For a while anyway.
"Returning Congress must act to avoid shutdown" by Andrew Taylor | Associated Press September 08, 2014
WASHINGTON — There are few must-pass items that require cooperation between the feuding House and Senate.
I'll bet I can gue$$ what they are.
Atop the list is the spending measure to keep agencies funded at current levels through mid-December.
Which ones? I'm $ure they are important to some intere$t.
That would give House and Senate negotiators ample time to work out a trillion-dollar-plus bill during a lame-duck session after Election Day on Nov. 4.
Why should a lame-duck Congress be locking in budget priorities?
Boehner is looking to settle a split among Republicans over reauthorizing the Export-Import Bank, which provides credit guarantees that help foreign buyers purchase US exports such as Boeing airplanes and heavy equipment built by Caterpillar.
I knew it, I knew it, I knew it!
It's biparti$an$hip again!
Many conservative Republicans, including House Financial Services Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling of Texas, oppose extending the bank.
There I am, evil Tea Party Patriot.
But Democrats and a host of business-friendly Republicans may have the upper hand.
Oh, imagine my $hock!
At least there are elections coming up!
That will make things all better, right?
Related: Nine protesting fast-food workers arrested in Boston
The police are there to protect and $erve.
GOP aides said it is likely that an interim deal would extend the bank’s authority until perhaps early next year.
Man, do these "public $ervants" ever love tax-looting, debt-enslaving banks!
So when are you guys going to end the authority of the private central banking scheme known as the Federal Reserve $y$tem?
Also in play is a freeze that prevents state and local governments from taxing access to the Internet.
It's ca$h-grabbing government on all levels as the 1% get richer.
Related: $exi$t EU and IMF
So Yellen has per$onally benefited from the policies she is carrying out, huh?
Under current law, the freeze expires Nov. 1, exposing Internet users to the same kind of connection fees that often show up on telephone bills. Legislation to extend the tax moratorium is expected to be attached to the must-do spending bill, according to a senior House GOP aide.
The aide spoke on condition of anonymity to candidly discuss internal party deliberations.
Republicans and Democrats are clamoring for legislation authorizing Obama to use military force against Islamic State militants in Iraq and Syria.
Oh, LOOK BOTH ARE IN AGREEMENT AGAIN when it comes to MORE WAR!
Related:
ISIS Is A Fake US/Israeli Created "Terrorist" Group: Government Fear Factory - "ISIS Is In The United States" Just In Time For Another 9-11 Anniversary!
The Islamic State (ISIS) and Israel are Allies
Why Does ISIS Fit In So Perfectly With The PNAC Plan?
ISIS in Iraq stinks of CIA/NATO ‘dirty war’ op
US, Jordan in counterterrorism talks
Putting ISIS on Jordan
US-NATO Proxy War in Iraq and Syria: US Financing and Training of “Moderate” ISIS Rebels in Syria
What?
What do you mean "covert CIA/FSA training facilities that have ties to ISIS [are] in both Jordan and Turkey?"
Why are they going to FIGHT(?) an "enemy" they created?
So if you CAN'T LIE US INTO a WAR, it is ACTUALLY CREATE ONE and then come on and tell us how threatened we all are, blah, blah, blah!!
But the abbreviated session and a lack of consensus raise doubts about whether any congressional action is possible.
Obummer has said he doesn't need it this time, so are the Congre$$ critters going to stand up to Israel and AIAPAC again and demand a vote?
Obama plans to meet with congressional leaders at the White House on Tuesday and give a speech Wednesday as he begins laying out a strategy for combating the Islamic State threat.
It's going to be ANOTHER COALITION to invade IRAQ for a THIRD TIME before moving on to SYRIA trough the backdoor!!!
This is reaching the absolute point of utter absurdity, folks!! It would be silli were it not so deadly serious.
Some lawmakers say the president has the power to act under the 1973 War Powers Resolution and no new permission is necessary.
Sigh.
Several Republicans say they are unwilling to grant Obama blanket authority without a detailed strategy from the administration.
Oh, yay.
Where is the antiwar party in this country anyway?
Several lawmakers are pressing for new economic penalties against Russia in response to its aggressive moves in Ukraine, but it’s doubtful Congress can move quickly on such a measure.
