What's the next step?

As mentioned briefly in this morning’s ‘”BushWhack’ing,” a new Washington Post-ABC News poll shows that a majority of Americans want to see funding for the Iraq war cut, with 70% opining that the allocated money be slashed and a scant 25% supporting the $190 billion war funding request.

And despite the best attempts by the traditional media to paint the picture that only the “far left, anti-war wing,” of the Democratic party wants Congress to cut funding for Iraq… look closer at the poll results that shows close to seven in 10 Independents want Congress to cut back funds, nine in 10 Democrats and 46% of republicans… yes, 46% of republicans want Congress to cut back funds.

Sure, the chances of seeing the money reduced are about as good as the chances that Brittany will be voted Mother of the Year… but surely the Democrats can manage to remove their collective heads from their collective asses long enough to grasp the concept that the American public, the public, wants some bold moves to end the war and thus wouldn’t mind an antagonistic stance when it comes to the allocation of funds.

To that end, chairman of the House Appropriations Committee David Obey is playing like he might do just that… saying in a press conference this morning that he has “no intention of reporting out of Committee anytime in this session of Congress any such request that simply serves to continue the status quo.”

What does that mean exactly? That he won’t, for the time being at least, allow a blank check to leave his committee’s hands…

The poll also shows that there is deep dissatisfaction with both “President” Bush and Congress (though I don’t think we actually needed a poll to tell us that) partly because of the Iraq policy stalemate between the White House and Congressional Democrats… which, again, is not at all surprising.

The Senate has already passed the defense policy bill that authorizes another $150 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, with the final tally being 92-3… though the Senate bill doesn't guarantee that the money will be spent; only a separate appropriations bill will manage that.

So what we're looking at is an impasse in the House Appropriations Committee, and the question comes down to this; will Obey shut it down, or will he just… obey?

So you say you want a resolution an ultimatum?

“President” Bush is planning to invite Congressional leaders from both parties to the White House for milk and cookies to try and resolve the Iraq War funding stalemate.

The only problem is that it doesn’t really look to be much of an attempt at a resolution but rather the throw-down of an ultimatum as Bush made it clear that he would not change his position opposing troop withdrawals.

Said White House spokeswoman Dana Perino; “President Bush will invite Democrats to the White House to discuss their standoff over a war-funding bill, but he will not budge from his opposition to troop-withdrawal deadlines in Iraq.”

Lovely…

When a reporter asked her why lawmakers should even attend a meeting that already has rules of no negotiation attached Perino replied, “Maybe they need to hear again from the president about why he thinks it is foolish to set arbitrary timetables for withdrawal.”

In other words, Bush is going to act like the spoiled little brat that he is and pout and shout until he either gets his way or takes his ball and goes home…

But Bush better be careful, as this is not the gop-controlled parents congress that let him do any damn thing he wanted…
Enter Senator Harry Reid; “Iraqi leaders are not willing to take the political risk of governing their own country. That must change. That's what Congress is demanding. That is what the American people, by a large majority, demand. And the president should be leading us in that direction, not threatening to veto funding for our troops unless we rubber stamp his flawed plan.”

And Reid has a strong point there as the American people overwhelmingly support a change in direction for the Iraq Conflict. According to an April 2-4 AP/IPSOS poll that showed 64% of those polled “Disapprove” of how George Bush has handled the war in Iraq, 59% feel that going to war with Iraq was “A Mistake” and 50% saying the war is “Hopeless”…

During all of this, Bush is trying to increase pressure on the Democrats by playing a pathetic game of trying to shift blame to the Democrats by touting that funds will be cut off and the troops will be the ones to suffer…

Never mind the fact that there IS adequate funding for the occupation until July… (a fact that is backed-up by the Congressional Research Service, whose report shows that our troops have plenty of funds for the next few months)… never mind the fact that the Pentagon can shift funds as needed… and never mind the fact that the previous republican Congress took 118 days to pass a supplemental request, he's trying to create a false sense of urgency, and it’s now been…

... carry the two…...

... 57 days since Bush requested the latest supplemental funding bill and the Democratic Congress passed it.

It’s painfully clear that Bush is attempting to increase pressure on the Democrats and to force them to move, meaning a final decision on exactly what direction the U.S. will take in Iraq may be decided very, very soon.

The only question is will it follow the path that a majority of American’s want, more responsibility from Iraq and a timetable for U.S. withdrawal? Or will the President gather up his toys and go home?

Stay tuned…

Talk about a long time coming...

