Friday News Roundup - Hour 1
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2011-09-02/friday-news-roundup-hour-1
Employers failed to add jobs last month for the first time in a year. The unemployment rate remained unchanged at 9.1 percent. The news comes as President Obama puts the finishing touches on his job-creation strategy. His much-debated launch of the plan can’t come too soon. Polls show the public believes G.O.P. candidate Mitt Romney would handle the economy better than the president. A veteran Senate Republican staffer is chosen to head the new deficit-reduction committee. And residents along the East Coast cope with the lingering effects of Hurricane Irene.
Guests
Michael Scherer
White House correspondent, Time magazine.
Jeanne Cummings
deputy government editor, Bloomberg News.
David Welna
congressional correspondent, NPR.
Friday News Roundup Video
The panelists respond to some listener questions from Facebook and Twitter which posit that President Obama has not been bold enough in pushing his agenda. Time Magazine's Michael Scherer also talks about White House Chief of Staff Bill Daley's invitation to presidential historian Michael Beschloss for Bescholss to speak to administration staff about past presidents that have won re-election despite high unemployment rates:
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
"DBallard wrote:
My GOODNESS - should everything concerning our government need to put politics first. Me and most of the people I know are so angry and frustrated that every time our president tries to put an idea forward he is blocked, not by sound reasoning and better ideas, but by political issues having absolutely nothing to do with fixing our countries horrible delimmas.
We are not stupid. We are watching how the congress seems to be more concerned with their own jobs, their own political parties, and doing everything they can do to destroy this president.
All of this while so many are without jobs, have distanced themselves through lack of trust in the political parties, and know, despite what the silly fighting congress is continueing, that there are solutions to all of this countries issues that need to be implemented - and QUICK!
Oh - and I'm not a democrate or a republican - and proud of it!"
Hello David and well come back:
Obama got his legislation through, the Recovery Act and Health Care Reform Act. He got it through even though the majority of Americans rejected it. The Recovery Act instead of what it was promised for (Bridges & Infractures) turned out to be a slush fund for unions. Dave no offense, but many of us do not want to be like England your home country.
You bet lots of us are mad at Obama, he is a failure.
"Lee Black wrote:
"The noisy wheel gets the oil" while others are ignore. The 'noisy' Tea Party is getting too much attention - they don't really represent the common citizen."
Lee:
They(Tea Party) sure did get the attention of the "common citizen" in November 2010. The Republicans won 63 seats.
Lee Black wrote:
Job growth in Texas is misleading. Texas is number 1 in lowest salaries. See the web site MEETRICKPERRY.com to learn more about how Perry has failed in Texas.
Lee:
The cost of living is low, no state income tax, and it is the fastest growing state in the country. Could be that low wages have to do with all the illegals in the state.
It is total disrespect to the American people that Congress and the President pretend they can't agree on when to hold a speech about jobs. Working people aren't falling for this nonsense. We've seen this kind of behavior before, when the politicians kept arguing about the shape of the table while real people were dying in Vietnam.
Part one:
Ouch! I’ve been out copied-and-pasted!
You and monte continue to solve the world’s problems with your keyboards and the illusion that we have choices and a functioning republic.
I’ll continue to do my bank-centric research, and share my results only with those who actually get it, and trust me, I don’t think my results are welcomed anywhere in NPR(especially at WBUR).
I highly recommend books by G. Edward Griffin and Ellen Hodgson Brown as starters.
The only chance our fading republic had was in Ron Paul, but that good soul is retiring at seventy six if he doesn’t win, and he has a good chance of winning given fair and balanced treatment in the press(L & R).
The only reason he’s still ALIVE, I’m purely assuming, is he reminds himself of JFK, and has mastered the art of compromise for the good of the Republic.
We’ll see what his son does in the future; I hope nothing but the best for him and Kentucky, and of course our nation.
If you think Gardasil Rick, and/or ‘tear-down-a-12-million-dollar-home-to-rebuild-another-one Mitt Romney are the answers, then you need to do some more research. They all represent the same corporate interests, and that includes “Chicago-politics” Obama. We don’t count.
Part two:
Monte, I’m not a “political junkie”, I don’t believe in the false left/right paradigm that has been created since at least 1913.
What do junkies need monte? Rehab; my rehab is in the form of bank history research.
As far as I’m concerned, and who am I to decide monte, you and ecgberht are welcome. I hope that I am welcome.
I just don’t see any productivity discussing and/or being critical of the two sub-parties that are controlled by the puppet masters, i.e. Wall Street, the private central banks, both here and abroad, the CFR, the TLC, and the Bilderbergers.