Look, I don't have time to get into that now, but I would really rather the world not go up in U.S. nuclear bombs because of this world domination folly.
I mean, this constant war-drumming by the lying pre$$ promoters and politicians is literally making me ill.
NO PARTISAN GRIDLOCK THERE!
One certainty is the first open hearing of the special House committee investigating the 2012 attack on the US diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya. The committee will hold a session the week of Sept. 14 to examine whether the State Department has put in place recommendations to improve security at US embassies and diplomatic posts.
And cover up that impeachable offense because we will never get the truth about that, either, and certainly not from this war pre$$ that has lied about so much for so long.
The issue that dominated lawmakers’ attention in the final days before recess — the crisis of unaccompanied minors at the border with Mexico — has faded because the numbers arriving at the border has dropped sharply in the hot summer months.
No, it has faded because it became a bad political issue for Democrats.
Congress never came to agreement on Obama’s emergency spending request to deal with the matters, and there’s unlikely to be an effort to revisit it.
With the list of must-do items so short, many observers expect votes aimed at motivating each party’s core supporters....
Enjoy the $how.
--more--"
"Obama defends decision to delay immigration action" | Associated Press September 08, 2014
WASHINGTON — President Obama said in an interview broadcast Sunday that the surge of immigrant children entering the United States illegally changed the politics surrounding the issue of immigration and led him to put off a pledge to use executive action to shield millions of people from deportation.
Translation: it was hurting Democrats who have nothing to run on, not a thing. They have a failed health project, MORE WARS, and a crap economy that serves corporate band elite interests. It's not that Republicans are better, they are often worse; however, on the few fringe issues like the Ex-Im bank they are better than the Repugs in Democrat clothing.
Immigration reform advocates criticized Obama after White House officials said that the president would not act at summer’s end as he promised in June but would take up the matter after midterm elections.
How cynical!
Speaking on NBC’s ‘‘Meet the Press,’’ the president rejected the charge that the delay was meant to protect Democratic candidates who are worried that his actions would hurt their prospects in Senate races.
He can't help but lie, can he? No matter what it is.
Obama said a partisan fight in July over how to address an influx of unaccompanied minors at the border had created the impression that there was an immigration crisis and thus a volatile climate for taking the measures he had promised.
Well, as with ISIS, why did they create the problem in the first place? Terrorists could be sneaking over that border, blah, blah, blah, but he's going to bus the illegal kids around and dump them in already bankrupt land. It's for cheap labor purposes while American kids are forced into the military to fight wars!
‘‘The truth of the matter is — is that the politics did shift midsummer because of that problem,’’ he said. ‘‘I want to spend some time, even as we’re getting all our ducks in a row for the executive action, I also want to make sure that the public understands why we’re doing this.’’
HA!!! Like a word of that would ever escape this guy's lips!
--more--"
Related: Obama Delays Immigration Orders
What cost politics even if terrorists are slipping over the border and into Boston.
"Obama to delay executive action on immigration" by Michael D. Shear | New York Times September 07, 2014
I feel revulsion every time I see that propagandists agenda-pushing name.
WASHINGTON — President Obama will delay taking executive action on immigration until after the midterm elections, bowing to pressure from fellow Democrats who feared that acting now could doom his party’s chances this fall, White House officials said Saturday.
I'm sorry, but the president just claimed the opposite on Meet the Press.
The decision is a reversal of Obama’s vow to issue broad directives to overhaul the immigration system soon after summer’s end, and sparked swift anger from immigration advocates.
Oh, another broken promise to another interest group?
Well, the line forms behind the American people, and boy is it a long one!
The president made the promise on June 30, standing in the Rose Garden, where he denounced Republican obstruction and said he would use the power of his office to protect immigrant families from the threat of deportation.
But he is not protecting American families, be it the booga-booga of the terrorists coming or the failed foreign policy and economy.
“Because of the Republicans’ extreme politicization of this issue, the president believes it would be harmful to the policy itself and to the long-term prospects for comprehensive immigration reform to announce administrative action before the elections,” a White House official said. “Because he wants to do this in a way that’s sustainable, the president will take action on immigration before the end of the year.”
Again, how cynical.