Senators Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Arlen Specter (R-PA) have introduced the Fair Elections Now Act, essentially a bi-partisan bill that would bring voluntary public financing to Senate elections with a companion bill expected to be introduced in the House soon by Rep. John Tierney (D-MA).

The issue is relatively easy to understand… a hundred $20 donors can be made insignificant by one maximum contribution of $2,300, a fact that gains even more traction when you hear that a scant few Americans give campaign contributions of $200 or more… meaning that candidates then spend all their time running down the big money and therefore ignore the little people.

The Fair Elections Now Act would create a voluntary public financing system for candidates running for a seat in the U.S. Senate with three flowing parts;

‘Seed Money’, which refers to the amount that candidates can raise (up to $100 per individual/PAC up to a set limit) so they can get their campaign off the ground. If they do that, that leads to…

‘Gather Qualifying Contributions. In order to qualify for public financing, a Senate candidate would have to demonstrate his/her seriousness and base of support by obtaining a set number of $5 contributions from citizens across the state (and it can’t be anymore than $5). Once they get enough, (based on state size), they can then receive…

‘The Benefits’: For agreeing not to accept private funding, a candidate instead receives a large sum of money to run his/her primary campaign, and if he/she is successful, they will also receive a larger sum for the general election. Further enhancing this stage is the fact that the sum is based on the state’s size, if the candidate is facing an opponent that is receiving private money or independent expenditures, and media costs – thus allowing for the possibility that the funding can be as much as tripled to guarantee a level playing field. Also included in the funding formula is a possible adjustment for media markets that would, possibly, allow candidates to receive broadcast vouchers discounting the cost of ads run near the end of primary and general election campaigns.

Kemp, what are the benefits of this system?

I’m glad you asked. Primarily, it boosts grassroots organizing at early stages, and then, with the fundraising load taken off their backs, it allows the candidates to spend time with the electorate… more so than they do now. Furthermore, once elected, the politicians will no longer have to rely on large donor support to win re-elections but instead on the average citizen, thus dramatically altering the dynamics on a wide range of policy issues.

Good thing… right? I think so…

If you want to help ‘level the playing field’ a bit, there are things you can do…

1. Show your support for Clean Elections by becoming a citizen co-sponsor by clicking on the link.

2. Make a donation today to support to bring Fair Elections to the U.S. Senate.

And finally…

3. Tell your friends and family to support Fair Elections today.

Stay tuned… this could get interesting…

The Weekly Rewind

It’s Friday, you all know what that means… it’s time for our ever-popular, ever-knowing feature; The Weekly Rewind… long-winded edition.

Applaud: to low polling numbers for the President and the Vice President. According to a new Harris Interactive Poll, “President” Bush’s approval is hovering at 32%, while Dick “Dick” Cheney’s numbers have him at an all-time Vice-Presidential low at 29% approval. (Hee hee hee hee… I love when hubris come back to bite people in the ass. What is it I used to say a lot here? Oh yeah… ‘Karma, baby!’)

Heckle: to the Department of Homeland Security for failing to tell Congress how the department is spending billions of dollars on major programs that run the gamut from aviation security to Gulf Coast rebuilding. (Checks and balances? What checks and balances???)

Applaud: to the republicans who are supporting House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s right to travel back and forth from DC on a military plane, like her republican predeccesor, Dennis Hastert (R-IL) did. According to the New York Times (new motto: all our reporters are now out of prison), a lot of republicans were put off by the flight fight. Said Rep. Ray LaHood (R-IL) “This is a bunch of baloney.” Rep Jeff Flake (R-AZ) followed that up by declaring; “Next week, we are going to steal their mascot and short-sheet their beds.” Now the White House is backing Ms. Pelosi with Spokesman Tony “Job” Snow saying in a briefing earlier this week: “This is a silly story, and I think it's been unfair to the speaker.” (I never thought I would say this, but nicely said Mr. Snow. This is a non-story that is being brought up by a slew of junior gop representatives who apparently have absolutely nothing better to do but criticize something that their former leader did and something aimed at protecting the SECOND person in the Presidential line of succession. To everyone who is making this molehill into a mountain; STFU)

Heckle: to the Bush(whacked) administration. According to the bipartisan U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, the administration, in its elan to secure the nation’s borders and slow the flow of illegal immigrants, might be leaving asylum seekers vulnerable to deportation and harsh treatment. (I’m sorry, what were the principles this country was founded on?)

