economy! How does that fit with your “laissez-faire” philosophy. (And with the false claim of conservative economists that as China became more capitalist it would also become more democratic. I’m seeing plenty of increasing capitalism there, but no increase in political freedom!)
Ironclad on April 8, 2011 @ 11:50 am wrote: “The tone was set that the "discovery" of a 10,000 volte discrepancy (7000-3000 for the 2 contestants) was somehow suspicious.”
First, thank you for providing a link to the video.
Second, look up the word “suspicious” sometime. If this had happened with any election official it would have been suspicious. (Or do you seriously think that if a Democratic clerk suddenly announced 10,000 new votes for the Democratic candidate, Republicans wouldn’t say that was suspicious?)
The point is: suspicion is not proof. Neither is this press conference proof. (Do you always believe everything said at a press conference?) With an election this close a re-count is inevitable, even without this turn of events. Let’s postpone final judgment until the process has run its course.
monte on April 8, 2011 @ 12:07 pm wrote: “I would go further and say these "back-handed" comments are welcomed by Diane since they come from the left.”
Of course you would. I’m sure you’d much rather Diane cut-off callers that don’t favor your point of view - the way your “Fox Friends” do!
Etaoin Shrdlu wrote:
"Tell me, monte, if Democratic officials announce today that they’ve just found 10,000 votes for the challenger they “overlooked”, will you quietly accept that, or will you express skepticism at how convenient that sounds?"
If they did, they were probably in the back of Al Franken's car.
In listening to a stream of this show while washing dishes and cooking this afternoon I got three really good belly laughs.
1. Many commentators who wrote here were obsessed with whether Congresspersons and Senators would get paid during a shutdown. This shows a real lack of awareness. First, few people who need the salary could ever afford to run for Congress. And second, the corporate lobbyists have the wherewithall to take care of any needs they might have in the absence of their little checks. The revolving door, the jobs for spouses, children and cronies; the consultancies and honorarium amount to a much greater sum. Their salaries would have little bearing on how they politic or vote. I'm ashamed of my colleagues who equate elite lifestyles with their
own quotidian ones.
2. The Tea Party think they are acting on principle. In fact most of what they advocate (as far as legislative results of funding cuts) serves only the needs of about a thousand families,the Oligarchy and their corporate underlings. Minutemen dressed as Indians trashed the tea of the East India Corporation in reaction to taxation without representation. The current extortionists do just the opposite In truth their actions serve corporate interests contrary to their constituency.
3. The new more "conservative" Republican Party thinks it has a mandate to jettison Liberalism forever. What they forgot is that "Liberalism" today is just as pro-corporate as they are and has not advocated for the typical working citizen in a long time. Many times Liberals provide an imaginative rhetoric and publicity to outshine any dour Republican in the glorification and acclaim of banksters and tyrants. Obama is foolish enough to expect posterior magnetism of his mouth to the elite derriere will ensure his re-election. T-partiers are not as ignorant and hateful , nor as loyal, as people in power might expect. They may come to resemble the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood in the oncoming North American Spring. This impass on the budget may light the fuse to a revolutionary bomb when our millions of poor working people cannot get the pay or services they depend upon. People have now surrendered their prosperity, prospects and human rights about as much as they are inclined and the rubberband is stretched tight. Whose nose will it obliterate? Ouch!
What a hoot, Diane! (As agent Dale Cooper once commented.)
From: Cornelia Gibbs [mailto:corneliaGibbs@hotmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 09, 2011 12:37 PM
To: Alexis Robinson [arobinson@trumporg.com]
Subject: Trump: Scam of the Century
I am sure Mr. Trump means the Collapse of WTC #7
We love Donald Trump and we support him all the way - with the hope and expectation that he will take on the New Investigation of the Events of 9/11
and lower his Commercial Property Insurance Premiums .... and he can sue Insurance Companies for not doing their regulated duties before cutting Checks for Arson.
If he does not listen to us .... when he comes to NH to campaign and face the people .... I will bring Obama's Aunt Zeituni Onyango to say Hi to Donald Trump in Manchester, NH.
Alternatively, you will arrange us to see Mr. Trump for 10-15 minutes to make a case ... and Mr. Trump can make it an attractive asset for his campaign - he is the Man!!!!
Thanks Allison for your kind help on this matter.
We want to see Larry Silverstein in Jail and Silverstein Properties and Vornado Realty go out of business for conspiring to bring down the entire World Trade Center complex down and profiting immensly with the replacement construction and insurance proceeds.
It's truly sad that not one mention was made of the people that are going to lose their jobs because of these cuts nor of those that are going to lose the government assistance they so sorely need. Have we become so consumed by the frenzy to cut deficits that we can spare them a thought? If so, it's a sad commentary on the state of our country.
If you once had encountered the person that makes you enchanted, so you are lucky, no matter ending how, should be happy? Hoary head arrives old, admittedly very good, if produced an accident, must not be love and hurt Bei. After all you had loved, you had fallen for love tear, pass for love heartbreak, once romance passes. Think you ever two people are mad in the wind in the winter run, stroll in the rain of summer, although he is already far,go, but romantic clue still is collected in your heart he joins earnest of all teammate regard as brother, is this also a very happy thing? Life resembles a road originally, a person no matter he accompanies you to go much further, still meet what part with you finally, this world has the sweet heart that is born to die in all together rarely after all, it is the husband and wife of hundred years also can have one party predecease. The everybody in life is sentient and unripe as parting as what die, just what you encounter is a few earlier, if thought so, you also so won't sad? Do not live for a person, the love that a person goes assuming two people is very painful, only two hearts manage love sincerely, that ability is real love. If you love that person really, he can appear in your memory when you want to forget most, can be in you are the saddest most lose when in the heart that appears in you, but you cannot recount you to him however present experience, your present affliction. Of course, you once had been paid, since was paid, did not regret to lose that feeling, lifetime of neither one person talks about love not to do other business only. Do not believe those love fictions, because we are to live in reality, there is lasting love in reality, do not have to who can wait for all one's life. Also do not have so called acceptance and agreement