Cristina Jimenez, managing director for United We Dream, an immigration advocacy group, accused Obama of “playing politics” with the lives of immigrant families and said “the president’s latest broken promise is another slap to the face of the Latino and immigrant community.”
I'm numb he's given so many to the American people.
Administration officials insist that Obama is more determined than ever to take action eventually. But the president and his top aides have concluded that an immigration announcement before November could anger conservatives across the country, possibly cripple Democratic efforts to retain control of the Senate, and severely set back any hope for progress on a permanent immigration overhaul.
Okay, think about that for a minute. The propaganda pre$$ push polls constantly tell us we are for immigration reform and that Republicans are too extreme, yet here they are worried about angering conservatives? What it tells you is this attempt at electoral success failed miserably. That is why the issue faded from the agenda-framing pre$$.
As for conservatives being motivated or angry, ALREADY ARE so that excuse doesn't wash as well as the hopes for reform when he will be getting a Republican Senate. It's not because Republicans are better, either. They are JUST THERE! The same thing happened to Bush after the first six years of his failed presidency.
In particular, advisers to Obama believe that an announcement before the midterm elections in November would inject the already controversial issue into a highly charged campaign environment that would force members of both parties to take extreme positions.
This stuff is reaching levels of absolute laughability except it is not funny.
So where is the extremity when it comes to unanimous votes in favor of Israeli slaughter of Palestinians or the rubber-stamped war budge.... oh, right. That i$ extreme!
That could drive away support for what the president’s advisers believe are common-sense changes to the immigration system, even among Democrats.
Does that make sense to you? If they are common sense.... ?
Of course, that it meant to frame anyone opposed to this as not having any.
So what about the LAW (I was told we were a nation of laws) and where does the word ILLEGAL fit in?
One adviser noted that if immigration is seen as the reason for Democrats losing the Senate, immigration could become toxic for years in both parties, much like gun control did after the issue was blamed for Democratic losses in 1994.
Related: Cantoring Through Politics
I will get to him below.
The combustible nature of the immigration debate was demonstrated over the summer, when the issue of the unaccompanied children from Central America crossing the border quickly became a highly charged partisan issue.
It shouldn't be! They took an oath to uphold the law, not ignore it!
Democrats on Capitol Hill warned the White House to deal with that issue before announcing broader immigration changes.
The president and his team believe that waiting until after the election is over will allow Obama to unveil sweeping and sustainable changes to the nation’s immigration system that could potentially shield millions of illegal immigrants from deportation and provide work permits for many of them.
Work permits for what?
Related:
"The slowdown in the labor market last month was disappointing to many economists who viewed the economy as accelerating after several years of lackluster growth. Even the decline in the unemployment rate was tinged with disappointing news, since it stemmed mostly from people giving up job searches rather than finding jobs. The labor force lost 64,000 people from July to August. There were bright spots in the jobs report. The likelihood that easy money policies will remain in place helped drive stocks higher."
Yeah, right, it's all Market Basket's fault as Yellen and crew get rich!
Obama is expected to talk about the issue Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”
I'm so glad I never watch those programs anymore.
On Saturday, Republicans quickly attacked Obama’s decision, calling it a cynical ploy to avoid letting voters express their opinions on his plan to exert executive power on the immigration issue.
“The decision to simply delay this deeply controversial and possibly unconstitutional unilateral action until after the election — instead of abandoning the idea altogether — smacks of raw politics,” Speaker John Boehner of Ohio said.
Unconstitutional, huh? Then impeach him over the IRS if nothing else, boner!
--more--"
Related: Rise in ER visits after Medicaid expansion
And what is this about no subsidies for mandated insurance (that can be hacked)?
So what did they follow up with regarding the shutdown?
"Senate Democrats launch push for campaign fund curbs; Measure would limit money raised and spent" by Alan Fram | Associated Press September 09, 2014
WASHINGTON — Senate Democrats started their drive Monday for a constitutional amendment aimed at curbing the financial clout that special interests have in elections. While the effort appears doomed, party leaders hope it will help them make a populist appeal to voters.
PFFFFFFFFTTT!
You are BOTH FEEDING at the CORPORATE LOBBYING TROUGH!