Applaud: that all 435 House members will be allowed to view the classified version of the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iraq which should provide some much-needed “fuel for a House debate” on Iraq and escalation next week where every single Rep. “will be given five minutes to speak” on Bush’s escalation plan. (Bush has to be feeling scared now… things are seemingly starting to slowly unravel regarding his build-up for not only the escalation plan, but for the whole Iraq war… makes one smile ear to ear…)

Heckle: to news that should not be a surprise to anyone with a brain. The Pentagon’s Inspector General has found that Donald Rumsfeld’s aide Douglas Feith’s rogue pre-war inteligence group was an “inappropriate” use of intelligence by Pentagon civilians, and was also “predisposed to finding a significant relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda.” (I am shocked… shocked to find gambling going on in this establishment…). Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), the Senate intel chairman, vows that his panel will probe whether the Pentagon broke the law by “failing to notify Congress about the group’s work.” (This is definitely a step in the right direction, though one has to wonder if anything will actually be done… I guess only time will tell… and remember, you read it here first second third again…)

Applaud: to “widespread” dissatisfaction. A lot of voting conservatives say they pick “none of the above” when faced with the options of Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), Gov. Mitt Romney (R-MT) and Rudy Giuliani (R-NY) as the 2008 republican presidential nominee. Such dissatisfaction with the leading Republican presidential candidates is widespread among the party's conservative stalwarts and should make this presidential election the most contested in decades.

Heckle: to Budget waste. “President” Bush’s proposed budget includes a slew of high-cost weapons that will not even be in operation for years to come, thus using a funding request aimed at supporting the troops to actually get money for some of the Pentagon’s pet projects… (and the White House and Pentagon have the audacity to say people against escalation and the budget don’t care about our servicemen/women… give me a break. I’m all for making new weapons to help our military, but right now, in the middle of fighting two wars and possibly a third with Iran, instead of funding tools that cant be used now, how about giving them the best of what we have now. Or would that make too much sense?)

Applaud: to the Fark.com political headline of the week: “Rice grilled over lack of smoking gun in allegations against Iran. Critics demand evidence, saffron”

Heckle: to Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) for announcing that he will be skipping a forum for Democratic presidential candidates in Nevada later this month, despite assertions that seven other announced or expected Democratic candidates, including Hillary Clinton (D-NY) & John Edwards (D-SC), will participate in the forum. Obama’s campaign spokesman Dan Pfeiffer said that they couldn’t fit the forum into his itinerary. (This is disappointing… this is the first chance for a lot of people in this country to see Obama with the other cast of characters and thus giving them the chance to start thinking about whom they want as the Democratic nominee… Personally, I think his campaign team should do some re-shuffling in order to make sure Senator Obama can be at this forum…)

Applaud: to becoming spectators instead of players. With neither a president seeking reelection nor a vice president being a presumptive nominee, the Bush(whacked) Administration has been turned into mere spectators for the 2008 presidential election. Ya think the gop wishes they could have had their 2000 VP nomination back instead of giving it to someone who they had to have known would not run for the big office in ’08. Personally, I think the fact they even chose Cheney in the first place shows just how much the gop was not confidant in Bush’s ability to run the country…

Heckle: to lying liars… Last week in the Rewind I applauded a White House proposal to increase Pell Grants. While it was announced and meeted with great fanfare last week, Dubya’s FY08 budget contains no new money to pay for it… (Bat rastards…)

Applaud: to Democratic presidential candidate and former governor Tom Vilsack (D-IA). No particular reason other than the fact he needs a little reassurance, doesn’t he? He’s gonna be this race’s Dennis Kucinich…

Heckle: to republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney (R-MT). No particular reason other than the fact he needs a little smackdown, doesn’t he?

Applaud: to resting cases. Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald wrapped up his portion of the Scooter Libby trial this week… a week that saw jurors hearing Libby’s grand jury audiotapes in which Libby claimed he learned about Valerie Plame’s CIA identity from Vice President Cheney, and that he then “forgot it, then learned it again” from Tim Russert (who said is was “impossible” for him to have told Libby about Plame). It was also revealed this past week that Cheney was “upset” at Ambassador Wilson for his criticism about the lead-up to the Iraq war. (All of this stuff coming out… and it’s getting more and more interesting…)

That’s all I got, take ‘em as you will and have a good weekend. Later.

He’s at it again

Once again, despite getting stopped in his tracks the last time, “President” Bush has set his sights on the dastardly evils over at PBS by slashing funding for NPR and PBS in his new budget and thus enacting devastating cuts to public broadcasting.

How devastating?