Name-calling bloggers have no place within decent discourse.
We are all USELESSEATERS on the road to SOYLENT GREEN, as others in these threads occasionally remind us, or at least only 60-90% of us.
I’m off to enjoy the rest of my Saturday, and I hope ya’ll have a good holiday weekend.
See ya 10 AM-EST Tuesday the 6th(wvxu.org/91.7 eFFF eMMM, no static at all...
Part three:
Last, but not least...
...ecgberht, I apologize for the odoriferous, flatulent, egg-related remark I made Friday morning, ok?
Now let’s all have a Labor Day weekend beer summit!
Actually most fiscal conservatives would like to lower taxes and eliminate tax breaks. I am against corporate welfare. I think you are correct about that. However, any new taxes should start above one million dollars because subchapter S corporations will be included in the new taxes and they are small businesses.
Also, everyone should have skin in the game. The 49% of Americans that don't pay taxes should pay something, even if it is a token amount.
Didn't Rick Perry step on the last Republican candidates' debate with his candidacy announcement? And now he is the front-runner in many polls.
So President Obama followed his lead by steppping on the next Republican candidates' debate in the hopes that he too can become popular.
By all means, pivot back in the direction of something resembling a progressive presidency. I share much of the frustration I hear in the voices of callers about a rightward drift that never dies; it only takes different forms. Personally, I will be looking closely into any sort of “jobs” program, or any other government program, and asking a simple question: “How does this help reverse the investor-led business model of redistributing wealth and/or tax dollars upward?” I mean, more crony capitalism disguised as a public service, or what? What about the value and efficacy of public industries and public investments on their own? Instead, it’s all about stoking the private sector (with public money, if nothing else). The thirties tells a different story (along with the run-up to the thirties). This laissez-faire free-market ideology has not been allowed to collapse from the weight of its own greed, and instead of even acknowledging that it would have, it’s once again being hailed as the national savior, while simultaneously vilifying “big government” as a comparatively wasteful and ineffective alternative. It’s a line that is wearing a little bit thin, at this point.
Sometimes government programs are a waste, but certainly the excesses in the financial industries have proven how wasteful, extravagant, fraudulent, abusive, and indifferent to people and the public welfare private industry can be. For those who may have criticism for Barack Obama for opposing the recent EPA bill that would expand area in California to be included in their smog program: I must say that there can be no better example of a poorly conceived and administered government program, and anyone who works within it will surely agree. It may be true that Obama was merely capitulating to Republican demands; but in this case, it can only be cause for rejoicing. Either/or positions are just too simple. Each program and how it is implemented needs to be carefully examined. We need change so radical and punitive to the ruling financial elite, I doubt that it will happen without worldwide financial collapse. As “young Turk” Cenk Uygur recently commented, the Democratic and Republican Parties have become nothing more than a good cop/bad cop routine that always, ultimately, ends up serving corporations, financiers, and what other analysts have called a rentier regime (owners of wealth and property who live strictly off rents and the interests of their assets). Pray for pivot.
gbloper wrote:
By all means, pivot back in the direction of something resembling a progressive presidency. I share much of the frustration I hear in the voices of callers about a rightward drift that never dies; it only takes different forms. Personally, I will be looking closely into any sort of “jobs” program, or any other government program, and asking a simple question
gbpooper:
Give me a break: We just had a 900 Billion dollar taxpayer funded spending projects that was suppose to be for infrastructure to put people back to work. Legislation sold by liberals like yourself for road and bridges in getting people back to work? What the hell happened? I believe you need to look at all the waste in government programs since FDR to present that could of been done more efficently by private business or not done at all.
What has also hurt the Laissez-faire market is Federal oversight with bureucratics that have no idea how free enterpise works and the guy at top who has no idea how jobs are created.
Mr. meancoser: I am passing this information along just for you, in case you are still around and actually interested in facts, instead of going on the personal attack to everything everyone says. If you would spend more time carefully reading what people have to say, instead of reacting to it with a visceral right-wing bias, maybe you wouldn’t have so many complaints on this site. Maybe I wasn’t specific enough. When I made reference to public/private ventures that can be a waste of taxpayers’ money, I assumed that visions of the California “energy crisis,” with market-manipulating Texas energy traders would immediately come to readers’ minds; or the failed attempt to privatize water delivery (in Stockton, CA, for instance, or Bolivia, where costs to consumers increased to a full quarter of citizens’ annual income—and brought to you by Enron’s San Fransisco based subsidiary, the Bechtel Corporation); or how about the more recent cases of highway development and repair being farmed out to private foreign companies because states are broke, or a case about eight years ago where a private construction company built a toll highway in southern California (with taxpayers’ money) on the condition that CalTrans would not make any improvements to an adjacent highway? When they did, the private company sued the state of California for breach of contract.