***************
The bill is considered to have no chance of winning the two-thirds majority needed to clear the Senate, let alone be considered by the Republican-run House. But Democrats brought the measure to the Senate floor anyway, eight weeks from elections in which they are fighting to retain their majority in the chamber.
Senators voted, 79 to 18, on Monday to keep debating the measure. That vote reflected a desire by some Republicans to spend time on the proposal before defeating it, which would reduce the time Democrats have for preelection debates on other issues that their voters support.
So THAT is what taxpayers are paying Congre$$ for, huh?
To stage meaningless votes to foment the illusion of difference between the two as "preselection debates" before going back to business as usual?
Led by Senate majority leader Harry Reid of Nevada, Democrats around the country have spent months lambasting special interest campaign spending as being undemocratic, with a special focus on the billionaire Koch brothers.
Charles and David Koch are industrialists who have contributed large sums to conservative groups that are spending millions against Democratic senators, and the party’s candidates have invoked their names in fund-raising appeals.
‘‘Should a family hard hit by the recession take a back seat in our government to a couple of billionaires?’’ Reid said Monday as the Senate returned from its recess.
They always do; you and yours allowed unemployment to lapse while approving more corporate tax breaks!
Republicans say limiting campaign spending by outside groups would violate free speech, a rationale Supreme Court justices have used in decisions diluting decades-old restrictions. They say Democrats are trying to rack up political points and say people are more concerned with issues like the economy and health care.
Notice how war and peace never makes it despite hot wars and failed puppet states all over the place?
The number two Senate GOP leader, John Cornyn of Texas, said that while back in his home state during Congress’s break, ‘‘Not a single time did my constituents say, ‘We want you to go back to Washington, D.C., and vote to gut the First Amendment right to free speech.’ ’’
You mean free $peech.
--more--"
Looking into the crystal ball a bit:
"Shift in Alaska helps Republicans retain Senate edge" | New York Times September 08, 2014
NEW YORK — The Senate battleground remains broad and competitive, with 10 races within 6 percentage points, according to the second wave of data from the New York Times/CBS News/YouGov online panel of more than 100,000 respondents.
The results nonetheless suggest that Republicans, who received good news in Alaska, hold an advantage in the fight for control of the Senate. They hold at least a nominal lead in eight states held by Democrats, more than the six they need to retake the chamber.
The results are broadly similar to previous polls in the race. A model now gives the Republicans a 61 percent chance of retaking the Senate, up from 58 percent before the infusion of new data.
The results are also similar to the last wave of YouGov data, in no small part because 63 percent of respondents participated in the first wave as well. Some of the shifts between the two waves of data reflect the changing opinions of those respondents, though other shifts result from the addition of new panelists and reweighting of the new sample.
There were very few changes over the last month. In the 10 most competitive seats, the overall result moved by more than 4 percentage points in only one state.
--more--"
One change:
"Eric Cantor lands at Wall Street investment bank" New York Times September 02, 2014
NEW YORK — When Eric Cantor suffered a surprising electoral defeat this year, Washington pundits wondered where the House majority leader would end up.
The answer: a Wall Street boutique investment bank. Moelis & Co. will pay Cantor a base salary of $400,000, along with an additional cash payout of $400,000 and $1 million in restricted stock that will vest over five years.
Next year, the investment bank will give him a minimum incentive payout of $1.2 million in cash and $400,000 in restricted stock.
In his 13 years in Congress, Cantor became an important link between Republicans and the business world.
This whole $y$tem is so ince$tuou$ly corrupt!
He came to know Moelis & Co.’s founder, the longtime dealmaker Kenneth Moelis, some time ago. When it came time for Cantor to find a new job after losing a primary battle with David Brat, a relatively unknown college professor with deep support from Tea Party activists, he eventually decided to head to the boutique investment bank to focus on dispensing advice to clients.
“When I considered options for the next chapter of my career, I knew I wanted to join a firm with a great entrepreneurial spirit that focused on its clients,” Cantor said in a statement.
“The new model of independent banks offering conflict free advice, in a smaller, more intimate environment, was a place where I knew my skills could help clients succeed.”
--more--"
Hey, what co$t politics?
"Romney says he would have done a better job than Obama" | Associated Press September 08, 2014
WASHINGTON — Former GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney said Sunday there is no question in his mind that he would have been more effective in the White House than President Obama. But he reiterated that he has no plans to run again.