Consider that Commander Cuckoo-Bananas’ budget would cut federal funds for public broadcasting by almost 25% and, according to PBS, the cuts could mean the end of their ability to support some of the most treasured educational children's series, not to mention the myriad of adult programming, and that’s not even bringing up how destructive the cuts would be to NPR.

Now comes the troubling part; Bush has tried this before… he tried it when he had a friendly, republican-controlled Congress. It didn’t work then, what the hell makes him think this Congress will approve these cuts? How stupid does he think we are anyway

Bush knows that this won’t get through Congress, and yet, he’s proposing these cuts in order to add to the illusion that he can wipe out the massive deficits (that he and his administration have created!) within five years… the problem is that his numbers (no matter how much “fuzzy math” you use) just don’t add up.

I think this whole thing is a ploy…

Humor me for a moment and think about this; he’s proposed this budget to slash PBS/NPR funding, and when the Democrats restore funding to these programs, Bush will be able to point to the Democrats and accuse them of not wanting to eradicate the deficit…

Maybe I’m reading too much into this, but I doubt I’m the only one.

With this latest attack on PBS, Bush’s budget has come under attack by, like last time, MoveOn who is leading the charge to protect Elmo and “All Things Considered”.

While I am not a huge fan of MoveOn (they do some good but, like the ACLU, they do tend to go too far), click on their link to sign their petition to rescue PBS.

After you sign your own petition, please forward the information and the link to your all of your Progressive/Liberal family and friends.

We banded together to stop these cuts once, and we can do it again.

Here we go a-budgeting

I’m going to forgo the fact that a group of republicans have stalled the debate on an Iraq troop increase or the “shocking” revelation that the Iraq vote could have a deep impact on the 2008 Presidential election (that’s some crack journalistic work there guys… I’m sure that tidbit caught everyone by surprise… as I’ve always say; it’s hard to express sarcasm in the written word?) or the fact that Katherine Harris just refuses to accept the truth that her political career is over and instead focus on something else today; the budget.

“President” Bush submitted his budget to the Democratically-controlled Congress Monday that has four substantial volumes and will now kick off what I’m sure will be months and months (and months) of debate.

One thing to keep in mind is that the Democrats have already made clear the fact that they have considerably different views on spending and taxes

Bush’s budget comes in at a whopping $2.90 trillion (yes, you saw that right; trillion with a ‘t’) that essentially screws the middle-class with their collective pants on…

Consider (hat tip to Think Progress):

• $77 billion in funding cuts for Medicare and Medicaid over the next five years - $280 billion over the next 10 (This won’t come back to bite us on the ass I’m sure)
• $223 million in funding cuts) to the Children’s Health Insurance Program which represents a 4% decrease from this year’s levels (Damn kids should get jobs and pay for their own insurance)
• $4.9 billion, cut in education, training, employment and social services grants (cause none of these things is imporant when our econmy is oh-so-good…)
• $100 million cut for Head Start, which provides child development services to economically disadvantaged children and families (Nice…)
• $2.4 billion cut in community and regional development grants that often provide funding for low- and middle-income communities (because if a community can’t sustain itself, they shouldn’t be allowed to exist… right?)
• $400 million cut in the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program that provides $2.2 billion to help people pay their heating bills (not really needed since heating a home is oh-so-cheap anymore…)
• $172 million cut in funding for housing for low-income seniors (They don’t need any help since they’ll have social secuirty to rely on… right?)

I apologize for my sarcasm… it’s just that this is getting ridiculous…

Bush's spending plan would make his first-term tax cuts permanent, at a cost of $1.6 trillion over 10 years

Bush maintains that he had made the right choices to keep the nation secure from terrorism and also to keep the economy growing (growing?)

Don’t worry though, despite Bush essentially saying ‘screw you’ to the Middle class, he’s doing the exact opposite regarding the wealthy as, according to Tax Policy Center notes, “People with incomes of more than $1 million would get tax cuts averaging $162,000 a year in perpetuity.”

Originally, the White House had projected a deficit of $244 billion.

Democrats, however, challenged those projections, contending that Bush only achieves a surplus by leaving out the billions of dollars Congress is expected to spend to keep the alternative minimum tax from ensnaring millions of middle-class taxpayers.

Said the “President” about his budget; “My formula for a balanced budget reflects the priorities of our country at this moment in its history: protecting the homeland and fighting terrorism, keeping the economy strong with low taxes and keeping spending under control while making federal programs more effective.”

I prefer Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-ND)’s take; "The president's budget is filled with debt and deception, disconnected from reality and continues to move America in the wrong direction.” Couldn’t have said it any better myself Senator Conrad…. Thank you.