These are things I assume most people are aware of, and, left- or right-leaning, should be outraged about. The list goes on, but the ultimate culprit is the globalization of finance capital. So, when I say we need to look into the specifics of a proposal—Democratic or Republican—this is what I’m talking about. I can’t do all your homework for you, but here is a journalist who has looked carefully into the specifics of all required infrastructure repair in the U.S., category by category, and offers facts and historical evidence to back up his perspective, as well as constructive proposals as to how to proceed. There is a performance review link to the very program to which you referred. If you don’t want to read the whole thing, at least scroll down the part titled: How do we pay for it?
http://www.economicpopulist.org/content/infrastructure-program-millions-...
to ecgberht:
Quote:
'villette wrote:
"and perhaps ecgberht, if he/she continues with comments like those today) from this forum. It's clear the tone of his comments often degrade the discussion and repulse participants. I feel he often breaks the civility standard you request."
You wrote:
"Point to one. Posts for which you have policy disagreements do not count as "degrading and repulsing". If you only want to read the opinions of liberal sycophants, visit the Daily Kos."
End quote
ecgberht, thanks for your comments. However, please do not assume that I have policy disagreements with you, or that I am interested only in the writings of "liberal sycophants." I am an interested, regular reader of a number of contemporary conservative authors.
My objection to your posts and Monte's refers to tone (often condescending, as I find your response above), aggressiveness, and domination. I appreciate Monte's request that people ignore his posts if they don't want to read them, but I still think that online forums work best if people speak as they would face-to-face, comfortably and respectfully. In this case, that includes refraining from domination. It is possible to be provocative, challenging,and to put forth different opinions, without rancor.
Posting has the advantage of potentially more complete thoughts than real-time conversation, but that does not mean that it is an acceptable screen for a barrage of aggressive comments. It's too bad: I would like to read your arguments more often, as I do with other conservative-leaning posters, but it's tough in this environment.
villette wrote:
"ecgberht, thanks for your comments. However, please do not assume that I have policy disagreements with you, or that I am interested only in the writings of "liberal sycophants." I am an interested, regular reader of a number of contemporary conservative authors. "
So, what I hear you saying is, you can't, or won't point to one post that is "degrading and repulsing" to you.
"My objection to your posts and Monte's refers to tone (often condescending, as I find your response above), aggressiveness, and domination. "
You said, you found my posts "degrading and repulsing". That's a pretty strong charge! I don't think it's unreasonable to ask you to back up such a charge. You still haven't done that. That's not "condescending". It's self-defense! It's like you punching me in the nose and then saying I'm "aggressive" and "dominating" if I put my hands over my face!
By the way, reading other posts of yours on this site pretty much tells me it's not "tone" you disagree with at all (one man's "aggressiveness" is another man's enthusiasm/fervor) it's the points I make. I don't care what "contemporary conservative authors" you read. Grady Lee Coward can call me a racist with absolutely no foundation and we don't hear a peep out of you. ES (aka strudel) can incessantly refer to "Republi-CONS" and villette remains silent. Instead, your solution? "Ban the "degrading and repulsing' commentators from the board", i.e. censor the views from the right. Hmmmm.
gbloper wrote:
Mr. meancoser: I am passing this information along just for you, in case you are still around and actually interested in facts, instead of going on the personal attack to everything everyone says. If you would spend more time carefully reading what people have to say, instead of reacting to it with a visceral right-wing bias, maybe you wouldn’t have so many complaints on this site. Maybe I wasn’t specific enough
gbloper:
No you are not specific enough. However I do agree with you in your statement of a private foreign contractor probably from Spain using publicly funded roads that will converage into a Toll Road. I have been a vocal critic in my hometown in Texas and Perry who favored this business arrangement.
What I disagree with you and I have read some of your previous posts in your belief that government is the solution to joblessness and that somehow it can give us the better life as posted in tread previous to this one.
" Personally, I will be looking closely into any sort of “jobs” program, or any other government program, and asking a simple question:"
“How does this help reverse the investor-led business model of redistributing wealth and/or tax dollars upward?” I mean, more crony capitalism disguised as a public service, or what? What about the value and efficacy of public industries and public investments on their own?"
Do you believe that a Federal run Public Bank will do better than a private bank owned by shareholders. Please be specific. Don't go off on what the Turk quoted or the price of Gold in Bolivia.
Mr gbloper:
I guess you are to proud to answer the above question I asked?