“My time has come and gone,’’ Romney said on “Fox News Sunday.’’
You are going to have to beg him.
Romney cited continuing high US unemployment and growing troubles abroad and said some of those who voted for Obama might now have some buyer’s remorse.
I didn't vote for either one: I wrote in Nader in the last two presidentials, but I am also having remorse for believing in the possibility of change and the audacity of hope(!).
Yet Romney said he did not want to dwell on the past. He acknowledged that he had made mistakes in his campaign and that the Obama campaign did a good job on picking up on them.
‘‘I’m not running and not planning on running,’’ he said.
A recent USA Today poll on prospective Republican candidates for the White House showed Romney with a huge lead in Iowa, far ahead of 14 other potential GOP candidates.
One of the Republican prospects, Governor Mike Pence of Indiana, will make his first trip as governor to Iowa on Monday. Several other possible presidential hopefuls from his party, including Governor Rick Perry of Texas and Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey, have already made trips to the early-caucus state.
Christie's bridge-gate, Perry and McDonnell lawsuits, decks are being cleared for the corporate and Israeli approved candidates
Pence appeared at a summit in Texas last month organized by Americans for Prosperity, one of several conservative interest groups backed by billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch.
Who are the Koch brothers again?
--more--"
Related: The world according to Romney
I would like to end this post with a very telling piece from today's Globe:
"Clinton and Bush banter, and introduce leadership program; Ex-presidents launch program" by Amy Chozick | New York Times September 09, 2014
NEW YORK — At a time of heightened partisanship in Washington, it seemed a brief respite to watch former presidents George W. Bush and Bill Clinton sit side by side on stage and gush about each other’s leadership and acute decision-making skills.
I just gushed something back up my throat.
On Monday, they introduced a joint program to train young leaders through collaboration of their presidential libraries and those of George H.W. Bush and Lyndon B. Johnson.
“I actually learned a lot watching him over the years,” Clinton said of Bush’s leadership.
Like how to steal Haitian aid money to build a hotel for layovers, Bill?
“He’s an awesome communicator,” Bush said of the man who defeated his father in the 1992 presidential election. “He can really lay out a case and get people all across the political spectrum to listen.”
The discussion at the Newseum in Washington stood as a lighthearted reminder of how much can change in politics after a president leaves office, and how much, in their post-presidencies, Bush and Clinton have come together, even as they embrace very different agendas.
It ALL LOOKS the $AME to ME!
Bush has lived a comparatively quiet post-presidential life in Texas, with a focus on his paintings. (“I’m trying to leave something behind,” he said of his art.) He plugged his upcoming book about his father, which he called a “love story.”
I don't want to comment on the implications of that last item.
Related: Artistic Annexations
As for leaving things behind, there are millions of dead Iraqis, you war-criminal f***.
Clinton, meanwhile, has taken on a public role through the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation and has been a near-constant presence on the campaign trail for Democratic candidates in the 2014 midterm elections.
They think it is helping!
*************
The other two former presidents did not talk about current events; rather, they spoke in broad generalities about the stress of the job, and avoided any discussion of President Obama, the emergence of the Islamic State terrorist group, and how the decisions they made in office have affected the current administration.
Instead, Clinton and Bush focused on what they learned in the White House and how it can inform future leaders.
So this was all a great big, self-adulating and aggrandizing back slap, huh?
Hillary Rodham Clinton, the former senator and secretary of state and potential 2016 presidential candidate, watched from the fourth row of an audience packed with Bush and Clinton White House alumni.
Bill Clinton said that while he did not always agree with Bush’s decisions, he “watched the way he thought through things and tried to approach them with clarity and decisiveness, and with great admiration.”
Slick Willie admires the Decider and the decisions he made!
Oh, puke!
--more--"
Also see:
US judge upholds Louisiana’s ban on same-sex marriage
NYC St. Patrick’s Day parade lifts ban on gay groups
Court rules against Ind., Wis. gay marriage bans
Idaho, Nevada, Hawaii gay marriage cases in court
Federal court considers bans on gay nuptials in three states
Chick-fil-A founder S. Truett Cathy dies at 93
Those links make you happy?
